Romans - Diss - DIKAISYHN THEOU, Examination of The Covenant Faithfulness Interpretation - Charles Lee Irons - 2011

Center for Advanced Theological Studies
School of Theology
Fuller Theological Seminary
AIKAIOZYNH 0EOY:
A LEXICAL EXAMINATION OF
THE COVENANT-FAITHFULNESS INTERPRETATION
A dissertation submitted to the faculty of the

School of Theology, Fuller Theological Seminary
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
Written by
Charles Lee Irons
May, 2011
UMI Number: 3501366
All rights reserved
INFORMATION TO ALL USERS

The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed,
a note will indicate the deletion.
UMI
Dissertation Publishing
UMI 3501366
Copyright 2012 by ProQuest LLC.
All rights reserved. This edition of the work is protected against
unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.
ProQuest LLC
789 East Eisenhower Parkway
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346
AIKAIOEYNH 0EOY:
A LEXICAL EXAMINATION OF
THE COVENANT-FAITHFULNESS INTERPRETATION
By Charles Lee Irons
Abstract
Advocates of the New Perspective on Paul appeal to the view that "righteousness" in
biblical theology is a Verhaltnisbegriff (relational concept). This is the view that
"righteousness" does not mean conformity to a norm, nor is it an essentially legal
concept; rather, "righteousness" denotes the fulfillment of the demands of a relationship,
since the relationship itself is the norm. This relational interpretation of "righteousness"
was first put forward by Hermann Cremer in 1899 and exercised a profound influence in
biblical scholarship throughout the 20th century. It lies at the root of the New Perspective
claim that 8iKaioown Osou in Paul is a cipher for God's saving faithfulness to his
covenant, a view defended by N. T. Wright. This dissertation is a critical examination
Cremer's chief arguments for the relational, covenant-faithfulness interpretation. I argue
instead for the view that 5iKaioawn Gsou in Rom 1:17; 3:21-22; 10:3; 2 Cor 5:21; and
Phil 3:9 (with SK) is the status of righteousness that comes from God as a gift.
Copyright ©2011
by Charles Lee Irons
Center for Advanced Theological Studies
School of Theology, Fuller Theological Seminary
Dissertation Approval Sheet
This dissertation entitled
AIKAIOLYNH 0EOY:
A Lexical Examination of the Covenant-Faithfulness Interpretation
written by
Charles Lee Irons
and submitted in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
has been accepted by the Faculty of Fuller Theological Seminary
upon the recommendation of the following readers:
^Wv-^-Gs^ ^J-*^*-*-
DonaldHagner ^ (J
Seyoon Kim
Mark Sei
Seifrid
May 5, 2011
Date
To my parents
Charles Stephen and Margaret Martha Irons
Ouî "H Kap5ia fmcov Kaiousvn rjv ev fjulv &>q £A.&A£i f|uTv EV xfj 65cp,
coc Sifivoiyev fiulv xaq ypacpac;;
Luke 24:32
CONTENTS
Acknowledgments v
Figure and Tables vii
Abbreviations viii
Introduction 1
Chapter 1: History of Interpretation of AiKouoauvri Oeou in Paul 12
Chapter 2: Methodological Considerations 83
Chapter 3: Righteousness in Extra-Biblical Greek 115
Chapter 4: Righteousness in the Old Testament 150
Chapter 5: Righteousness in Jewish Literature 278
Chapter 6: Exegesis of AiKOUoawn ©eon in Paul 385
Chapter 7: Synopsis and Implications 467
Appendix: All Occurrences of "Righteousness" in the Old Testament 475
Bibliography 512
iv
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I could not have written this dissertation without the help and encouragement of
so many people whom God has placed in my life. To begin with, I am grateful to my
mother and father for their unwavering support. I have dedicated this dissertation to them
in thankfulness to the spiritual inheritance they passed on to me. It was my father who
showed me his Greek New Testament and his Hebrew Bible when I was a child, instilling
in me a thirst to be able to read God's word in the original languages. And it was my
mother who passed on to me her analytical mind to dissect issues logically. I am the
person I am today because of their Christian nurture.
I am indebted to my advisors in the New Testament Ph.D. program at Fuller
Theological Seminary. I am thankful for my primary advisor, Donald Hagner, who
agreed to take me on as a doctoral student and who continued to mentor and encourage
me after his retirement. My first Ph.D. seminar at Fuller with him, "History of New
Testament Research," was a delight and laid the foundation for the entire doctoral
program. It was like being given a map of Pilgrim's Progress, so one knows ahead of
time where to walk and where the dangers lurk. My secondary advisor was Seyoon Kim.
His Teutonic wissenschaftlich approach made a lasting impression on me, especially his
seminar on "Jesus and Paul." Both of my mentors earned their doctorates under the
supervision of F. F. Bruce. And so, through them, I consider myself honored to be a
second generation student of that great evangelical New Testament scholar.
V
I must acknowledge my debt to the CATS Committee for awarding me two
scholarships: the Everett Harrison Memorial Scholarship for the 2007-08 academic year
and a CATS Scholarship the following year, 2008-09.1 want to express my deep
gratitude to my father- and mother-in-law, Dr. Thomas and Mrs. Catherine Yoshikawa.
who have been extraordinarily generous with their resources over the years. 1 would also
like to thank my boss, Dr. Keith Norris, Executive Vice President for Research and
Health Affairs at Charles R. Drew University of Medicine and Science, who provided me
with flexible hours enabling me to take afternoon courses on campus during the first two
years of my program.
Keith Balser deserves special thanks for proofreading my manuscript and laboring
to improve the clarity of my prose. As a self-taught scholar of New Testament Greek, he
spent countless hours checking every iota subscript. Thanks to Bob Bjerkaas who
accompanied me to the 2010 Annual Meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society in
Atlanta, where I read a paper summarizing my dissertation. I am also grateful to T. David
Gordon for his friendship and his insights on the influence of Ernst Kasemann on N. T.
Wright.
Finally, I must close by acknowledging those who sacrificed the most to enable
me to pursue doctoral studies: my wife, Misty, whose companionship and support mean
more than I can express in words, and our three children, Geneva, Lydia, and Jonathan. It
was only because they gave me permission to go to the library every Saturday that I was
able to make the final push to complete this project. I am blessed to have such a
wonderful family.
FIGURE AND TABLES
Figure 1. The Ogden-Richards Triangle 85
Table 1. Occurrences of the p"12S root in the Hebrew Bible 152
Table 2. Categories of Usage for p-J^/Hp"!^ with Statistics 154
Table 3. The AIK-group in LXX 166
Table 4. LXX Translation Choices for p"1S 168
Table 5. LXX Translation Choices for nj?"TS 168
Table 6. Hebrew words translated by 5iKaioai3vn in LXX 169
Table 7. Comparison of Categories of Usage: MT/Hebrew (p"13/nj?"]S) vs. 171
LXX/Greek (SiKaioouvn)
Table 8. AiKaiocuvn parallel with acainpia/cayrripiov in LXX Isaiah 231
Table 9. "Righteousness of God" in Hebrew Bible ("my, his, your") 259

Table 10. All 12 Occurrences of the Plural JTlplX in the DSS 283
Table 11. All 35 Occurrences of "God's Righteousness" in the DSS 284
Table 12. Categories of Usage for p^S/np-J? with Statistics 285
Table 13. All Occurrences of 5iKaioo-uvn in Tobit (NETS) 299
Table 14. Two Textual Traditions at 4 Ezra 8:31-36 326
Table 15. Parallel Terms in Romans 3:1-8 389
Table 16. AiKaiooT>vn (sans OEOU) in Paul 434
Table 17. The Ten "Righteousness of God" Texts in Paul 444
Table 18. Parallels Between Rom 10:3 and Phil 3:9 463
vii
ABBREVIATIONS
AB Anchor Bible
ABD Anchor Bible Dictionary. Edited by D. N. Freedman. 6 vols. New
York, 1992
ACCS Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture
AGJU Arbeiten zur Geschichte des antiken Judentums und des
Urchristentums
AnBib Analecta biblica
ANE Ancient Near East(ern)
ANET Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament. Edited by
J. B. Pritchard. 3 rd ed. Princeton, 1969
ANR W Aufstieg undNiedergang der romischen Welt. Edited by H.
Temporini and W. Haase. Berlin, 1972-
ANTC Abingdon New Testament Commentaries
APOT The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament. Edited by
R. H. Charles. 2 vols. Oxford, 1913
ASTI Annual of the Swedish Theological Institute
ATA Alttestamentliche Abhandlungen
BASOR Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research
BCOT Baker Commentary on the Old Testament

BDAG Danker, F. W., W. Bauer, W. F. Arndt, and F. W. Gingrich. A Greek-
English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian
Literature. 3 r ed. Chicago, 2000.
BDB Brown, F., S. R. Driver, and C. A. Briggs. A Hebrew and English
Lexicon of the Old Testament. Oxford, 1907
BDF Blass, F., A. Debrunner, and R. W. Funk. A Greek Grammar of the
New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. Chicago, 1961
vm
BECNT Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament
BETL Bibliotheca ephemeridum theologicarum lovaniensium
BEvT Beitrage zur evangelischen Theologie
BHS Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia. Edited by K. Elliger and W. Rudolph.

Stuttgart, 1983
BHT Beitrage zur historischen Theologie
BIOSCS Bulletin of the International Organization for Septuagint and

Cognate Studies
BJRL Bulletin of the John Rylands University Library of Manchester
BJS Brown Judaic Studies
BNP Brill's New Pauly: Encyclopedia of the Ancient World. Edited by H.

Cancik, et al. Leiden, 2002-
BNTC Black's New Testament Commentaries
BSac Bibliotheca sacra
BTB Biblical Theology Bulletin
BZAW Beihefte zur Zeitschrift fur die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft
CBQ Catholic Biblical Quarterly
CCSS Catholic Commentary on Sacred Scripture
CEJL Commentaries on Early Jewish Literature
ConBNT Coniectanea biblica: New Testament Series
CTO Concordia Theological Quarterly
Diels-Kranz H. Diels and W. Kranz, Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker. 2 vols. 5 th

ed. Berlin, 1952.
DLCPT Digital Library of Classic Protestant Texts
DNTB Dictionary of New Testament Background. Edited by C. A. Evans
IX
and S. E. Porter. Downers Grove, 2000
DPL Dictionary of Paul and His Letters. Edited by G. F. Hawthorne and
R. P. Martin. Downers Grove, 1993
DSS The Dead Sea Scrolls
DSSR The Dead Sea Scrolls Reader. Edited by D. W. Parry and E. Tov.
6 vols. Leiden, 2004-2005
EB English Bible
EDNT Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament. Edited by H. Balz and
G. Schneider. ET. Grand Rapids, 1990-1993
EKK Evangelisch-katholischer Kommentar zum Neuen Testament
EKL Evangelisches Kirchenlexicon. Edited by E. Fahlbusch. et al. 4 vols.
3 rd ed. Gottingen, 1985-1996
ESV English Standard Version
ET English Translation
EvT Evangelische Theologie
FRLANT Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen
Testaments
GAP Guides to Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha
GCS Die greichische chrisfliche Schriftsteller der ersten Jahrhunderte
GKC Gesenius' Hebrew Grammar. Edited by E. Kautzsch. Translated by

A. E. Cowley. 2nd ed. Oxford, 1910
HALOT Koehler, L., W. Baumgartner, and J. J. Stamm. The Hebrew and
Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament. Translated and edited under
the supervision of M. E. J. Richardson. Study Edition. 2 vols. Leiden,
2001
HBS Herders biblische Studien
HNT Handbuch zum Neuen Testament
X
HNTC Harper's New Testament Commentaries
HSM Harvard Semitic Monographs
HTR Harvard Theological Review
IBHS An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax. B. K. Waltke and M.

O'Connor. Winona Lake, 1990
ICC International Critical Commentary
1DB The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible. Edited by G. A. Buttrick. 4

vols. Nashville, 1962
IRT Issues in Religion and Theology
JBL Journal of Biblical Literature
JES Journal of Ecumenical Studies
JETS Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society
JPSTC JPS Torah Commentary
JSJ Journal for the Study of Judaism in the Persian, Hellenistic, and
Roman Periods
JSJSup Journal for the Study of Judaism: Supplement Series
JSNT Journal for the Study of the New Testament
JSNTSup Journal for the Study of the New Testament: Supplement Series
JSOT Journal for the Study of the Old Testament
JSOTSup Journal for the Study of the Old Testament: Supplement Series
JSS Journal of Semitic Studies
JTS Journal of Theological Studies
KEK Kritisch-exegetischer Kommentar tiber das Neue Testament
KJV King James Version
XI
L&N Louw, J. P., and E. A. Nida. Greek-English Lexicon of the New-
Testament Based on Semantic Domains. 2 Vols. New York, 1989
LCL Loeb Classical Library
LEH Lust, J., E. Eynikel, and K. Hauspie. Greek-English Lexicon of the

Septuagint. Rev. ed. Stuttgart, 2003
LLT-A Library of Latin Texts - Series A.
LSJ Liddell, Henry George, Robert Scott, Henry Stuart Jones, with the
assistance of Robert McKenzie. A Greek-English Lexicon. 9th ed.,
with a Supplement 1968. Oxford, 1989
LXX Septuagint
MSU Mitteilungen des Septuaginta-Unternehmens
MT Masoretic Text
Muraoka Muraoka, T. A Greek-English Lexicon of the Septuagint. Louvain,
2009
N ASB New American Standard Bible - Updated Edition
NCB New Century Bible
NCBC New Cambridge Bible Commentary
NETS A New English Translation of the Septuagint. Edited by A. Pietersma
and B. G. Wright. Oxford, 2007
NIB The New Interpreter's Bible
NIBCOT New International Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament
NICNT New International Commentary on the New Testament
NICOT New International Commentary on the Old Testament
NIDOTTE New International Dictionary of Old Testament Theology and

NIGTC New International
Exegesis. Edited byGreek
W. A.Testament Commentary
VanGemeren. 5 vols. Grand Rapids, 1997
Xll
NIV New International Version
NIVAC NIV Application Commentary
NovT Novum Testamentum
NovTSup Supplements to Novum Testamentum
NPNF1 Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Series 1
NPP New Perspective on Paul
NRSV New Revised Standard Version
NT New Testament
NTAbh Neutestamentliche Abhandlungen
NTL New Testament Library
NTS New Testament Studies
OCD The Oxford Classical Dictionary. Edited by S. Hornblower and A.

Spawforth. 3 rd ed. Oxford, 1996
ODCC The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church. Edited by F. L.
Cross and E. A. Livingstone. 3 rd ed. Oxford, 1997
OT Old Testament
OTL Old Testament Library
OTP Old Testament Pseudepigrapha. Edited by J. H. Charlesworth. 2 vols.
New York, 1983, 1985
PBM Paternoster Biblical Monographs
PG Patrologia graeca. Edited by J.-P. Migne. 162 vols. Paris, 1857-1886
PL Patrologia latina. Edited by J.-P. Migne. 217 vols. Paris, 1844-1864
PNTC Pillar New Testament Commentary

PTSDSSP Princeton Theological Seminary Dead Sea Scrolls Project. Edited by
James H. Charlesworth. Tubingen/Louisville, 1993—
XUl
PVTG Pseudepigrapha Veteris Testamenti Graece
RB Revue biblique
RevQ Revue de Qumran
RGG3 Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart. Edited by K. Galling. 7 vols.

3 rd ed. Tubingen, 1957-1965
RGG4 Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart. Edited by H. D. Betz. 8 vols.

4th ed. Tubingen, 1998-
RSV Revised Standard Version
SB Sources bibliques
SBLDS Society of Biblical Literature Dissertation Series
SBLSCS Society of Biblical Literature Septuagint and Cognate Studies
SBLSymS Society of Biblical Literature Symposium Series
SBLWGRW Society of Biblical Literature Writings from the Greco-Roman World
SBT Studies in Biblical Theology
SC Sources chretiennes. Paris, 1943-
SNTSMS Society for New Testament Studies Monograph Series
SP Sacra Pagina
SSN Studia semitica neerlandica
ST Studia theologica
StudNeot Studia neotestamentica
SUNT Studien zur Umwelt des Neuen Testaments
SVTP Studia in Veteris Testamenti pseudepigraphica
TDNT Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. Edited by G. Kittel

and G. Friedrich. Translated by G. W. Bromiley. 10 vols. Grand
Rapids, 1964-1976
XIV
TDOT Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament. Edited by G. J.
Botterweck and H. Ringgren. Translated by J. T. Willis, et al. Grand
Rapids, 1974-2006
THAT Theologisches Handworterbuch zum Alien Testament. Edited by E.

Jenni, with assistance from C. Westermann. 2 vols. Stuttgart, 1971—
1976
ThWAT Theologisches Worterbuch zum Alten Testament. Edited by G. J.
Botterweck and H. Ringgren. Stuttgart, 1970-
TLG Thesaurus Linguae Graecae. Irvine.
TLNT Theological Lexicon of the New Testament. C. Spicq. Translated and

edited by J. D. Ernest. 3 vols. Peabody, 1994
TLOT Theological Lexicon of the Old Testament. Edited by E. Jenni, with
assistance from C. Westermann. Translated by M. E. Biddle. 3 vols.
Peabody, 1997
TLZ Theologische Literaturzeitung
TSAJ Texte und Studien zum antiken Judentum
TUGAL Texte und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der altchristlichen

Literatur
TWNT Theologisches Worterbuch zum Neuen Testament. Edited by G. Kittel
and G. Friedrich. Stuttgart, 1932-1979
TynBul Tyndale Bulletin
TZ Theologische Zeitschrift
VT Vetus Testamentum
WAC Wise, M., M. Abegg, Jr., and E. Cook. The Dead Sea Scrolls: A New
Translation. New York, 1996
WBC Word Biblical Commentary
WUNT Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament
ZA W Zeitschrift fur die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft
XV
ZEE Zeitschrift fur evangelische Ethik
ZNW Zeitschrift fur die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der
dlteren Kirche
ZTK Zeitschrift fur Theologie und Kirche
XVI
Introduction
The New Perspective on Paul represents a significant paradigm shift in the
interpretation of Paul's doctrine of justification. One of the hallmarks of the New-
Perspective is the shift, to use Krister Stendahl's terminology, from reading Paul through
the lens of the introspective conscience of the West, to reading him through a
sociological and covenantal lens in terms of the Jew-Gentile issue.2 Paul's righteousness
' N. T. Wright says there is no such thing as "the" New Perspective, but only a "disparate family of
perspectives" with "fierce squabbles and sibling rivalries going on inside." Wright, Justification: God's
Plan and Paul's Vision (Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 2009), 28. Accordingly, Wright is hesitant to
identify with "the New Perspective" label and uses other terms such as "a covenantal reading of Paul"
(Wright, What Saint Paul Really Said [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997], 132) and more recently "a 'fresh
perspective' on Paul" (idem, Paul in Fresh Perspective [Minneapolis: Fortress, 2005], 40). However,
without smoothing over the unique viewpoints held by individual scholars, in this dissertation I use the
label "the New Perspective on Paul" in order to refer to an established, coherent position with regard to the
interpretation of Paul's doctrine of justification. I believe it is legitimate to do so since "the New
Perspective on Paul" was identified as such by James D. G. Dunn in his Manson Memorial Lecture at the
University of Manchester on November 4, 1982 and published as "The New Perspective on Paul," BJRL 65
(1983): 95-122; reprinted with additional notes in Dunn, Jesus, Paul, and the Law: Studies in Mark and
Galatians (Louisville: Westminster/John Knox, 1990), 183-214. More recently, see Dunn, The New
Perspective on Paul: Collected Essays (WUNT 11/185; Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2005). In spite of
differences with Dunn on numerous issues (e.g., Christology; the pistis Christou debate; the notion of
Israel's continuing exile and the narrative dimension of Paul's thought, to name the most significant ones),
Wright is in fundamental agreement with Dunn on the social/covenantal shape of Paul's doctrine of
justification and claims {The Climax oj the Covenant [Minneapolis: Fortress, 1992], 139 n. 10) to have
arrived at essentially the same position independently of Dunn. See his lecture delivered at the Tyndale
House in Cambridge on July 4, 1978, published as "The Paul of History and the Apostle of Faith." TynBul
29 (1978): 61-88. Dunn further points out in a footnote that Wright "was the first to recognize the
significance of Sanders' work and to offer 'anew way of looking at Paul... (and) a new perspective on ...
Pauline problems.'" Dunn, "The New Perspective: whence, what and whither?" in The New Perspective on
Paid: Collected Essays, 6-1 n. 24. Wright responded to Dunn's footnote by saying: '"There are times when I
wish that the phrase had never been invented; indeed, perhaps for Freudian reasons, I had quite forgotten
that 1 had invented it myself (though even then it was borrowed from Krister Stendahl) until J. D. G. Dunn,
who is normally credited with it, graciously pointed out that I had used it in my 1978 Tyndale Lecture, in
which, as I well remember, he was sitting in the front row." Wright, Justification, 28. Thus, by "the New
Perspective on Paul" I am referring to the position marked out by the points of agreement between Dunn
and Wright in their sociological reinterpretation of Paul's doctrine of justification in light of the work of
Sanders on the gracious character of the religion of Judaism.
2
Krister Stendahl, "The Apostle Paul and the Introspective Conscience of the West," IITR 56 (1963): 199-
215. Besides Stendahl, other precursors of the Dunn/Wright emphasis on the sociological function of the
law and their construction of Paul's doctrine of justification in covenantal terms include Markus Barth
1
Introduction 2
terminology is seen as having less to do with how individual sinners can be justified or
declared righteous in the sight of a holy God in order to enjoy eschatological life, and
more to do with corporate questions concerning the identity of the covenant people, the
inclusion of the Gentiles in that people, and the fulfillment of God's covenant promises to
Abraham.3
This shift in the interpretation of the Pauline doctrine of justification from
soteriological concerns to questions regarding covenant faithfulness and covenant
membership rests on three pillars. The first pillar is E. P. Sanders's critique of the older
Protestant characterization of Judaism as a legalistic religion and his revised
understanding of the pattern of the Jewish religion as one of "covenantal nomism."4 The
two terms provide the two poles of the Jewish religion. At its heart, Judaism is "nomism,"
since the keeping the Law of God is viewed as central; but it is "covenantal nomism,"
because the keeping of the Law is within the context of God's gracious covenant with his
people. The covenant is prior to keeping the Law. Israel was brought into a covenant
("Jews and Gentiles: The Social Character of Justification in Paul," JES 5 [1968]: 241-67). and Nils
Alstrup Dahl ("The Doctrine of Justification: Its Social Function and Implications," in Studies in Paul:
Theology for the Early Christian Mission [Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 1977], 95-120). See also
Stendahl's essay, "Paul Among Jews and Gentiles," based on the Thomas White Currie Lectures delivered
at Austin Presbyterian Seminary. February 4-8. 1963. and published in Paul Among Jews and Gentiles
(Philadelphia: Fortress, 1976), 1-77.
3
Stendahl: "We tend to read [Paul] as if his question was: On what grounds, on what terms, are we to be
saved? ... But Paul was chiefly concerned about the relation between Jews and Gentiles - and in the
development of this concern he used as one of his arguments the idea of justification by faith." Stendahl,
Paul Among Jews and Gentiles, 3. Wright: "Saul of Tarsus was not interested in a timeless system of
salvation, whether of works-righteousness or anything else ... Jews like Saul of Tarsus were not interested
in an abstract, timeless, ahistorical system of salvation. They were not even primarily interested in, as we
say today, 'going to heaven when they died' ... They were interested in the salvation which, they believed,
God had promised to his people Israel ... 'Justification' thus describes the coming great act of redemption
and salvation, seen from the point of view of the covenant (Israel is God's people)." Wright, What Saint
Paul Really Said, 32-33.
4
E. P. Sanders made the New Perspective possible (so Dunn, Jesus, Paul, and the Law, 211) by
demonstrating the character of Judaism as a non-legalistic covenantal nomism. Sanders may therefore be
regarded as a founding father of the New Perspective. However, Dunn and Wright distance themselves for
Sanders on a number of issues with regard to the interpretation of Paul. Sec Dunn, Jesus, Paul, and the
Law. 186-88, 211-12; idem, "The New Perspective: whence, what and whither?" in The New Perspective
on Paul: Collected Essays, 6-7; Wright, What Saint Paul Really Said, 114.
Introduction 3
relationship by God's electing grace and mercy, but once in the covenant obedience is the
requirement for staying in the covenant and thus attaining salvation at the last day. "The
covenant was not earned, but obedience to the commandments was a consequence of the
prior election of Israel ... Obedience and the intention to obey are required if one is to
remain in the covenant and share in its promises, but they do not earn God's mercy.' 0
Older Protestant theologians had spoken as if Judaism denied God's mercy and taught
that humans earn God's favor through meritorious works righteousness. This was thought
to be the view that Paul was attacking in his doctrine of justification when he rejected the
notion of justification by works of the law in favor of justification by faith in Christ on
the basis of his atoning death.
The significance of this change in the perception of the nature of the Judaism that
Paul was interacting with in his teaching on justification cannot be overstated. If Paul was
not criticizing justification by human works of righteousness, then what was he
criticizing? It was this question which led James D. G. Dunn and N. T. Wright to erect
the second pillar of the New Perspective, namely, the social function of the law.6 Their
argument is that spya vouou is a technical term for the boundary markers (circumcision,
Sabbath observance, and kosher food laws) that separate Jews from Gentiles. Paul's
formula "justification not by works of the law but by faith in Christ" (e.g., Gal 2:16) is
thus not setting up a contrast between justification by merit and justification by grace, but
a contrast between two ways of being identified with the covenant people of God,
5
E. P. Sanders, Paul and Palestinian Judaism (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1977), 85, 147.
6
"If the Judaism of Paul's day also gave such a place to divine election, atonement and forgiveness, then
what was Paul objecting to? ... My T. W. Manson Lecture on 'The New Perspective on Paul' (1983) was a
first attempt to find a better answer. I found it in the context occasioning Paul's first use of the key term,
'works of the law', in Gal 2.16." Dunn, "The New Perspective: whence, what and whither?" in The New
Perspective on Paul: Collected Essays, 1.
Introduction 4
namely, by the badge of the boundary markers and by the badge of faith in Christ. Paul's
doctrine of justification by faith, then, rejects the Jewish racial view that membership in
the covenant community is restricted either to those who are born Jews or to Gentiles
who become Jews by getting circumcised and observing the distinctive practices that
keep the Jews from the unclean Gentiles.7
The third pillar of the New Perspective is connected to the second, and consists of
the lexical claim that Paul's AIK-language is to be interpreted against a Jewish
background and hence in covenantal categories. In Paul's "justified not by works of the
law but by faith in Christ" language, not only the phrase "works of the law" but also the
verb SiKaioco is subjected to reinterpretation. Traditionally, the verb was understood in
soteriological terms, that is, as having to do with the status of righteousness before God,
with the Catholic-Protestant split on whether it means "to make righteous" (Augustine
and the Roman Catholic Church) or "to declare righteous" (Luther and the Protestant
tradition). But in the New Perspective it is interpreted, not in soteriological but
sociological/covenantal terms, as meaning "to reckon someone to be a member of the
covenant people of God." The adjective 5ucaio<; is taken to mean "faithful to the
covenant." The noun 5iKaoicr6vr| is interpreted as "the status of covenant membership" or
as "covenant faithfulness," depending on the context.
7
N. T. Wright says, "I am in substantial agreement with [Dunn's] general thesis about 'works of law' in
Paul." Wright, The Climax of the Covenant (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1992), 139 n. 10. "If we ask how it is
that Israel has missed her vocation, Paul's answer is that she is guilty not of 'legalism' or 'works-
righteousness' but of what I call 'national righteousness', the belief that fleshly Jewish descent guarantees
membership of God's true covenant people." Idem, "The Paul of History and the Apostle of Faith," 65.
"Torah thus provided the vital covenant boundary-marker, especially in those areas where it seemed
important to maintain Israel's distinctiveness ... It was Torah, and particularly the special badges of
sabbath and purity, that demarcated the covenant people." Idem, The New Testament and the People of God
(Minneapolis: Fortress, 1992), 238.
Introduction 5
The focus of this dissertation is on the third pillar of the New Perspective, the
covenantal interpretation of Paul's AIK-terminology. And even here, I have chosen to
narrow my investigation to one of these AlK-terms, the lexeme 5iKatoawn 9sou, which
occurs 10 times in Paul's epistles. It is a hallmark of the New Perspective on Paul that its
advocates claim that in Romans 1:17 and 3:2 Iff the phrase is a cipher for God's covenant
faithfulness. For example, James D. G. Dunn writes:
It should be equally evident why God's righteousness could be understood as

God''s faithfulness to his people. For his righteousness was simply the fulfilment
of his covenant obligations as Israel's God in delivering, saving, and vindicating
Israel, despite Israel's failure.8
N. T. Wright adopts substantially the same interpretation as Dunn:
For a reader of the Septuagint... "the righteousness of God" would have one
obvious meaning: God's own faithfulness to his promises, to the covenant.9
"God's righteousness will be revealed" was a coded way of saying that God
would at last act within history to vindicate Israel.10
The righteousness of God [in Rom 3:21] ... must mean, can only mean, God's
faithfulness to his single plan.1'
It should be noted that this interpretation is not exclusive to the New Perspective.
For example, scholars as diverse as Ernst Kasemann,1 Richard B. Hays, and Michael F.
8
James D. G. Dunn, The Theology of Paul the Apostle (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), 342.
9
N. T. Wright, What Saint Paul Really Said {Grand Rapids: Eerdmans. 1997), 96-97.
10
N. T. Wright, Romans, in New Interpreter's Bible (Nashville: Abingdon, 2002), 10.401.
11
N. T. Wright, Justification: God's Plan and Paul's Vision (Downers Grove: IVP, 2009), 201.
12
Ernst Kasemann, Commentary on Romans (trans. Geoffrey W. Bromiley: Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
1980), 24-30, 78-85, 100-1.
13
Richard B. Hays, "Psalm 143 and the Logic of Romans 3," JBL 99 (1980): 107-15; idem, Echoes of
Scripture in the Letters of Paul (New Haven: Yale, 1989), 36-38; idem, "Justification," ABD 3.1131; idem,
The Faith of Jesus Christ: The Narrative Substructure of Galatians 3:1-4:11 (2nd ed.; Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans/Dearborn: Dove, 2002), 294.
Introduction 6
Bird,14 are influenced by the relational/covenantal interpretation of 5iKaioauvn Osofj or
some version of it.
The first and second pillars of the New Perspective ("covenantal nomism" and
"works of the law") have been sufficiently addressed by a number of important studies.13
The third pillar has received less attention. But given the importance of "the
righteousness of God" for Paul, especially in Romans, this novel view merits further
investigation.'
I suspect that this lacuna is due to the fact that the redefinition of "righteousness"
in covenantal, relational, Hebraic terms has become so entrenched that few scholars feel
the need to subject this redefinition to critical examination. I believe that I have
something new to contribute, since I will be going against the tide of the scholarly
consensus by arguing that Paul's "righteousness" terminology does not have a Hebraic,
relational context or meaning. By conducting a more methodologically-sound
investigation of the lexical semantics of Paul's "righteousness" terminology using the
latest developments in LXX lexicography, I believe I can help move the discussion
forward on a more secure philological basis, rather than merely engaging the issue with
the broad bmsh of theological motifs. While much has been written on Paul's doctrine of
1
Michael F. Bird. The Saving Righteousness of God: Studies on Paul, Justification and the New
Perspective (PBM; Milton Keynes, United Kingdom/Waynesboro, Georgia: Paternoster, 2007), 10-16;
idem, Introducing Paul: The Man, His Mission and His Message (Downers Grove: IVP, 2008), 93-95.
15
E.g.. Andrew A. Das, Paul, the Law, and the Covenant (Peabody: Hendrickson, 2001); idem, "Beyond
Covenantal Nomism: Paul, Judaism, and Perfect Obedience," Concordia Journal 27 (2001): 234-52; Simon
J. Gathercole, Where Is Boasting? Early Jewish Soteriology and Paul's Response in Romans 1-5 (Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002): Seyoon Kim, Paul and the New Perspective: Second Thoughts on the Origin of
Paul's Gospel (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002); Peter Stuhlmacher, Revisiting Paul's Doctrine of
Justification: A Challenge to the New Perspective, with an essay by Donald A. Hagner (Downers Grove:
InterVarsity, 2001); Charles H. Talbert, "Paul, Judaism, and the Revisionists," CBQ 63 (2001): 1-22.
16
Some good work has been done by Mark A. Seifrid in "Righteousness Language in the Hebrew-
Scriptures and Early Judaism," in Justification and Variegated Nomism, Vol. 1: The Complexities of Second
Temple Judaism (WUNT 11/140; cd. D. A. Carson, Peter T. O'Brien, and Mark A. Seifrid; Grand Rapids:
Baker Academic/Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2001), 415-42.
Introduction - 7
justification as a theological theme, there are far fewer scholarly treatments of the issue
from a more philological angle, with careful attention to the principles of lexical
semantics in general and of semantic change via the LXX in particular. The book-length
studies that have examined the issue philologically17 used what are now regarded as
outdated linguistic methods and operated with naive - and in many cases, incorrect -
assumptions about the nature of semantic change when Greek words were used by Jewish
authors with a supposed "Hebraic" or "Semitic" mindset.
The idea for this dissertation topic was triggered by the apparent dissonance
between two things: (1) on the one hand, the fact that James Barr's critique of the
Cremer/Kittel methodology of lexical study has been so widely accepted; and (2) on the
other hand, the continued employment of the Cremer/Kittel method in the writings of
Dunn and Wright as if Barr's critique never made any impact.
Therefore, my dissertation will make a contribution to the field of Pauline studies
(1) by subjecting Cremer's Hebraic/relational theory to a critical examination using the
latest theoretical and applied principles of lexical semantics and LXX lexicography, and
(2) by seeking to rescue the interpretation of Paul's doctrine of justification from
inappropriate covenantal categories, thus making possible a renewed "Old Perspective"
understanding of Paul's "righteousness/justification" terminology.
In the article on "Righteousness, Righteousness of God" in the Dictionary of Paul
and His Letters we read:
17
Hermann Cremer, Die paulinische Rechtfertigungslehre im Zusammenhange ihrer geschichtlichen
Voraussetzungen (2nd ed.; Giitersloh: Bertelsmann, 1900); Peter Stuhlmacher, Gerechtigkeit Gottes bei
Paulus (2nd ed.; FRLANT 87; Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1966); David Hill, Greek Words and
Hebrew Meanings: Studies in the Semantics of Soteriological Terms (SNTSMS 5; Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1967); John A. Ziesler, The Meaning of Righteousness in Paul: A Linguistic and
Theological Inquiiy (SNTSMS 20; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1972).
Introduction 8
The Hellenistic idea of righteousness as a virtue, a meeting of the norm, was

replaced with the idea of meeting God's claim in this covenant relationship ...
Thus the semantic range for dikaios in LXX Greek was enlarged due to the
influence of the Hebrew background.18
My purpose is to examine whether this claim is in fact true using a rigorous
methodology based on the latest developments of LXX lexicography. Furthermore, I
want to draw out the lexical implications of my lexicographical findings for the
interpretation of Paul's doctrine of justification. In particular, I want to provide lexical,
philological, and exegetical support for Westerholm's reading of Paul's "righteousness"
language, which rests on the distinction between "the righteousness of the law" (ordinary
righteousness) and "the righteousness of faith/God" (extraordinary righteousness).19 The
task of debunking the Cremer's Hebraic/relational interpretation is a crucial step toward
restoring the traditional understanding of "righteousness." I will argue in the positive part
of my dissertation that "righteousness," for Paul, is not covenant membership but the
state of being legally recognized as Sucouoq before God, a state theoretically achievable
by perfect good behavior and one which God requires of all humans if they are to avoid
perishing and inherit eternal life. But since, in fact, "there is none SIKOIIOC;, no not one"
(Rom 3:10), God in his mercy has made provision for an extraordinary righteousness,
even "the righteousness of God" in Christ, received as a gift, by faith in Christ, apart
from doing the good deeds required in the law.
In Chapter 1,1 trace the history of interpretation of StKouorjwri Bsou in Paul, from
Origen (the earliest commentator on Paul's epistle to the Romans) down to the present-
day New Perspective. I see three main phases in the history of interpretation of Paul's use
18
K. L. Onesti and M. T. Brauch, "Righteousness, Righteousness of God," DPL 830.
19
Stephen Westerholm, Perspectives Old and New on Paul: The "Lutheran " Paul and His Critics (Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, 2004), 263-84; idem, "The Righteousness of the Law and the Righteousness of Faith in
Romans," Interpretation 58 (July 2004): 253-64.
Introduction 9
of the phrase "the righteousness of God." Phase one is the Greek and Latin fathers,
primarily Augustine, and the medieval commentators, who follow Augustine's lead. In
this phase, the term is understood soteriologically as referring to the righteous status that
comes from God as a gift and is bestowed on humans by faith through the infusion of
righteousness. Phase two begins with the Protestant Reformation and continues in the
post-Reformation period through to the present in various evangelical writers and
commentators. In this phase, "the righteousness of God" is also understood
soteriologically, as a gift of God, but rather than that gift coming to humans through the
infusion of righteousness, the gift is bestowed by means of imputation, so that the
righteousness of God is the righteousness of Christ reckoned to the believer. Phase three
starts in the 19th century with the Ritschlian school and is picked up and developed by
Hermann Cremer in his view that righteousness is a relational concept. In this third phase,
"the righteousness of God" is understood not primarily as a gift but as God's saving
activity in fulfillment of his covenant relationship with Israel. The focus of my
dissertation is to critique this new relational view, associated primarily with the name of
Hermann Cremer, and developed in New Testament theology through the writings of
Kasemann and Stuhlmacher, and subsequently incorporated into the New Perspective
(Dunn, Wright, and Hays).
Having shown that the New Perspective interpretation of SiKatocruvn Qeov is
relatively recent with roots in the Ritschlian school and founded directly on Hermann
Cremer's relational theory of righteousness, I then move on to engage in a detailed
lexical study of "righteousness." My goal is to demonstrate the fallacious nature of
Cremer's theory and, thereby, to undermine the central lexical basis of the New
Introduction - 10
Perspective interpretation of "the righteousness of God." Since this dissertation is a word
study of "righteousness" across two languages, Greek and Hebrew, in Chapter 2,1
describe the methodological assumptions and approach of this study.
The next three chapters (3-5) are the heart of the dissertation, in which I examine
the usage of 8iKouoct>vr| in extra-biblical Greek (Chapter 3), the usage of p~125 and np"]S
in the Old Testament and of SiKcxiorjuvn in the Septuagint (Chapter 4), and the usage of
"righteousness" in Jewish literature (mostly extant in Greek and Latin translations) from
the post-exilic period to the Bar Kokhba revolt in 135 AD (Chapter 5). The chapter on
extra-biblical Greek is important for providing a baseline against which biblical and
Jewish usage can be compared. My argument is that the difference between "Greek" and
"Hebrew" thought regarding "righteousness" is not as marked or dramatic as scholars
from Cremer to the New Perspective have made it seem. To be sure, the Hebrew terms
have usages that are unique to the biblical context (e.g., the use of the plural "righteous
acts," the saving/delivering/vindicatory use of "righteousness") not found in extra-
biblical Greek. Nevertheless, aside from these differences, the term "righteousness" -
whether in extra-biblical Greek, Jewish Greek, or in Hebrew - is basically used in two
main senses, a judicial and an ethical sense. Furthermore, and this is the critical point,
there is no evidence, in either the Greek or the Hebrew usage, for the notion that
"righteousness" is a relational concept in which the relationship itself is the norm so that
"righteousness" is conformity to the demands that a relationship brings with itself. This is
Cremer's theory and I believe that the lexical study of Chapters 3-5 has disproved it once
and for all.

Introduction - 11
Another theme that runs throughout Chapters 3-5, in addition to refuting
Cremer's Hebraic/relational theory, is that "righteousness," both in biblical usage and in
Jewish literature, is frequently used in reference to the notion of "righteousness before
God." This is a critical observation, for it then becomes the basis for my positive
interpretation in Chapter 6. In this chapter, 1 make the case that in seven of its ten
occurrences in Paul, StKaioawn Osoi) refers to the gift of the status of righteousness
before God, a status received by faith in Christ, on the basis of his righteous life and
atoning death.20 In addition to making this positive case for the gift interpretation of "the
righteousness of God," I also engage in exegesis of several key passages in Paul that have
been appealed to in order to argue for "the covenant faithfulness" interpretation (Rom
3:5; 3:25-26; 2 Cor 5:21).
Finally, having critically examined the New Perspective and vindicated the old
perspective with regard to "the righteousness of God" in Paul, in the concluding (Chapter
7) I review and summarize the argument of this dissertation. In addition, I offer some
implications for Paul's doctrine of justification and for the New Perspective on Paul.
20
There is no need to insist that Paul must use the phrase in the same way in all ten instances, as if it were a
terminus technicus. The seven occurrences of SiKatoouvr) 9eoi3 in the gift-of-righteousness-from-God sense
are Rom 1:17; 3:21, 22; 10:3 (2x); 2 Cor 5:21; Phil 3:9 (with EK). The remaining three occurrences (Rom
3:5, 25, 26) I interpret as having reference to God's distributive justice. All ten cases will be examined in
Chapter 6.
Chapter 1
History of Interpretation of AiKaiocwn 0eov in Paul
My task in this opening chapter is to provide a survey of the history of
interpretation of the phrase 8iKaioauvn 6sou in Paul. I see that history as unfolding
basically in three stages: (1) patristic and medieval interpretation up to the time of the
Protestant Reformation; (2) the interpretation of this phrase by the 16th century Reformers
and their theological heirs from the 17th century to the present day; and (3) the rise of a
"new view" in the latter half of the 19th century, beginning with Ludwig Diestel, Albrecht
Ritschl, and Hermann Cremer, and continuing down to the present in both Old Testament
and New Testament scholarship, culminating in "the New Perspective on Paul." The
"new view" interprets StKaioouvrj in a Hebraic/relational sense and takes the entire
phrase as God's saving activity in fulfillment of his covenant promises (iustitia
salutiferd). The genitive 0soi5 on this view is thus taken as a subjective genitive.
Although the purpose of this chapter is entirely descriptive, there is also an
implicit argument involving the following steps.
First, I believe it is significant that the patristic and medieval tradition, especially
among the Greek-speaking fathers, is nearly unanimous in taking SiKaiocruvn as referring
to the righteous status conferred on the believer as a gift and the genitive Osou as a
genitive of source or author. If the fathers who were native Greek speakers did not see
"covenant faithfulness" or iustitia salutifera in this Pauline lexeme, and rather interpreted
12
Chapter 1. History of Interpretation 13
Sncaiorjuvn in a manner more in line with its traditional meaning in extra-biblical Greek
(i.e.. as "righteousness" or "a righteous status"), then there is good reason to doubt the
correctness of the Hebraic/relational view.
Second, while the Reformers undeniably departed from the patristic and medieval
tradition when they asserted that this righteousness from God is imputed rather than
infused, they nevertheless operated within the same lexical and syntactical framework of
patristic and medieval interpretation. That is, they maintained the basic meaning of
SiKouorjuvn as "righteousness" or a "righteous status," and they continued the tradition of
taking Bsou as a genitive of source or author.
Third, the "new view" promoted in the 19th century by Diestel, Ritschl, and
Cremer and picked up by Schlatter, Kasemann, and the New Perspective, really has very
little historic support and suggests a radical divergence from what could be regarded as
the nearly unanimous voice of ecclesiastical tradition from Origen to the Protestant
Reformation. It is, of course, possible that a new interpretation could be proved correct,
and I am certainly not arguing that the weight of tradition is ipso facto the decisive
criterion of truth. Nevertheless, it is something that ought to be taken into consideration.
The fact that there is hardly any support for the "new view" prior to Ritschl and Cremer
would suggest that the burden of proof rests with the advocates of the "new view" to
demonstrate the correctness of their exegesis with clear and compelling argument.
Additionally, I would argue that most 20th century interpreters, as well as those in
the present, who advocate the Hebraic/relational interpretation have not gone back to
examine Cremer's arguments for themselves but typically cite his 1899 work as an
unquestioned authority, or they cite other scholars influenced by Cremer, but the chain of
citation eventually goes back to Cremer. Yet if the arguments that Cremer advanced are
found to be wanting, then the entire edifice of scholarship may be seen to have been built
on a less than secure foundation.
A. History of Interpretation up to the Reformation
In describing the history of inteipretation. one naturally wants to begin with the
apostolic fathers, as they are the earliest writings attesting to Christian reflection on the
New Testament. However, they do not comment specifically on Paul's language of "the
righteousness of God."1 This is not surprising, since their writings were more topical and
ad hoc in nature. Commentary writing did not begin until the third century. Therefore, 1
begin with the Greek fathers of the third century and following.
1. The Greek Fathers
Origen (c. 185 - c. 254),2 in his commentary on Romans, explains Rom 3:21 by
appealing to 1 Cor 1:30 and concludes that "the righteousness of God" is Christ himself:
The apostle Paul himself says elsewhere of Christ that "he has become for us
wisdom from God and righteousness and holiness and redemption." This
righteousness of God, therefore, which is Christ (Haec ergo justitia Dei, quae est
Christus), is indeed disclosed apart from the natural law, but not apart from the
law of Moses or the prophets.3
1
Peter Stuhlmacher, Gerechtigkeit Gottes bei Paulus (2nd ed.; FRLANT 87; Gottingen: Vandenhoeck &
Ruprecht, 1966), 11.
2
The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church (ODCC) (3rd ed.; ed. F. L. Cross and E. A. Livingstone;
Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997), 1193.
J
Migne, Patrologia graeca {PG) 14.944. ET by Thomas P. Scheck, Origen • Commentary on the Epistle to
the Romans, Books 1-5 (The Fathers of the Church 103; Washington, D.C.: The Catholic University of
America Press, 2001), 213. Origen's commentary on Romans was translated into Latin by Rufmus (345-
410). "No doubt he touched up Origen's text as he went along, but on the whole it seems that the author's
original intention has been preserved in translation." Gerald Bray, ed., Romans (ACCS; Downers Grove:
InterVarsity, 1998), xxiii.
Chapter 1: History of Interpretation 15
Not only is "the righteousness of God" Christ himself, but it is given to all who believe,
causing them to be cleansed of their sins, justified, and made fit for glory:
Therefore the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ reaches to all
who believe, whether they are Jews or Greeks. It justifies those who have been
cleansed from their past crimes and makes them capable of receiving the glory of
God (Justitia Dei per fidem Jesu Christi ad omnes perveniens qui credunt, sive
Judaei sint, sive Graeci, purgatos eos a prioribus sceleribus justificat, et capaces
facit gloriae Dei); and it supplies this glory, not for the sake of their merits nor for
the sake of works, but freely to those who believe.4
In other words, Origen interprets the Pauline lexeme "the righteousness of God" as
having reference not to God's faithfulness to the covenant but to Christ himself and the
status of being cleansed from sin, justified, and qualified for eschatological glory on the
basis of Christ's atonement. "The righteousness of God" is thus a soteriological status
that sinful humans receive by believing in Christ.
Later, in his comments on Rom 10:5-6, Origen notes that Paul makes mention of
"two kinds of righteousness" (duarum justitiarum), namely, "the righteousness that is
from the law" {justitia quae ex lege) and "the righteousness that is from faith" (justitia
quae ex fide). Origen connects these two kinds of righteousness with Paul's statement in
the immediately preceding context about Israel's unbelief ("being ignorant of the
righteousness of God, and seeking to establish their own righteousness," Rom 10:3).
Origen comments: "It seems to me that that righteousness of God that he said above was
not known by Israel is this righteousness that is from faith (Deijustitiam, ipsa sit justitia
haec quae ex fide est)," while "their own righteousness" is the same as the righteousness
4
Origen; PG 14.945. ET by Thomas P. Scheck, Origen: Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans. Books
7-5,215.
Chapter 1: History of Interpretation- 16
that is from the law.5 This is significant because, as we will see, many recent scholars
from Cremer to Kasemann to the New Perspective reject the identification of "the
righteousness of God" with "the righteousness of faith." Although they aclmowledge the
close connection between the two, these scholars want to retain the theocentric emphasis
of "the righteousness of God" (interpreted as God's saving righteousness in fulfillment of
his covenant promises) while allowing only the latter term, "the righteousness of faith,"
to refer to the soteriological status of righteousness enjoyed by the believer.
Although Origen is an important early witness, it is when we turn to the great
preacher Chrysostom (c. 347^107)6 that we really begin to see a line of interpretation
that will be followed by all the Antiochene fathers and will influence the Latin fathers as
well. In his second homily on Romans, commenting on Rom 1:17, Chrysostom says:
And righteousness, not thine own, but that of God; hinting also at the abundance
of it and the facility. For you do not achieve it by toilings and labors, but you
receive it by a gift from above, contributing one thing only from your own store,
"believing" (Kai 5iraiocruvr|v ov onv, akXa ©sou, KOU TO 8a\|/i)is<; avxf\q Kai TO
SUKOXOV aiviTTOuevos;. On yap s<^ iSprorcov Kai TIOVGJV aurnv KaTopOoig, akX' and
rfjc; avcoOsv 5copsac; A,afx|3avsic;, sv uovov sio(pspcov o'ucoBev, TO 7iiaTsi5aai).7
Again, in his homily on Rom 10:3, Chrysostom makes the contrast between the
righteousness of the law, which comes by "toils and labors," and the righteousness of
God, received as a gift. He says:
But he calls it "their own righteousness," either because the Law was no longer of
force, or because it was one of trouble and toil. But this he calls God's
righteousness, that from faith, because it comes entirely from grace from above,
and because men are justified in this case, not by labors, but by the gift of God
(18tav Ss 5tKaioo"i3vr|v auTf)v KaXeT, f) 5ta TO unKsri TOV vouov iaûsiv, f\ 5ia TO
7iovcov sivai Kai ISpcoTcov Taurnv 5s TOU ©SOU 5tKatorjuvnv TTJV SK maTscog, 8ta TO
5
Origen; PG 14.1160. ET by Thomas P. Scheck, Origen: Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, Books
6-10 (The Fathers of the Church 104; Washington D.C.: The Catholic University of America Press, 2002),
136.
" ODCC 342.
7
Chrysostom, NPNF] 11.349; PG 60.409.
6A,6KA,npov aikfjt; SK Tfjc; avcoOsv sivat xapiroc;, Kai oux*ftovoic;akXa ©sou

StKaiourjOai Scopsg).8
Chrysostom's interpretation sets the pattern for those who follow him. In his
comments on Rom 10:3, Theodore of Mopsuestia (c. 350-428)9 makes clear that he
interprets the phrase as equivalent to "justification":
On the one hand, they [the Jews] have disregarded the justification from God
promised to us; on the other hand, having supposed that by their own works and
by following the law in their conduct they would be able to save themselves, they
made no effort to believe in Christ and to receive the justification thenceforth
promised to us by grace (xr\v u£v 7iapa TOU 0SU S7iayysA,0staav fip.lv SiKaicoatv
napsTSov, oinOsvTsg 8s d7io raw oucsicov spyoov OKOAOUOWC; TG> v6(aw
7IOXITSU6U,SVOI TOVJTO sauToi) Ttspmoifjaai SuvacBai, oi)8s uiav SOSVTO a7iou5f|v
TOU 7nrjTsi5oai XpirjTcp, Kai Tf)v SKSIGSV f|piv Kara x«piv S7rayys^0sTCTav SiKataiaw
SsâaBai).10
Notice that Theodore glosses "the righteousness of God" as "the justification from
God (7tapd xov ©sou) promised to us," indicating that he takes "righteousness" as
equivalent to "justification" (SiKaicoan;), and "of God" as a genitive of source or a
genitivus auctoris.
Theodoret of Cyrrhus (c. 393-c. 460)" was another prolific exegete in the
Antiochene tradition. In his comments on Rom 1:17, he writes:
He says that the righteousness of God is revealed through the gospel, not only that
[righteousness] which is supplied to us (rf|v f|ulv xopnyonpsvnv), but also that
which in the very mystery of the [divine] economy is openly set forth. For not by
power did he administer our salvation, nor by command and word did he destroy
the power of death, but he mixed mercy with justice (sKspaas TCD Sncako TOV
sA,sov). And the only begotten Word of God himself, having clothed himself with
Adam's nature, and having kept it uninitiated from all sin, offered it on our behalf
and, having paid the debt of that nature, he discharged the common debt of all
men (evSucdusvoc; (pucnv, Kai 7cdan<; duapTia<; (puXdâq dpunrov, TauTnv imsp
8
Chrysostom, NPNF^ 11.472; PG 60.565.
9
ODCC 1598.
10
Theodore of Mopsuestia; PG 66.845; translation mine.
11
ODCC 1600.
f]U(bv 7cpoo"svf)voxs, Kai TO xp£°?ri^c;(puascoc d7to8ou<;, TO KOIVOV navTCov

dv0ptb7icov 8isA,uosv 6cpA.rjua).12
Theodoret sees "the righteousness of God" as containing two ideas: it is not only
a gift ("that [righteousness] which is supplied to us"), but it is also God's attribute of
righteousness as expressed in the economy of redemption, namely, the fact that the only
begotten Word clothed himself with Adam's nature in order to pay the debt that all
humans owed, thus mixing "mercy with justice."
On Rom 10:3, Theodoret has this to say:
He calls their unseasonable (mcatpov) keeping of the law, "their own

righteousness," for they are zealous to keep it even though it has ceased. But "the
righteousness of God" he names that [righteousness] which comes by grace
through faith (©sou 8s SiKaiocuvnv, TUV Kara x&pw Sid rfjc nioxeoic, yivou£vnv
cbvouaas).
And on 2 Cor 5:21, Theodoret interprets "the righteousness of God" as a gift of
God, "for he has gifted us with the riches of righteousness (TOV ydp rfjc 8ucaiocwnc; T]uiv
s8capf|aaTO TTX-OUTOV)."14
The semi-Pelagian Gennadius of Constantinople (d. 471)lD offered this
comment on Rom 10:3:
For not understanding the greatness of righteousness, [namely,] that by divine

grace alone could humans produce it, they foolishly strive to establish the things
that seem [right] to them, and to obtain justification through their own works (xr\q
SiKatcbrjscoc; 5i' oucsicov spycov STUTOXSVV), while opposing that [justification]
which has now been given to you in Christ by God (dvTiXsyovrsc; TTJ "dnb ©sou
vov sv XpioTcp SoOsian ufiTv).16
Notice that Gennadius glosses "the righteousness of God" as "that [justification -
SiKaicooic;] which has now been given (SoOsian) to you in Christ by God." Gennadius was
12
Theodoret of Cyrrhus; PG 82.60; translation mine.
13
14
15
ODCC 663.
16
Gennadius; PG 85.1712; translation mine.
a semi-Pelagian and a critic of Augustine's predestinarian monergism, so it should not be
presumed that this tradition of interpretation was only held by the fathers in the
Augustinian tradition.
2. The Latin Fathers
Ambrosiaster was a fourth century Latin writer living in Rome, probably a
presbyter, who wrote a commentary on all the epistles of Paul. His real identity is
unknown, but since his works were incorrectly attributed to Ambrose, he is called
"Ambrosiaster" to distinguish him from Ambrose. Gerald Bray considers him to be one
of the most important, though unfortunately neglected, ecclesiastical writers of this
period.17 In his commentary on Romans, Ambrosiaster presents two different approaches
to "the righteousness of God." On the one hand, in his comments on Rom 3:21,
Ambrosiaster interprets "the righteousness of God" as his mercy in fulfillment of the
promise:
Therefore, what is called the righteousness of God appears to be mercy

(misericordia) because it has its origin in the promise, and when God's promise is
fulfilled it is called "the righteousness of God" (cum pro missum Dei redditur,
iustitia Dei dicitur). For it is righteousness when what is promised has been
delivered. And when God accepts those who flee to him for refuge, this is called
righteousness, because to not accept them is injustice (quia non suscipere
iniquitas est).
1
' Gerald Bray, "Ambrosiaster," in Reading Romans Through the Centuries: From the Early Church to
Karl Barth (Jeffrey P. Greenman and Timothy Larsen, eds.; Grand Rapids: Brazos, 2005), 21-38.
1
Ambrosiaster, Commentarius in Pauli epistulam ad Romanos. Gerald Bray, ed., Romans (ACCS;
Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1998), 95.1 have corrected Bray's translation in the last line. Bray has
"because wickedness would not accept such people." But "wickedness" is a mistranslation of iniquitas,
which means "injustice, unfairness," and Bray's translation fails to account for the est. Latin text from the
online Libraiy of Latin Texts - Series A (Turnhout, Belgium: Brepols) (hereafter cited as LLT-A).
This emphasis on righteousness as the fulfillment of the promise, as equivalent to mercy,
and as God's acceptance of those who flee to him for refuge may very well be one of the
earliest precursors of the Cremer relational theory.
On the other hand, commenting on Rom 1:17. Ambrosiaster writes:
Paul says this because the righteousness of God is revealed in the one who
believes, whether Jew or Greek. He calls it "the righteousness of God" because
God freely justifies the ungodly by faith, without the works of the law (iustitiam
Dei dicit, quia gratis iustificat impium perfidem sine operibus legis), just as he
says elsewhere: "That I may be found in him, not having a righteousness of my
own, based on law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness
from God that depends on faith." He says that this same righteousness is revealed
in the gospel when God grants faith to man, through which he may be justified
(dum donat hominifidem, per quam iustificetur).
In this second interpretation, "the righteousness of God" has to do with the application of
soteriological righteousness to the believer, when "God freely justifies the ungodly by
faith," or "when God grants faith to man, through which he may be justified." This is
more consistent with the patristic tradition of interpretation than Ambrosiaster's
comments on Rom 3:21.
Augustine (354^430)20 never wrote a commentary on Romans. However, we can
glean his exegetical insights on certain key verses in Romans from his anti-Pelagian
writings. The following comments on Rom 3:21 are significant:
He does not say, the righteousness of man, or the righteousness of his own will,
but the "righteousness of God," - not that whereby He is Himself righteous, but
that with which He endows [lit. clothes]21 man when He justifies the ungodly (non
dixit: iustitia hominis uel iustitia propriae uoluntatis - iustitia Dei, non qua Deus
iustus est, sedqua induit hominem, cum iustificat impium) .... Accordingly he
advances a step further, and adds, "But righteousness of God by faith of Jesus
19
Ambrosiaster. Brav, ed., Romans, 31. Latin text from LLT-A.
20
ODCC 128.
21
The verb induo is more correctly rendered "clothes" in The Works of Saint Augustine: A Translation for
the 2f Centuiy 1/23: Answer to the Pelagians (trans. Roland J. Teske, S.J.; Hyde Park, New York: New
City Press, 1997), 158; and The Library of Christian Classics, Volume VIII: Augustine: Later Works (trans.
John Burnaby; Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1955), 205.
Christ," that is, by the faith wherewith one believes in Christ; for just as there is
not meant the faith with which Christ Himself believes, so also there is not meant
the righteousness whereby God Himself is righteous. Both no doubt are ours, but
yet they are called God's and Christ's, because it is by their bounty that these gifts
are bestowed on us.22
Augustine uses similar language when dealing with Rom 10:3: "They were ignorant of
the righteousness of God, not that righteousness whereby God is righteous but the one
which comes to man from God."23
It was statements such as these that helped Luther break out of the medieval
understanding of iustitia Dei as if it were nothing other than God's iustitia distributiva,
that is, the attribute of divine righteousness in accordance with which he rewards the
good and punishes the wicked."
Cassiodorus (485/90-c. 580)23 served in the magister officiorum in the court of
the Ostrogothic king, Theodoric the Great. Although a layman in the church, he was a
prolific writer who shows Augustinian influence. In his commentary on Romans, he
quotes lines from Paul and intersperses his brief comments. At Rom 3:21, he writes:
'"But now apart from the law, the righteousness of God' - which has been freely given to
us by God, not sought after by our toil (quae nobis a Deo gratis donata est, non nostro
labore quaesita)." And at Rom 10:3, he alludes to Augustine's line, quoted above: "It is
called 'the righteousness of God,' not that with which God is righteous, but that which
God gives to man, in order that man might be righteous through [or before] God (Iustitia
22
Augustine, De spiritu et littera 9.15. NPNF1 5.89. Latin text from LLT-A.
23
Augusine, De gratia et libero arbitrio 12.24. Bray, ed., Romans, 262-62.
24
Luther actually claimed that he came to his interpretation of "the righteousness of God" before reading
Augustine. Luther quotes several passages from Augustine in his lectures on Romans (see below).
25
ODCC 296.
Dei dicitur, non qua iustus est Deus, sed qua dat homini Deus, ut iustus sit homo per
Deum)."26 Clearly, Cassiodorus interprets "the righteousness of God" as a divine gift.
3. The Medieval Period
Peter Abelard (1079-1142/3)27 is unclear in his interpretation. On the one hand,
in his comments on Rom 1:17 he says that the righteousness of God is "his just
recompense (iusta eius remuneratio), whether in the elect unto glory, or in the ungodly
unto punishment." But at Rom 3:21, he says it is "that which God approves and through
which we are justified before God, that is charity (iustitia Dei, id est quam Deus approbat
TO
etper quam apudDeum iustificamur, id est caritas)." There appears to be a bit of
confusion in Abelard's thought. In any case, the righteousness of God is either God's
attribute of recompense, or it is the righteousness of the believer in justification (i.e.,
"charity") and it is called "of God" because it is approved before God. Abelard provides
little precedent for the view that the righteousness of God is a relational concept.
William of St-Thierry (1075/80-1148) was a Benedictine monk and a close
friend of Bernard of Clairvaux.29 In his commentary on Rom 1:17, he writes: "This
righteousness which justifies believers is faith. Veiled in the Old Testament, it is revealed
in the gospel. It is called righteousness because it justifies those whom it encompasses.
Moreover it is 'of God' because faith itself is from grace." And on Rom 3:21: "What is
this righteousness? 'The righteousness of God,' answers the Apostle, when faith obtains
Cassiodorus, Expositio sancti Pauli Epistulae adRomanos 3.430; 10.476. Latin text from LLT-A;
translation mine.
21
ODCC 3.
28
Peter Abelard, Commentaria in epistulam Pauli ad Romanos 1.1; 2.3. Latin text from LLT-A; translation
mine.
29
ODCC 1746.
Chapter 1: History of Interpretation -23
what the law commands. It is the righteousness of God, not of men, not of works, not of
one's own will." And a little later in the same context (on Rom 3:24-25), he writes:
Then came the Man who alone was bom righteous (Venit homo, qui solus iustus
natus est), and who did not accept the pleasure of sin, but did not refuse sin's
punishment; and he gave this righteousness to man who was sold and who had
nothing in the substance of his nature whereby he could buy himself back, so that
by Christ's punishment man might destroy the bond of his debt. And this is the
righteousness of God that, clinging in faith to him who died for us, we might have
from him what we cannot have from ourselves (Et haec iustitia Dei, ut per fidem
inhaerentes ei qui pro nobis mortuus est, ex ipso habeamus quod non possumus ex
nobis). And because this is conferred on us gratuitously, it is a grace.31
This is a remarkable set of quotes, for here William of St-Thierry appears to adumbrate
the Reformation interpretation that the righteousness of God is the righteousness of Christ
reckoned to the believer by faith. He speaks of Christ being "alone born righteous" and
yet taking the punishment for sin that sinners deserved. He then goes on to say that the
righteousness of God is that, as we cling in faith to Christ, we freely receive from Christ
that righteousness which we were not capable of producing from our own resources. The
righteousness of God is thus a soteriological benefit that the sinner receives by faith. It is
called "of God," according to William, because it is a free gift of God's grace, not
produced by human volition or human works.
Peter Lombard (c. 1100-1160) does not offer his own interpretations but
collects comments from earlier commentators. He quotes one named Haimo (presumably
Haimo of Auxerre, d. 855), who interpreted the righteousness of God in Rom 1:17 as
follows: "The righteousness of God is that by which he freely justifies the ungodly apart
William of St-Thierry, Expositio super epistulam ad Romanos 1.385; 2.450. Latin text from LLT-A. ET:
William of St Thierry: Exposition on the Epistle to the Romans (trans. John Baptist Hasbrouck; Cistercian
Fathers Series 27; Kalamazoo: Cistercian Publications, 1980), 31-32, 69, modified (e.g., among other
minor changes, I have replaced "just, justice" with "righteous, righteousness").
31
William of St-Thierry, Expositio 2.491. Latin text from LLT-A. ET: William of St Thierry: Exposition on
the Epistle to the Romans, 70, modified.
32
ODCC 1266.
from works of the law, as the apostle says elsewhere: 'That I may be found in him, not
having my own righteousness which is by the law, but that which is by faith.'"33
Thomas Aquinas (c. 1225-1274)34 was of the opinion that iustitia Dei in Rom
1:17 could be taken in one of two ways. "In one way it can refer to the justice by which
God is just." He explains why the gospel might be said to reveal the justice of God by
arguing that the justice of God may refer here to God's faithfulness in keeping his
promise to send the Messiah. This interpretation seems to echo one of Ambrosiaster's
comments and is possibly a faint precursor of the later views of Cremer in the 19th
century.
But judging by his subsequent commentary on Rom 3:21 and 10:3 (which he
connected together), Aquinas seemed to lean toward the second, more traditional, option:
"Or it can refer to the justice of God by which God makes men just. For the justice of
men is that by which men presume to make themselves just by their own efforts: Not
knowing the justice of God and seeking to establish their own justice, they did not submit
to the justice ofGod (Rom 10:3). This justice [of God] is revealed in the gospel inasmuch
as men are justified by faith in the gospel in every age." Commenting on Rom 10:3, he
refers back again to Rom 3:21: "for being ignorant of the righteousness that comes from
God, i.e., by which God justifies them through faith: 'The righteousness of God through
faith in Jesus Christ' (Rom 3:22)' ... For they did not submit to God's righteousness, i.e.,
they refused to be subject to Christ through faith in whom men are made just before
Peter Lombard, Collectanea in omnes Pauli apostolic Epistulus. Migne, Patrologia latina (PL)
191.1322; translation mine.
34
ODCC 1614.
God." j5 It is clear that for Aquinas, the righteousness of God is equivalent to justification,
which he understood as God's act of making sinners righteous or just before God. It is
called "the righteousness or justice of God" to distinguish it from the righteousness or
justice of humans when they "presume to make themselves just by their own efforts."
4. Preliminary Conclusion
We have seen that most of the church fathers (Greek and Latin), as well as the
medieval commentators who relied on them, interpreted "the righteousness of God"
in Romans as the righteousness that is bestowed as a gift of God's grace in the act of
justification. This is not to say that there was perfect agreement across the board. Abelard
took the righteousness of God as the recompensing justice of God shown either to the
elect, resulting in their glory, or to the wicked, resulting in their judgment. Ambrosiaster
and Aquinas attempted to bring in some notion of God's faithfulness to his promises, but
they followed this up with a more traditional line about the righteousness of God being
that by which he makes sinners righteous. On the whole, apart from these minor
deviations, the tradition up to the time of the Reformation is fairly uniform in taking the
righteousness of God as a gift of grace and as something that has to do fundamentally
with the righteousness given to or wrought in the sinner in the moment of justification.
This is not to say that the church fathers held what would later be known as the
Reformational understanding of justification. None of them made the sharp distinction
between justification and sanctification that would later characterize the Reformation's
central insight. Nevertheless, as Ben Witherington points out, "the righteousness of God"
35
Thomas Aquinas, Lectures on the Letter to the Romans (trans. Fabian Larcher; ed. Jeremy Holmes; Ave
Maria, Florida: The Aquinas Center for Theological Renewal at Ave Maria University; available online at
vvww.aquinas.avemaria.cdu/commentaries.asp), 58, 409. Accessed January 27, 2009.
in Paul was not fundamentally understood by the church fathers as a "cipher" for "God's
covenant faithfulness," but was interpreted (in keeping with the context in which Paul
uses the phrase) as both an attribute of God and "the basis of a believer's right-standing
and so 'justification' as well." Those who were closest to the culture, language, and
worldview of Paul's milieu, i.e., the church fathers (especially the Greek-speaking
fathers), readily understood his references to "the righteousness of God" in a sense that
was consistent with the ordinary meanings associated with the Greek word SiKaioown
rather than in some esoteric Hebraic/relational sense that bears no relationship to what the
word actually means in Greek.
B. The Reformation Tradition of Interpretation
To be sure, there are important points of discontinuity between the Reformation
and the patristic interpretational traditions. Arguably the most significant point of
discontinuity is that the Reformation tradition treats "the righteousness of God" as the
imputed righteousness of Christ, making a sharp distinction between justification as a
purely forensic act, on the one hand, and the moral renewal and sanctification of the
believer, on the other. Alister McGrath argues that "the essential feature of the
Reformation doctrines of justification is that a deliberate and systematic distinction is
made between justification and regeneration," and that this is the primary feature which
distinguishes the Reformers' doctrine of justification from that of their patristic and
medieval predecessors.37 Nevertheless, in spite of its critical theological break with the
6
Ben Witherington III, Paul's Letter to the Romans: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary (Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 2004), 54 n. 15.
37
Alister E. McGrath, Iustitia Dei: A History of the Christian Doctrine ofJustification (3rd ed.; Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press. 2005), 217.
past at this key point, the Reformation tradition continues to follow in the footsteps of
patristic and medieval interpretation in taking the Pauline phrase "the righteousness of
God" as equivalent to "the righteousness of faith," that is, the righteousness that believers
have by virtue of Christ's atonement, a status received by faith as a gift of God's grace.
They may have conceived of this "righteousness" in much more clearly forensic, legal,
and imputative terms than the patristic and medieval exegetes, but they were one with
their predecessors in viewing this "righteousness of God" in terms of the gift of
righteousness received by the sinner in justification.
1. The Reformers
Martin Luther (1483-1546),38 in his 1515-1516 lectures on Romans, agrees
with Augustine's interpretation of "the righteousness of God" in Rom 1:17 and 3:21.
Luther's lectures are divided into two parts: (1) his interlinear and marginal glosses on
the Vulgate text, and (2) his more extended comments or scholia. In his glosses on Rom
1:17, Luther writes: "For the righteousness, by which a person is worthy of such
salvation, of God, by which alone there are righteous people before God (qua sola Iusti
.sunt coram Deo)."39 This seems to suggest that Luther takes "of God" as equivalent to
coram Deo - the righteousness of God is the righteousness by which believers are
righteous in God's sight. But in his more extended comments on Rom 1:17 (the scholia),
Luther takes a slightly different tack:
38
ODCC 1007.
39
Martin Luther. "Lectures on Romans: Glosses and Scholia," in Luther's Works: American Edition (eds.
Jaroslav Pelikan and Helmut T. Lehmann; Saint Louis: Concordia, 1972), 25.9; "Die Vorlesung iibcr den
Romerbrief," in D Martin Luthers Werke: Kritische Gesamtausgabe (Weimar: Hermann Bohlaus
Nachfolger, 1938), 56.10.
And here again, by the righteousness of God (Iustitia Dei) we must not
understand the righteousness by which He is righteous (iustus) in Himself but the
righteousness by which we are made righteous (iustificamur) by God. This
happens through faith in the Gospel. Therefore blessed Augustine writes in
chapter 11 of On the Spirit and the Letter: "It is called the righteousness of God
because by imparting it He makes righteous people (Ideo Iustitia Dei dicitur,
quod impertiendo earn lustos facit), just as 'Deliverance belongs to the Lord'
refers to that by which He delivers." Augustine says the same thing in chapter 9 of
the same book. The righteousness of God is so named to distinguish it from the
righteousness of man, which comes from works (ad differentiam lustitie
hominum, que ex operibus fit), as Aristotle describes it very clearly in Book III of
his Ethics.
Here in the scholia on Rom 1:17, Luther leaves behind the coram Deo of the gloss and
argues, in dependence on Augustine, that this righteousness is called "of God" because
God imparts (impertio)AX it to us and so makes us righteous. It is precisely because it is
God who imparts this righteousness to us, that it is called "of God," to distinguish it from
the righteousness "of man," i.e., that which humans produce of themselves by their good
behavior (as Aristotle says).
The same notes are sounded in his gloss on Rom 3:21. Luther again asserts his
dependence on Augustine. His gloss after the phrase "the righteousness of God" is "by
which God justifies us," which then has an extended footnote quoting Augustine's On the
Spirit and the Letter (9.15) more fully (the same quote we looked at above when dealing
with Augustine's interpretation):
Blessed Augustine in chapter 9 of On the Spirit and the Letter says: '"The
righteousness of God'; he did not say 'the righteousness of man' or 'the
righteousness of one's own will,' but 'the righteousness of God,' not that
righteousness by which God is righteous but that righteousness with which He
covers man when He justifies the ungodly. As the term 'the faith of Christ' is used
to describe not the faith by which Christ believes but the faith 'by which we
believe in Christ,' so likewise this righteousness is not the righteousness by which
God is righteous. For both are ours. But it is called God's righteousness and
40
Luther's Works, 25.151-52; Luthers Werke, 56.172.
41
The verb impertio means "to cause a person to share in ... to impart to." D. P. Simpson, Cassell 's Latin
Dictionar)': Latin-English, English-Latin (New York: Macmillan, 1968), 290.
Christ's righteousness because He gives it to us out of His bounty." The same

things are said in chapter 11 [which Luther goes on to quote].42
Continuing with his glosses on Rom 3, moving now to the next verse, v 22, we
come to this very brief but significant gloss: "The righteousness, that righteousness, I say,
of God, from God" (lusticia ea, inquam autem dei ex Deo).43 If it was not clear up to this
point, Luther now explicitly interprets the genitive Bsofj (Dei) as a genitive of source (ex
Deo).
So much for Luther's lectures on Romans. Later, in 1545, he wrote a preface to
his Latin writings that contains the famous "gates of paradise" passage in which he
describes his struggle to understand the meaning of "the righteousness of God" in Rom
1:17. He writes autobiographically of the process of exegetical discovery. There is great
debate among Luther scholars on when to date the event here recorded - some say as
early as 1513, others up to five years later.44 Be that as it may, here is the story as
recounted by Luther:
I had indeed been captivated with an extraordinary ardor for understanding Paul
in the Epistle to the Romans. But up till then it was not the cold blood about the
heart, but a single word in chapter 1 [:17], "In it the righteousness of God is
revealed," which, according to the use and custom of all the teachers, I had been
taught to understand philosophically regarding the formal or active righteousness,
as they call it, with which God is righteous and punishes the unrighteous sinner.
Though I lived as a monk without reproach, I felt that I was a sinner before
God with an extremely disturbed conscience. I could not believe that he was
placated by my satisfaction. I did not love, yes, I hated the righteous God who
punishes sinners, and secretly, if not blasphemously, certainly murmuring greatly,
I was angry with God, and said, "As if, indeed, it is not enough, that miserable
sinners, eternally lost through original sin, are crushed by every kind of calamity
by the law of the Decalogue, without having God add pain to pain by the gospel
and also by the gospel threatening us with his righteousness and wrath!" Thus I
raged with a fierce and troubled conscience. Nevertheless, I beat importunately
upon Paul at that place, most ardently desiring to know what St. Paul wanted.
Luther's Works, 25.30; Luthers Werke, 56.36.

43
Luther's Works, 25.31; Luthers Werke, 56.36-37.
^Luther's Works, 34.326.
At last, by the mercy of God, meditating day and night, 1 gave heed to the
context of the words, namely, "In it the righteousness of God is revealed, as it is
written, 'He who through faith is righteous shall live.'" There 1 began to
understand that the righteousness of God is that by which the righteous live by a
gift of God, namely by faith. And this is the meaning: the righteousness of God is
revealed by the gospel, namely, the passive righteousness with which merciful
God justifies us by faith, as it is written, "He who through faith is righteous shall
live." Here I felt that I was altogether born again and had entered paradise itself
through open gates ....
And I extolled my sweetest word with a love as great as the hatred with which
I had before hated the word "righteousness of God." Thus that place in Paul was
for me truly the gate to paradise. Later I read Augustine's The Spirit and the
Letter, where contrary to hope I found that he, too, interpreted God's
righteousness in a similar way, as the righteousness with which God clothes us
when he justifies us.45
A year later, in the 1546 version of his preface to Romans (he wrote prefaces to
each of the books of the Bible as part of his German translation), Luther said that the
righteousness of faith "is called 'the righteousness of God' because God gives it, and
counts it as righteousness for the sake of Christ our Mediator."46
Philipp Melanchthon (1497-1560)47 placed the accent on the fact that this
righteousness is imputed to us by God: "Iustitia Dei signifies the divine acceptance or
the imputation of righteousness, by which God reputes and pronounces us righteous." It
is not clear whether Melanchthon takes 6sou as a genitive of source or as an objective
genitive, but it is clear that for him "the righteousness of God" is not God's own
righteousness (whether conceived of as an attribute or an activity) but is the righteousness
that is imputed to the believer.
45
Luther's Works, 34.336-37.
*b Luther's Works, 35.371.
47
ODCC 1066.
48
Melanchthon, Commentary on Romans (1532 edition), in Melanchthons Werke (ed. Robert Stupperich;
Giltersloh: Gerd Mohn, 1965), 5.65 (translation mine).
Martin Bucer (1491-1551) wrote a massive and learned 507-page commentary
on Romans that is little known today.5 In his comment at Romans 3:21, he expressed his
fundamental agreement with Melanchthon's interpretation of iustitia Dei, the focus of
which is the forensic benefit of acceptance before God by means of the forgiveness of
sins and the imputation of righteousness:
Philippus Melanchthon iustitiam Dei hie pro acceptatione accipit, qua nos deus
acceptat: id vero cum eo convenit, quod nos per earn intelligimus incomparabilem
illam Dei bonitatem in Christo exhibitam, qua & peccata condonat, & iustitiam
imputat, & vitam aetemam largitur, eamque hie adspirando mentem novam, ac
pietatis studium, auspicatur. (Philipp Melanchthon takes the righteousness of God
here for the acceptance with which God accepts us; this agrees with our own
understanding of it as the incomparable goodness revealed in Christ by which he
forgives sins and imputes righteousness and bestows eternal life; and he initiates it
by inbreathing a new mind and a devotion to godliness.)51
Although Bucer defines the righteousness of God as the acceptance with which God
accepts us, an acceptance which includes the forgiveness of sins and the imputation of
righteousness, he also adds that a simultaneous benefit is the new life of the believer ("by
inbreathing a new mind and a devotion to godliness"). This ambiguous formulation could
be taken as including regeneration and sanctification within the iustitia Dei itself."" On
the other hand, Bucer could be speaking of the reality that the iustitia Dei, once imputed,
results in the believer's possession of eternal life, the enjoyment of which is initiated by
the divine inbreathing of a new mind and devotion to godliness.
4
" ODCC 246.
50
Martin Bucer, Metaphrasis et enarratio in epist. d. Pauli apostoli ad Romanos (15361; 15622). For
background on Bucer's commentary, as well as a detailed outline sec T. H. L. Parker in Commentaries on
the Epistle to the Romans, 1532-1542 (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1986), 34-62.
Dl
Latin text retrieved online from The Digital Library of Classic Protestant Texts (Alexandria, Va.:
Alexander Street Press, 2007) (hereafter cited as DLCPT). ET by Parker, Commentaries, 146.
52
"Bucer wishes to include regeneration and sanctification in his definition of righteousness" (Parker,
Commentaries, 146). This seems to me to be reading too much into Bucer's carefully chosen words and
presumably depends on taking "he initiates it [eamque]" as "he initiates righteousness [iustitiam]." It is
more likely that the word to be supplied is from the immediately preceding clause: "... bestows eternal life
[vitam aeternum]; and he initiates it [eamque - sc. eternal life] by inbreathing a new mind," etc.
John Calvin (1509-1564)53 wrote: "By the righteousness of God I understand
that which is approved at His tribunal."54 But later he adds, "By reintroducing the name
of God, however, [Paul] appears to make Him the author, and not merely the approver, of
the righteousness of which he speaks, as though he had said that it flows from Him alone,
or that its origin is in heaven."5" Calvin thus sees Bsou as a genitive of source as well as
an objective genitive.
There are different nuances here, but the Reformers agreed that the righteousness
of God refers to the righteous status possessed by the believer, which status is "of God"
in the sense that (a) it comes from and is bestowed by God (genitivus auctoris or genitive
of source), and/or (b) is valid before and approved by God (objective genitive). Luther
started with the objective genitive but then moved toward the genitive of source;
Melanchthon was unclear; and Calvin combined both meanings. In spite of this slight
variety of interpretations of the genitive, the Reformers were unanimous in taking the
head-noun SiKaiocwn as referring to the forensic status of the believer who has been
credited or imputed with "righteousness," and is therefore regarded and treated as such by
God, on the legal ground of the atoning work of Christ.
2. Post-Reformation Protestant Interpretation
To trace the trajectory of post-Reformation Protestant interpretation in both its
Lutheran and Reformed branches would be tedious and repetitive. We need only get a
53
ODCC 266.
54
Calvin's Commentaries: The Epistles of Paul the Apostle to the Romans and to the Thessalonians (trans.
Ross MacKenzie; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1960). 28 (on Rom 1:17).
55
Calvin's Commentaries, 73 (on Rom 3:22).
glimpse of how the Reformers' exegetical and theological insights regarding justification
were taken up by a representative sampling of their successors.
Robert Rollock (1555-1598) was a Scottish Presbyterian and the first principal
of the newly established University of Edinburgh (est. 1582), where he was also a
professor of divinity.56 Rollock was one of the earliest Reformed theologians to speak
explicitly of a pre-fall "covenant of works" (foedus operum) between God and Adam in
the garden, in contrast with which stands the "covenant of grace" (foedus gratiae) made
between God and elect sinners after the fall. 7 In his Treatise of God's Effectual Calling,
he offers a treatment of the benefits of the covenant of grace. In this context, Rollock
argues that the primary benefit is imputed righteousness, and it is in this context that he
explains the meaning of the Pauline phrase "the righteousness of God":
The first and principal grace promised in this covenant is righteousness; which
must necessarily here have the first place, for after the breach of the covenant of
works, that one first original justice, as they call it, was quite lost, and injustice
did succeed in the place thereof. And this justice, which is here promised in the
Covenant of Grace, is no inherent righteousness, as that original justice was, but is
the righteousness of our Mediator Jesus Christ, which is ours by faith, and by the
imputation of God. For which cause the Apostle calls it the righteousness of God;
for without this imputative justice we cannot possibly stand before the tribunal of
God, and by the imputation of this righteousness we are said to be justified before
Using standard Protestant terminology, Rollock states that the righteousness of God is the
righteousness of Christ imputed to the elect. However, rather than focusing on the
genitive of source, he seems to emphasize the coram Deo interpretation mentioned by
Luther in his original gloss on Rom 1:17. For Rollock, this imputed righteousness of
Cyclopaedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature (ed. John McClintock and James
Strong; Harper & Brothers, 1880; reprinted by Baker, 1970), 9.68.
57
Mark Karlberg, Covenant Theology in Reformed Perspective (Eugene: Wipf & Stock, 2004).
38
Robert Rollock, A Treatise of God's Effectual Calling (Tractatus de Vocatione Efficaci) (Edinburgh,
1597), 39. Retrieved from DLCPT.
Christ is designated "of God" because "by the imputation of this righteousness we are
said to be justified before God' or "before the tribunal of God."
William Perkins (1558-1602) was a prominent Puritan theologian. He was
educated at Cambridge University and a fellow there from 1584 to 1594, where he
engaged in preaching, lecturing, and anti-Roman polemics. Perkins writes:
This obedience of Christ, is called the Righteousness of God, and of Christ. Of

God, 1. not because it is in God, but of God: for it taketh all the power and merit it
hath from the deity of the Son: whence it is that Jeremy saith, Jehovah our
Righteousness. II. God doth only accept it for us, because that alone makes us
boldly approach unto Gods [sic] throne of grace, that we may have pardon for our
sins, and be received to eternal life.60
Perkins combines the two interpretations: the obedience of Christ is called "the
righteousness of God" (1) because it has its origin from God (specifically taking its
power and merit from the deity of the Son), and (2) because it is accepted by God so that
we may boldly approach God's throne and be received to eternal life.
Andrew Willet (1561/2-1621) was a Cambridge-educated English Puritan who
remained in the Church of England. He was famous in his day for a polemical treatise
against the Roman Catholic Church titled Synopsis Papismi (1 st ed., 1592). Later, he
devoted himself to the more irenic task of scriptural commentary, writing "a remarkable
scries of encyclopaedic works of biblical exegesis" on Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, 1-2
Samuel, Daniel, and Romans.61 His style of commentary writing is to ask questions about
the text and then to collect quotations from previous commentators, both patristic and
Protestant, although he does add his own commentary as well. On Romans 1:17 he
writes:
59
ODCC 1256.
60
William Perkins, A Golden Chaine (1616), 82. Retrieved from DLCPT.
"' Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (cd. H. C. G. Matthew and Brian Harrison; Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 2004), 59.26-29.
Chrysostomes [sic] exposition is best, who homil. 3 taketh this for that justice,
which is communicated and infused unto us by that justice of Christ: and so
Augustine understandeth that justice, not whereby God is just in himself, sed qua
hominem induit, cum eum iustificat, but wherewith he judueth [sic] man when he
justified him, lib. de spirit. & liter, c. 9 ... This justice then consisteth only in the
remission of sinns [sic], and in imputing unto us the righteousness of Christ by
faith ... It is called the justice of God, both because it is given us from God, not
procured by our own works: and for that we thereby are made righteous, not
before men, but in the sight of God.62
Franciscus Gomarus (1563-1641) was a Dutch Calvinist, a professor of
theology at the University of Leiden, and a commissioner to the Synod of Dordt (1618-
1619). A gifted Orientalist, his scholarly work was primarily in the area of scriptural
exegesis, which was admired even by Erasmus.63 He was a vigorous opponent of Jacob
Arminius and his followers, the Remonstrants, and became the leader of the movement
against them, so much so that the anti-Remonstrants were styled "Gomarists."64 In his
commentary on Romans, at 1:17, Gomarus adopts the standard Reformation
interpretation of "the righteousness of God" in Paul:
Iustitia autem Dei is understood not subjectively, neither formally of the essential
righteousness of God, as Andreas Osiander dreams (whom Calvin solidly refutes
in his Institutes), but effectively, certainly given by the obedience of Christ the
mediator unto death, even that of the cross. Which is called iustitia Dei, not that
which is in God, nor which is God, but that which is given from God (non quod in
Deo, aut Deus ist, sed quod a Deo data sit), Rom 3:21-22, which is opposed to the
righteousness of man and one's own or that which is acquired by our works, Rom
10:3-4; Phil 3:9.65
It is called "the righteousness of God," not because it is the essential righteousness of
God's own nature, but because it is a righteousness given from God in the form of the
62
Andrew Willet, llexapla: That Is, A Six-Fold Commentary Upon the Most Divine Epistle of the Holy
Apostle S. Paul to the Romans (Cambridge, 1611, 1620), 54-55. Retrieved from DLCPT. WiUet's work is a
collection of quotes or paraphrases from patristic and Protestant commentators. In this case, the last two
sentences quoted are attributed to Pareus and Gryneus, respectively.
63
ODCC 689-90.
64
Encyclopaedia Britannica (11th ed.; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1910), 12.228.
65
Franciscus Gomarus, Analysis & Explicatio Epistolae Ad Romanos (1644), 6. Retrieved from DLCPT.
Translation from the Latin mine.
obedience of Christ unto the point of death, even death on a cross (Phil 2:8), and because
it stands in contrast with human righteousness acquired by works.
Johannes Cocceius (1603-1669) was a German theologian who taught at
Bremen, Franeker, and later at Leiden. Like Gomarus, he was also an expert in Oriental
languages and attempted to expound dogmatics on a purely biblical basis. Although he
professed adherence to Calvinist doctrine, he was critical of the spirit of scholastic
orthodoxy that reigned in his day and his writings are thought to have contributed to the
rise of Pietism in the 17' and 18l centuries.6 Cocceius takes much the same approach as
Gomarus and the Reformation tradition generally. However, what stands out as unique is
Cocceius's appeal to the many Old Testament references to God's righteousness. He
argues that Paul's language imitates that of the prophets:
This righteousness, which was brought about when the Son assumed the condition
of a servant, is called Dei iustitia, later by the Apostle (as Rom 1:17; 3:22), first
by the prophets (as Psalm 5:10; 36:6; 40:11; 50:6; 85:11; 97:6: 119:141 and
especially 143:1, 11 and Isaiah 56:1). For the same he comes as "our
righteousness from God" (Isa 54:17). Which language is imitated by the Apostle:
"And may be found in him, not having my righteousness, which is of the law
(meaning, 'He who does these things shall live by them,' Rom 10:5), but that
which is through faith of Christ, the righteousness of God by faith" (Phil 3:9), that
is, the righteousness which is given from God and of which God himself is the
cause (quod a Deo datur, & cuius causa est Deus ipse), which is received through
communion with Christ to the end that we may believe/trust further and may live
by the faith of the Son of God (Gal 2:20). For this reason he is called "God of our
righteousness" (Ps 4:2) and "God our righteousness" (Jer 23:5-6; 33:15-16) and
"we are justified in him" (Isa 45:25).
Having traced Paul's usage back to the Old Testament (the Psalms, Jeremiah, and Isaiah),
Cocceius then concludes that there are three reasons for the "of God" appellation:
In which appears the reason for this appellation: (1) because righteousness is
given from God (a Deo donatum); (2) because God himself supplies the
b
l ODCC 370.
"' Johannes Cocceius, Summa Theologiae (1665), 496. Retrieved from DLCPT. Translation from the Latin
mine.
obedience of the Son, which can be the merit of life; (3) because it is in
communion with God that this righteousness is obtained.
Petrus van Mastricht (1630-1706) was a Reformed professor of Hebrew and
practical theology at the University of Frankfurt and later at the University of Utrecht. He
became famous for his Theoretico-Practica Theologia, a work that was translated in
Dutch and English, and which had an impact on the Dutch Nadere Reformation and was
also highly prized by Jonathan Edwards.69 Van Mastricht was not a highly original
thinker but he represents the thinking of Reformed scholasticism at its peak. The quote
below shows his dependence on the Reformed tradition. In the immediate context, van
Mastricht is responding to Osiander's view that the righteousness on account of which we
are justified is the essential righteousness of the divine nature of Christ. Osiander had
appealed to the verse which says that God has given us great and precious promises so
that through them we might become "partakers of the divine nature" (2 Peter 1:4). Van
Mastricht responds as follows:
To which we reply: (1) that SiKaioauvn Osou occasionally designates produced

righteousness, James 1:20; (2) that the righteousness of Christ produced is the
righteousness of God, insofar as he who has produced it, 0edv9pcD7toc; [God-man],
is himself God, Acts 20:28; (3) that the righteousness of Christ produced is
termed the righteousness of God, because it is constituted from God and accepted
by God on our behalf (quod a Deo constituta sit, & pro nobis a Deo admittatur),
Rom 3:25; 2 Cor 5:21.70
The Reformation tradition continued into the 19th and 20th centuries and remains
71
to this day a vital force in evangelical Pauline interpretation.
68
Johannes Cocceius, Summa Theologiae (1665), 496. Retrieved from DLCPT. Translation from the Latin
mine.
69
George M. Marsden. Jonathan Edwards: A Life (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2003). 318.
70
Petrus van Mastricht, Theoretico-Practica Theologia (1699), 711. Retrieved from DLCPT. Translation
from the Latin mine.
71
The Reformation tradition is also continued in the following 19th- and 20th-ccntury commentators, listed
here in chronological order: Moses Stuart, A Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans (3rd ed.; Andover:
Warren F. Draper, 1854), 60-5; Charles Hodge, Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans (rev. ed.; Grand
C. The New View and Its Trajectory
1. 19th Century Origins of the New View
In the second half of the 19th century a significant and long-lasting shift began to
occur - one that eventually culminated in the New Perspective's understanding of "the
righteousness of God" as God's saving activity in keeping with his covenant faithfulness.
The shift is first detectable in an 1860 article by Ludwig Diestel (1825-1878)72
titled "The Idea of Righteousness, particularly in the Old Testament, biblico-theologically
set forth" (my translation).73 At the time of the publication of this article, Diestel was an
associate professor of theology at the University of Bonn. He later held professorships in
Old Testament exegesis at the Universities of Greifswald. Jena, and Tubingen. His
primary contribution to the field of Old Testament studies was a major 800-page tome
titled Geschichte des Alten Testaments in der christlichen Kirche (1869), in which he
traced the reception history of the Old Testament in Christian theology from the apostolic
fathers down to the establishment of the field of Old Testament studies as a historical
discipline in the 19th century. In his article on "the idea of righteousness," Diestel took
Rapids: Eerdmans. 1950; originally published 1864), 30-31,88; Robert Haldane, Exposition oj the Epistle
to the Romans (New York: Robert Carter & Brothers, 1870), 125-37; William G. T. Shedd, A Critical and
Doctrinal Commentary on the Epistle of St. Paul to the Romans (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons,
1879), 17; Frederick L. Godet, Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans (trans. A. Cusin; rev. and ed. by
Talbot W. Chambers; Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1956; original French edition, 1883), 96, 149; H. A. W.
Meyer, Critical and Exegetical Hand-Book to the Epistle to the Romans (trans. John C. Moore and Edwin
Johnson; rev. William P. Dickson; New York: Funk & Wagnalls, 1884), 50; R. C. H. Lenski, The
Interpretation oj St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1961; originally, 1936), 78-80;
Anders Nygren, Commentary on Romans (trans. Carl C. Rasmussen; Philadelphia: Muhlenberg Press,
1949; original Swedish edition, 1944), 74-76; John Murray, The Epistle to the Romans (N1CNT; Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, 1959), 1.30-31; C. E. B. Cranfield, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the
Epistle to the Romans (ICC; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1975), 1.96-98; William Hendriksen, New
Testament Commentary: Exposition of Paul's Epistle to the Romans (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1982), 62-63;
Leon Morris, The Epistle to the Romans (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988), 100-3.
72
Biographisch-Bibliographisches Kirchenlexicon. http ://www.kirchenlcxikon.de 'd/diestei m. shtml.
Accessed on March 8, 2011.
7j
Ludwig Diestel, "Die Idee der Gerechtigkeit, vorzuglich im Alten Testament, biblisch-theologisch
dargestellt," Jahrbiicherfur deutsche Theologie 5 (1860): 173-253.
exception to the traditional view that "righteousness" in the Old Testament has to do with
iustitia distributiva, that is, God's rewarding of the good and his recompensing of evil.
This would presuppose an external norm that God is enforcing. According to Diestel,
God executes this judgment according to an inner norm, which he defines as the salvation
of the godly. God's righteousness is his steadfast commitment to achieving the aim
defined by that inner norm. This is why God's righteousness in the Old Testament so
frequently appears as equivalent to salvation and as grace. Diestel wrote:
Bare recompense, which bestows salvation on the good and evil on the wicked, is
never itself the aim, but is always only a means (nie selbst Zweck, immer nur
Mittel), and therefore it is almost never attributed to righteousness. In the final
analysis, then, recompense is never what defines just government, but only God's
highest aim (Zweck). Its content is the covenantal salvation of the godly.74
When God removes the obstacles that stand in the way of the fulfillment of his gracious
aim toward the godly, then the punishment of the wicked may on occasion occur as part
of this, but it is never an end in itself. Punishment arises only if the wicked attempt to
hinder or thwart God's aim of love, grace, and salvation toward the covenant community.
Ultimately, God's righteousness is not a static attribute but his steadfast commitment to
fulfilling his salvific aim toward humankind.75
Albrecht Ritschl (1822-1889)76 took up Diestel's ideas and developed them in
his three-volume magnum opus, The Christian Doctrine of Justification and
Reconciliation (1870-74),77 the second volume of which includes a treatment of the
Diestel, "Die Idee der Gerechtigkeit," 198. Translation mine.

75
Diestel, "Die Idee der Gerechtigkeit," 198-99.
76
ODCC 1400.
77
Albrecht Ritschl. Die christliche Lehre von der Rechtfertigung und Versohnung (3 vols; Bonn: A.
Marcus, 1870-74). ET of vol. 1: A Critical History oj the Christian Doctrine of Justification and
Reconciliation (trans. John S. Black; Edinburgh: Edmonston and Douglas, 1872). ET of vol. 3: The
Christian Doctrine of Justification and Reconciliation: The Positive Development of the Doctrine (trans. H.
R. Mackintosh and A. B. Macaulay; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1902).
Chapter!: History of Interpretation 40
theme of God's righteousness in the Scriptures. Under the influence of Kant and
Schleiermacher (the father of liberal Protestant theology), Ritschl began with the
foundational theological presupposition that God is Father, which means that he is
"loving will," and that all of his other attributes (such as holiness and righteousness) must
be subsumed under that of love. The fact that God is love is not derived from scholastic
metaphysical theology but is a datum revealed in the person of Jesus.79 From this
presupposition he drew the corollary that God's ultimate aim in the providential
government of the world is the moral progress of humanity toward a community
characterized by love for God and for one's neighbor. This morally-improved humanity
he calls "the kingdom of God," the central theme of the teaching of Jesus, which Ritschl
believed had been neglected in Protestant theology until Schleiermacher.
Within this theological framework, Ritschl adapts the concept of "the
righteousness of God" so that it no longer has any punitive or judicial elements, but is
nothing less than God's faithfulness to his aim of fulfilling his love toward humanity by
forming humanity into "the kingdom of God." He writes: "God's righteousness is His
self-consistent and undeviating action in behalf of the salvation of the members of His
community; in essence it is identical with his grace." And again, the righteousness of
God is "the congruence of his activity with his inner norm (die Congruenz seines
Handelns mit seiner innern Normalitat)," the inner norm, that is, of his love.
It is important to recognize the sense of the divine righteousness in relation to the

purpose (Zweck) that is predominantly pursued through God's judging or
78
Albrecht Ritschl, Die christliche Lehre von der Rechtfertigung und Versohnung, Zweiter Band: Der
hiblische Stoff"der Lehre (3rd ed.; Bonn: A. Marcus, 1889), 102-13. To my knowledge, no ET of vol. 2 has
yet been published; hence all translations of quotes from this volume are mine.
79
Ritschl, Christian Doctrine of Justification and Reconciliation, 3.270-84.
80
Ritschl, Christian Doctrine of Justification and Reconciliation, 3.413-14.
81
Ritschl, Die christliche Lehre, 2.104. Translation mine.
governing ... In this respect, it is found now, above all, that the righteousness of
God is directed at the good or the peace of the righteous.82
Now the judgment of God here has no other meaning than that he establishes
Israel's right in the world (a right established by his own grace), so that
righteousness is regarded as the motive of this procedure, how God consistently
proceeds according to his own norm (wie Gott nach seiner eigenen Norm
folgerecht verfahrt), that is, according to his intention (nach seiner Absicht) and
according to the quality in which the covenant people are presupposed. The
righteousness of God stands accordingly in the nearest analogy with his
faithfulness (Treue) (Ps 143:1). It signifies the constancy of his gracious purpose
(die Stetigkeit seiner Gnadenabsicht) toward the chosen people.83
Note the similarity with Diestel's formulation of God's righteousness in terms of
the inner norm of his gracious aim/intention/purpose (Zweck/'Absicht). In fact, Ritschl
was close friends with him and explicitly acknowledged his dependence on Diestel's
1860 article.84 As for Diestel, so for Ritschl, "the righteousness of God" in the Old
Testament has a thoroughly positive and saving significance; it never connotes divine
wrath or judgment. If in a handful of cases punishment is connected with the
righteousness of God, "this happens only indirectly, insofar as God's care for the
righteous is put into effect by the destruction of the wicked."85 Any notion that
righteousness is punitive comes from paganism, not from the Scriptures.86 God's
righteousness, therefore, does not stand in tension with God's mercy, grace, and love, but
is really identical with it. God's very essence is love; therefore, his righteousness is
merely his unswerving fidelity to pursuing his loving will, which will achieve its ultimate
fulfillment in the kingdom of God.

83
84
Ritschl, Die christliche Lehre, 2.103 note 1. According to David L. Mueller, Diestel was Ritschl's
confidant and letter-writing correspondent. Mueller, An Introduction to the Theology of Albrecht Ritschl
(Philadelphia: Westminster, 1969), 49, 84.
85
86
Although Ritschl did acknowledge that the righteousness of God is used in a punitive sense in a handful
of verses in the OT, he dismissed these verses as irrelevant since they were in the post-exilic books. Ritschl,
Die christliche Lehre, 2.104-5.
Under Ritschl's influence similar views were espoused by Hermann Schultz87 in
the area of Old Testament theology and by Theodor Haring88 in the field of Pauline
studies. When applied to Paul's language of "the righteousness of God," German
scholarship at the beginning of the 20' century tended to take Geou as a subjective
genitive and interpreted the lexeme as a whole not as God's attribute of righteousness -
an interpretation considered too static - but as God's saving activity.
It is within this late 19th-century context that Hermann Cremer (1834-1903),90
Protestant Professor of Dogmatics at the University of Greifswald, wrote his famous
treatise, Die paulinische Rechtfertigungslehre im Zusammenhange ihrer geschichtlichen
Voraussetzungen. It was first published in 1899 and reissued in a second edition in 1900,
which is the edition I will be using throughout this dissertation. The full title of his
work may be translated, The Pauline Doctrine of Justification in the Context of its
Historical Presuppositions. It is widely acknowledged that Cremer was the first biblical
scholar to identify "righteousness" in biblical language as a relational concept
(Verhaltnisbegriff), although he was not the first to call into question its essential
87
Hermann Schultz, Alttestamentliche Theologie: Die Offenbarungsreligion auf ihrer vorchristlichen
Entwickelungsstufe (5th ed.; Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1896), 327, 424-5. Schultz was not a
student of Ritschl, but he associated himself with Ritschl. Alfred E. Garvie, "Ritschlianism," in
Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics (ed. James Hastings; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1918), 10.817.
88
Theodor Haring, AIKAIOZYNH 0EOY bei Paulus (Tubingen: J. J. Heckenhauer, 1896). Haring was a
student of Ritschl and a member of the Ritschlian school. Garvie, "Ritschlianism," Encyclopaedia of
Religion and Ethics, 10.817-18.
89
"In the latter part of last century, and the beginning of the present one, intensive research into Paul's
teaching on justification, and particularly into the meaning of'righteousness of God', produced a strong
emphasis on OeotJ as a "subjective genitive', meaning in this case that it is God's own righteousness, not as
a static attribute, but as an expression for the activity of the living God. A whole galaxy of German scholars
held this position." J. A. Ziesler, The Meaning of Righteousness in Paul: A Linguistic and Theological
Enquiry (SNTSMS 20; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1972). 10-11.
90
ODCC 431.
91
Voraussetzungen (2nd ed.; Giitcrsloh: Bertelsmann, 1900). See also Hermann Cremer, Biblico-Theological
Lexicon of New Testament Greek with Supplement (trans. William Urwick; 4th ed.; Edinburgh: T&T Clark,
1895), 690-93.
connection with distributive justice (see Diestel and Ritschl above).92 Cremer's primary
concern in this volume is to set Paul's doctrine of justification in its historical context,
which for Cremer primarily means the theology and religion of the Old Testament and
early Judaism. He quotes Rom 3:21 where Paul says that the law and prophets bear
witness to the righteousness of God (SiKaiocruvn Osofj ... uapTDpoupxvn vnb xov vouou
Kai xcbv 7rpo(puT0)v). Cremer takes this to mean that Paul regards the Old Testament as a
whole ("the law and the prophets") as bearing witness to the righteousness of God, not
just "two or three scattered Old Testament sayings" explicitly quoted by Paul that use
"righteousness" terminology.93 Cremer argues that for Paul, the doctrine of justification
by faith, summarized in the lexeme, "the righteousness of God," is "a theme that runs
throughout the entire Old Testament," reflecting "a single common view of the entire Old
Testament," and that Paul's "explicit Old Testament citations come only as a classic
expression of this Old Testament perspective."94 Therefore, Cremer wants to investigate
the Old Testament in order to see if Paul was right to view the entire Old Testament as
teaching the Pauline doctrine of justification by faith.
Cremer does this by examining references to the righteousness of God in the
prophets (especially Deutero-Isaiah) and the Psalms.95 Beginning with Deutero-Isaiah, he
quotes the passages where God's "righteousness" stands in poetic parallelism with God's
"salvation," e.g., in Isa 56: lb, "My salvation is about to come and my righteousness to be
revealed" (NASB; also cited by Cremer: 45:8, 21; 46:13; 51:5, 6, 8; 59:17; 63:1). The
92
E.g., Peter Stuhlmacher, Gerechtigkeit Gottes bei Paulus (FRLANT 87; 2nd ed.; Gottingen:
Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1966), 46, 50.
93
Cremer, Die paulinische Rechtfertigungslehre, 2. Cremer does not identify what "two or three" OT
sayings he has in mind, but we may venture to guess that he is thinking of Gen 15:6 (cited by Paul in Rom
4:3ff; Gal 3:6); Ps 143:2 (quoted in Rom 3:20; Gal 2:16); and Hab 2:4 (cited in Rom 1:17; Gal 3:11).
94
Cremer, Die paulinische Rechtfertigungslehre, 2, 6, 9.
93
Cremer, Die paulinische Rechtfertigungslehre, 11-16.
Chapter 1: History of Interpretation • 44
fundamental concept in these passages is that the righteousness of God is God's saving
activity on behalf of Israel. In the Psalms, a similar usage prevails, though the focus is on
God's righteousness as refuge for the oppressed, e.g., as in Psalm 31:1: "In you, O Lord, I
have taken refuge; let me never be ashamed; in your righteousness deliver me" (NASB;
also cited by Cremer: Pss 36:10; 51:14; 69:27; 71:2, 15, 16:98:2-3; 103:17; 129:3-4;
143:1, 11). In addition to these passages in Deutero-Isaiah and the Psalms, Cremer points
out that the Septuagint translates "lOn with SiKouocruvn nine times (Gen 19:19; 20:13;
21:23; 24:27; 32:10; Ex 15:13; 34:7; Prov 20:28; Isa 63:7), and once njTI? is translated
with zkzoq (Isa 56: l). 96 This suggests that, whereas we tend to view righteousness and
grace as opposites, in Old Testament thought there is actually an affinity between the two
Q7
concepts and that righteousness in fact has a gracious connotation.
Up to this point, Cremer's interpretation would appear to be very close if not
identical to that of Ritschl, insofar as he seems to be taking the righteousness of God as a
purely positive concept with no negative judicial connotations. However, at this juncture
in his argument Cremer explicitly addresses the position of Ritschl, as well as that of
Diestel and Schultz who were members of the Ritschlian school. Ritschl and his school
claimed that the righteousness of God has no judicial component, or in the few cases
where it does, that the judicial aspect is not essential to the concept of righteousness but
only an incidental judgment needed to accomplish God's unerring aim of love toward
Actually, Ezek 18:19, 21 bring the number to three, but Cremer only counted Isa 56:1.
97
Cremer, Die paulinische Rechtfertigungslehre, 16-17. John A. Ziesler makes a similar appeal to the
LXX's translation decisions in The Meaning of Righteousness in Paul: A Linguistic and Theological
Enquiry (SNTSMS 20; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1972), 60-69.
98
Garvie, "Ritschlianism," Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics, 10.817-18.
Chapter 1. History of Interpretation -45
humanity. In response, Cremer objects to the philosophical abstraction involved in
Ritschl's interpretation of the righteousness of God, particularly Ritschl's definition of
righteousness as God's fidelity to "the in-God-himself lying yardstick of his perfect
purpose" (in Gott selbst liegenden Mafistab vollkommener Zwecke), that is, his loving
will which aims to bring all humanity into the perfection of mutual love in the kingdom
of God. There may be some value in Ritschl's formulation in a dogmatic context,
according to Cremer, but to Cremer's mind it is not exegetically grounded in the
linguistic usage of "righteousness" in the Scriptures.100
Given his concerns as a biblical-theologian, Cremer seeks to define righteousness
in a non-philosophical manner. In opposition both to Ritschl's notion that righteousness
is an "aim concept" (Zweckbegriff)m and to the prevailing view that it is a "norm
concept" (Normbegriff), Cremer argues that righteousness in scriptural usage is in fact a
"relational concept" (Verhdltnisbegriff):
p"72J is a thoroughly relational concept (durchaus Verhdltnisbegriff) based on an

actual relationship between two parties, between object and subject in relation ...
The concept of righteousness is in fact a relational concept (Verhdltnisbegriff),
which derives not from a relationship to an ideal norm (nicht aufdas Verhaltnis
zu einer idealen Norm), but from a relationship between two related parties,
which brings claims/demands with itself, the fulfillment of which is righteousness
(sondern aufdas Verhaltnis zwischen zweien beziehend, welches Anspriiche mit
1 09
sich bringt, deren Erfullung die Gerechtigkeit isf).
Diestel wrote that "Bare recompense, which bestows salvation on the good and evil on the wicked, is
never itself the aim, but is always only a means, and therefore it is almost never attributed to
righteousness." Diestel, "Die Idee der Gerechtigkeit," 198 (translation mine). Ritschl said that on the rare
occasions in the OT where punishment is connected with the righteousness of God, "this happens only
indirectly, insofar as God's care for the righteous is put into effect by the destruction of the wicked."
Ritschl, Die christliche Lehre, 2.110 (translation mine).
100
Cremer, Die paulinische Rechtfertigungslehre, 22.
101
See Cremer, Die paulinische Rechtfertigungslehre, 33-34, 39, where he explicitly characterizes his
debate with Ritschl in terms of Zweckbegriff'vs. Verhdltnisbegriff.
1C
" Cremer, Die paulinische Rechtfertigungslehre. 34, 53.
The central, constitutive element of Cremer's Verhdltnisbegriff'is that there is no
abstract norm lying outside the relationship, to the judgment of which either God or
humanity is subordinate; rather, "the relationship itself is the norm" (das Verhaltnis selbst
ist die Norm). Any claims, demands, or obligations (Anspriiche) "are simply given with
the existing relationship" (sie sind einfach mit dem bestehenden Verhaltnisse gegeben).
Thus, "the basic concept of p l U is that something or someone complies with the claims
which are set in place with the existing relationship in which he finds himself."1
In contrast to the traditional interpretive stream from the church fathers to the
Reformers, "righteousness" for Cremer is not conformity to an external norm, but is a
relational, social, or covenantal concept. And in contrast to Ritschl, "righteousness" is not
merely God's fidelity to his loving purpose, but also includes a forensic dimension, since
God's covenantal relationship with Israel demands that he come to Israel's defense and
vindicate her against her oppressors.
Yet, in the final analysis, Cremer is closer to Ritschl than to the traditional
interpretation, for he agrees with Ritschl that righteousness is "thoroughly positive"
(durchaus positiver)m and does not include any thought of punishment. "Righteousness,
which someone possesses or which he exercises, always comes to the good of those with
whom he stands in relationship (Verhaltnis)."1 5
How does Cremer accomplish this union of Ritschl's thoroughly positive, saving
righteousness and his own recognition of the forensic or judicial dimension of
righteousness? He does so by arguing that
Cremer, Die paulinische Rechtfertigungslehre. 36.

Chapter 1: History of Interpretation - 47
The proper purpose of God's righteousness-activity or judging is not negative, but

thoroughly positive, not punishment, but... the defense of right, the defense of
those who are in the right and who desire to come to their right over against a
world that treats them as having no right.106
When God comes to the aid of his oppressed people, delivering them from their enemies,
and vindicating their right over against those who treat them as if they have no right, God
is exercising his saving righteousness in keeping with his covenant relationship with his
people. Contra Ritschl, judicial activity is involved, because God is exercising his
righteousness on behalf of his covenant people, though he is punishing not them but their
oppressors.
So we can see that there is no conflict between God's righteousness and God's
grace (dafi kein Widerstreit zwischen Gerechtigkeit und Gnade Gottes besteht),
that the exercise of righteousness on God's part is grace (dafi die
Gerechtigkeitsiibung seitens Gottes Gnade ist), that his judicial righteousness is
salvific (seine richtende Gerechtigkeit heilschaffend ist) and stands in the closest
connection with his goodness and faithfulness (Giite und Treue), so that
righteousness and faithfulness (Gerechtigkeit und Treue) are synonymous, and
that righteousness and grace can stand in parallel.107
In sum, the righteousness of God in the Old Testament is always a judicial act that
creates salvation for God's people who are oppressed by their enemies. God's
righteousness is his covenant faithfulness, expressed (particularly in the Psalms and
Deutero-Isaiah) in the form of God's saving activity (Heilshandeln) by which he
intervenes in history to redeem his people and vindicate them from their oppressors, thus
fulfilling his obligations to the covenant. To express this concept, Cremer invented a new
Latin phrase, iustitia salutifera or "saving righteousness," modeled after the old
interpretation of "righteousness" as iustitia distributiva that Cremer rejected:
In the entire Old Testament, the righteousness of God is and remains justitia
salutifera, because its essence accords with justitia justificatoria, that is, because

its essence is to create justice for those who need it, to exercise justice on behalf
of God's people and thereby to help them.108
Taking this concept and applying it to Paul, Cremer argued that in the key Pauline
texts that speak of "the righteousness of God," the genitive Osofj is to be taken as a
subjective genitive and that the whole phrase refers to God's covenant faithfulness as
manifested in his saving (i.e., justifying or vindicating) activity in Christ.
2. Cremer's Reception in Old Testament Scholarship
It is interesting to observe that although Cremer's work was a study in Paul's
doctrine of justification, his thesis concerning p*12 and H j?"J2J appears to have been
taken up by Old Testament scholarship, from which point it soon came to be regarded as
an assured result of modern critical study.
Gerhard von Rad (1901-1971) claimed that Old Testament theology until
Cremer was in the grip of the Western idea of righteousness as conformity to a norm. Yet
to the question, "What is the norm according to the Old Testament?" scholars could not
find a satisfactory answer. But, von Rad argues, they were asking the wrong question. "It
was H. Cremer who recognized the impossibility of applying this way of thinking to
Biblical thought, and succeeded in breaking through to a completely different way of
thinking which has so far been rightly accepted as proven, in its basic thesis at least."10
Von Rad goes on to give a summary of Cremer's theory that righteousness is not
conformity to an external norm, but rather fulfillment of the claims that arise from a
particular relationship. Von Rad accepts Cremer's interpretation of the phrase, "Jahweh's
108
109
Gerhard von Rad, Old Testament Theology (2 vols.; trans. D. M. G. Stalker; Edinburgh: Oliver and
Boyd, 1962), 1.371.
righteous acts" (HIIT nip"|S) (Judges 5:11; 1 Sam 12:7; Mic 6:5; Ps 103:6; Dan 9:16),
as God's saving acts in history, the effects of his faithfulness to his covenant relationship
with Israel.110 Von Rad agrees with Ritschl and Cremer, arguing that the righteousness of
Yahweh is "always" a gift that brings salvation. "It is inconceivable that it should ever
menace Israel. No references to the concept of a punitive TlpTS can be adduced - that
would be a contradictio in adiecto."
Walther Eichrodt (1890-1978) argues in much the same way as von Rad. He
warns against reading the Hebrew concept of righteousness in light of the iustitia
distributiva of Roman legal thought and says, "In Hebrew thinking there is no such thing
as an abstract formal concept which might be classified according to an objective
standard, thus presupposing a universal idea of righteousness." " He cites the work of
Emil Kautzsch,113 who attempted to defend the older view that righteousness in Hebrew
means conformity to a norm, whether that norm is God himself or the divine command or
even the subjective conscience of humans. But in Eichrodt's perspective these were alien
ideas that needed to be swept away. "With the insight of genius H. Cremer recognized
this and described sdq as a concept of relation referring to an actual relationship between
two persons and implying behavior which corresponds to, or is true to, the claims arising
out of such a relationship."114 The righteousness of God, then, is a gracious gift of
salvation wrought through the establishment or restoration of the covenant relationship
110
Von Rad, Old Testament Theology, 1.372.
111
Von Rad, Old Testament Theology, 1.377. Contradictio in adiecto is a contradiction where the noun and
the adjective modifying it stand in contradiction. The classic example is "deafening silence." In this case,
von Rad is saying that "punitive righteousness" is an oxymoron in Old Testament theology.
112
Walther Eichrodt, Theology of the Old Testament (2 vols.; trans. J. A. Baker; Philadelphia: Westminster
Press, 1961). 1.240.
113
Emil Kautzsch, Uber die Derivate des Stammes p~l25 im alttestamentlichen Sprachgebrauch (Tubingen:
Eberhard-Karls-Universitat Tubingen, 1881).
114
Eichrodt, Theology of the Old Testament, 1.240.
between God and his people. Indeed, the maintenance of the covenant relation is so
gracious that it is tantamount to the justification of the ungodly.115
It goes without saying that von Rad and Eichrodt were (and are) widely respected
Old Testament scholars whose endorsement of Cremer helped cement in the minds of
many New Testament scholars the correctness of the covenant faithfulness/iustitia
salutifera interpretation. In addition to these Old Testament heavyweights, mention must
also be made of Elizabeth R. Achtemeier (1926-2002)116 who wrote a 1962 article,
"Righteousness in the OT," for The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible. This article is
historically significant as a nexus that mediated Cremer's theory to English-speaking
New Testament scholars. James D. G. Dunn acknowledges that it exercised a profound
influence on his own thinking.117 Closely following Cremer, Achtemeier defines
"righteousness" as follows:
Righteousness is in the OT the fulfillment of the demands of a relationship,

whether that relationship be with men or with God ... Each of these relationships
brings with it specific demands, the fulfillment of which constitutes righteousness.
The demands may differ from relationship to relationship; righteousness in one
relationship may be unrighteousness in another. Furthermore, there is no norm of
1 1 R
righteousness outside the relationship itself.
This entry in The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible is not an isolated case.
Many other Old and New Testament lexica and theological dictionaries repeat the Cremer
115
Eichrodt. Theology of the Old Testament, 1.246-47.
" 6 http://wwvv.layman.org/ncws.aspx?article=l 1722. Accessed October 12, 2010.
1!
' Dunn writes: "The puzzle which quickly began to nag emerged from my initial probing into one of the
key phrases in Paul's justification teaching - the phrase, 'the righteousness of God' ... 1 found the articles
on the subject by Elizabeth and Paul Achtemeier in Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible highly
illuminating - but puzzle-provoking. For the Achtemeiers brought home to me that Paul's central phrase
was drawn directly from the Old Testament, and resonated through and through with characteristic Jewish
emphases. 'Righteousness' was a relational concept, and was to be understood 'as meeting the demands of
a relationship.'" James D. G. Dunn, "The New Perspective: whence, what and whither?" in The New
Perspective on Paul: Collected Essays (WUNT 11/185; Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2005), 2.
118
E. R. Achtemeier. "Righteousness in the OT," IDB 4.80.
Chapter 1: History of Interpretation •••- 51
thesis as one of the assured results of modern critical scholarship.119 For this reason, I
believe it is not going too far to call it a reigning paradigm.120
3. The 20 -Century Gottes Gerechtigkeit Discussion
This next section is devoted to the Gottes Gerechtigkeit discussion in 20th century
German New Testament scholarship from Schlatter to Kasemann to Bultmann to
Stuhlmacher. The significance of this survey is that it demonstrates another important
development in the shift away from the traditional patristic and Reformational reading of
the genitive of source (a righteousness from God) to the subjective genitive (the saving
activity of God). Cremer's relational theory is sometimes implicitly in the background,
and at other times explicitly cited by these scholars. Although a number of scholars will
be examined here, it should become obvious that one figure towers among the rest,
namely Ernst Kasemann, whose views have arguably influenced those of the New
119
Gottlob Schrenk, "SiKn,, K T V in Theologisches Worterbuch zum Neuen Testament (TWNT) (cd.
Gerhard Kittel; Stuttgart: W. Kohlhammer, 1935), 2.180-229; Klaus Koch, "Gerechtigkeit im Alten
Testament," in Evangelisches Kirchenlexikon (EKL) (ed. Heinz Brunotte and Otto Weber; Gottingen:
Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1956), 1.1501-1502; Fr. Horst, "Gerechtigkeit Gottes im AT und Judentum," in
Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart (RGG3) (ed. Kurt Galling; 3rd ed; Tubingen: Mohr, 1958), 2.1403-
1406; Klaus Koch, "p"12J," in Theologisches Handworterbuch zum Alten Testament (THAT) (ed. Ernst
Jenni and Claus Westermann; Miinchen: Chr. Kaiser, 1971-76), 2.507-30; Johannes P. Louw and Eugene
A. Nida, Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament Based on Semantic Domains (L&N) (New York:
United Bible Societies, 1988), 1.452; Karl Kertelge, "Stratocrovn, SIKOUOCD, Sucaicoua," in Exegetical
Dictionary of the New Testament (EDNT) (ed. Horst Balz and Gerhard Schneider; Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1990), 1.325-35; K. L. Onesti and M. T. Brauch, "Righteousness, Righteousness of God," in
Dictionary of Paul and His Letters (DPL) (ed. Ralph P. Martin, Gerald F. Hawthorne, and Daniel G. Reid;
Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1993), 827-37; Eckart Otto, "Gerechtigkeit, Biblisch, Alter Orient und Altes
Testament," in Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart (RGG4) (ed. Hans Dieter Betz; 4th ed.; Tubingen:
Mohr Siebeck, 2000), 3.702-3; Frederick William Danker, ed., A Greek-English Lexicon of the New
Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (BDAG) (3rd cd.; Chicago: University of Chicago Press,
2000), 247-49; Ludwig Koehler, Walter Baumgartner, and J. J. Stamm, The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon
of the Old Testament (HALOT) (trans. M. E. J. Richardson; 2 Vol. Study Edition; Leiden: Brill, 2001),
1004-7; B. Johnson, "p"12», etc.," in Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament (TDOT) (ed. G. Johannes
Botterweck, Helmer Ringgren, and Heinz-Josef Fabry; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2003), 12.239-64.
120
By contrast with the preceding footnote, I could find only one dictionary of OT theology whose entry on
"righteousness" was not influenced by Cremer: David J. Reimer, "p"12," in New International Dictionary
of Old Testament Theology and Exegesis (NIDOTTE) (ed. Willem VanGemeren; Grand Rapids:
Zondervan, 1997), 3.744-69.
Perspective even though New Perspective scholars indicate points of disagreement with
him.
We begin this historical survey with Adolf Schlatter (1852-1938), who
functioned as a pre-WWII bridge mediating Cremer to Kasemann and his successors.121
Eighteen years his senior, it was Cremer who invited Schlatter to move from the
University of Bern in Switzerland to the University of Greifswald in Germany. Schlatter
served as a colleague with Cremer on the theological faculty at Greifswald from 1888 to
1893, during which period the two biblical theologians developed a close bond in their
mutual defense of orthodox Christianity against the then-dominant Ritschlian
liberalism.122
In his 1935 commentary on Romans, titled Gottes Gerechtigkeit,,123 Schlatter
shows his dependence on Cremer and advances a very similar interpretation:
First, like Cremer, Schlatter argues that the genitive Beofj is to be taken "strictly,"
by which he seems to mean as the possessive or the subjective genitive, although he does
not explicitly specify which. "Righteousness" is as much God's own attribute as are
"power" ("the power of God," Rom 1:16) and "wrath" ("the wrath of God," Rom
1:18).124 Since he makes clear that he is referring not to the static attribute of
righteousness but to "God's salvific work," it would seem that Schlatter takes Beou as a
subjective genitive.
121
See the article by Robert W. Yarbrough on Schlatter in the Dictionary of Major Biblical Interpreters
(ed. Donald K. McKim; Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 2007), 881-85.
122
Werner Neuer, Adolf Schlatter: A Biography of Germany's Premier Biblical Theologian (trans. Robert
W. Yarbrough; Grand Rapids: Baker, 1995), 82-94.
123
Adolf Schlatter, Gottes Gerechtigkeit: Ein Kommentar zum Romerbrief (Stuttgart: Calwer, 1935). ET:
Romans: The Righteousness of God (trans. Siegfried S. Schatzmann; Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 1995).
124
Schlatter, Romans, 20-21.
125
Schlatter, Romans, 21.
Second, Schlatter, again in dependence on Cremer, uses the language of
relationship when describing the content of "the righteousness of God." For example, he
writes:
It is obvious that Paul's statement concerning the righteousness of God could not
have referred to a static substance. In every expression Paul is thinking of God as
the creator, as the one who wills and acts, the one who reveals himself and who
brings the person into relationship (Verhaltnis) with him, as he intended. Because
of the very deity of God, his work brings about justice, and he so orders the
relationship (Verhaltnis) of humans to him that, on account of the power of his
will, everything evil is eliminated.126
Schlatter's emphasis on the relationship between God and humans, effected by "the
righteousness of God," is connected with his Pietistic concern, throughout his writings, to
combat an anemic and calcified Christianity - so common in the state-sanctioned
Lutheran church of the time - in which faith is reduced to intellectual assent to the
articles of the creed without a corresponding connection with the will as expressed in a
life of obedience to God.127 Thus, for Schlatter, "the righteousness of God" must not be
defined merely as the righteousness that God bestows upon or imputes to the believer (as
Luther and Calvin taught), which would reduce God's righteousness to his mercy. "The
righteousness of God" is powerful and effective. It refers not only to what God does "for"
the believer but also to what he does "in" the believer. It brings us into a new relationship
with God in which we enjoy not only God's favor and mercy but also his transforming
power resulting in a changed life:
When an individual believes and because he believes, God's righteousness is

effective for him and in him. As a result of his faith, on account of the fact that he

127
Stuhlmacher explains this polemical context in "Adolf Schlatter as Interpreter of Paul," xiv, xviii-xix.
Schlatter lamented that Luther's sola fide and simulpeccator et Justus "meant the truncation of life that
separates action from it and leaves behind nothing but faith" (Romans, 104).
believes, he is brought into relationship with God in which he enjoys God's

goodwill and lives in accordance with God's will.128
In terms of the distinction upheld by traditional Protestant orthodoxy between
justification and regeneration/sanctification, one may say that Schlatter strives to blur the
lines as much as possible.129 In his treatment of Romans 6, Schlatter explicitly rejects the
"dissection of grace" into two sequential gifts, justification and sanctification, and argues
that this formulation does not originate with Paul.130 Schlatter argues that righteousness
itself is so "effective" that it "establishes the fellowship between [God and humans] in a
1^1
manner that everything evil remains excluded."
Third, Schlatter's interpretation of "the righteousness of God" builds on Cremer's
theocentric emphasis but adds the further dimension of the authority of God the creator
and the lordship of Christ who reigns in God's name. This relates to the previous point,
since the salvific activity of God in Christ is the powerful, effective, life-changing work
of the creator God. This is an element of Schlatter's theology that will be taken up by
Kasemann and Stuhlmacher, though they will develop it further by tying the concept of
God's creatorhood to Paul's Jewish "apocalyptic" worldview. "The [Reformation]
interpreter began with his own self while Paul began with God."132
Of course, Schlatter wrote prior to the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, so he
was not able to bring to bear that body of literature in defense of his interpretation of "the
righteousness of God." This would be left to the towering figure to whom we now turn.
128
129
As noted earlier, Alister E. McGrath argues that the essence of the Reformation doctrine of justification
is its insistence on making a clear distinction between justification and regeneration. Iustitia Dei: A Histoiy
ojthe Christian Doctrine of Justification (3rd ed.; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005), 217.
130
131
Schlatter, Romans, 20. Schlatter also speaks of "the effectiveness of Christ" (55, 151). Similar language
may be found in his The Theology of the Apostles, ("Christ effectively brings all sin to an end ... the
effective power of God's verdict"), 236.
132
Cremer and Schlatter laid the foundations for the 20 -century, subjective-
genitive, theocentric interpretation of Paul. But it was Ernst Kasemann (1906-1998)
who sparked a renewed debate in the post-WWII era over the significance of "the
righteousness of God" in Pauline theology. In his famous 1961 lecture,
"Gottesgerechtigkeit bei Paulus,"133 he argued that SiKaiocuvn Osou is a technical term
borrowed from Jewish apocalyptic that refers to God's righteous activity of bringing
about the cosmic restoration of creation. As appropriated by Paul, "the righteousness of
God" refers to God's gift and God's power simultaneously, thus overcoming the divide
between the forensic and the ethical dimensions of righteousness that he thought has
plagued discussions since the Reformation.1 Kasemann was also concerned, in reaction
to Bultmann,135 to avoid an individualizing, existentialist interpretation of justification.
He wanted to stress the theocentric aspect - not denying the anthropological aspect, but
making it clearly subordinate to the theocentric. Kasemann employed "apocalyptic
thought" as a way of bringing out this theocentric dimension. The "apocalyptic
worldview" (which, he argued, exercised a controlling influence on Paul's theology)
''' The lecture itself was delivered at the Oxford Congress on "The New Testament Today" on September
14. 1961. It was first published as "Gottesgerechtigkeit bei Paulus," ZTK58 (1961): 367-78. It was
reprinted in Exegetische Versuche undBesinnungen, Zweiter Band (2n ed.; Gottingen: Vandenhoeck &
Ruprecht. 1965), 181-93. ET: "'The Righteousness of God' in Paul," pp. 168-82 in New Testament
Questions for Today (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1969).
1-4
Kasemann. "The Righteousness of God," 169-72.
133
Rudolf Bultmann, Theology of the New Testament (trans. K. Grobel; New York: Scribners, 1955),
1.270-329. Later, in response to Kasemann's 1961 essay, Bultmann wrote "AIKAIOZYNH ©EOY," JBL
83 (1964): 12-16. Bultmann argued that Oeofj is agenitivus auctoris so that 5iK<xiocruvr| Oeou refers to God's
gift of righteousness bestowed on believers.
U6
Stuhlmacher states that "Kasemann's interpretation of Paul can only be understood correctly from
Schlatter's perspective." Peter Stuhlmacher, "Adolf Schlatter as Interpreter of Paul - An Attempt"
(commemorative address given at the fiftieth anniversary of Schlatter's death, Tubingen, September 26-29,
1988); translated and published as "Foreword" in Schlatter, Romans, ix-xxiv (quotation from p. xvi).
Additionally. David Way documents in Kasemann's writings, including a letter to Bultmann in 1949, the
fact of Kasemann's indebtedness to Schlatter. David Way, The Lordship of Christ: Ernst Kasemann's
Interpretation of Paul's Theology (Oxford: Clarendon, 1991), 42-44, 51, 197 n. 63.
placed the accent on God's cosmic act of making creation right again, of which the
restoration of individuals to a right relationship with God is but a subordinate part.
Kasemann appeals to what he sees as "the gift-power dialectic" in Paul's
theology. According to Kasemann, Paul views salvation in the context of the lordship of
Christ. Salvation is not merely a private affair of receiving a gift, but a change of lordship
(Herrschaftswechsel).131 The gift cannot be isolated from the Giver.138 Thus, when the
gift is received, the Giver himself comes on the scene and takes hold of the recipients and
transforms them. "Paul knows no gift of God which does not convey both the obligation
and the capacity to serve."139 The gift therefore has a power-character (der
Machtcharakter der Gabe).140 The application of this dialectic to "the righteousness of
God" is supported by Rom 1:16 (which speaks of "the power of God unto salvation" in
the verse just prior to the one about "the righteousness of God") and Rom 10:3 (which
speaks of Israel's failure to "submit" to God's righteousness).
Demonstrating the influence of Cremer, Kasemann articulates his position by
contrasting "Greek" with "Hebraic" thought in regard to righteousness:
In the field of the Old Testament and of Judaism in general, righteousness does
not convey primarily the sense of a personal, ethical quality, but of a relationship
(Relation); originally signifying trustworthiness in regard to the community
(Gemeinschaftstreue). ...The widely-held view that God's righteousness is simply
a property of the divine nature can now be rejected as misleading. It derives from
Greek theology, which speculates about such properties; it contradicts the basic
sense of "righteousness" within the tradition of the Old Testament and later
Judaism - namely, faithfulness in the context of community
(Gemeinschaftstreue).
Kasemann, "Righteousness of God," 176.

13s
139
140
141
Kasemann, "Righteousness of God," 172, 174. Cp. Kasemann, Commentary on Romans (trans. G. W.
Bromiley; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980), 24-25.
Chapter 1. History of Interpretation -57
Kasemann's use of the word Gemeinschaftstreue (as well as the almost synonymous
term, Bundestreue[42) is a tell-tale sign that he has been influenced by Cremer, even
though he did not explicitly identify his indebtedness to Cremer's work.
Kasemann not only argues that "righteousness" is to be interpreted according to a
Hebraic background as a relational or social concept; he also argues that the phrase, "the
righteousness of God," was not invented by Paul but was "a ready-made formulation"143
that Paul picked up from apocalyptic Judaism to describe God's saving activity in Christ.
This theory was originally put forward in 1953 by Oepke who cited Deut 33:21; T. Dan
6:10; Matt 6:33; and James 1:10.144 Kasemann took Oepke's theory and augmented the
list with three Qumran texts: 1QS 10:25; 11:12; 1QM 4:6.145 This was not a strong list,
but right about the same time as Kasemann's "righteousness of God" lecture, his student
Stuhlmacher was busy trying to augment the list in his dissertation, Gerechtigkeit Gottes
bei Paulus.
In sum. the Cremer emphasis on the Hebraic/relational meaning of righteousness
is strongly present in Kasemann's thought. It is also interesting to observe the ways in
which Kasemann has taken Cremer's thesis, filtered it through Schlatter's theocentric
vision, further expanded it with his apocalyptic "gift-Giver" dialectic, and added a dollop
of Qumran citations to top it off. Perhaps the most significant and lasting contribution
that Kasemann made to the Cremer/Schlatter approach was to argue that Paul's
terminology and theology are governed by "apocalyptic" thought and language, as
142
Kasemann, "Righteousness of God," 177-78.
14j
144
Albrecht Oepke, "Aucaiocrovri ©son bei Paulus in neuer Beleuchtung," TLZ 78 (1953): 257-64.
]4
^ Kasemann, "Righteousness of God," 172. He also cites several passages from the Hodayoth (1QH 4:37;
7:14, 19; 11:17-18,30-31; 13:16-17; 15:14-15; 16:10) but they do not actually contain the complete
lexeme.
exemplified most clearly and strikingly in the Qumran sectarian literature. Thus, while
Kasemann is clearly indebted to Cremer and Schlatter, neither is he enslaved to them.
Kasemann appropriates Cremer's relational interpretation of righteousness and
Schlatter's theocentrism in the service of a new (and admittedly inspiring) theological
vision.
As we have seen, Kasemann's emphasis on the "power-character" of the
righteousness of God was in many ways a reaction to Bultmann's anthropological
approach which emphasized the "gift-character." The views of Rudolf Bultmann (1884-
1976) were originally presented in his famous New Testament Theology, and then later he
wrote a critique of Kasemann's 1961 lecture in a brief article published in 1964 in The
Journal of Biblical Literature.
Bultmann disagrees with Kasemann's taking BEOU as a subjective genitive,
arguing rather that it is a genitivus auctoris, indicating that God is the author or source of
this righteousness which is a gift granted to believers. That is his main thesis in the 1964
article. What are his arguments?
First, Bultmann takes Kasemann to task for assuming that SiKaiocuvu Osou must
have the same meaning everywhere in Paul's letters. He points out that the phrase was
developed from OT usage, and in the OT itself the concept of the righteousness of God
has a variety of senses, and so we should expect the same thing in Paul. In some contexts
it refers to God's judicial iustitia distributiva (e.g., Rom 3:5), and in others to Cremer's
iustitia salutifera (Bultmann recognizes that this usage occurs in the OT and Qumran, but
Rudolf Bultmann, Theology of the New Testament (trans. K. Grobcl; New York: Scribners, 1955),
1.270-329; idem, "AIKAIOEYNH ©EOY," JBL 83 (1964): 12-16. All quotes from the JBL article are my
own translation from the German.
does not see it playing a major role in Paul).147 In addition, Bultmann is not convinced
that "the righteousness of God" is a fixed formula in Jewish apocalyptic literature, since a
fixed formula must have a universal and totally fixed meaning in every context.148
Second, if "the righteousness of God" is not a fixed formula, then we must
consider Paul's use of the phrase in his writings rather than allowing the background of
the OT and Jewish literature to exercise such a controlling influence that Paul's actual
usage is ignored. In this case, the interpretation of "the righteousness of God" in Rom
1:17; 3:21-22 as referring to the gift of righteousness bestowed on those who believe is
confirmed by three crucial cross-references (Phil 3:9; Rom 5:17; 10:3).149
Bultmann responds to Kasemann's argument that "the righteousness of God" has
a "power-character," not merely a "gift-character," by acknowledging that the receipt of
the gift of righteousness is such that it obligates the believer to new obedience. However,
he hastens to add that "this does not change the meaning of SiKaioouvn 0£oi3."150
Bultmann is making the important distinction between a word's sense and its referent. He
acknowledges that there is a broader contextual reference to "the righteousness of God"
in Paul's thought insofar as it has systematic linkages with other aspects of Pauline
theology, such as the lordship of Christ, the necessity of the new obedience, and Paul's
teaching that believers must stand before the judgment seat of Christ to give an account
of their works (e.g., 2 Cor 5:10). But as true as these things may be, they are not part of
the lexical sense of SiKaiocruvn 0sou.
Bultmann, "AIKAIOSYNH 0EOY," 12-13.

Bultmann. "AIKAIOSYNH 0EOY," 15-16.
Bultmann, "AIKAIOXYNH 0EOY," 12-13.
Bultmann, "AIKAIOEYNH 0EOY," 14-15.
Bultmann, then, mounted a powerful critique of Kasemann's new view and a
defense of a more traditional Reformation exegesis of "the righteousness of God" in Paul.
Bultmann's critique was seconded by his followers.1 ' It must be acknowledged that in
terms of sheer numbers Kasemann seems to have won. since more scholars appear to
1 S9
have lined up behind Kasemann than behind Bultmann.
The discussion of Bultmann in the previous section is somewhat of a detour from
the main path that we have been attempting to trace from Cremer to the New Perspective.
We now return to the main path as we examine the work of two students of Kasemann
who wrote Ph.D. dissertations developing Kasemann's thesis. The first is Christian
Miiller, whose dissertation, Gottes Gerechtigkeit und Gottes Volk: Eine Untersuchung zu
Romer 9-11, was completed in 1959 and published in book form in 1964.153 As the
subtitle indicates, the focus of Miiller's dissertation is on the role of "the righteousness of
God" in connection with Paul's treatment of the question of Israel's future in Romans 9-
11, although he also examines the other key "righteousness of God" passages earlier in
Romans.
Miiller accepts Cremer's critique of the 19th-century idealistic interpretation of
"righteousness" (i.e., that righteousness denotes conformity to a norm) and accepts
Cremer's thesis that "righteousness" is a Verhdltnisbegriff'that when predicated of God

151
Giinter Klein, "Gottes Gerechtigkeit als Thema der neuesten Paulus-Forschung," Verkiindigung und
Forschung 12 (1967): 1-11; Hans Conzelmann, "Die Rechtfertigungslehre des Paulus: Theologie oder
Anthropologic?" EvT 28 (1968): 389-404; idem, Grundrifi der Theologie des Neuen Testaments
(Munchen: Chr. Kaiser Verlag, 1968), 237-43; Gtinther Bomkamm, Paul (New York: Harper & Row,
1971), 136-39; Eduard Lohsc, "Die Gerechtigkeit Gottes in der paulinischen Theologie," pp. 209-27 in Die
Einheit des Neuen Testaments: Exegetische Studien zur Theologie des Neuen Testaments (Gottingen:
Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1973); Georg Strecker, Theology of the New Testament (trans. M. Eugene
Boring; New York: Walter de Gruyter/Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2000). 149-56.
152
Robert Jewett says that the interpretation of "righteousness" in the tradition from Cremer to Kasemann
is one "that subsequent scholars have largely accepted." Jewett, Romans: A Commentary (Hermeneia;
Minneapolis: Fortress, 2007), 141.
153
Christian Miiller, Gottes Gerechtigkeit und Gottes Volk: Eine Untersuchung zu Romer 9-11 (FRLANT
86; Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1964).
denotes his judicial accomplishment of iustitia salutifera}iA However, he does not end
there but goes on to add his own unique interpretation of righteousness by appealing to
the Old Testament motif of the cosmic lawsuit (Prozefi) or legal controversy
(Rechtsstreit) in which God emerges as the victor (e.g., Psalm 82 :1; Isaiah 41:21-29; Joel
3:2).ls5 In other words, Miiller accepts Cremer's thesis but applies it in a unique way.
"The righteousness of God" is for Miiller a relational concept, but not in the purely
positive sense that it indicates God's saving activity on behalf of his people and nothing
more (Cremer). Rather, "the righteousness of God" is a relational concept in the sense
that God's victory in the cosmic lawsuit is not complete until it has been acknowledged
by humanity. "Thus Sucaioauvn is 'right' not as an abstract norm or judicial idea but as
the realization of [God's] right (Rechtsverwirklichung)." Miiller bases this primarily on
the opening paragraph of Romans 3 where Paul says, "Let God be found true, and every
human be found a liar," and quotes Psalm 51:4: "That you may be justified in your
words and prevail when you are judged" (Rom 3:4). This is then followed by an
immediate reference to "the righteousness of God" in the very next verse: "Our
unrighteousness demonstrates the righteousness of God" (v 5). Miiller argues that this
"demonstration" of God's righteousness and the human acknowledgment of God's justice
presuppose a cosmic lawsuit between God and the world. In a lawsuit, the victory of
1 SR
one party necessarily involves the defeat of the other. As applied to the cosmic lawsuit
between God and the world, the world confesses its own unrighteousness, acknowledges
134
Miiller, Gottes Gerechtigkeit und Gottes Volk, 8-11.
1,5
Miiller, Gottes Gerechtigkeit und Gottes Volk, 58.
156
Miiller. Gottes Gerechtigkeit und Gottes Volk, 74.
157
Miiller, Gottes Gerechtigkeit und Gottes Volk, 65-67.
158
Miiller. Gottes Gerechtigkeit und Gottes Volk, 65. Miiller speaks in this regard of the motif of the
Gerichtsdoxologie, that is, when humans acknowledge that God is right by giving glory to God, e.g., Luke
7:29 (where the tax collectors "justified God" by submitting to John's baptism), and Rev 11:13 (where
humanity "gave glory to the God of heaven" in response to the eschatological judgments).
that God is right, and submits in obedience to God's victory. Only then is God fully
vindicated and victorious. This context of the legal controversy, Miiller believes, is a
critical element lacking in views that define "the righteousness of God" merely as God's
covenant faithfulness.159
Whereas Miiller focused on the concept of the legal controversy in the OT as the
background to Paul's "righteousness of God" language, Peter Stuhlmacher (1932-)
provided an in-depth examination of the OT and early Jewish literature with the goal of
providing substantiation for Kasemann's thesis that "the righteousness of God" was a
technical term or fixed formula in Jewish apocalyptic literature.
Stuhlmacher may have the distinction of having written more on the subject of the
righteousness of God than any other author. 1 have divided my survey of Stuhlmacher's
scholarly contribution into two phases: the early Stuhlmacher, in which I deal with his
doctoral dissertation in the early 1960s; and the later Stuhlmacher, in which I survey the
evolution of Stuhlmacher's thought after his doctoral dissertation and culminating in his
most recent work, the third edition of his justly famous two-volume magnum opus,
Biblische Theologie des Neuen Testaments.
In 1962 (a year after Kasemann's famous 1961 lecture), Peter Stuhlmacher
completed his doctoral dissertation under the supervision of Kasemann at Eberhard-Karls
University in Tubingen. It was edited and published in 1965 with the title Gerechtigkeit
Gottes bei Paulus, and was reissued in a second edition in 1966.160 Stuhlmacher
embraced his teacher's thesis and sought to provide further support for it by a detailed
study of the phrase "the righteousness of God" in the Old Testament and a variety of
159
Miiller, Gottes Gerechtigkeit und Gottes Volk, 64.
160
Peter Stuhlmacher, Gerechtigkeit Gottes bei Paulus (FRLANT 87; 2nd ed.; Gottingen: Vandenhoeck &
Ruprecht, 1966). All quotations from this book are my own translations.
post-biblical Jewish sources, with special reliance on the writings of the Qumran sect.
Stuhlmacher's method was tradition-historical; that is, he sought to trace the tradition
history of "the righteousness of God" from the Old Testament to Paul, mediated by the
apocalyptic literature. He argued that "the righteousness of God" originated in the Old
Testament cult. From there, it became a terminus technicus in Jewish apocalyptic
literature for God's covenant faithfulness, as exemplified most clearly in the sectarian
literature of the Dead Sea Scrolls. Paul then took up this technical term and made it the
center of his theology.161
The fact that Stuhlmacher is dependent on Cremer is evident from the very
beginning. In his extensive history of the interpretation of "the righteousness of God"
from the second century up to the time of his dissertation,162 Stuhlmacher identifies
Cremer as the turning point. Prior to Cremer, interpreters of Paul's doctrine of
justification were held captive by a Greek, idealistic understanding. Stuhlmacher (quoting
Cremer) defines the idealistic understanding of "righteousness" (which he rejects) as the
pure formal fulfillment of one's legal obligations that entitles one to be called a righteous
person.163 Stuhlmacher thinks that Greek legal categories have dominated the history of
Pauline interpretation. He identifies the failure to distinguish the "Hebrew" from the
"Greek" concept of righteousness as a critical methodological error on the part of past
interpreters. Greek legal categories have, in Stuhlmacher's opinion, led to conceptual
ambiguity and do not provide the appropriate lens for interpreting the Pauline texts in
question. Only OT-Jewish legal categories, he asserts, are suitable for interpretation of
the concept of "the righteousness of God" in Paul. In addition, "SiKaioown 9eoi> is an
161
Stuhlmacher, Gerechtigkeit Gottes, 71, 186-7.
162
Stuhlmacher, Gerechtigkeit Gottes, 11-73.
163
Stuhlmacher, Gerechtigkeit Gottes, 46.
independent terminus technicus and hence may not be interpreted from the generic
concept (Allgemeinbegriff) of 5iKaioauvn." Because, for Stuhlmacher, SiKaioouvn
Osofj is an independent terminus technicus, it has a unique, specialized meaning in Jewish
apocalyptic literature. Its meaning therefore has nothing to do with "the generic concept
of 5iKaiocruvr|" as it is ordinarily employed in standard Greek usage - i.e.,
"righteousness" in the sense of upright and virtuous behavior or the status of being
regarded as Sixmoc;. Therefore, it is to the Old Testament and Jewish apocalyptic
literature that Stuhlmacher believes we must turn; this, he thinks, will ultimately be
determinative for the precise lexical and theological significance of "the righteousness of
God."
The third chapter of his dissertation is titled "The Righteousness of God in the
History-of-Religion Sphere" and is really the heart and soul of Stuhlmacher's early work.
This is where he attempts to demonstrate that "the righteousness of God" is a technical
term that originated in the Old Testament and was carried over into the apocalyptic
literature of Second Temple Judaism. Stuhlmacher's thesis stands or falls with the
outcome of his tradition-historical research in this critical section (83 pages).
The tradition-historical path, in Stuhlmacher's view, runs straight from the
Hebrew Old Testament to the apocalyptic literature, which explains why he pays little
attention to the Septuagint. Since the exact phrase, "the righteousness of God," occurs
only once in the singular (Deut 33:21) and only three times in the plural (Judges 5:11; 1
Sam 12:7; Micah 6:5) in the Hebrew Old Testament, Stuhlmacher's case rests primarily
on the apocalyptic literature where it occurs more frequently (although not impressively
so). He cites the following eight occurrences of the phrase as definitive: lQS10:25-26;
164
Stuhlmacher, Gerechtigkeit Gottes, 73.
Chapter 1 History of Interpretation 65
11:12; 1QM 4:6; T. Dan 6:10; 1 (Ethiopic) Enoch 71:14; 99:10; 101:3; 4 Ezra 8:36. As a
technical term, "the righteousness of God" in these texts refers to God's own activity,
God's justice, whereby his Creatorhood (Schopfertum), covenant faithfulness
(Bundestreue), mercy, and the summons to obedience, are all brought together in a single
thought. It also has an eschatological dimension. Depending on the context, the term can
emphasize either realized or future eschatology. When the emphasis is on realized
eschatology, the mercy-dimension of "the righteousness of God" comes to the fore.
Stuhlmacher thinks that "the righteousness of God" must be viewed as a power of the
creative word of God (die Macht des schaffenden Gotteswort). When God declares
something to be the case, it effectually becomes the case.
I cannot think of a better way to wrap up my survey of Stuhlmacher's dissertation
than to quote his extended definition of the righteousness of God: "The age-spanning,
creational, in-the-beginning-existing, now-as-Word-existing and in-Christ-personified
liberating right (Rechf) of the Creator to and over his creation."1 3 Clearly, for
Stuhlmacher, the concept of the righteousness of God is pregnant with rich eschatological
meaning and sits within a vast web of theological connections.
The key issue with regard to the early Stuhlmacher is that he has attempted to
prove that "the righteousness of God" is a technical term in apocalyptic Judaism that
signifies the Creator's saving activity and covenant faithfulness. Setting aside all of the
passages that come close to but do not actually contain the complete lexeme - which is
the bar he must set for himself if he is to vindicate Kasemann's thesis - Stuhlmacher
claims a grand total of eight occurrences of this phrase in extra-biblical Jewish literature,
only four more than Kasemann's list! It is amazing that after all of Stuhlmacher's
16:5
Stuhlmacher, Gerechtigkeit Gottes, 11, 98.
industry in his dissertation, this is all he could come up with. Perhaps for this reason it is
not surprising that, as we will see, Stuhlmacher would later back away from the claim
that SiKaiorjuvn Osofj was a pre-existing technical term in apocalyptic Judaism taken up
by Paul.
Karl Kertelge (1926-2009)166 is similar to Miiller and Stuhlmacher in that he is
the author of another dissertation inspired by Kasemann's 1961 essay that ignited a
renewed discussion of "the righteousness of God" in Paul.167 However, he differs from
them in two ways: first, he was not a student of Kasemann; second, he wrote from a
Roman Catholic perspective. Yet in spite of these differences, Kertelge follows in the
same tradition. In fact, his dissertation closely resembles that of Stuhlmacher in both
form and content.
Kertelge begins his dissertation by focusing on the (!"I)p"12S of Yahweh in the Old
Testament. Rejecting the old definition of "righteousness" as conformity to a norm and
appealing to Cremer, Kertelge argues that (rT)p"12J is a relational concept
(Verhdltnisbegriff) denoting the adequacy of conduct according to concrete relationships,
rather than according to abstract norms. There is therefore a great distance between the
Greek and the Hebraic understanding of the concept of righteousness.168 When applied to
the (i"l)p"72J of Yahweh, it denotes his covenant faithfulness. Like Stuhlmacher, Kertelge
takes particular note of the passages in the Old Testament that speak of "the righteous
acts of Yahweh" (Kertelge cites Judges 5:11; 1 Sam 12:7; Isa 45:24; Micah 6:5; Ps 103:6;
166
http://kirchensite.de/aktuelles/news-aktuelles/datunT/2009/06/29/professor-karl-kertelge-ge.storben.
Accessed December 27, 2010.
6/
Karl Kertelge, "Rechtfertigung" bei Paulus: Studien zur Struktur und zum Bedeutungsgehalt des
paulinischen Rechtfertigungsbegriffs (NTAbh 3; Minister: Aschendorff, 1966). All quotations from this
book are my own translations.
168
Kertelge, Rechtfertigung, 16, 20. Cp. Kertelge, "5iKatoovjvr|, KTA," EDNT 1.325-35.
Chapter 1 History of Interpretation 67
Dan 9:16). Many of these passages have to do with Yahweh's activity of bringing
victory to Israel in her holy wars against her enemies. Therefore, Kertelge concludes, "the
righteousness of God" is essentially his salvific activity on behalf of his people.169
Kertelge also examines the passages from Jewish literature cited by Oepke (especially T.
Dan 6:10) and the Qumran texts cited by Kasemann (1QS 10:25; 11:12; 1QM 4:6).
Kertelge does not go any deeper into the literature of early Judaism than Kasemann, thus
making Stuhlmacher's dissertation a much more wide-ranging search for parallels.
Kertelge concludes, in agreement with Oepke and Kasemann, that Paul found the phrase
"the righteousness of God" as a pre-existing formula.
As Kertelge reads it, "the righteousness of God" in Qumran is, first and foremost,
a subjective genitive that denotes the covenant faithfulness and salvific activity of God.
In this, of course, he agrees with Kasemann. But Kertelge adds his own nuance when he
goes on to argue that by means of this saving activity (as an expression of God's
covenant faithfulness), the Qumran members are placed in the covenant (specifically, the
Qumran sect's renewed Mosaic covenant) and preserved in it.170 The Qumran members
are therefore "qualified" by this divine righteousness in a way that has an effect on their
own personal holiness and righteousness. Thus, while it is a subjective genitive, it also
has shades of a genitivus auctoris. For Kertelge, the righteousness of God therefore has a
double sense that includes: (a) the divine salvific activity of establishing the covenant;
and (b) the call to the individual members of the covenant so that they are enabled to live
in the covenant relationship in personal righteousness and holiness.
Kertelge, Rechtfertigung, 1.
170
171
Kertelge, Rechtfertigung, 33, 44.
When we come to his interpretation of Paul, Kertelge's thesis is that Paul's
doctrine of justification has a specific "forensic and eschatological structure." What he
means by this is that justification is a forensic verdict to be sure, but it is a forensic
verdict that has creative power.172 The forensic nature of the verdict can be properly
understood, according to Kertelge, only when it is viewed in light of the preceding
discussion of righteousness as a relational and covenantal concept. When God declares
the ungodly to be righteous (Rom 4:5), he thereby creates a new relationship between the
sinner and himself.
The new actuality of the justified, created by God, must not be thought of as a
static state of humans, but as a relational reality (Beziehungsrealitdf), i.e., an
actuality which lies in nothing less than the new relationship (neue Verhaltnis) of
humans to God created by God, which on God's side consists of lordship and on
1 7^
the side of humans consists of obedience.
This new relational reality is nothing less than "a new creation" in Christ (2 Cor 5:17)
which overcomes the ungodliness of sinners.174 This language sounds very similar to that
of Schlatter.
With Ulrich Wilckens (1928-) we return to Protestant exegesis in the Kasemann
tradition. His prime contribution to the discussion is his 32-page excursus on
"Gerechtigkeit Gottes" in his important commentary on Romans for the Evangelisch-
katholischer Kommentar (EKK) series,175 the first volume of which was published in
1978. Stuhlmacher later refers to this excursus favorably, beginning in 1981 and onward.
Thus, Wilckens's excursus stands as a transitional point between the early Stuhlmacher
" Kertelge, Rechtfertigung, 123.

173
174
175
Ulrich Wilckens. Excursus on "Gerechtigkeit Gottes," pp. 202-33 in Der Brief an die Romer, vol. 1
(EKK VI/I; K6ln: Benziger/Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchencr Verlag, 1978). All quotations are my
translations.
and the later Stuhlmacher. Wilckens accepts Cremer's theory that in the biblical tradition,
righteousness is "not a judicial norm-concept but a social relational-concept (sozialen
Verhdltnisbegriff)."™ Relying heavily on Stuhlmacher's dissertation, he then briefly
surveys the use of "righteousness of God" in the Old Testament, the Qumran sectarian
writings, and other early Jewish literature.
Wilckens's conclusions after surveying this literature are not radically new.
Although he argues that Kasemann and Stuhlmacher went too far in identifying "the
1 7R
righteousness of God" as a fixed formula, Wilckens thinks they were fundamentally
correct in their claim that "the righteousness of God" in apocalyptic Judaism is "his
community faithfulness (Gemeinschaftstreue) to his own people, which manifests itself in
his salvific acts in connection with holy war," or, more simply, "the eschatological saving
power of the covenant faithfulness of God (die eschatologische Heilsmacht der
Bundestreue Gottes).''''119 The notion was then taken up by Paul but Christologically
determined in light of the atoning death of Jesus. In Paul, "the righteousness of God" is
therefore "the infinitely superior power of God's love by which he has abolished the
universal negation-power of sin in the atoning death of Christ."
Aside from the fixed formula correction, there is nothing radically new here.
What is new is that Wilckens wants to issue a slight corrective to Stuhlmacher's initial
formulation by returning to a better balance between the theocentric and the
anthropological dimensions, between the "power-aspect" and the "gift-aspect." Wilckens

176
Wilckens, 212, citing Cremer, K. Koch, H. H. Schmid, and Stuhlmacher.
1-77
Wilckens, 213-20.
178
Wilckens, 212. Wilckens cites the article by Giittgemanns, who critiqued the idea that §tKaioouvn, 0sou
was a fixed formula. Erhardt Giittgemanns, "'Gottesgerechtigkeit' und strukturale Semantik: Linguistische
Analyse zu 5iKatoo~6vr| Osoti," pp. 59-98 in Studia linguistica neotestamentica: Gesammelte Aufsatze zur
linguistischen Grundlage einer neutestamentlichen Theologie (BEvT 60; Munich: Chr. Kaiser, 1971).
179
Wilckens, 220. 221.
180
Wilckens, 222.
argues that we must not set up the two as a false alternative. He cites Kertelge's
dissertation favorably as a book that captures the balance between God's saving activity
and God's saving gift, and in a way that also permits us to see the objective link between
"the righteousness of faith" on the one hand and "the obedience of faith" on the other.181
Wilckens also argues that, while there is a close relationship between "the
righteousness of God" and "the righteousness of faith," we must not identify them with
one another as the Reformers did. Rather, the latter is the effect (Wirkung) of the former.
Just as the destruction of sinners is the effect of "the wrath of God" (Rom 1:18), so the
justification of sinners is the effect of "the righteousness of God."182 Wilckens believes
that it is important to make this distinction because it has the hermeneutical function of
guarding the righteousness of faith against all "self-independence" and against reducing
Pauline soteriology to the anthropological plane.18" As we will see in the next section,
this both/and approach is precisely the direction in which Stuhlmacher himself wants to
go in his later work, and he in fact quotes Wilckens favorably to this effect.
Gerechtigeit Gottes bei Paulus was Stuhlmacher's first major work of scholarship
as a doctoral student. So it should come as no surprise that it was not his last word on the
subject. Having summarized his dissertation, I now move to the work of the later
Stuhlmacher, which is characterized by more mature thought on the question of "the
righteousness of God." The later Stuhlmacher continues to adhere to the Cremer thesis
concerning the relational significance of "righteousness," arguing that in the majority of
its occurrences in the OT, the term "righteousness" is "a semantically positive word used
181
Wilckens, 232.
182
Wilckens, 205-6.
183
Wilckens, 211.
184
Stuhlmacher, Reconciliation, Law, and Righteousness: Essays in Biblical Theology (Philadelphia:
Fortress, 1985), 91.
in reference to relationships," and that "God's righteousness" signifies God's work of
salvation, making things right, and establishing order and life.183 He continues to argue
that "righteousness" in OT-Jewish thought is a relational concept having to do with
community faithfulness that must be set in contrast with the Greek ethical conception of
SiKaiocwn.1 As before, he relies on the work of his predecessors - e.g., Herman
Cremer, Gerhard von Rad, Klaus Koch - for this conclusion, although he also (as in
1981) wants to supplement it with the work of H. H. Schmid, who argued that
righteousness in the OT is an Ordnungsbegriff 'that has to do with the preservation of
"good order" in the world.187 Stuhlmacher then adds that when this
relational/covenantal/world-ordering concept is applied to God and his rule,
righteousness becomes a "salvation concept" (Heilsbegriff). He cites the same nip"!2J
YHWH ("righteous acts of Yahweh") passages in the Old Testament as before, and then
concludes: "In these texts, 'the righteousness of God' is the reliable power (Macht) of
God which also in judgment and through judgment creates salvation and good-order."
However, in 1981, Stuhlmacher looks back on his dissertation and makes the
comment that he is hereby taking "a new position" with regard to the debate concerning
the meaning of "the righteousness of God." In his original dissertation, he says, he tried
to support and extend Kasemann's position, but now he realizes that his dissertation had
the fundamental weakness that he "treated the concept of the righteousness of God too
185
Stuhlmacher, Versohnung. Gesetz und Gerechtigkeit: Aufsatze zur biblischen Theologie (Gottingen:
Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1981). I quote from the ET: Reconciliation, Law, and Righteousness: Essays in
Biblical Theology (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1985), 42-43, 62-63.
186
Peter Stuhlmacher, Biblische Theologie des Neuen Testaments, Band 1: Grundlegung - Von Jesus zu
Paulus (3rd ed.; Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2005), 326.
187
H. H. Schmid. Gerechtigkeit als Weltordnung: Hintergrund und Geschichte des alttestamentliche
Gerechtigkeitsbegriffs (Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1968).
188
Stuhlmacher, Biblische Theologie, 1.327.
rigidly as a fixed terminus technicus that always and only meant God's own
righteousness."189 Stuhlmacher thus accepts the criticisms of Giittgemanns190 and
Wilckens.
I would argue that Stuhlmacher has not changed where he wants to go; he has
merely adopted a new route to get there. Stuhlmacher still cites the same handful of proof
texts from the OT and Jewish apocalyptic literature. He even goes so far as to say that the
phrase is "a frequently recurring, almost fixed term" for God's saving activity understood
in a judicial context,191 and elsewhere he calls it a "language tradition."192 So although it
may appear that he has retracted his original thesis, what he has really done is to restate
the thesis in a more cautious manner as opposed to making the questionable claim (first
made by Oepke and picked up by Kasemann and the early Stuhlmacher) that "the
righteousness of God" is a technical term.
There is another critical difference between Stuhlmacher's original dissertation
and his "new position." In his original thesis he was more critical of the traditional
Reformation reading of Paul. (The traditional Reformation reading, recall, is that "the
righteousness of God" signifies the righteous status that is from God and/or approved by
God and which is bestowed on believers - in other words, what Kasemann would call the
"gift-dimension" of "the righteousness of God.") For example, in his dissertation
Stuhlmacher could baldly say: "God's 5iKaiocr6vr| in this verse [Rom 1:17] is not God's
gift but his particularly powerful activity ... the justice-creating, salvation-bringing
Stuhlmacher, Reconciliation, 91.

190
Giittgemanns, "'Gottesgerechtigkeit' und strukturale Semantik."
191
Stuhlmacher, Reconciliation, 82 (emphasis mine).
192
Stuhlmacher, Paul's Letter to the Romans: A Commentaiy (transl. Scott J. Hafemann; Edinburgh: T&T
Clark; and Westminster/John Knox, 1994), 30.
Chapter 1: History of Interpretation ~ 73
activity."193 But the later Stuhlmacher shifts from an either/or position to a both/and
position. He admits that his original thesis suffered from "one-sidedness" and quotes
Wilckens's "Gerechtigkeit Gottes" excursus favorably.194 Therefore, now Stuhlmacher
can say that he agrees with Luther but wants to "go beyond" him, so that instead of
reducing "the righteousness of God" to the righteousness that is received by faith, he
wants to see it as designating "both God's own righteous action and the result of this
action."195 He wants to combine the two notions of divine activity and divine gift: "The
one expression, 'the righteousness of God,' was always understood ... to refer at the
same time both to God's own salvific activity (Rom. 3:25f) and to its effect in the form of
the righteousness which is allotted to those who, in faith, confess Christ (2 Cor 5:21)."196
Stuhlmacher argues that taking "the righteousness of God" as the gift of righteousness
(genitive of source) and taking it as God's own righteousness (subjective genitive) is a
"false alternative."197
He summarizes the debate between Bultmann's more Lutheran interpretation and
the Schlatter/Kasemann interpretation of the righteousness of God - the two fundamental
types of Pauline interpretation in German Paul research.198 Stuhlmacher recognizes that
the battle lines have softened since the 1960s and that now it is no longer necessary to
choose one interpretation over the other, since there is an element of truth in both. He
concludes by affirming the "synthetic" breadth of meaning of "the righteousness of God"
in Paul: "AiKaioauvn Oeovi denotes in Paul the activity of God that creates salvation and
193
Stuhlmacher, Gerechtigkeit Gottes, 79-80 (emphasis mine).
194
Stuhlmacher, Reconciliation, 91-92.
195
Stuhlmacher, Reconciliation, 78.
196
Stuhlmacher, Romans, 31.
197
Stuhlmacher, Romans, 32.
198
Stuhlmacher, Biblische Theologie, 1.234-35, 334.
199
good-order, so that God's own effectiveness and the result of this effectiveness can be
named using one and the same term."200 Stuhlmacher argues that "the righteousness of
God" in Paul is neither purely theocentric nor purely soteriological but embraces both
aspects of God's salvific activity. The emphasis in any given passage - whether
theocentric or soteriological - must be determined in context.201
4. English-Speaking Scholarship in the 20th Century
In the previous section I have focused on the Gottes Gerechtigkeit debate among
20u-century German New Testament scholars. I now turn to the English-speaking world
of scholarship up to but not including the New Perspective on Paul.
David Hill made an important contribution in English to the discussion with his
709
monograph Greek Words and Hebrew Meanings, published in 1967. Hill devoted a
long chapter (81 pages) to "The Background and Meaning of SiKaioauvn and Cognate
Words." He was aware of James Barr's critique of Kittel's TWNT(=TDNT) and was
therefore more cautious both in his methodology and in his conclusions, even though he
basically endorsed the fundamental outlines of Kittel's approach. Hill argued that
although Barr was generally correct in his criticisms, he went too far in emptying
theologically significant terms found in the NT of any Hebraic coloring via the influence
of the LXX. Therefore, it should not be surprising that Hill followed in the Cremer
tradition of arguing for a relational meaning to Paul's righteousness terminology based
upon the theory that the Hebraic/relational idea of righteousness has been infused into the
200
201
Stuhlmacher, Biblische Theologie, 1.335-36.
202
David Hill, Greek Words and Hebrew Meanings: Studies in the Semantics of Soteriological Terms
(SNTSMS 5; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1967).
Greek words via the LXX. However, when it came to the exegetical and theological
payoff, Hill did not depart radically from traditional Protestant interpretations of Paul's
Rechtfertigungslehre. Although Hill took Osovj in the Pauline phrase SiKaiocruvn Osou as a
subjective genitive (like Kasemann), he translated the whole as "God's justifying
action."2(b He interpreted the verb 5ucai6co even more traditionally as a forensic term that
denotes God's act of reckoning sinners to be in the right before God on the basis of
Christ's atoning death, with the result that one is "not guilty" of sin's charges but legally
"righteous" in God's sight.204 Thus, although Hill began by emphasizing the
Hebraic/relational background of righteousness, he ended up with fairly traditional
conclusions with regard to Paul's appropriation of that language. In Hill there is only a
hint of the later Dunn-Wright synthesis in which the Hebraic/relational background is
defined more narrowly in terms of "covenant faithfulness" and "covenant membership."
The last book-length study of the lexical semantics of Paul's "righteousness"
language was The Meaning of Righteousness in Paul: A Linguistic and Theological

90S
Inquiry by John A. Ziesler, published in 1972. It is one of the most important
contributions in English to the topic of "righteousness" in Paul. Ziesler's work is a
comprehensive linguistic study of "righteousness" vocabulary in the Hebrew Old
Testament, the Septuagint, the Jewish intertestamental literature, Philo, Josephus, the
Rabbinic corpus, and the New Testament. This wide-ranging study is intended to provide
the background for a more precise understanding of Paul's usage of the AIK-group.
20J
Hill, Greek Words, 159.
204
Hill, Greek Words, 141-42.
205
John A. Ziesler, The Meaning of Righteousness in Paul: A Linguistic and Theological Inquiry
(SNTSMS 20; Cambridge: Cambridge"University Press, 1972).
Ziesler argues that the verb (Sucaioco) is used forensically and relationally, while the
adjective (SIKOUOC;) and the noun (SiKaioown) are used ethically and behaviorally.
Like Hill, Ziesler also accepted the Hebraic/relational interpretation of the biblical
"righteousness" word-group, citing Cremer, von Rad, and Achtemeier. Like Hill, Ziesler
was also aware of Barr's strictures on the dangers of the word-study approach to theology
and attempted to take them into account in his methodological approach. Unlike Hill,
Ziesler was more favorable to Kasemann's view that God's gift of righteousness cannot
be separated from the Giver, and therefore Ziesler saw both a forensic and a
transformative aspect in justification. Believers are not only declared to be legally right
with God; they are also changed and actually made ontologically or ethically righteous.
The particular focus of his concern was the Protestant-Catholic debate over whether
justification has a purely forensic meaning or may also have an ethical/transformational
component. For this reason, 1 believe Ziesler's work was methodologically unsound,
given his approach of interrogating the Greek literature (biblical and non-biblical) from
the point of view of a later dogmatic debate. Still, in comparison with Dunn and Wright,
Ziesler's interpretation of Paul's Rechtfertigungslehre was closer to traditional views in
that it worked within the orbit of soteriology rather than sociology. Ziesler summarized
Paul's justification-teaching in these terms: "God's saving righteousness does two things
for men and does them inseparably: it restores their relationship with God, and it makes
them new (ethical, righteous) beings."206 The Hebraic/relational background of Paul's
righteousness terminology was thus employed by Ziesler in a way that fits within the
Kasemann school broadly defined.
Ziesler, Meaning oj Righteousness, 189.

After Ziesler, there were several minor contributions, such as the Reumann-
Fitzmyer ecumenical dialogue,207 but nothing of the same scale or lexicographical
intensity. There appears to have been something of a hiatus of lexicographical scrutiny
for the next three decades as scholarship moved into the New Perspective era. Recently,
however, Mark Seifrid published two important articles in Justification and Variegated
Nomism that are critical of Cremer's thesis.208 Seifrid's work is only a beginning and so a
full-scale treatment is still needed. While Seifrid subjects the view that "righteousness"
means "covenant faithfulness" to critical scrutiny, he does not bring to bear James Barr's
critique of the distinction between the so-called "Hebraic" and "Greek" thought with
respect to the lexical claims made by NPP scholars concerning Paul's "righteousness"
language.
5. The New Perspective on Paul
Having looked briefly at some contributions from English-speaking scholars, we
turn now to the New Perspective on Paul (NPP). Arguably, the NPP would not have been
possible as an intellectual movement without some influence from the
Schlatter/Kasemann/early-Stuhlmacher school of thought insofar as SiKaioauvn Bsou is
interpreted not as a soteriological righteous status from God but as God's eschatological,
saving activity as an expression of his Lordship and his faithfulness to the covenant
promises. To be sure, both Dunn and Wright would want to distance themselves from
John Reumann, "Righteousness " in the New Testament, with Responses by Joseph A. Fitzmyer and
Jerome D. Quinn (Philadelphia: Fortress; New York: Paulist, 1982).
208
Mark A. Seifrid, "Righteousness Language in the Hebrew Scriptures and Early Judaism," and "Paul's
Use of Righteousness Language Against Its Hellenistic Background," in Justification and Variegated
Nomism (2 vols.: WUNT 11/140 and 11/181; ed. D. A. Carson, Peter T. O'Brien and Mark A. Seifrid;
Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck/Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2001, 2004), 1.415-42 and 2.39-74 respectively.
Kasemann, or at least modify his position in various ways, but the fundamental
conceptual kinship (especially the theocentric emphasis) is not hard to detect. Another
intellectual current detectable in the NPP - a current that was present but not central in
the Schlatter/Kasemann/early-Stuhlmacher school - is the notion that Sucaiorjuvn Osou
means God's covenant faithfulness. It is here that we see even more clearly the influence
of Cremer's Verhdltnisbegriff'theory functioning as a crucial component of the NPP's
recasting of Paul's doctrine of justification in terms of covenant faithfulness and covenant
membership.
Consider the following quotes from James Dunn and N. T. Wright. Note that the
Dunn-Wright claim is not merely theological. At its base, it is a lexical claim about the
semantics of Paul's AlK-terminology.
First, there is the claim that the Hebraic usage differs significantly from the
typical Hellenistic Greek usage. Dunn makes this claim explicitly:
More to the theological point, "righteousness" is a good example of a term whose

meaning is determined more by its Hebrew background than its Greek form ... In
the typical Greek worldview, "righteousness" is an idea or ideal against which the
individual and individual action can be measured ... In contrast, in Hebrew
thought "righteousness" is a more relational concept.209
The argument is that the lexical differences between the plU-group in Hebrew and the
AIK-group in Greek reflect broader differences between the thought-worlds of the two
cultures. Thus Dunn contrasts "Hebrew thought" with "the typical Greek worldview."
This way of speaking sounds suspiciously like the sort of thing one would find in Kittel's
TWNT.
James D. G. Dunn, The Theology of Paul the Apostle (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), 341.
Second, once the Hebraic/relational interpretation of "righteousness" has been put
on the table as an accepted fact, the theory then exercises a controlling influence on the
NPP interpretation of Paul's thematic statement in Rom 1:17. "The righteousness of
God" is interpreted in Hebraic terms as "the covenant faithfulness of God." Continuing
on from the previous quote, Dunn draws out the following implication:
The relevance of this observation [about Greek vs. Hebrew thought] begins to
become clear when we recall Paul's thematic statement about justification, in
Rom. 1:16-17, as "the righteousness of God ... from faith to faith." For the
righteousness of God, in line with the understanding of "righteousness" above,
denotes God's fulfilment of the obligations he took upon himself in creating
humankind and particularly in the calling of Abraham and the choosing of Israel
to be his people ... It should be equally evident why God's righteousness could be
understood as God's faithfulness to his people. For his righteousness was simply
the fulfilment of his covenant obligations as Israel's God in delivering, saving,
and vindicating Israel, despite Israel's failure. ]
N. T. Wright adopts substantially the same interpretation as Dunn:
What 1 want to do is to sketch out the Jewish context within which the phrase
would naturally be heard ... For a reader of the Septuagint ... 'the righteousness
of God' would have one obvious meaning: God's own faithfulness to his
promises, to the covenant. God's 'righteousness', especially in Isaiah 40-55, is
that aspect of God's character because of which he saves Israel, despite Israel's
perversity and lostness. God has made promises; Israel can trust those promises.
God's righteousness is thus cognate with his trustworthiness on the one hand, and
Israel's salvation on the other ... At the heart of 'God's righteousness' is his
covenant with Israel, the covenant through which he will address and solve the
problem of evil in and for the whole world.21'
Third, having redefined "the righteousness of God" as God's covenant
faithfulness, both Dunn and Wright go on to apply this to the terminology for
"justification," both the verb and the noun. Thus, when Paul says that God justifies
people, this too is understood in a Hebraic/relational sense as the declaration that one is a
member of the covenant people of God. In other words, "justification" means "covenant
210
Dunn, Theology of Paul, 342.
211
N. T. Wright, What Saint Paul Really Said (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997), 96-97.
Chapter 1. History of Interpretation- 80
membership." This is the new element in the NPP's appropriation of Cremer's
Hebraic/relational interpretation that goes beyond Cremer himself. Dunn writes:
[In Gal 2:15-16] Paul... prefaces his first mention of 'being justified' with a
deliberate appeal to the standard Jewish belief, shared also by his fellow Jewish
Christians, that the Jews as a race are God's covenant people. Almost certainly,
then, his concept of righteousness, both noun and verb (to be made or counted
righteous, to be justified), is thoroughly Jewish too, with the same strong
covenant overtones - the sort of usage we find particularly in the Psalms and
Second Isaiah, where God's righteousness is precisely God's covenant
faithfulness, his saving power and love for his people Israel ... In talking of
'being justified' here Paul is not thinking of a distinctively initiatory act of God.
God's justification is not his act in first making his covenant with Israel, or in
initially accepting someone into the covenant people. God's justification is rather
God's acknowledgement that someone is in the covenant - whether that is an
initial acknowledgement, or a repeated action of God (God's saving acts), or his
919
final vindication of his people.

N. T. Wright takes a very similar approach:
Though it is unfashionable to use covenantal categories in interpreting Paul, I

believe, as is already clear in this book, that they are actually central; and,
moreover, they are habitually expressed in forensic language, i.e. using the root
5IK-. ... 8iKaioawn, I suggest, can often be translated, more or less, as 'covenant
membership' (when referring to the SiKaioouvn of humans, of course); and
SiKaicoua can perfectly properly bear the meaning 'the covenant decree'.213
And in case there is any doubt that N. T. Wright still advocates this interpretation,
I quote from a more recent book, Paul in Fresh Perspective:
The point is that the word 'justification' does not itself denote the process
whereby, or the event in which, a person is brought by grace from unbelief,
idolatry and sin into faith, true worship and renewal of life. Paul, clearly and
unambiguously, uses a different word for that, the word 'call'. The word
'justification', despite centuries of Christian misuse, is used by Paul to denote that
which happens immediately after the 'call': 'those whom God called, he also
justified' (Romans 8.30). In other words, those who hear the gospel and respond
to it in faith are then declared by God to be his people, his elect, 'the
212
James D. G. Dunn, "The New Perspective on Paul," in Jesus, Paul and the Law: Studies in Mark and
Galatians
•latians(Louisville:
(Louisville Westminster/John Knox Press, 1990), 190.
213
N. T. Wright, The Climax of the Covenant: Christ and the Law in Pauline Theology (Minneapolis:
Fortress, 1992), 203.
Chapter 1: History of Interpretation • 81
circumcision', 'the Jews', 'the Israel of God'. They are given the status of dikaios,
'righteous', 'within the covenant'.214
Thus, the New Perspective on Paul, as exemplified by two of its most well-known
advocates, interprets Paul's Rechtfertigungslehre primarily in terms of covenant concepts
and defines "justification" as God's act of identifying someone as a member of the people
of God. There are undoubtedly many additional historical, exegetical and theological
considerations contributing to this interpretation, but one salient factor is clearly the
lexical semantics of Paul's "righteousness" terminology interpreted against a putative
Hebraic background.215
Conclusion
The discussion over the last 110+ years has been dominated by Cremer's 1899
thesis. A variety of interpretations of Paul's Rechtfertigungslehre have emerged under the
influence of Cremer's Hebraic/relational interpretation of the AIK-group - from more
traditional readings like Hill's, to apocalyptic readings such as those emanating from the
Kasemann school, and finally to the more recent New Perspective school of Dunn and
2,4
N. T. Wright, Paul in Fresh Perspective (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2005), 121-22. See also Wright's latest
contribution. Justification: God's Plan and Paul's Vision (London: SPCK, 2009). This volume is a
response to John Piper's critique, The Future of Justification: A Response to N. T. Wright (Wheaton:
Crossway, 2007).
215
In addition to Dunn and Wright, it should also be noted that Richard B. Hays falls in the same general
camp. See his article, "Justification" in ABD 3.1129-33. Hays has also suggested that Rom 1:17 contains an
intertextual allusion to Psalm 97:2-3LXX [98:2-3MT], noting the occurrence of the three terms "salvation,"
"his righteousness," and "revealed." Echoes of Scripture in the Letters of Paul (New Haven: Yale
University Press, 1989), 36-37. Earlier, Hays pointed to the reference to "his righteousness" in Ps 142:1LXX
[143:1MT], followed by v 2 which is quoted by Paul in Rom 3:20. Hays, "Psalm 143 and the Logic of
Romans 3," JBL 99 (1980): 107-15. Hays's suggestions have been taken up more recently by Douglas A.
Campbell, "The Meaning of SiKcaocruvn ©eorj in Romans: An Intertextual Suggestion," in As It Is Written:
Studying Paul's Use of Scripture (eds. Stanley E. Porter and Christopher D. Stanley; SBLSymS 50;
Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2008), 189-212 (= ch. 17, §2.3 of Campbell's tome The Deliverance
of God: An Apocalyptic Rereading of Justification in Paul [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2009]). Campbell
argues that StKaioonvn Geou in Paul refers to Christ's enthronement by God and denotes "a singular,
saving, liberating, life-giving, eschatological act of God in Christ" but that it does not have the added
meaning of "God's covenant faithfulness" (208-11). Campbell's position is a modification of Kasemann's
without the entanglements of Cremer's Verhdltnisbegriff'theory.
Wright. Yet they all have in common the assumption that the decision by the translators
of the Greek Bible to translate the p"12J-group in Hebrew with the AIK-group in Greek
fundamentally changed the meaning of these Greek words by introducing covenantal
ideas not present in extra-biblical Greek. Moreover, they all agree that this process of
semantic change had a profound effect on Paul's doctrine of justification - specifically,
on the vocabulary with which he formulated that doctrine.
In conclusion, I think it is safe to say that the Cremer theory has exercised a
dominant influence on Pauline scholarship, even to the point that it may be called a
reigning paradigm. It is precisely this interpretive scheme that I wish to subject to critical
examination.
Chapter 2
Methodological Considerations
The purpose of this chapter is to establish the methodological assumptions of the
following chapters. Since much of this study overlaps with three fields - Old Testament
and New Testament lexicography and Septuagint studies - it will be useful to establish
the ground rules before proceeding to examine the usage of SiKaiocruvn in the Septuagint,
in Jewish literature, and in Paul. I will first address the broader methodological concerns
regarding lexical semantics, and then I will turn to Septuagint studies - specifically, to
the role of the Septuagint in influencing the lexical semantics of New Testament
vocabulary. Finally, I will provide justification for my reliance on Jewish literature
composed in Greek for determining whether SiKouoawn as used in Greek-speaking
Jewish circles has undergone semantic change due to Hebraic influence.
A. Lexical Semantics
An entire panoply of issues lurks here that I cannot address in detail, but I want to
focus particularly on the issues that are directly relevant to the question of whether the
pllS-group in Hebrew or the AIK-group in Greek has a relational meaning as Cremer
argued.
83
Chapter 2: Methodological Considerations - 84
1. Lexical Concepts vs. Discourse Concepts
It is a truism that words have meanings. This feature of words is usually referred
to as their "lexical sense." It may seem to be a straightforward and simple notion, yet
philososphers and linguists have struggled to understand this concept of "lexical sense"
from the beginnings of modern linguistics in the 19l century. Moises Silva defines
"sense" as "the mental content called up by the symbol."1 Peter Cotterell and Max Turner
prefer to speak of a word's "lexical concept," which they define as "some sort of more-
or-less discrete bundle of meaning, a segment of the language users' understanding of
their world, conventionally bound to a particular lexical form."" They emphasize two
points: (1) that words usually have a range of senses, not just one sense; (2) that the
sense or range of senses we are interested in is not the usage of an individual (i.e., an
idiolect) but the conventional, agreed-upon meaning. Putting these two concepts together,
"the lexical meaning is the range of senses of a word that may be counted on as being
established in the public domain."3
Having attempted a brief definition of "sense," we now need to clarify the concept
further by appealing to the distinction between sense and reference. This distinction is
well established in the field of lexical semantics, although among biblical scholars the
reception of this distinction has proved somewhat patchy. The "referent" of a word is the
extra-linguistic reality to which the word points. The "sense" of a word we have already
defined, namely, as essentially a mental concept. Words that have a denotative and hence
a referential function do not directly mean that to which they refer. Rather, they do so
Moises Silva, Biblical Words and Their Meaning: An Introduction to Lexical Semantics (Grand Rapids:
Zondervan, 1983), 102.
2
Peter Cotterell and Max Turner, Linguistics and Biblical Interpretation (Downers Grove: Inter Varsity,
1989), 145.
3
Cotterell and Turner, Linguistics, 140.
indirectly or in a mediated manner, by means of the mental concept. This was made clear
earlier in the 20th century by means of the famous Ogden-Richards triangle4 in which the
two elements of meaning and their relationship are illustrated with the following diagram:
symbol referent
Figure 1. The Ogden-Richards Triangle3
The vertex labeled "symbol" stands for the lexical item, or word. The vertex
labeled "sense" stands for the mental content called up by that symbol or word. The
vertex labeled "referent" stands for the extra-linguistic reality to which the word points.
The dashed line between "symbol" and "referent" is intended to convey the notion that
words do not directly relate to the referents with which they are associated. Rather, the
line of meaning must first pass through a word's lexical "sense," which is a mental
concept, before it can reach its extra-linguistic referential destination. Thus the Ogden-
Richards triangle effectively communicates the distinction between "sense" and
"reference," while also conveying the mentally-mediated nature of the relationship
between words and the extra-linguistic realities to which they refer.
4
C. K. Ogden and I. A. Richards, The Meaning of Meaning: A Study of the Influence of Language Upon
Thought and of the Science of Symbolism (New York: Harcourt Brace, 1938). A slightly different version
of the Ogden-Richards triangle may be found in Stephen Ullmann, Semantics: An Introduction to the
Science of Meaning (Oxford: Blackwcll, 1977), 55.
5
This version of the Ogden-Richards triangle is from Silva, Biblical Words, 103.
Chapter 2. Methodological Considerations 86
One way to illustrate the distinction between "sense" and "reference" is to note
that two words may be used to refer to the same extra-linguistic reality and yet have very
different meanings with regard to semantic content. Consider, for example, the following
paragraph: "Mr. Richard Smith was a judge on the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals.
Although well-respected by his fellow colleagues on the bench, the judge was suspected
of taking bribes in exchange for lighter sentences in scores of cases. After a two-year
investigation by the FBI and a federal grand jury, the disgraced judge became a defendant
and was found guilty on 23 counts of corruption." The terms "judge" and "defendant"
here refer to the same person, a specific corrupt judge. But we recognize that the terms do
not have the same meaning, and are usually so clearly distinct that we have to come up
with a unique scenario like this in order to use them in a co-referential manner. The extra-
linguistic ontological reference of these terms is identical, and yet the precise sense of
each is quite distinct.
The failure to recognize this distinction has created many problems in the past for
biblical scholars. The classic example of this fallacy is the way the use of ay&7rn in the
New Testament is often interpreted. It is well known that the New Testament writers
frequently use the word &yd7rn in reference to God's love for humanity, especially as
expressed in the self-abnegating love of Christ in giving himself up for our sins. But
failure to distinguish between sense and reference leads some scholars to argue,
fallaciously, that the word dy&7in itself (along with its cognates) means "divine, self-
sacrificial love." This argument is made in spite of the fact that dy&7rn is clearly used in
both the Septuagint and the New Testament to refer to baser and even sinful forms of
love. For example, the verb dyaTtdco is used of Amnon's lust for Tamar (LXX 1 Kgdms
13:15), and in the sentence, "Do not love the world" (1 John 2:15). Thus, while dyd7rn
can be used to refer to God's love, it does not in and of itself mean God's love. Sense and
reference must be clearly distinguished.
When that distinction is not made, it is easy - especially when theologically
significant vocabulary is under investigation - to read the theological significance that
arises from the extra-linguistic realities to which the word points in a specific context into
the lexical sense of the word itself. This was one of James Barr's chief points in his
critique of Kittel's TWNT (=TDNT). Barr wrote:
The attempt to relate the individual word directly to the theological thought leads
to the distortion of the semantic contribution made by words in contexts; the value
of the context comes to be seen as something contributed by the word, and then it
is read into the word as its contribution where the context is in fact different.6
The term he used for this was "illegitimate totality transfer."7 Moises Silva illustrates
Barr's concern with the use of SKKXnora in Act 7:38, where we read: "This is the one
[i.e., Moses] who was in the sKKlnaia in the wilderness." Clearly, it would be invalid to
read into the usage of eKKAnaia in Acts 7:38 the same fullness of meaning that it has in
Ephesians, where, for example, Paul says that "Christ is the head of the SKKA,naia, his
body" (Eph 5:23). In the former verse, it merely means "congregation," following LXX
usage in reference to the congregation of the people of Israel; in the latter instance, it is a
technical term for "the church" in the sense of "the body of Christ." Clearly, the word
SKid,r|0ia does not mean "the body of Christ" in Acts 7:38. In other words, "any one
instance of a word will not bear all the meanings possible for that word."
6
James Barr, The Semantics of Biblical Language (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1961), 233.
Barr, Semantics, 218.
8
Silva, Biblical Words, 25-26.
Other scholars get at this issue using a different set of terminology, and in so
doing they also add precision to Barr's concern. Some scholars have suggested that we
distinguish between "lexical concepts" and "discourse concepts." Cotterell and Turner
provide a helpful illustration to clarify this distinction:
A speaker may keep referring to his Uncle's bike, but (having formally introduced
it earlier, as it were) now just speaks of it as 'the bike'. Because the expression
'the bike' now still refers to Uncle George's old red one, this is all included in the
concept denoted by the expression 'the bike' in the speaker's discourse, even
though it is not properly part of the sense of the expression 'the bike' as such. We
need to distinguish here between what we might call lexical concepts (i.e. the
sense of the respective lexical units) and discourse concepts - the latter being
used to denote not only the lexical sense of the expressions involved, but also
germane elements of meaning contributed by the context. Oldness, redness, ,and
to-Uncle-George-belongingness would not be part of the lexical concept "bike",
but would belong to the discourse concept "the bike" in this particular situation.9
This is a more precise analysis than Barr's original formulation. If taken literally,
Barr's "totality transfer" means that the entire semantic range of a given word is read into
every particular instance of that word. But, as Barr himself recognized, there is also a
more subtle version of this error in which concepts derived from some contexts are read
into the lexical sense of the word. It is this subtler form of the error that I believe has
been committed by Cremer, Kasemann, Stuhlmacher, and New Perspective scholars. And
I am not alone in this general concern. Mark Seifrid, for example, using Barr's older
terminology, is concerned that even the later Stuhlmacher is still in danger of engaging in
"illegitimate totality transfer."10 To reword the charge using the more precise terminology
of Cotterell and Turner, Stuhlmacher is in danger of blurring the distinction between
discourse concepts and lexical concepts, so that the grand theological themes ("the age-
9
Cotterell and Turner, Linguistics, 152; citing John Beekman, John Callow, and Michael Kopesec, The
Semantic Structure of Written Communication (Dallas: Summer Institute of Linguistics, 1981), 4 Iff.
10
Mark A. Seifrid, Justification by Faith: The Origin and Development of a Central Pauline Theme
(NovTSup 68; Leiden: Brill, 1992), 40 n. 136.
spanning, creational, in-the-beginning existing, now-as-Word-existing and in-Christ-
personified liberating right of the Creator to and over his Creation") bleed over into the
lexical concept of the lexeme SiKaioouvn Osou.
2. Hebrew Parallelism
We must also examine the role of parallelismus membrorum in Hebrew poetry in
determining the precise meanings of Hebrew words. Hermann Cremer and those who
followed in his tradition, both OT and NT scholars, tended to rely on this feature of
Hebrew poetry in order to draw inferences about the meaning of the p~ISS-group in the
Hebrew Bible.11
However, this appeal to parallelismus membrorum to determine lexical meaning
is problematic because Hebrew parallelism may set up a variety of relationships between
the parallel members. There are a variety of theories as to how Hebrew parallelism
works. Let me briefly sketch the history of interpretation of Hebrew parallelism. In the
18th century, the Anglican bishop Robert Lowth, in his Oxford lectures De Sacra Poesi
Hebraeorum (first edition published in 1753),12 argued that there were three types of
Hebrew parallelism: synonymous parallelism, antithetical parallelism, and synthetic or
constructive parallelism. The first two types are exemplified in Psalm 1:5-6:
Al Therefore the wicked will not stand in the judgment,

A2 Nor sinners in the congregation of the righteous;
B1 For the LORD knows the way of the righteous,
B2 But the way of the wicked will perish (ESV).
1!
E.g., Cremer, Die paulinische Rechtfertigungslehre, 14-17, 23, 27.
12
For a facsimile of the 1787 translation from Latin into English by G. Gregory, see Robert Lowth,
Lectures on the Sacred Poetry of the Hebrews (1787), vols. 1-2 (Anglistica & Americana 43; Hildesheim:
Georg Olms Verlag, 1969).
Al and A2 constitute a good example of synonymous parallelism, while Bl and
B2 clearly constitute antithetical parallelism. Lowth's third category was a kind of catch-
all for the many instances that seemed to be neither strictly synonymous nor strictly
antithetical.13
Although Lowth's analysis was widely accepted for two centuries, in the 1980s
James Kugel and Robert Alter challenged the received Lowthian orthodoxy. They
rejected Lowth's category of synonymous parallelism, pointing out that even when the
two lines seem to be saying something roughly similar, they are never perfectly
equivalent, and that the difference, however small, when viewed in light of the similarity
of the two lines, produces a new meaning that goes beyond what each line contributes
individually. James Kugel's label for this was "subjunction," i.e., line B is subjoined to
line A. To explain this he invented the formula, "A, and what's more, B." The first line
(A) is the primary statement; the second line (B) adds new information or a new
perspective.
A few years later, Robert Alter took Kugel's approach and moved the ball down
the field a few more yards. He fleshed out the specific ways in which the B line
heightens, intensifies, focuses and even dramatizes the A line. Alter speaks of
"parallelism of specification" and "parallelism of intensification," although he does
acknowledge that, occasionally, one finds "static synonymity." Alter's main point is that
"literary expression abhors complete parallelism ... usage always introducing small
wedges of difference between closely akin terms." He quotes Viktor Shklovsky who
13
"The need for this third category eventually called into question the adequacy of the older understanding
of parallelism as 'saying the same thing twice in different words.'" Mark D. Futato, Interpreting the
Psalms: An Exegetical Handbook (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2007), 38.
14
James L. Kugel. The Idea of Biblical Poetry: Parallelism and Its History (New Haven: Yale University
Press, 1981), 23,42, 54, 57-8.
wrote that "the purpose of parallelism ... is to transfer the usual perception of an object
into the sphere of a new perception - that is, to make a unique semantic modification."15
More recently, the Dutch scholar J. P. Fokkelman vividly explained the Kugel-
Alter theory of parallelism with the helpful metaphor of binoculars. Just as binoculars
provide depth perception by bringing two nearly identical pictures together to form a new
unity, so in Hebrew parallelism the similarities and the differences between the two lines
complement one another, and the result is that the whole is greater than the sum of its
parts. Parallelism helps us to see in stereo.16
Since the 1980s, scholars have added more types of parallelism, such as chiastic,
17
staircase, emblematic, and Janus parallelism. One of the types of parallelism that needs
to be particularly considered is that in which the two lines stand in a relationship of genus
to species, i.e., where one term is a broader category and the other is a subset.
Technically, words in the second category are not synonyms but hyponyms. For example,
consider Isaiah 3:8: "Jerusalem has stumbled, and Judah has fallen." Clearly the
parallelism here does not mean that "Jerusalem" and "Judah" are synonymous terms. It
only indicates that there is a close relationship: Jerusalem is the main city within Judah,
and the inhabitants of Jerusalem constitute a large portion of the population of Judah. But
it would be a mistake for a lexicographer to write an entry on "Jerusalem" in which he
cited this verse as if it proved that in some cases the word "Jerusalem" means "Judah."
15
Robert Alter, The Art of Biblical Poetry (New York: Basic Books, 1985), 3-26.
16
J. P. Fokkelman, Reading Biblical Poetiy: An Introductory Guide (transl. Ineke Smit; Louisville: WJK.
2001), 78-79. In line with the new understanding of Hebrew parallelism, Mark Futato offers the following
definition: "Parallelism is the art of saying something similar in both cola but with a difference added in the
second colon. Hebrew poets thus invite us to read slowly, looking for a difference in the second colon, be
that difference small or great... The new understanding [of Hebrew parallelism] opens up possibilities for
a richer reading. When we read the poetic lines of a psalm slowly and by reflecting on how the second
colon adds to the sense of the first, our understanding of the text deepens and our delight in the text
blossoms." Futato, Interpreting the Psalms, 38-41.
17
Adele Berlin, "Parallelism," ABD 5.155-62.
Chapter 2: Methodological Considerations • 92
This example is directly applicable to the Cremer theory. Advocates of this theory
have traditionally appealed to passages such as Ps 143:1, where the terms "faithfulness"
and "righteousness" are in parallel: "Hear my prayer, O LORD, give ear to my
supplications! Answer me in your faithfulness, in your righteousnessV On this basis, they
have argued that "righteousness" means "faithfulness." But rather than being synonyms,
the two terms are better viewed as hyponyms. Faithfulness (keeping one's word or
promise) is an important sub-category within the larger domain of righteousness. As
Mark Seifrid points out, faithfulness is covenant-righteousness.18 The way God is
"righteous" within the terms of a (promissory) covenant is by being faithful to keep his
promises and delivering his people. But this does not mean that the lexical denotation of
"righteousness" is "faithfulness to a promissory covenant." Just as everyone who is in
Jerusalem is in Judah but not everyone who is in Judah is in Jerusalem, so all instances of
faithfulness to a promissory covenant may be termed "righteousness," but not
all "righteousness" is faithfulness to a promissory covenant.
Thus, when examining the phenomenon of Hebrew parallelism, we must
recognize the wide variety of potential relationships between the parallel lines and
between their constituent words. As John Sawyer writes:
There are a number of different types of parallelismus membrorum which can be

detected only when the meaning of the terms involved has already been fairly
closely defined .... It is clear from this that the structure of Hebrew poetry, while
indicating that a meaning-relation exists between two or more terms, does not
provide a built-in definition of what relation it is, and cannot therefore be taken as
a starting point for semantic description.19
18
Mark A. Seifrid, "Righteousness Language in the Hebrew Scriptures and Early Judaism," in Justification
and Variegated Nomism, Vol. 1: The Complexities of Second Temple Judaism (WUNT 11/140; ed. D. A.
Carson, Peter T. O'Brien, and Mark A. Seifrid; Grand Rapids: Baker Academic/Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck,
2001), 424.
19
John F. A. Sawyer, Semantics in Biblical Research: New Methods of Defining Hebrew Words for
Salvation (SBT 11/24; London: SCM, 1972), 75.
Given the variety of conceptual, semantic, and even syntactical relationships that can be
utilized in Hebrew parallelism, it is methodologically unsound to attempt to determine
the semantic content of Hebrew words on this basis alone.
B. Septuagint Studies
In addition to Old and New Testament lexicography, this study examines the role
of the Septuagint in introducing Hebrew meanings into the Greek vocabulary of the New
Testament.20 In this study, I will be examining the AIK-group, but before looking at the
specific issues related to that group, we must establish the parameters of the larger
discussion.
1. The Role of the LXX in Mediating Hebrew Meanings into Greek
With respect to the question of the role of the Septuagint in mediating Hebrew
meanings from the Hebrew vocabulary of the Old Testament into the Greek vocabulary
of the New, scholars tend to fall in one of two camps.
One camp says that many New Testament Greek words, especially the
theologically significant ones, are really "Greek words with Hebrew meanings." They
argue that the LXX is the primary driver of the importation of Hebraic semantic content
into the Greek words. Although they are Greek in form, they are really Hebrew in
substance. For example, in 1889, Edwin Hatch claimed that the majority of New
20
It is also possible that Semitic meanings were introduced into the Greek of Palestinian Jews by the
alternate mechanism of Aramaic usage. However, there are two reasons for setting this scenario to one side
for the purpose of this study: (1) we lack a written corpus of Aramaic literature from the New Testament
period, and so any appeals to Aramaic will necessarily be speculative; and (2) with regard to 5iKaioauvr|,
scholars have traditionally appealed to the Septuagint as the mechanism for the introduction of Hebraic
meaning into this Greek word.
Testament words "express in their Biblical usage the conceptions of a Semitic race," and
as a consequence their meaning must be determined by examining their usage in the
LXX. He offered this canon of lexical study: "A word which is used uniformly, or with
few and intelligible exceptions, as the translation of the same Hebrew word, must be held
to have in Biblical Greek the same meaning as that Hebrew word."21 In the same vein,
David Hill wrote a book in 1967 titled Greek Words and Hebrew Meanings devoted to
the thesis that "the language of the New Testament ... reveals in its syntax and - more
important for our work - in its vocabulary, a strong Semitic cast, due in large measure to
its indebtedness to the Jewish biblical Greek of the Septuagint."22 Hill then sought to
vindicate this thesis by examining Ampov, SiKaioown, ^cof), ^cof| ai6vio<;, and Ttvsuua in
their LXX and NT contexts.
The other camp is generally dismissive of LXX influence and thinks that the vast
majority of the vocabulary of the Greek New Testament remains largely unaffected by
the Hebraic background and functions with the same semantic range as normal Koine
Greek. To provide illumination into the meaning of these words, these scholars argue,
one would be better served studying other literature composed in Koine Greek, especially
the Greek papyri, from the period when the New Testament was written. For example, T.
K. Abbott, in his review of Edwin Hatch's Essays in Biblical Greek, wrote that "the
amount of influence of the Septuagint Version on the language of the New Testament is
very often exaggerated."23 Abbott argues that in none of the instances cited by Hatch is
21
Edwin Hatch, Essays in Biblical Greek (Oxford: Clarendon, 1889), 34-35.
* David Hill, Greek Words and Hebrew Meanings: Studies in the Semantics of Soteriological Terms
(SNTSMS 5; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1967), 18.
23
T. K. Abbott, "New Testament Lexicography," in Essays Chiefly on the Original Texts of the Old and
New Testaments (London: Longmans, Green & Co., 1891), 67. Several pages later, however, Abbott adds
the qualifier, "except in case of terms of Hebrew theology" (p. 71).
he successful in attaching a peculiarly Septuagintal meaning to the Greek vocabulary of
the New Testament, claiming rather that the meanings are best illuminated by writers of
extra-biblical Koine or by various papyri.24 Similarly, in his review of David Hill's book,
James Barr says that he formerly gave assent to the proposition "that the LXX was the
primary channel bringing Hebrew meanings into New Testament Greek usage," but that,
ironically, the strength of this belief has been reduced by reading Hill's monograph. "To
me there is too much LXX idiom which is not found in the New Testament... and too
much New Testament Greek which is not very like the LXX."25 Adolf Deissmann took a
similar position.26
My sympathies lie with the first camp, that is, the camp which says that the
influence of the Septuagint on the vocabulary of the New Testament is significant. After
having read all of the Greek New Testament several times and the original core of the
Septuagint (the Pentateuch), I am convinced that the influence of the LXX on the
vocabulary and syntax of the Greek New Testament is considerably greater than the
scholars in the second camp suppose.
However, as much as I sympathize with Hatch, Hill, and others, in their general
expectation that the vocabulary of the Greek New Testament must be interpreted in light
of the Septuagint's mediation of Hebraic semantic content, I consider their work to be
lacking in methodological rigor. Their work tends to operate with false assumptions
about the differences between Hebraic and Greek "thought." In particular, they tend to
engage in wholesale importation of Hebraic meanings without attempting to understand
24
Abbott, "New Testament Lexicography," 98.
25
James Barr, "Common Sense and Biblical Language," Biblica 49 (1968): 380.
26
Adolf Deissmann, The Philology of the Greek Bible: Its Present and Future (London: Hodder &
Stoughton, 1908); idem, St. Paul: A Study in Social and Religious History (trans. L. R. M. Strachan;
London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1912).
how those meanings are related to or extensions of standard (extra-biblical) Greek usage.
And even where greater correlation or continuity is sought between Hebrew and Greek,
scholars have failed to establish that Hebraic meanings have in fact entered into the living
usage of the Greek-speaking Jewish communities of the first century. I believe that
stricter criteria and more fine-toothed analytic tools are needed in order to establish
Hebraic influence in the first place and then to determine the precise semantic contours of
that influence in greater detail.
2. The LXX as a Translation and Caiques
I will outline those methodological issues below, but before I do so, 1 must briefly
introduce some technical terms and concepts from the field of LXX studies.
First, we need to understand the distinction, from translation theory, between the
97
"source language" and the "target language." The source language of the LXX is
Hebrew and Aramaic and the target language is Koine Greek. In other words, translation
is a complex process involving, at least minimally, the act of selecting words from the
target language (Koine Greek) that best represent the words from the text in the source
language (Hebrew and Aramaic). For the sake of simplicity I will leave out "Aramaic" in
the rest of this discussion, and I will use "Greek" to mean Koine Greek.
Second, it is well recognized that the LXX is a fairly literal translation. Parts of
the LXX (which was created over centuries by various translators) show slightly more
interpretive, free, or dynamic approaches to the task of translation. But for the most part
the LXX may be identified as a translation that is closer to the literal (or formal-
27
Gideon Toury, Descriptive Translation Studies and Beyond (Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 1995). Older
terminology is "source language" and "receptor language." E.g., Eugene A. Nida and Charles R. Taber, The
Theory and Practice of Translation (Leiden: Brill, 1974).
equivalence) end of the spectrum, even if there is some degree of variation within the
books of the Septuagint that are translations from Hebrew." However, we have to be
careful not to overstate the degree of literalism lest we give the impression that the
translators never engaged in more idiomatic translations. The LXX translators were not
consistent in their literalism, even within a single book. For example, the Hebrew idiom
"he lifted up his eyes" (Vr^TllS! K&ST) is reproduced literally in Gen 13:10 (srcdpac; TOO<;
6(p0aA,uoi)c; auxou) but not in Gen 33:1 and Deut 4:19 (which use ava^Xe\\iaq). ' Still, on
the whole and with qualifications, it may be stated that most of the books of the LXX that
are translations of a Hebrew (or Aramaic) original are literal. For example, the Hebraic
oath-formula introduced by DK is translated with si without an apodosis in LXX Gen
14:23; Num 32:11; Deut 1:35; Ps 94:ll. 30 Another example is the idiom *]0; + infinitive,
meaning "to do something again/further," rendered by TcpooxiOnpi + infinitive at Gen 4:2,
12; 8:21; 18:29; 37:8; 38:26, etc.31 The frequency with which such Hebraic idioms are
reproduced with word-for-word Greek equivalents suggests that the translators intended
to preserve the flavor of the original. "
Third, one of the outstanding features that scholars have noted about the literalism
of the LXX is that the various translators tended to employ stereotyped equivalents. A
2S
James Barr, "The Typology of Literalism in Ancient Biblical Translations," MSU15 (1979): 275-325.
29
John A. L. Lee prov ides a wealth of examples from the Pentateuch where the translators depart from a
literal translation of the Hebrew and employ idiomatic Greek instead. J. A. L. Lee, A Lexical Study of the
Septuagint Version of the Pentateuch (SBLSCS 14; Chico: Scholars Press, 1983), 25-29, 34-40, 150-51.
30
GKC § 149; HALOT 60. This idiom has made its way into the NT, not only in scriptural quotations (Heb
3:11; 4:3, 5, quoting LXX Ps 94:11), but even in original composition (Mk 8:12). Cp. BDF §372(4);
BDAGsi4.
31
IBHS §39.3.lb; HALOT418. Also used in the NT: Mk 14:25 (v.L); Lk 19:11; 20:11-12; Acts 12:3; Heb
12:19. Cp. BDF §392(2): BDAG 7ipocrrien,ui lc.
32
John Lee writes: "In many of the books it seems that the translators deliberately chose to produce a
version that preserved the flavour of the original. Certainly it is generally agreed that in most books fidelity
to the original was their primary aim." Lee, A Lexical Study of the Septuagint, 21.
stereotype is a word in the target language that is consistently employed as a translational
equivalent for a word in the source language. The LXX consistently employs the AIK-
group in Greek to translate the corresponding nouns, verb, and adjective of the p12S-
group in Hebrew. David Hill claims that AIK-words are used to translate pllU-words 462
out of a possible 476 times in the LXX, that is, 97% of the time.33 This is clearly a good
example of a stereotyped equivalent. Of particular interest is the observation that the
LXX translators often stuck with their chosen stereotyped equivalents even in contexts
where the Greek words stood in some tension with their context, thus creating readings
that were often idiosyncratic and even puzzling by the standards of non-translational
Greek usage. There are always exceptions to this rule, of course, for no stereotype is
rigidly followed in every case, particularly if sticking with the stereotype would have
resulted in an incomprehensible text (although this too occurs on occasion). In some
instances, the translators felt that the need for comprehension outweighed the desirability
of literalism and adopted more dynamic or idiomatic renderings. But for the most part,
they permitted themselves to employ wooden renderings in Greek in order to preserve
what they apparently considered to be the higher value of literalism, sometimes even at
the expense of intelligibility.34
Fourth, some stereotyped equivalents can become so fixed that they enter the
bloodstream of the target language - or, more accurately, they become part of the mental
furniture of a cultural group that uses the target language. If this happens, they are called
33
David Hill, Greek Words and Hebrew Meanings: Studies in the Semantics of Soteriological Terms
(SNTSMS 5; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1967), 104.
34
"In some passages, as is generally agreed, they resorted to mechanical, word-for-word representation of
the Hebrew, with little concern for the over-all result. It is doubtful that the meaning of what they wrote
was always clear to others." Lee, A Lexical Study of the Septuagint. 18.
"caiques," that is, words in the target language that have become enlarged or narrowed
due to semantic borrowing from the source language.35 The actual historical process by
which caiques are created is difficult to discern. In the case of the Greek-speaking Jews
of the Hellenistic Diaspora, it is possible that some caiques predated the writing of the
LXX and the translators simply adopted these Greek words as pre-existing, readily
available caiques for their stereotyped equivalents when writing the LXX. Many scholars
think that the Greek word v6u,og (= r n l n ) is such a case.36 This is plausible because the
Greek-speaking Jewish communities surely would have needed some agreed-upon Greek
term to use as a technical term for the "Torah." Other caiques may have arisen due to the
influence of the LXX as a revered religious text. The fact that the LXX used a particular
stereotyped equivalent may have contributed to that particular Greek word becoming a
caique in those Greek-speaking Jewish communities that used the Greek Bible as their
primary text.
Let me give two additional examples of caiques that are widely accepted by LXX
scholars. In both cases, we do not know whether they pre-dated the LXX or came about
as a result of the LXX. The first example is 8ia9f|Kr| (= rTH3). In extra-biblical Greek,
both classical and Koine, a SiaBfJKn is a last will and testament,' whereas in both the
LXX and the NT it has become the equivalent of "covenant," although without
completely losing its traditional meaning.38 The second example is ixjyeXoq, which means
3
' Moises Silva, "Semantic Borrowing in the New Testament," NTS 22 (1975-76): 104-10.
36
Karen H. Jobes and Moises Silva, Invitation to the Septuagint (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2000),
109.
j7
LSJ 5ia0r)Kr|, "disposition of property by a will, testament."
38
Sec Gal 3:15 and Heb 9:15-17 where arguably the meaning "testament" is still sufficiently alive to be
played upon. But aside from these exceptions. 5ia9f)KT| in both the LXX and the NT ought to be translated
"covenant" almost all of the time.
"messenger, envoy" in extra-biblical Greek. In the LXX it is used as a stereotype to
translate "=1^7Q, which can mean either "messenger" or "angel" in Hebrew. The result is
that in roughly half of the occurrences of ayyetax; in the LXX, it retains its traditional
meaning of "messenger," but in the remaining half it means "angel." In the NT, ayyekoq
is used with the meaning "messenger" only a handful of times.40 In the vast majority of
NT occurrences (97%), it means "angel." Here is a Greek word with a Hebrew meaning.
Fifth, the critical issue with regard to the proper definition of a caique is that, as
Albert Pietersma says, it is "a stereotype that has been acclimatized to the host
language."41 Not all LXX stereotypes become caiques, that is, not all stereotypes become
"Greek words with Hebrew meanings" available for use by speakers or writers in the host
language. The critical factor that distinguishes caiques from stereotypes is that caiques
have been acclimatized to the host language, that is, they have been incorporated into the
mental habits of the culture in which the host language is spoken. In our case, we are not
arguing that caiques were acclimatized to Koine Greek in general, wherever and by
whomever it was spoken in the Hellenistic world, but to Koine Greek as spoken and
written by the Greek-speaking Jewish communities of the Hellenistic Diaspora and even
Palestine.
LSJ ayyeXoc; 1-2. In this sense, ayjeXoq is a synonym of npeafivc,, as seen, e.g., in Xenophon's reference
to "the Lacedaemonian ambassadors ... and other messengers (ot TE AaiceSaipovicov TtpsafSsiq ... Kai oi
aAloi ayysXot)" (Xenophon, Hellenica 1.4.2). Cited by Hermann Cremer. Biblico-Theological Lexicon of
New Testament Greek (trans. William Urwick; 4th ed.; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1895), 18.
40
Out of 175 NT occurrences, the ESV translates ayjekoq as "messenger" seven times in the NT (Matt
11:10; Mk 1:2; Lk 7:24, 27; 9:52; 2 Cor 12:7; Jas 2:25). These are the same verses cited under BDAG
ayystax; 1 ("a human messenger serving as an envoy").
41
Albert Pietersma, Translation Manual for "A New English Translation of the Septuagint" (NETS) (Ada:
Uncial Books for IOSCS. 1996), 40.
3. Relevance to the Cremer Theory
The above sketch provides some background for the methodology that I will use
in my dissertation as I critically examine the Cremer theory. Directly relevant to the
Cremer theory is the warning by LXX lexicographers that the mere fact that a certain
Greek word is a stereotyped equivalent for a certain Hebrew word in the LXX does not
ipso facto constitute evidence that it has become a caique. This, in my opinion, is the
Achilles' heel of the Cremer theory. David Hill, for example, makes this unwarranted
leap from the one to the other, that is, from stereotypes to caiques:
From this discussion of LXX usage it will be obvious that the 5iKaioq-words
underwent considerable expansion and change of meaning through being
consistently used to render the Hebrew root p~T2S ... Through being used
consistently as the means of translating the Hebrew word, SiKaiocruvn gained this
new dimension of reference.42
Note well: Hill says that the meaning of the words in the AIK-group underwent
semantic change "through being consistently used to render the Hebrew root." Hill here
clearly rests his case for the existence of a caique on the mere fact that the words were
used "consistently" to translate the pHlS-group in Hebrew. But this is far from sufficient
evidence. Statements exhibiting the same methodological fallacy can be found in other
scholars. For example, John Ziesler writes, "The meaning of the Greek words seems to be
dominated by the Hebrew words they render."43
Septuagint scholars widely agree that, to identify a caique in any given instance,
we must have evidence that it was used with a non-standard, "Semitic" or "Hebraic"
meaning in compositional - not solely translational - Greek literature of Greek-speaking
* Hill, Greek Words and Hebrew Meanings, 108-9.

4j
John A. Ziesler, The Meaning of Righteousness in Paul: A Linguistic and Theological Enquiry (SNTSMS
20; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1972), 67.
Judaism. As Cameron Boyd-Taylor puts it, "The only unassailable evidence for a caique
will come from non-translational documents."44 In the case I want to examine, it is not
enough to argue that the words in the AIK-group were stereotyped translational solutions
for rendering the words in the plU-group in the LXX. The fact that these AIK-words
functioned as stereotypes is not disputed. But it does not follow from this that a
specialized Hebraic or Semitic meaning was thereby introduced into these words, making
them available for use with this specialized meaning in compositional Greek by Jewish
authors writings in Greek.
We now have an objective criterion by which to test Cremer's hypothesis. If
Cremer's hypothesis is correct, we would expect to find instances of AIK- terms being
used with a Hebraic/relational meaning in compositional Koine Greek literature written
by Greek-speaking Jews (e.g., The Wisdom of Solomon; 4 Maccabees; The Testaments of
the Twelve Patriarchs; the Sentences of Pseudo-Phocylides; The Letter of Aristeas; The
Sibylline Oracles; Philo; Josephus; and so on). By implication, if we fail to find such
evidence for a Hebraic-relational usage of the AIK-group in non-translational Jewish
literature composed in Greek, the validity of Cremer's hypothesis will be called into
serious question.
Now, I can anticipate a possible objection that may be raised in response to my
thesis by those unwilling to give up the Cremer thesis completely. It is conceivable that a
weaker form of the Cremer thesis may be put forward in place of the original, strong
form. Those wishing to rehabilitate the Cremer thesis may well concede that the words in
44
Cameron Boyd-Taylor, "Calque-culations: Loanwords and the Lexicon," BIOSCS 38 (2005): 90. A
question that I have not resolved, and which I need to examine more closely, is whether and how recourse
can also be made to Jewish literature that was originally composed in Hebrew but which was translated into
Greek at an early stage (e.g., Sirach, Psalms of Solomon, etc.).
the AIK-group have not become caiques in the technical sense - Greek words with
Hebraic meanings or denotations. But, while conceding that they remain Greek words
with Greek denotative meanings, some may nevertheless want to maintain that they have
more subtle Hebraic/relational connotations, allusions, and overtones due to their
repeated use in Jewish covenantal contexts. Such a scenario is indeed conceivable. For
example, the Greek word iXaoxfipiov in Rom 3:25 is probably not to be classified as a
caique. It is a Greek word with a very ordinary Greek meaning, and so ought to be
translated "expiatory or propitiatory object." It does not mean "mercy seat," even if it
may refer to the mercy seat or atonement cover in the LXX (as we have seen above, sense
and reference must be distinguished). Nevertheless, due to its repeated usage in the LXX
in reference to the atonement cover on the Ark of the Covenant, it has developed an
allusion to the mercy seat, at least when used in Greco-Jewish literature.46 The reality of
this added connotation or referential allusion is easily demonstrated in the writings of
Philo who uses the term in precisely this way, thus satisfying the requirement that
Hebraic meanings for Greek words must be documented in non-translational,
compositional Greek.47 Is something similar going on with the AIK-group? Is it possible
that they are Greek words with Greek meanings and with Hebraic allusions, connotations,
and echoes? Obviously, in order to forestall this possible objection, this new kind of
caique - we may call it "the soft caique" - would need to be defined more clearly.
43
"The lid of the ark of the covenant is an iâaxriptov, but it does not follow that iXacxfipiov means 'lid'
either in the Septuagint, in St. Paul, or anywhere else; it can only mean 'expiatory or propitiatory object.'"
Deissmann, The Philology of the Greek Bible, 92-3.
46
LXX Exod 25:17. 18, 19, 20 (2x), 21,22; 31:7; 35:12; 38:5, 7 (2x), 8; Lev 16:2 (2x), 13, 14 (2x), 15;
Num 7:89; Amos 9:1; Ezek 43:14, 17, 20. The 20 occurrences in the Pentateuch definitely refer to the
mercy seat on the Ark of the Covenant. Of the four occurrences outside the Pentateuch, Amos 9:1 is
ambiguous and the three instances in Ezek 43 use the term in reference to some sort of ledge on the altar
where atonement takes place.
47
TA.ao-rf)piov occurs six times in Philo: Cher. 25; Her. 166; Fug. 100, 101; and Mos. 2:95, 97. Two of the
occurrences are in quotations of LXX Exod 25:22 (Her. 166; Fug. 101).
Nevertheless, the acid test for determining soft caiques is the same as that for determining
hard caiques, namely, documentation of this usage in the Greek-speaking corpus of
Jewish literature.
4. Continuity between Meaning in Extra-Biblical Greek and New Hebraic Meaning
This leads to a related point - we must make room for the possibility that there is
continuity between the meaning of a Greek word in extra-biblical Greek and the new
Hebraic meaning or nuance that it takes on. Rather than thinking of these Greek words as
Greek in form only but really Hebrew in substance, it is better to think of them as Greek
words in both form and substance, but whose meaning has been extended in certain new
directions so that they now have Hebraic applications, usages, and nuances that, while not
impossible in extra-biblical Greek, are nevertheless new. I would argue that a new
Hebraic meaning cannot simply be grafted onto any Greek word without regard to the
semantic possibilities already inherent in extra-biblical Greek. Ordinarily, the semantic
possibilities of the Greek word in extra-biblical usage must be such that its meaning
(whether referential or connotative) can be reasonably and organically extended into the
new Hebraic semantic territory.
An example will illustrate. The word SIKCUOCO in extra-biblical Greek generally
means one of three things: (1) to make something right; (2) to deem someone/something
to be right or correct; and (3) to do justice to someone, typically by punishing them.
Now it is clear that this usage is somewhat different from that of the New Testament
where it may mean (1) to vindicate someone, or (2) to declare someone to be righteous
and to treat them as righteous. The meaning "to do someone justice by punishing them" is
LSJ SIKCUOCO
entirely absent and the word has a more positive connotation. In fact, for Paul it is a
soteriological term that denotes God's act of forgiving sins and accounting sinners as
righteous in his sight. Now it is generally agreed that this new usage came about because
of the influence of the Septuagint mediating a Hebraic context and connotation to the
word SiKaioco. The verb p"12 is frequently translated using the Greek verb SiKaioco in the
Septuagint, or with various circumlocutions involving the adjective SiKaioc and a
verb.50 In other words, it is basically a stereotype. Since the Hebrew verb is used in a
positive, judicial sense, that meaning has been introduced into the Greek word among
Greek-speaking Jews. This can be documented not only in the NT but also in Philo and
other Jewish Greek literature. Now the point I am trying to make is that this new, more
positive connotation is organically related to that portion of the extra-biblical Greek
usage which I have glossed "to deem someone to be right or correct." The Septuagint has
not added a new meaning unrelated to extra-biblical usage, but has taken the semantic
possibilities of SiKaioco in extra-biblical Greek and extended them in a new direction, but
a direction that is anchored in an extra-biblical starting point.31 It is a short step from "to
deem someone to be right or correct" (focusing non-judicially on someone's Tightness or
correctness with regard to something they said or their opinion) to "to deem someone to
be righteous" (focusing on their judicial status before humans or God). It is an organic
extension of semantic possibilities already present. Furthermore, the usage of the verb in
49
Qal: Gen 38:26; Ps 18(19):9; 50(51):4; 142(143):2; Isa 43:9, 26; 45:26; Ezek 16:52. Piel: Job 33:32; Jer
3:11; Ezek 16:51-52. Hiphil: Exod 23:7; Deut 25:1; 2 Kgdms 15:4; 3 Kgdms 8:32; Ps 81(82):3; Isa 5:23;
50:8; 53:11. Hithpael: Gen 44:16.
50
E.g., StKatog avacpaivsoOai (Job 13:18; 40:3(8) [both Qal]), Succuoc; &7tocpatvEtv (Job 27:5 [Piel]; 32:2
[Qal]), StKcuog EIVCU (Job 9:2, 15,20; 10:15; 11:2; 15:14; 25:4; 33:12; 34:5; 35:7 [all Qal]), and SIKOUOV
Kpivstv (Prov 17:15 [Hiphil]).
51
The LXX's use of SIKCUOCO to mean "acquit, declare righteous," though strange to the non-Jewish Greek
reader, "bears ... a certain analogy with the common Greek use of SIKCUOUV for deeming a course of action
right, and may be regarded as an extension of this use." C. H. Dodd, The Bible and the Greeks (London:
Hodder & Stoughton, 1935), 52-53.
the Septuagint in primarily judicial contexts (e.g., Exod 23:7) builds upon a usage that is
possible in extra-biblical Greek, though in extra-biblical Greek the judicial usage usually
takes the negative form, "to do someone justice by punishing them."
In the aftermath of Martin Hengefs paradigm-altering work on the complex
relationship between Hellenism and Judaism, we can no longer speak in such stark
contrast between "Greek thought" and "Hebraic/Jewish thought."3" Accordingly, it is
now irresponsible to assume radical discontinuities between Hebrew words and Greek
words used among Greek-speaking Jewish communities to represent Hebrew words and
concepts. Rather than assuming discontinuity, we must be prepared to see significant
areas of continuity and overlap between the usage of SiKaiorruvn in extra-biblical Greek
literature and its usage in Greco-Jewish literature. And when discontinuities are posited,
strict criteria must be applied, not only to demonstrate that such discontinuities do indeed
have evidentiary support in non-translational Jewish Greek literature, but also to provide
a more fine-grained analysis of the precise points where the continuities end and the
discontinuities begin.
C. Relevance of Jewish Literature Composed in Greek
In Chapter 5, we will survey the use of SiKaiocruvn in Jewish literature composed
in Greek, both Apocrypha, Pseudepigrapha, and Hellenistic Jewish writers like Philo and
Josephus. It may be objected that, given Paul's Palestinian Jewish background as a
Pharisee and his rabbinic education at the feet of Gamaliel in Jerusalem (Acts 22:3),
52
Martin Hengel, Judaism and Hellenism: Studies in their Encounter in Palestine during the Early
Hellenistic Period (WUNT 10; trans. John Bowden; vols. 1-2; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1974); idem, Jews,
Greeks, and Barbarians: Aspects of the Hellenization of Judaism in the pre-Christian Period
(Philadelphia: Fortress, 1980); idem, The 'Hellenization' of Judaea in the First Century after Christ
(London: SCM Press, 1989).
Paul's thought is best understood against the background of Palestinian Jewish literature
and that the literature of Hellenistic Judaism is less relevant for interpreting Paul. This
way of thinking has resulted in privileging Jewish literature composed in Hebrew, such as
the Dead Sea Scrolls, Jubilees, and 1 Enoch, with far less attention given to Jewish
literature composed in Greek. Paul's origin and later ministry among Diaspora Greek-
speaking Jews has been downplayed while his Palestinian roots have been given pride of
i 53
place.
But as most scholars now recognize, New Testament scholarship prior to Martin
Hengel's ground-breaking work, Judaism and Hellenism, had operated with simplistic
categories, positing a binary polarity between "Palestinian Judaism" and "Hellenistic
Judaism." Hengel's work broke down this binary schematization and showed that
Palestinian Judaism was not a pristine phenomenon uninfluenced by its Hellenistic
environment. In Judaism and Hellenism Hengel forcefully makes a single, simple point:
"The usual distinction between Palestinian and Hellenistic Judaism needs to be corrected
.... From about the middle of the third century BC all Judaism must really be designated
'Hellenistic Judaism' in the strict sense."34 Hengel's overall thesis has been well received
and essentially vindicated in its main outlines.35

5
' Here are some illustrative quotes: "Contrary to Ramsay and others, [Paul's Palestinian education] fits
quite nicely with Paul's rather scanty use of Hellenistic writers and ideas, as well as his much deeper
dependence on the Pharisaic Jewish heritage." W. Ward Gasque, "Tarsus," ABD 6.334. "Essentially non-
Palestinian sources (e.g. the Sibylline Oracles) are also of lesser value for a comparison with Paul, who
despite his familiarity with the Hellenistic world, had Palestinian roots." Mark A. Seifrid. Justification by
Faith: The Origin and Development of a Central Pauline Theme (NovTSup 68; Leiden: Brill, 1992), 79.
54
Martin Hengel, Judaism and Hellenism, 1.104. Hengel looks back on his work in "Judaism and
Hellenism Revisited," in Hellenism in the Land of Israel (ed. John J. Collins and Gregory E. Sterling; Notre
Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 2001), 6-37. He acknowledges that his thesis "can surely be
supplemented, improved, and sometimes corrected ... but it must not be revised" (29).
55
Peder Borgen states that "scholars no longer regard the distinction between Palestinian Judaism and
Hellenistic Judaism as a basic category for our understanding of Judaism." The New Testament and
Hellenistic Judaism (ed. Peder Borgen and Soren Giversen; Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 1995), 11.
Similar assessments of Hengel's work may be found in Tessa Rajak, The Jewish Dialogue with Greece and
Paul was a Jew of the Diaspora, as he said, "a Jewish man, born in Tarsus of
Cilicia" (Acts 22:3; cp. 9:11; 21:39; 23:34). This is indicated by the fact that he thinks
and writes in Greek. Hengel thinks that "Paul's excellent command of his Greek mother
tongue and his sovereign treatment of the Greek Bible suggest that Tarsus cannot be
pushed completely into the background."56 Hengel goes on to argue that even Paul's pre-
Christian habitat in Jerusalem was probably Greek-speaking Jewish communities in
which the Greek Bible was used. The type of Greek that was spoken in this habitat was
not the high literary Greek of the more educated elites, nor was the full canon of pagan
Greek literature from Homer to Plato studied. Rather, the Greek spoken was Septuagintal
and practical, although a modest degree of rhetorical skill seems to be evidenced in our
sources. Hengel hypothesizes that after his Pharisaic training, Paul found himself mainly
among the Hellenistic (that is, Greek-speaking) Jewish synagogues in Jerusalem. Paul
may even have been a teacher in a Hellenistic synagogue in Jerusalem who sought to
catechize Diaspora Jews in Pharisaic theology and practice.57 It was precisely because of
Paul's pre-conversion membership in the Jewish Hellenistic community in Jerusalem that
he became involved in the persecution of Stephen and the Greek-speaking Jewish

CO
Christians in Jerusalem.
Rome: Studies in Cultural and Social Interaction (AGJU 48; Leiden: Brill, 2001); Lee I. Levine, Judaism
and Hellenism in Antiquity: Conflict or Confluence? (Seattle: The University of Washington Press, 1998);
Lester L. Grabbe, Judaism from Cyrus to Herod, Vol. 1: The Persian and Greek Periods (Minneapolis:
Fortress, 1992), 148, 153, 251; John J. Collins, Jewish Cult and Hellenistic Culture: Essays on the Jewish
Encounter with Hellenism and Roman Rule (Leiden: Brill, 2005). See also James K. Aitken's critical
reassessment of Judaism and Hellenism over 30 years later in JBL 123 (2004): 331-41.
56
Martin Hengel in collaboration with Roland Deines, The Pre-Christian Paul (trans. John Bowden;
London: SCM, 1991), 38-39.
=
" Hengel, The Pre-Christian Paul, 58, 61.
58
Hengel regards the persecution described in Acts 8:1-3 as directed primarily against "the Hellenists."
In his acclaimed book, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, John M. G. Barclay
both builds on and moves beyond Hengel in a number of important ways.59 Barclay
agrees that Hengel "decisively shattered"60 the old scholarly dichotomy between
Palestinian and Hellenistic Judaism, but he seeks to advance the discussion by providing
some important theoretical tools gleaned from the realm of sociology that enable a more
fine-grained analysis of the variety of ways that Jews interacted with their Hellenistic
environment. To be specific, Barclay isolates three distinct scales for describing that
interaction: assimilation, acculturation, and accommodation.
The "assimilation" scale refers to the degree of social integration, with the Jew
living in an isolated Jewish ghetto at the bottom of the scale and the fully integrated Jew
who has abandoned all Jewish distinctives at the top. Assimilationist and separatist forms
of Judaism existed in both the Diaspora and Palestine. Assimilation is not the sole
preserve of Hellenistic Judaism, nor were all Diaspora Jews assimilationists. The pre-
Christian Paul (a Diaspora Jew) and the Diaspora Jews from Asia Minor who tried to kill
him were clearly strict segregationists who kept themselves from Gentile entanglements.
There is little evidence that Greek-speaking Jews were, as a group, more "liberal" with
regard to Torah-observance or that their religion was more universalistic than their
Palestinian counterparts.62 Indeed, assuming the historical reliability of Acts, Luke
contradicts this view when he describes the non-Christian Diaspora Jews of Jerusalem
59
John M. G. Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora from Alexander to Trajan (323 BCE -117 CE)
(Berkeley and Los Angeles: The University of California Press, 1996).
60
Barclay. Jews, 6.
61
Barclay, Jews, 82-102.
62
This was the standard assumption of die religionsgeschichtliche Schule. For example, Wilhelm Bousset
claimed that the primary difference between Palestinian Judaism and Flellenistic Diaspora Judaism was that
the former was characterized by a cramped particularism, whereas the latter had an out-facing, missionary
openness to the Gentile world. Bousset, Die Religion des Judentums im spdthellenistischen Zeitalter (3 r
ed.; ed. Hugo Gressmann; Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1926). 432-37.
(explicitly called "Hellenists") as among those who were the first to stir up persecution
against the newly-converted Saul (Acts 9:29), thus demonstrating that "Hellenistic Jews"
could be just as "conservative" and "particularistic" as Palestinian Jews. 6j
The "acculturation" scale describes the degree of skill in the employment of
Hellenistic culture. In this case, a Jew who does not know any Greek would be placed at
the bottom of the scale, a Jew who had attended a Greek grammar school or gymnasium
would be in the middle, and a Jew like Philo who had mastered Greek literature, rhetoric,
and philosophy (i.e., the whole panoply of the Greek paideia) would be at the top. Paul
clearly spoke Greek fluently, had a basic facility in the use of rhetorical conventions, and
employed some terminology gleaned from popular philosophy, but he does not
demonstrate the kind of profound knowledge of Greek literature and philosophy that
Philo does. Paul would be somewhere in the middle of the "acculturation" scale. Paul was
probably bilingual at a minimum, knowing both Greek and Aramaic, and probably
Hebrew as well.64 However, his Greek does not display the same degree of sophistication
as a Philo. Barclay suggests that Paul's rabbinic training in Jerusalem was probably in a
Pharisaic school in which instruction occurred in Greek.65
The "accommodation" scale has to do with the use to which a Jew put his or her
acculturation. This scale differs from the other two in that it does not go from zero to
100%, but starts in the middle with a neutral stance to Hellenistic ideals and philosophy,
and from that point moves in two opposite directions, upward toward increasing cultural
63
"So [Saul] went in and out among them in Jerusalem, speaking boldly in the name of the Lord. He spoke
and argued with the Hellenists (CTUVSL/|T81rcpoc;TOVC, 'EXXnviardq); but they were attempting to kill him.
When the believers learned of it, they brought him down to Caesarea and sent him off to Tarsus" (Acts
9:28-30 NRSV). These "Hellenists" are not Christians and are thus not the same as those mentioned in Acts
6:1. Joseph A. Fitzmyer, The Acts of the Apostles (AB 31; New York: Doubleday, 1998), 440.
64
Hengel. The Pre-Christian Paul, 37-38.
63
Barclay, Jews, 383-84, following Hengel.
convergence or downward toward increasing cultural antagonism. Jews like Philo and the
author of The Letter ofAristeas sought cultural convergence between their Judaism and
the reigning ideals of Hellenistic philosophy and ethics. By contrast, the authors of 4
Maccabees and The Wisdom of Solomon - although highly acculturated in terms of their
fluency in Greek and their ability to employ rhetoric and philosophy - used their
acculturation to warn their fellow Jews against becoming too assimilated to Gentile
society. These Jews are cited by Barclay as examples of cultural antagonism.
Barclay concludes that Paul was born in Tarsus and can therefore be regarded as a
Diaspora Jew by birth. It is true that at some point early in life he moved to Jerusalem
and received considerable rabbinical training there (Acts 22:3). Yet after his conversion
he spent the remaining 30 years of his life outside of Palestine (aside from occasional
visits to Jerusalem), typically visiting cities that had sizeable Greek-speaking Jewish
communities. For Barclay, "the Paul who preaches, disputes with Jews and Gentiles and
writes to members of his churches is a Jew at work in the Diaspora." The Diaspora is
Paul's "primary social context." Therefore, to shed light on Paul's socio-cultural location
Barclay compares him with other Diaspora Jews, a comparison that Barclay believes has
not received sufficient attention.66 This conclusion is corroborated by the recognition that
Paul's use of the Old Testament is primarily an exegetical engagement with the Greek
Bible rather than the Hebrew.67 J. Ross Wagner, for example, concludes that there are no
6
Barclay, Jews, 381. Barclay points out that W. D. Davies, E. P. Sanders, and Alan Segal focused their
efforts on comparing Paul with rabbinic or Palestinian Judaism.
67
"Paul was at home in the Greek Bible because he had used it - presumably from his earliest childhood ...
He also learned the Jewish Bible primarily in the form of the LXX." Hengel, The Pre-Christian Paul, 37-
38.
quotations of Isaiah in Romans that cannot be explained as quotations from the
Septuagint or other Greek Bible traditions.68
So where does this leave us with regard to the issue of the use of Jewish literature
composed in Greek for Pauline interpretation? 1 recognize that Paul's thought does not
show much influence either from non-Jewish Hellenistic philosophical writings or from
the Hellenistic Jewish apologetic literature that attempts to package Judaism as
comporting with the best of Hellenistic moral philosophy. Barclay rightly observes: "To
turn to Paul after reading most other Diaspora literature is to be struck by his minimal use
of Hellenistic theology, anthropology or ethics."69 Certainly Paul had no interest, as
Pseudo-Phocylides, Aristeas, Philo, 4 Maccabees and the Testaments of the Twelve
Patriarchs (to name a few) did, in showing the convergence between the ethic of the
Mosaic Law and that of Greco-Roman moral philosophy with its four virtues ((ppovnoic;,
SiKaioouvn, acocpporjuvn, dvSpsia). Nevertheless, this diverse body of writings offers
helpful lexical information regarding the way in which theological words such as Sucaioc;,
SiKaioco, and SiKaioawn were understood within the mental furniture of Greek-speaking
Judaism in which Paul was raised and among which he conducted much of his ministry.
The literature of Hellenistic Judaism can be deceptively subtle in its Jewishness. A
superficial reading of many of these works may initially cause one to pay more attention
"My own close examination of the wording of Paul's quotations and allusions to Isaiah in Romans
supports the consensus view that Paul cites a Greek text (or texts) of this prophetic book. In most cases,
Paul's Vorlage seems to have been nearly identical with the Septuagint version of Isaiah ... Although I
have given full consideration to the textual evidence provided by MT, the Qumran finds (biblical MSS,
pesharim, and quotations in other documents), the Targum. and the Peshitta, at no point has it been found
necessary to suppose that Paul has relied on a Hebrew or Aramaic text of Isaiah ... I have discovered no
instance in which the hypothesis that Paul used a Greek text does not account for the data more simply and
more satisfactorily than the supposition that Paul employed Hebrew and/or Aramaic texts." J. Ross
Wagner, Heralds of the Good News: Isaiah and Paul "In Concert" in the Letter to the Romans (NovTSup
101; Leiden: Brill, 2002), 344-45 and n. 8.
69
Barclay, Jews, 390-91.
to the ways in which they sound so dissimilar to OT/Jewish thought and so similar to the
thought-world of Hellenistic moral philosophy. Yet a more careful reading demonstrates
the depth of the Jewish element, which extends not only to the content but also to the
Greek vocabulary. For example, in this body of literature, as Hellenistic as it may at first
appear, we find many theologically-significant terms used with a specialized Hebrew
meaning typically derived from the LXX, e.g., dyyeXoc;, apxiepevq, diafioXoq, Sia0f|Kr],
SiKaioco, Sota, iâoxripiov, KIPCOTOC;, Kuptoc;, vopoc;, 7ispuouf|, and so on. Thus, an
examination of the usage of SiKaiocuvn in this body of Jewish literature can serve as a
critical test of the theory that the semantic range of this word in Greek-speaking Judaism
was enlarged due to the influence of the Hebrew background.
D. Conclusion
Based on my assumption that the Septuagint has exercised a significant influence
on the syntax and vocabulary of the New Testament, I have prima facie sympathy with
the hypothesis that the word 5iKaioo~6vn may have taken on a Hebraic cast and, when
combined with the genitive Oeofj, could be translated "God's saving activity in fulfillment
of his covenant promises." However, I find that the evidence is not compelling to
conclude that in this case we have a Greek word with a Hebrew meaning, or, more
precisely, with this particular Hebrew meaning. My doubts arise from two primary
considerations (at least) which will be explained in greater detail in the chapters that
follow. But at this point I state them here succinctly:
First, looking solely at the Hebrew, Cremer's view that the Hebrew root pHU has
a relational meaning is doubtful. The arguments Cremer put forward are by no means
compelling. In fact, 1 believe that Cremer engaged in the fallacy of "totality transfer"
when he made the case for taking p"725 as a Verhdltnisbegriff'or relational concept. He
also failed to provide a reasonable explanation for the counterexamples in the Hebrew
Bible where p"12S denotes penal judgment, suggesting that the lexeme is not thoroughly
positive as Cremer and Von Rad claimed.
Second, even when we recognize that p"12J can be used in contexts and in ways
that SiKaiorjuvn ordinarily is not used - e.g., to describe God's saving righteousness or
vindicating deliverance on behalf of the oppressed - it remains unproven that this salvific
usage has passed over into the mental furniture and parlance of Greek-speaking Jews.
Now as I said, one way of looking at this dissertation is to view it as a subset of
the larger topic of "Greek words with Hebrew meanings" mediated via the LXX. I am
writing with the presupposition that this phenomenon is very real and one that must be
taken into account when doing New Testament lexicography. As applied to the specific
case of the AIK-group in the New Testament, I generally expect to find ways in which the
LXX has shaped the precise contours and semantic range of the words in this group.
However, I want to prosecute this with great methodological sophistication and controls
in order to ensure that we are seeing Hebraic nuances that are objectively there. I aim to
demonstrate that the concept of "covenant faithfulness" as proposed in Cremer's
Verhdltnisbegriff theory is not one of the Hebraic meanings that has been introduced into
the Greek AIK-group among Greek-speaking Jews or Christians of the period under
investigation.
Chapter 3
Righteousness in Extra-Biblical Greek
In order to understand the continuities and discontinuities between biblical usage
and standard Greek usage not influenced by biblical revelation, we must form a basic
idea of how SiKaioauvn is used in extra-biblical Greek. In Chapter 4, we will examine the
usage of p"!?S/np"l2 in the Hebrew Bible and SiKaioouvn in the Septuagint. Chapter 3,
then, sets the baseline usage of "righteousness" in comparison with which the distinctives
of biblical usage can be analyzed and hence made more apparent. My claim is that the
Hebraic/relational theory of righteousness operates with a false contrast between Greek
and Hebrew thought. Even extra-biblical Greek recognizes that keeping one's promises is
a subset of "righteousness." Conversely, Hebraic usage is just as judicially stamped by
the concept of iustitia distributiva as extra-biblical Greek, if not more so.
The scope of this chapter is as follows:
First, I am focusing only on extra-biblical Greek, that is, Greek literature that was
composed by non-Jewish and non-Christian authors. Mostly these are Greek and Roman
philosophers, historians, and orators (or speech writers) writing in Attic and Hellenistic
Greek.
Second, the chronological limits are from the first occurrence of the word
SiKaiorjuvn in the 6th century BC down to the 2nd century AD.
115
Third, I have not attempted an exhaustive examination of every occurrence of
SiKaiorjuvn in every secular writer of this time period, as that would make the chapter
unmanageably large. I aim only to provide a representative sampling of the usage of
SiKaioown in extra-biblical Greek that will provide a sufficient baseline for comparison
with its usage in Greek-speaking Judaism.
The primary method for finding occurrences of the word was by querying the full
online database of Greek literature, Thesaurus Linguae Graecae (TLG), an ongoing
project by the University of California, Irvine.1 This yielded 2,184 hits up to (but not
including) the occurrences in the 2nd/3rd century father, Clement of Alexandria. This must
be qualified, however, by noting that many of these hits were duplicates (e.g., multiple
editions of the same work: multiple occurrences of identical fragments scattered
throughout the corpus; etc.). In addition, the total of 2,184 hits includes the Septuagint,
the New Testament, and a number of Jewish and Christian authors. When these are
removed, there are approximately 1,700 instances of the word SiKaioawn in extra-
biblical Greek literature from the 6th century BC to the 2nd century AD - i.e., from
Theognis to Sextus Empiricus.
In addition to searching TLG, I also wanted to see if SiKaiocruvn occurred in the
sub-literary papyri. This proved a more difficult task. Although there were certainly other
papyri that could have been checked, I was able to check only the indices of each volume
of The Oxyrhynchus Papyri, volumes 1 -69 (1898-2005).2 The words SiKaio<;, Sucaicopa,
1
http://www.tlg.uci.edu. The site says: "The Thesaurus Linguae Graecae (TLG) is a research center at the
University of California, Irvine. Founded in 1972 the TLG has collected and digitized most literary texts
written in Greek from Homer to the fall of Byzantium in AD 1453. Its goal is to create a comprehensive
digital library of Greek literature from antiquity to the present era."
" The Oxyrhynchus Papyri, Parts. I-LX1X (various eds.; London: The Egypt Exploration Society, 1898-
2005).
Chapter 3: Righteousness in Extra-Biblical Greek • 117
Siraicoc;, SiKaaxfjc;, SiKaaxfjpiov, and Sua] were found, with SiKaioi; and SIKU occurring
frequently, in practically every volume. But StKatoown itself was found only three times:
twice in the Antiphon fragment (see below) and once in a 5th century AD Byzantine letter
concerning a riot.3 The latter occurrence was too fragmentary and too far outside the
chronological parameters of this study to be useful. My foray into the papyri, though
limited, reinforces Moulton and Milligan's observation that "so far as we have noticed,
this word is rare in the papyri."4
A. Before the Fifth Century BC
The period before the 5 l century BC is shrouded in mystery. Although there are a
handful of occurrences of SiKaiocwn in the period roughly from the 8th through the 6lh
century, they lack textual certainty, are often suspected of being interpolations from a
later time, or are extant only in fragments quoted by later writers.
According to TLG, the very earliest occurrence of the word is once in
Titanomachia (8th to 6th century?) and twice in apothegms attributed to the Seven Sages
(who were said to have lived in the f /6th centuries). However, I will pass over these
occurrences since they are so doubtful and exist only in fragments quoted by later
authors.
The first secure occurrence of the word is to be found in Theognis (6th century
BC), who is attributed with saying:
J
The 5th cent. AD fragment reads: ... ?ux|3(bv 7tapa xfjq ofy; otKato[or>v]r|[cj stepav ... ("... having taken
from your righteousness another ..."). The editors comment that "little consecutive sense can be extracted"
from this part of the papyrus. The Oxyrhynchus Papyri, Part XVI (ed. Bernard P. Grenfell and Arthur S.
Hunt; London: The Egypt Exploration Society, 1924), papyrus 1873.
4
J. H. Moulton and G. Milligan, Vocabulary of the Greek Testament (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1930),
162.
Prefer to live righteously (euoepecov) with a few possessions than to become rich
by the unjust (dSiKcoq) acquisition of money. For injustice there is the sum total
of every excellence (sv Se SiKaioowni auA,A,f]p5r|v Ttac' apsTr) 'an), and every
man who is just (Sucaioc;), Cyrnus, is noble (dya96<;) (Theognis 145-48).5
The classical scholar Eric Havelock argued that the collection of sayings
attributed to Theognis had come to serve as a textbook for students and that the italicized
maxim sounded suspiciously like something from a later philosophical age that had been
interpolated into the collection.6 However, there are several considerations that point to
its authenticity. First, while scholars recognize that not all of the sayings traditionally
collected under the name of Theognis are genuine, they place greater confidence in those
sayings that are addressed to "Cyrnus."7 Second, the proverb itself ("in justice there is the
sum total of every excellence") is well integrated into its immediate context addressed to
Cyrnus. Third, the italicized proverb is quoted by Aristotle as an anonymous, ancient,

th
authoritative saying (Ethica Nicomachea 1129b30). A 12 century AD commentator on
Aristotle (Michael of Ephesus) claims that a fourth century BC successor of Aristotle
(Theophrastus) assigned the saying to both Theognis and Phocylides. Thus, while the
original author of the saying is uncertain, the evidence points to its ancient provenance. It
is interesting that even this early in the usage of SiKaioauvn, it is already understood to
denote justice as a virtue and even as the sum total of all virtue. One would have expected
the earliest occurrences of the word to focus on the judicial use of the term, such as we
find with the earlier terms for justice, Sucr) and TO Sucaiov, which are commonly used in
5
Greek Elegiac Poetry from the Seventh to the Fifth Centuries BC (LCL; ed. and trans. Douglas E. Gerber;
Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1999), 192-95.
6
Eric A. Havelock, "DIKAIOSUNE: An Essay in Greek Intellectual History," Phoenix 23 (1969): 69.
7
Based on this criterion, only 308 of the 1,400 sayings attributed to Theognis can be confidently regarded
as genuine. The Oxford Classical Dictionary (OCD) (3rd cd., ed. Simon Homblower and Antony
Spawforth; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003), 1503.
8
Greek Elegiac Poetry! (LCL), 399 n. 1.
Homer and Hesiod. The judicial aspect of Sucaiocruvr) will, however, become clear in the
fifth century and will continue as a part of its semantic range from that point on.
B. The Fifth Century BC
We next encounter the word SiKaioown with certainty in Herodotus (c. 485-
424)10 who uses it eight times in five passages (it occurs more than once in two of the
passages).11 We will now look at each of these passages in turn.
In the first passage, Herodotus describes a certain Median named Dioces who had
the ambition of gaining kingly power in a time of political and social lawlessness
(Historiae 1.96). So he "began to profess and practice justice more constantly and
zealously than ever" (uaAAov xi Kai 7tpo0DLi6xepov SiKaioauvnv £7ri8s(isvo<; fjaKes). He
commenced by setting up shop as a judge (StKarjxfjc;) who would dispense equal justice
for any who came to him with lawsuits or complaints. A key underpinning of Dioces'
judicial activity was his conviction that "injustice is ever the foe of justice" (xcp SiKaicp xo
dSiKov 7roA,eui6v saxi). With this commitment to rigorous justice, he gained the reputation
in the surrounding villages of being "honest and just" (iQvq xs Kai SiKaioc;), of being a
judge who "alone gave righteous judgments" (dvfip LIOUVOC; raxd xo opOov Sucd^cov), and
eventually was made monarch of the Median kingdom.12 In this context, SiKaioown
means the quality of justice on the part of a judge. Havelock argues that the judicial/royal
context is the original Sitz im Leben of the term in the cultural and linguistic
9
Eric A. Havelock. The Greek Concept of Justice From Its Shadow in Homer to Its Substance in Plato
(Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1978), 123-217.
10
Brill's New Pauly: Encyclopedia of the Ancient World (BNP) (ed. Hubert Cancik, et al.; Leiden: Brill,
2002-), 6.265.
11
Havelock, "DIKAIOSUNE," 50.
12
Translations from Herodotus (LCL: trans. A. D. Godley; London: William Heinemann, 1926), 1.127.
Chapter 3: Righteousness in Extra-Biblical Greek - 120
consciousness of the Greeks and accordingly provides its basic semantic content and
orientation, even though it would later be expanded into other realms, such as the
1^
financial, social, covenantal, and ethical.
The next occurrence of SiKaioauvn in Herodotus arises in his account of an
ancient confederacy of 12 Egyptian kings. There was a time when Egypt was bereft of
monarchy; the land was divided into 12 regions, each governed by a king. The 12 kings
promised to be mutually friendly and not seek to oust any of the others (2.147). These
arrangements are called "laws" (VOLIOI) which clearly have the force of a political
compact, sealed by marriage alliances and the construction of an elaborate memorial. At
this point we come to the key sentence, which one translation renders: "Now as time went
on, the twelve kings, who had kept their compact not to molest one another, met to offer
sacrifice in the temple of Hephaestus."14 The italicized portion could be more literally
translated as "when they had exercised righteousness" (xcov SucbSaKa paciXscov
SiKaioauvn YJDSCOUSVCOV - genitive absolute) (2.151), but the phrase "to exercise
SiKaioauvn" is clearly used in reference to the keeping of a political compact.
This passage provides an important application of the term beyond its original
judicial setting. But it is a fitting application of the term, since it is just to keep a mutual
compact involving multiple parties. However, it must not be assumed that SiKaioauvn
itself means "keeping a compact," for it is the entire collocation xpdoum SiKaioauvn, not
merely the noun SiKaioauvn, which has that meaning. Furthermore, rather than saying
that the collocation itself means keeping a compact, it is more accurate to say that
keeping a compact is here characterized as "exercising righteousness." Other social and

13
Havelock, "D1KA10SUNE," 62.
14
Herodotus, The Histories (trans. Aubrey de Sclincourt; rev. with introduction and notes by A. R. Burn;
London: Penguin, 1972), 190.
political interactions could be characterized the same way, since covenant-keeping is not
the only species of "righteousness." Again, the contextual concept must not be equated
with the lexical concept.
The fact that other social interactions can also be characterized as SiKaioauvn is
borne out by Herodotus himself, who on three occasions in a single context uses the term
with reference to a certain Spartan named Glaucus who had a reputation for "honesty"
(SiKaioauvn) more than all of the other Spartans. The specific context has to do with
honest dealing regarding a 7iapaKaxa6f|Kr|, that is, a deposit of money temporarily
entrusted to the care of another (6.86a). In another context, Herodotus twice uses the
word SiKaioauvn in reference to a certain Cadmos who, because of his outstanding
"justice," freely abdicated his role (inherited from his father) of tyrant of the city of Cos
(7.164), and then, having thus proved his righteousness in the political realm, was
entrusted with an important embassy in the face of the invasion of the Persians from the
east. In both of these contexts, the term is used to describe an outstanding quality
possessed by an individual, a quality that can be translated "justice, righteousness, or
honesty," but which has specific, contextually-variable references fleshing out the
particular form that justice takes in any given situation. These contextual references color
and flesh out the meaning of SiKaioauvn but they are not part of its lexical sense.
The eighth occurrence of SiKaioauvn in Herodotus is significant, and that is why I
have saved it for last. It shows up in the context of the scene where Xerxes and his uncle
Artabanus are reviewing the vast army from a high pinnacle as they prepare to invade and
conquer Europe. Artabanus had previously registered his opposition to Xerxes' desire to
invade Greece, and though he lost that debate, he now warns Xerxes of some of the risks
involved in this massive undertaking. In particular, Artabanus urges Xerxes to be wary of
relying on the Ionians (who had been sent out by the Greeks of the mainland to colonize
the western part of Asia Minor on the Aegean Sea) for military assistance in Xerxes'
attack on the Greeks of mainland Hellas. Artabanus fears that they will be put in the
position of fighting against their own mother country and may end up siding with the
Greeks against the Persians. But Xerxes replies that he is not worried about the Ionians.
He appeals to the Ionians' involvement in an earlier military campaign undertaken by
Darius: "On that occasion, when the Ionians had it in their power to save or destroy the
whole Persian army, they gave proof of justice and faithfulness (Sucaioauvnv Kai
maxoxnxa evsScoKav), and no evil intent" (7.52).15 AiKaioauvn itself does not mean
"faithfulness/loyalty," or Herodotus would not have needed to add maxoxnt;. Yet there is
a close relationship between the two nouns, and I would argue that that relationship is
genus and species. They showed righteousness; specifically, they showed a particular
variety of righteousness, namely, faithfulness or loyalty. This will be significant when we
examine whether SiKaioauvn in the Septuagint means "covenant faithfulness" as Cremer
and those who follow him argue. I would argue that while it can be used to refer to
faithfulness, since faithfulness is a species of righteousness, faithfulness is not part of the
lexical sense of SiKaioauvn.
Thucydides (c. 455-c. 400)16 often speaks of "justice" but he prefers the older
phrase xo SiKaiov. He employs the form SiKaioauvn only once, but it is a significant
passage for our study. The word occurs in the context of the first military hostilities of the
Peloponnesian war, when Thebes (an ally of Sparta) attacked Plataea (an ally of Athens)
15
Combining elements of both the Penguin (Histories, 463) and LCL (3.369) translations.
16
OCD 1516-17.
in 431 BC and eventually defeated it in 427. Thucydides has the Thebans say to the
subdued Plataeans:
According to your own account you became allies and citizens (auuuaxoi Kai
7ioX,ixai) of Athens in your own self-defense. If so, then you should merely have
called them in against us, and not joined them in their attacks on others .... It
would have been disgraceful, you say, to desert your benefactors [the Athenians].
It was a much more disgraceful and wicked thing (dSiKcoxspov) utterly to betray
all the Hellenic states, your allies (oic, ûvcouoaaxs), who were liberating Hellas,
than merely the Athenians, who were enslaving it. Moreover, you did for them
[the Athenians] something very different from what they did for you, and this is
something of which you ought to be ashamed. You, according to your own
account, called in Athens because you were the victims of oppression
(dSiKouLisvoi); you then aided and abetted Athens in oppressing other people (xoic,
dSiKOuaiv aXkovq). Yet to pay back a justly incurred debt by acting unjustly is
more disgraceful than not to pay at all (Kaixoi xac. ouoiac, ^dpixac; uf| dvxiSiSovai
aiaxpov uaAôv fj xac usxd SiKaioauvrjc; psv ocpsfAnGsiaac, sc dSuciav
17
5s a7ro8i5o|J,svac;) (Hist. 3.63).
The debt in this case is that the Plataeans felt obligated to side with the Athenians against
the Peloponnesian League (led by Sparta and including Thebes) because the Athenians
defended them against the past aggression of Thebes. But the Thebans reply that, while
the previous debt or obligation itself may have been incurred "justly" (usxd SiKaioauvnc),
it would have been better to not pay back the debt at all, than to pay it back by
committing injustice against others, in this case by joining Athens in what the
Peloponnesian League regards as its attempt to enslave all of Hellas. The phrase pxxd
SiKaioauvnc. ("with justice" or "justly") stands in contrast to sc [= sic] dSuciav ("to
injustice" or "unjustly"). From the perspective of the Thebans, the debt of the Plataeans
to the Athenians was incurred justly but repaid unjustly (because they joined in the
Athenian oppression and attempted enslavement of all Hellas).
' Thucydides, History of the Peloponnesian War (trans. Rex Warner; introduction and notes by M. I.
Finley; London: Penguin, 1972), 232 (I have changed "just debt" to "justly incurred debt").
Now, in the immediate context, both the Thebans and the Plataeans in their
speeches use covenantal language in describing their moral obligations and alliances. The
Plataeans, in their earlier speech to the Thebans, stand as suppliants at their fathers'
tombs and summon up "the solemn oaths" which the Thebans' fathers also "swore"
(opKOUc. ouc oi Tiaxspsc uucov copoaav), pleading with them not to forget their fathers'
oaths (3.59). The Thebans, for their part, accuse the Plataeans of betraying "all the
Greeks with whom you swore to be confederates" (xoucrcdvxac"EAAnvac... oic
ûvcopocaxs) (3.63), claiming that they "left that alliance (ûvcopoaia) and violated its
terms" (3.64). "Who, then, more than you [Plataeans]," the Thebans rhetorically ask,
"are more justly hated by all the Hellenes?" (xiveq dv ouv upcov Sucaioxspov 7idai xoic,
"EAAnai uiaoivxo) (3.64).
The significance of this is that words from the AIK-group, even in extra-biblical
Greek, can be used with reference to covenantal relationships, even though the words
themselves do not have covenantal relationships as part of their lexical sense. For the
Greeks, as for the Hebrews, it is just to keep one's oaths and alliances, and unjust to
violate them. But it does not follow that SiKaioauvn itself means keeping one's oaths and
covenants, since the term is broader and can be applied to other activities such as judging
or paying back deposits. As I argued in Chapter 2 (on methodology), discourse concepts
must not be confused with the lexical concepts.
Before concluding our survey of the 5th century, I want to quote from two sophists
of this period. The definition of SiKaioauvn by Antiphon the sophist (active in Athens in
the second half of the 5th century)18 is preserved in one of the Oxyrhynchus Papyri. He
wrote:
Justice, then, is not to transgress that which is the law of the city in which one is a
citizen (Auca[ioa]uvr| [raxjvxa xfjc. jto[A,sco]c A'ouiLia [sv] fj dv 7ioî[xEu]nxai xic; uf]
[7iap]aPaivsiv). A man therefore can best conduct himself in harmony with justice
(SiKaioauvn), if when in the company of witnesses he upholds the laws, and when
alone without witnesses he upholds the edicts of nature. For the edicts of the laws
are imposed artificially, but those of nature are compulsory.19
Here we see one of the older definitions of SiKaioauvn as "observing the law," whether
the laws of a given polis, which in Antiphon's view are artificial and based on
convention, or the law of nature, which is compulsory. In any case, the notion that
SiKaioauvn arises from observance of the law is a common motif in extra-biblical Greek
literature, and it is one that will be appropriated in Greco-Jewish literature, although "the
law" in view will no longer be the political laws of the state but the divinely revealed
Mosaic Law.
On a different note, another 5th-cenrury sophist, Thrasymachus, said: "The gods
do not see human affairs; otherwise they would not have overlooked the greatest of all
blessings among mankind, Justice (ou ydp xo Lisyiaxov xcov sv dv9pco7toic, dyaBcov
7rapsiSov xr|v SiKaioauvuv) - for we see mankind not using this virtue." This skeptical
|v
Scholars debate whether this Antiphon is the same as Antiphon the orator (c. 480^111).
'" The Oxyrhynchus Papyri, Part XI (ed. Bernard P. Grenfell and Arthur S. Hunt; London: The Egypt
Exploration Fund, 1915), papyrus 1364. Fragment 87.44 in H. Diels and W. Kranz, Die Fragmente der
Vorsokratiker (Diels-Kranz) (2 vols.; 5th ed.; Berlin: Weidmann, 1952). Kathleen Freeman, Ancilla to the
Pre-Socratic Philosophers: A Complete Translation of the Fragments in Diels, Fragmente der
Vorsokratiker (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1957), 147.
20
Paul recognizes the Jewish doctrine that 5iKatocnvr| comes from observing the Mosaic Law: "For it is
not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but the doers of the law will be deemed righteous"
(Rom 2:13); "Israel pursued a law that would lead to righteousness" (Rom 9:31); "Moses writes about the
righteousness that is based on the law" (Rom 10:5); "As to righteousness in the law, blameless" (Phil 3:6).
However, in view of the Christ-event, he rejects this method of attaining righteousness: "If righteousness
were through the law, then Christ died for no purpose" (Gal 2:21); "... not having a righteousness of my
own that comes from the law, but that which comes tlirough faith in Christ, the righteousness from God that
depends on faith" (Phil 3:9).
21
Fragment 85.8 in Diels-Kranz; Freeman, Ancilla, 142.
Chapter 3. Righteousness in Extra-Biblical Greek 126
view is consistent with Plato's characterization of Thrasymachus in The Republic, where
Thrasymachus is presented as arguing for the position that "justice is nothing other than
the advantage of the stronger" (Respublica 338c). However, the significance of this
quotation lies not in its skepticism but in the implication that the conventional wisdom
(here rejected by Thrasymachus) was that justice among humans was a blessing bestowed
by the gods. This is another motif that we will have occasion to observe as we continue
our study.
C. The Fourth Century BC
Isocrates (436-338)22 is considered one of the great Athenian speech-writers. He
employs SiKaioauvn more than 40 times in his various extant speeches, and almost
always as one of the chief virtues along with courage, wisdom, and self-control, although
he frequently couples self-control and righteousness without mentioning the other two.
One interesting feature of Isocrates' usage is that on a few occasions he takes the
traditional linkage of "piety" and "righteousness," applying the former to the gods and
the latter toward other humans. For example, in praising Athens as the greatest and best
of the Greek city-states, he claims that the Athenians "at all times had practiced reverence
in relation to the gods and justice in relation to mankind" (d7tavxa xov yjpbvov fiaicnKOxac.
suaspsiav usv 7ispi xouq Osouq SiKaioauvnv 5s 7ispi xouc, dv9pcb7toug) (Panathenaicus
[=Oration 12] §§124, 204; cp. Nicocles [=Oration 3] §2).23 However, this should not be
taken too strictly, as if righteousness has no relationship to the gods, for elsewhere
Isocrates says that "justice is more beloved by the gods than injustice" (9so<piA,eaxspov
22
BNP 6.979.
23
Isocrates (LCL; trans. George Norlin; London: William Heinemann, 1929), 2.449.
xfjv SiKaioauvnv xfjc, dSudac) (De pace [=Oration 8] §35).24 Yet, on the whole, the phrase
"piety and righteousness" is a comprehensive description of the ideal moral life, for
"those who live a life of piety and justice pass their days in security for the present and
have sweeter hopes for all eternity" (xouc 8s u£i' suas(3siac Kai Sucaiocuvnc; ^covxac sv xs
xoic; Tcapouarv xpovoic; daq>aX,coc Sidyovxac. Kai 7tspi xou auLmavxoc aicovoc fjSiouc xac
sA,7ii8ac sxovxac) (Depace [=Oration 8] §34).25
Xenophon (c. 430-354) has an interesting passage in his Cyropaedia that sheds
light on our word. The context is a long dialogue between Cyrus (still a youth) and his
father about how to be a good general, how to get one's soldiers to be willingly obedient,
and other military matters. At one point the young Cyrus asks his father the best way to
gain an advantage over an enemy. Cyrus's father responds that a man who would gain an
advantage over the enemy must be "the most righteous and law-abiding man in the
world" (SiKaioxaxoq xs Kai vouiucbxaxoc dvip) (Cyropaedia 1.6.27). 7 The young Cyrus
is surprised at this and asks why, then, was he taught to be the opposite, that is, why was
he taught how to throw a spear and to use deceit and trickery to capture animals, and so
forth? His father explains that he was instructed to deceive and to take advantage when
hunting beasts, so that, if there should ever be a war, he would be prepared to treat his
enemies this way (1.6.29). Cyrus's father goes on to explain:
It is said that in the time of our forefathers there was once a teacher of the boys
who, it seems, used to teach them justice (SiKaioauvn) in the very way that you
propose; to lie and not to lie, to cheat and not to cheat, to slander and not to
slander, to take and not to take unfair advantage (UT] \|/su5sc9ai Kai \|/su5sa9ai,
Kai uf| scâ7iaxdv Kai sârtaxav, Kai uf| SiapdAAsiv Kai SiapdAAsiv, Kai LIT]
7IA,SOVSKXSIV Kai 7rXsovsKxsTv). And he drew the line between what one should do
24
Translation mine.
25
Isocrates (LCL), 2.29.
26
OCD 1628.
21
Xenophon (LCL; trans. Walter Miller; Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1983), 5.115.
to one's friends and what to one's enemies. And what is more, he used to teach
this: that it was right (SiKaioc) to deceive friends even, provided it were for a good
end, and to steal the possessions of a friend for a good purpose. (1.6.31)i8
However, the practice backfired and the boys began to treat even their friends unjustly.
So a law was passed that boys must be taught "to tell the truth and not to deceive and not
to take unfair advantage" (dA,n9eusiv Kai uf] sâTtaxav Kai uf| JXXSOVSKXSTV) (1.6.33), and
only when they had become adults was it permitted to teach them the arts of deception
and injustice, which were to be employed only against their enemies. "For it does not
seem likely that you would break away and degenerate into savages after you had been
brought up together in mutual respect" (1.6.34).30 Cyrus's father explains how a general
can take advantage of the enemy by using the element of surprise, coming upon the
enemy when he is unarmed or asleep, and so on. The point is that SiKaioauvn is here
understood as upright behavior toward one's friends, consisting of such things as telling
the truth and not deceiving them, not slandering them, and not cheating or taking unfair
advantage of them. Such behavior, however, is perfectly acceptable when dealing with
one's enemies and would not be considered dSiKia.
Plato (428/7-348/7)31 uses our word approximately 265 times. This is not
surprising, given that the Socratic quest for the nature of "justice" is a significant theme
that arises often in the Platonic corpus. Indeed, Plato's greatest work, The Republic,
begins with a search for the definition of "justice," a search that leads him, through many
digressions, to the clearest statement of his whole philosophy. Plato represents Socrates
as arguing that "justice" can be viewed in the macrocosm (i.e., in the city-state) or in the
2%
Xenophon (LCL), 5.117.
29
m
31
BNP 11.338.
microcosm (i.e., in the individual person or soul), and that the nature of "justice" in the
city-state enables us to better comprehend the nature of "justice" at the individual level,
since it is easier to reason from the larger to the smaller (Respublica 369a; 434d-435a).
Now after much dialectical back-and-forth with various interlocutors, Plato has Socrates
ultimately define SiKaioauvn as a virtue of the soul (dpsxfi M/uxfjc) (353e) in which its
three parts - the rational part (xo XoyiaxiKOv), the spirited part (xo 9uu.osi5sc), and the
appetitive part (TO S7XI9ULITIXIK6V) - are in perfect order and harmony under the control
and direction of the rational part, thus enabling the just man to live in a just and virtuous
manner (443 d-e).
However, Plato's philosophical definition presupposes such a specific analysis of
the psychological make-up of the human soul, that it is not directly relevant to our
purpose, namely, determining the lexical content of the word SiKaioauvn. Certainly we
would not want to engage in "totality transfer" and equate Plato's philosophical definition
with the lexical sense of the word. After all, not all Greek-speakers were schooled in
Platonic philosophy, and many who were did not agree with it. C. H. Dodd rightly says
that Plato's profound philosophical treatment of SiKaioauvn "had little effect upon
current usage of the term."33 For this reason, the non-philosophical definitions floated in
the earlier parts of The Republic, only to be cast aside in favor of Socrates' philosophical
definition, are actually more relevant from a lexical point of view, because it is with them
that we get some indications of the mental concepts that would be triggered by the word
in the mind of the ordinary Greek.
32
See Aristotle's friendly disagreements with the ethical theories of Socrates and Plato in Ethica
Nicomachica 1096al 1-18; 1144b 17-20; etc. Not to mention the many passages where Aristotle differs with
them on other topics such as rhetoric and poetry.
33
C. H. Dodd. The Bible and the Greeks (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1935), 43.
Chapter 3. Righteousness m Extra-Biblical Greek 130
In the early stages of dialogue in The Republic, SiKaioauvn is defined as "to speak
the truth and to pay back any debt one may have contracted" (331c). Justice is fleshed
out with more specific types of actions: to refrain from stealing other people's property;
to refrain from having sexual relations with just anyone one wants; to refrain from killing
just anyone (360b-c); to offer the proper sacrifices and not neglect the gods (362c; 443a);
to keep one's oaths (363d; 443a); to not embezzle a deposit of money that has been
entrusted to one; to have nothing to do with temple robberies, thefts, betrayals, and
adultery; and to respect one's parents (443a). By appealing to the poet Simonides, the
concept is made more abstract: "It is just to give to each what is owed to him" (xo xd
ocpsvlousva SKdaxcp dftoSiSovai Sucaiov saxi) (33 le). Though Socrates ultimately thinks
this is inadequate as a definition, since it is based on common opinion and supported by
the authority of the poets, it nevertheless serves as a heuristic first attempt on the path to a
more formal, abstract definition.
Demosthenes (3S4-322),35 the greatest of the Attic orators, has a passage in one
of his lawcourt speeches on the traditional topos of the relationship between the laws and
righteousness. He states that "obedience to the existing laws [of the city] is the greatest
good" (xo xoic KSIUSVOIC, vopoic, 7isi9sa9ai TJMKOV dya96v saxiv), for the laws "produce
works of wisdom, self-control, and righteousness" (xd xfjc; (ppovf|ascocj Kai acocppoauvnc;
Kai Sucaioauvnq spya Siaupaxxopsvout;) (In Aristogitonem 2 §25). The notion that the
Plato's Republic (trans. G. M. A. Grube; Indianapolis: Hackett, 1974), 5.

35
OCD 456.
36
Translations mine. In context: "The surest way to realize the blessing oj obedience to the established
laws, and the curse of despising and disobeying them, is to put before your eyes and examine separately the
advantages that you derive from the laws and the results of lawlessness. For you will find that the fruits of
lawlessness arc madness, intemperance and greed, but from the laws come wisdom, sobriety and justice."
Demosthenes (LCL; trans. J. H. Vince; Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1935), 3.593.
laws of the polls are able to effectuate virtue and morality among the citizenry is a
common motif in Greek literature.
Aristotle (384-322)37 uses the term SiKaioauvn hundreds of times in his various
treatises. For our purposes, the most important passage is Book 5 of his Nicomachean
Ethics (E.N.), which is devoted entirely to "Justice and Injustice" (SiKaioauvn Kai
dSiKia). Aristotle begins his investigation of the topic by pointing out that the terms
SiKaioauvn and dSiKia are equivocal, that is, they are both commonly used in two distinct
but related senses (E.N. 1129a24-30). These two senses Aristotle terms "universal"
(Tiapd TT\V 6A,nv) and "particular" (sv uspsi) justice and injustice (1130a34-l 130b7).
Universal justice he defines as "perfect Virtue, though with a qualification, namely that it
is displayed towards others" (auxn iisv ouv fj SiKaioauvn dpsxf] p,sv saxi xsA,sia, oXX' oi>x
cnzk&q aXka npbq sxspov) (1129b25).38 It is to support this point that Aristotle quotes the
saying ascribed to either Theognis or Phocylides that we examined above ("Injustice
there is the sum total of every excellence [or virtue]") (1129b30). Aristotle adds, "Justice
in this sense is not then a part of Virtue, but the whole of Virtue" (auxn p,sv ouv r\
in
SiKaioauvn ou Lispoc; dpsxfjq dXl' 6Xn dpsxr) saxiv) (1130a9-10). Universal justice can
also be defined as that which is lawful (vouipoc) (1129a34), since "all lawful things are
just in one sense of the word" (ndvxa xd vouipd saxt 7tcoc Sucaia) (1129b 12). Now
particular justice and injustice are species of universal justice and injustice, and they have
to do with fairness or unfairness in the distribution of honor, wealth, and other assets of
the community (1130b30—34). Occasions where justice and injustice in the particular
37
OCD165.
38
Aristotle, Vol. XIX: The Nicomachean Ethics (LCL; trans. H. Rackham; Cambridge: Harvard University
Press, 1934), 259.
39
Aristotle, Vol. XIX (LCL), 261.
40
sense can arise are any number of social transactions, whether voluntary (such as selling,
buying, lending, depositing [7tapaKaxa0f|Kn],41 letting for hire) or involuntary (such as
theft, adultery, poisoning, procuring, enticement of slaves, assassination, false witness,
assault, imprisonment, murder, robbery with violence, maiming, abusive language, and so
on) (1131al-9). Justice in the particular sense Aristotle defines as "the proportionate" (xo
dvdôyov) and injustice in the particular sense is "that which violates proportion" (xo
Jtapd xo dvaXoyov) (1131bl7-18). 42 For example, injustice usually consists in taking
more than one's fair and rightful share of some good, whether it be stealing someone's
property, not returning a deposit to its rightful owner, damaging someone's reputation by
bearing false witness, or sleeping with someone else's wife. When an injustice is
committed, people generally resort to judges who implement "corrective justice" (xo
SiopOcoxiKOv [or STiavopOcoxiKov] Sucaiov), and the judge's task is to undo the damage by
imposing a penalty and restoring equality or proportionality (1131b25-l 132a25).
Later in the chapter on justice Aristotle has an interesting comment that is highly
relevant to the Cremer theory. Aristotle writes: "There seems to be some room for justice
(xi Sucaiov) in the relations of every human being with every other that is capable of
participating in law and contract (vopou Kai auv9fJKnc) (1161b6-7)." 3 This is relevant
because it shows that even in "Greek thought" the relational element of righteousness
was understood, and so it is simply incorrect to pit the "Greek" conception of
righteousness against the "Hebraic" conception. There is much greater continuity than
Cremer and his followers would have us believe.
41
Cp. Herodotus, llistoriae 6.86a (discussed above).
42
Aristotle. Vol. XIX (LCL). 273.
43
Finally, before leaving Aristotle, it is worth pointing out that he offers another
definition in his Ars Rhetorica that is complementary to the discussion above: "Justice is
a virtue by which all, individually, have what is due to them and as the law requires"
(saxi Ss SiKaioauvn psv dpsxfi Si' fjv xd auxcov SKaaxot sxouai, Kai coc, 6 vopoc)
(1366b).44 Again, the law is the arbiter of what rightly belongs to each person, and hence
the arbiter of justice itself.
D. Third to First Centuries BC
Ariston of Chios (fl. c. 250),45 a Stoic philosopher and student of Zeno, argued
that there is only one virtue, which is then applied in different situations. "When it
considers what we must do or avoid, it is called prudence (cppovnaic); when it controls
our desires ... it is called temperance (acocppoauvn); when it has to do with men's
relations to one another and their commercial dealings, it is called justice" (Koivcovf|Liaai
Ss Kai auuPoA.aioic, 6p.iXouaa xoic 7ipoc sxspouc; SiKaioauvn) (as reported by Plutarch, De
virtute morali 440F^141 A).46
Chrysippus (c. 280-207),47 the prolific systematizer of Stoic orthodoxy, is said to
have written a treatise titled nspi AiKaioouvnc;.48 According to a fragment, he had this to
say about SiKaioauvn: "It is not possible to discover any other beginning of justice or any
source for it other than that from Zeus and from universal nature" (ou ydp saxiv supsrv
ET: Aristotle, On Rhetoric: A Theory of Civic Discourse (trans. George Kennedy; Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 1991), 80.
45
S/VP 1.1120.
46
Plutarch's Moralia (LCL; trans. W. C. Helmbold; Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1939), 6.21.
Fragment 375 in Hans F. A. von Arnim, Stoicorum Veterum Fragmenta (4 vols.; Lipsiae: Teubner, 1903-
1924), 1.86.
47
OCD 329.
48
Arnim, Stoicorum Veterum Fragmenta, 4.195.
xfjc Sucaioouvnc; akhr\v dpxnv ouS' akhr\v ysvsaiv f\ xr\v SK XOV AIOC Kai xf|v SK xfjc;
Kotvfjc; cpucscoc) (quoted by Plutarch in De Stoicorum repugnantiis 1035C).
Polybius (before 199 - c. 120 BC)50 was a Greek historian who sought to explain
how Rome grew from a small city-state to the dominant world power in the
Mediterranean. In his attempt to explain the origins of morality, he argues that sympathy
is the key, for when humans observe someone being mistreated by another, they "will
notice the thing and be displeased at what is going on, looking to the future and reflecting
that they may all meet with the same treatment (auAXoyiô|isvouc, oxi xo 7r.apa7iA,f]aiov
SKdaxoic; auxcov cuyKupf|asi) .... From all this there arises in everyone a notion of the
meaning and theory of duty, which is the beginning and end of justice" (sc^ cov UTcoyivsxai
xic swoia Trap' SKdaxcp xfjc xou Ka0f|KOVXOC, Suvdpscoc, Kai Oscopiac- ojcsp saxiv dpxr) Kai
xsAxx; SiKaioauvnc) (Historiae 6.6.5-7).51 In other words, the concept of justice as a moral
standard of interpersonal relationships is rooted in the basic law, "do unto others as you
would have them do to you."
Diodorus Siculus (fl. c. 50 - c. 30 BC) was an important historian who wrote
during the turbulent closing decades of the Roman Republic. In the preface to his
massive history of the world from its mythic beginnings down to 60 BC, he describes
the moral benefits of the study of history. He argues that the study of history serves to
promote good character, "for it is ever to be seen urging men to justice, denouncing those
who are evil, lauding the good (opdaOai yap auxfjv 7cpoxps7copsvnv S7ii SiKaioauvnv,
49
Plutarch 's Moralia (LCL; trans. Harold Cherniss; Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1976),
13/2.433. Fragment 326 in vol. 3 of Arnim, Stoicorum Veterum Fragmenta, 3.80.
50
BNP 11.496.
51
Polybius: The Histories (LCL; W. R. Paton; Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1954), 3.279-81.
52
OCD 472.
33
Originally the Bibliotheca historica of Diodorus comprised 40 books, but only 15 of them have survived
in full. OCD 472.
raxnyopouaav xcov cpauXcov, syKcouidôuaav xouc dyaOouc), laying up, in a word, for its
readers a mighty store of experience" (Bibliotheca historica 1.2.8).M It would seem that
SiKaioauvn here is practically equivalent to moral goodness in its most generic sense. In
the same vein, there are several passages where Diodorus uses the traditional phrase
suasPsia Kai SiKaioauvn ("piety and righteousness") to comprehensively cover both the
god-ward and the man-ward dimensions of moral probity (e.g., 1.2.2; 1.92.5; etc.),
although the distinction must not be pressed too far, since piety and righteousness are
interwoven and inseparable in the Greek tradition from Plato onward.55
Diodorus also retains the ancient original usage of SiKaioauvn in reference to
royal and/or legal justice. He reports that the Egyptian kings "exercised justice toward
their subjects" (xpcopsvcov xcov PaaiA.scov SiKaioauvn Ttpoc xouc rmoxExayusvouc)
(1.71.4),56 thus securing the goodwill and affection of the people. Diodorus notes the
mythical story that Zeus surpassed all the other sons of Cronus in possessing the attribute
of SiKaioauvn and therefore was the first to establish the court of justice (SiKaaxfpiov)
where people could settle their differences (5.71.1). He then turns to the mythic king
Rhadamanthys, who was appointed judge (8iKaaxf|c) in Hades to separate the good from
the wicked "because of his very great justice" (Sid xfjv U7tspPoAxrv xfjc Ttspi auxov
SiKaioauvnc) (5.79.2). "And the same honour has also been attained by Minos, because
Diodorus of Sicily (LCL; trans. C. H. Oldfather; Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1960), 1.13
,5
Plato: "1 would say that justice is pious, and that piety is just" (tnv SiKaiocruvnv ociov etvat Kai Tf|v
6ai6xr|Ta 8iKatov) (Protagoras 331b). Offering sacrifices to the gods is part of SiKaiocuvn, (Plato, Republic
331b; 362c). Arius Didymus: "Holiness falls under justice toward the gods" (TLG #1202, cp. #1216) (trans,
mine). Andronicus Rhodius: "Is piety a part of SiKaioouvn or does it follow? Holiness and truth and
faithfulness and hatred of evil follow 5iKcaocr6vr|" (TLG #1236) (trans, mine). "Justice too has been
introduced because of the connexion of men with one another and with the Gods" (f) SiKaioauvn. Kara xr\v
87ii7rA,oKf]v xcov avOpdmaw 7tpoc TE aAAf]A.ouc; Kai 7tpoc; Osouc; EiofJKxat) (Sextus Empiricus, Adversus
mathematicos 9.126).
56
Translation mine.
Chapter 3: Righteousness in Extra-Biblical Greek • 136
he ruled wholly in accordance with law and paid the greatest heed to justice"
(pspaaiXsuKoxa vouiucbxaxa Kai \xakioxa SiKaioauvnc JiscppovxiKoxa) (ibid.).57
Dionysius of Halicarnassus (born c. 60 BC)58 was another chronicler of Roman
history in the first century BC. He tells us that he came to Rome after Augustus put an
end to the civil war (c. 30/29 BC). There he wrote and worked for several decades,
publishing the first part of his history 22 years after arriving in Rome (c. 8/7 BC)
(Antiquitates Romanae 1.7.2).5
Many of the occurrences of SiKaioauvn in Dionysius arise in the context of his
discussion of the various laws enacted by the early Roman kings. For example, he reports
that Romulus, co-founder of the city of Rome and its first king, enacted laws "with
respect to reverence and dutifulness [lit. righteousness] of children toward their parents,
to the end that they should honour and obey them in all things" (a sic aiSco Kai
SiKaioauvnv 7iai5cov, iva asPcoai xouc; 7taxspat; ajiavxa) (Antiquitates Romanae 2.26.1).
The laws established by the legendary second king of Rome, Pompilius Numa
(who reigned 715-673 BC, at least according to tradition),61 tended to inspire self-control
or moderation (acocppoauvn) in the individual citizen's personal life and "to create a
passion for justice, which preserves the harmony of the State" (sic s7ti9uLiiav
Kaxaafjaavxa xfjc (puA,axxouanc sv ouovoia xfjv 7i6?av SiKaioauvnc) (2.74.1).1 The two
virtues, acocppoauvn and SiKaioauvn, are viewed here as connected, for if each citizen
exercises moderation in the goods that he desires and takes, then this will lead to greater
Diodorus of Sicily (LCL), 3.313.

BNP 4.480.
OCD 478; BNP 4.480.
Dionysius of Halicarnassus (LCL; trans. Earnest Cary; London: William Heinemann, 1948), 1.387.
OCD 1217.
Dionysius of Halicarnassus (LCL), 1.531.
Chapter 3: Righteousness in Extra-Bibhcal Greek 137
justice (each person taking only what belongs to him and not defrauding others), and
thence to overall civic harmony. Here is another example of the common motif that the
laws of the polis are thought to be effectual in shaping the ethical quality of society by
promoting virtue, a thought that Dionysius states twice, at the beginning and end of this
section (cp. 2.74.1 with 2.75.4).
Dionysius then goes on to describe the legal enactments set up by Numa to
promote acocppoauvn and SiKaioauvn. The first virtue, acocppoauvn, was promoted by the
establishment of boundary stones (opia or termines) marking off the property of each
citizen, with the boundary stones dedicated to Jupiter Terminalis and confirmed by an
annual festival called Terminalia (2.74.2-5). Next, "in order to encourage the observance
of SiKaioauvn in the matters of contracts (Ttspi xd aupPoXaia)" (2.75.1), Numa enjoined
that all contracts must be sealed by taking an oath to the goddess "Faith" (Tliaxic), to
whom he also erected a temple (2.75.2). By this means, Numa sought to promote an
"attitude of good faith and constancy" (rfioq 7iiaxov Kai PsPaiov), since the citizens were
thus taught to believe that good faith (xo 7iiax6v) was a "revered and inviolable thing"
(asPaaxov xi Ttpaypa Kai duiavxov) and that "the greatest oath a man could take was by
his own faith" (opKov uiyiaxov ysvsaOai xr\v iSiav SKaaxcp 7riaxiv) (2.7S.3).63 This was
the means that Numa used to promote SiKaioauvn in the city of Rome. Faithfulness in
contracts, sealed with an oath, is thus viewed as included under the virtue of
SiKaioauvn.
Dionysius of Halicarnassus (LCL), 1.535-37.

64
Plutarch relates the same story about Numa's building temples to Faith and Terminus. "Numa reasoned
that the god of boundaries was a guardian of peace and witness of just dealing" (eipnvr|c; (pulaKa Kai
8iKatoouvn,c paprnv) (Numa 16.1). Plutarch's Lives (LCL; trans. Bernadotte Perin; London: William
Heinemann,1914), 1.363.
The sixth Roman king, Servius Tullius (who reigned 578-535 BC according to
tradition),65 is represented by Dionysius as giving a lengthy speech to the people of Rome
in which he says that he is "determined to make the government fair and impartial and
justice the same for all and towards all" (ianv Kai Koivf]v 7ioisiv xfiv 7ioA,ixsiav Kai xd
SiKaia 7iaai Jipoc aTtavxac. ouoia), specifically by making the rich and the poor, the
powerful and the weak, equal in the eyes of the law. Accordingly, he promises to
"establish such laws as shall prevent violence and preserve justice" (vououc; Orjaouai
KcoX-uxdc usv xfjc piac, cpuXaKac Ss xfjc; SiKaioauvnc) (4.9.9). Here is a classic usage of
SiKaioauvn as tantamount to equality and fairness in the administration of the law.
The last example from Dionysius that I will cite is found in the passage dealing
with the rule of the first set of Decemvirs in the city of Rome (451-50 BC), the authors of
the famous Ten Tables of Roman law (later augmented to Twelve).67 Dionysius states
that the city was well governed under their rule. As an illustration of this, he relates that
the Decemvirs "sat from early morning arbitrating cases involving private and public
contracts in which complaints might arise between citizens ... examining each case with
complete fairness and justice" (e£ scoOivou KaOsôusvoi Sifixcov xd iSicoxucd auppoXaia
Kai xd Snuoaia ... pxxa 7idanc dvaaKOTiouvxsc sKaaxa E7nsiKsiac xs Kai SiKaioauvnc;)
(10.57.2).68
5
OCD 1558.
6
Dionysius of Halicarnassus (LCL). 2.299.
7
OCD 435.
Dionysius of Halicarnassus (LCL), 6.357.
E. First to Second Centuries AD
Dio Chrysostom (also known as Dion Cocceianus of Prusa) (c. AD 40 - after AD
112)69 was a Greek rhetorician and moralist who wrote many orations, of which 80 have
come down to us. Dio makes frequent reference to SiKaioauvn, but we can look at only a
handful of representative quotes. Like his contemporaries, Dio frequently uses the term as
one of the traditional four virtues (courage, self-control, wisdom, and righteousness),
although sometimes only two or three of the four are listed.70 Dio also uses it in keeping
with Aristotle's notion that SiKaioauvn can refer to virtue as a whole. For example, he
states that people admire virtuous men, considering their virtuous qualities to be god-like,
and thus they are ready to appoint a virtuous man as their king, "any man whom they
suppose to be really prudent and righteous and wise and, in a word, a good man" (6v dv
ccb(ppova Kai Sucaiov Kai cppoviLiov ovxcoc UTioâLiPdvcoai Kai d7rlcoc dvSpa dyaOov)
(69.1).71
Dio also uses the term in a more traditional context with reference to the king's
duty of providing justice for his people. He says that "the pre-eminently kingly virtues
are two - courage and justice" (Suo xdc PaaiA,iKcoxdxoc dpsxdc xfjv xs dvSpsiav Kai
Sucaioauvnv) (2.54)72 - kingly, not in the sense that the virtues themselves reign, but in
the sense that these are the qualities that befit the "successful and exemplary king." In
another discourse, he speaks of "the good ruler" (6 dyaOoc; dpxcov) as one who is not
covetous, who is sparing in his pleasures, cherishing the laws, and who "is more just than
any other man inasmuch as he provides justice for all" (SiKaioxspoc; xcov aXXxav saxiv, dxs
6
" BNP 4.466.
70
Dio Chrysostom speaks of dvSpsia Kai SiKaioouvn, Kai cppovnaic; Kai auAAf|[3§r|v dpeifrv 7iaaav (69.1),
acoeppoowr) Kai dvopsia Kai oiKatoouvr] (13.32), dvSpsia Kai SiKaioauvn, (2.54), and so on.
71
Dio Chrysostom (LCL; trans. H. Lamar Crosby; London: William Heinemann, 1951), 5.139.
72
Dio Chrysostom (LCL; trans. J. W. Cohoon; London: William Heinemann, 1932), 1.85.
7idai Tiapsxcov xfjv SiKaioauvnv) (62.3).73 Finally, he says that the law is full of
righteousness and benevolence (SiKaioauvnc Kai (piXav8pco7riac LISCXOC), because it
provides justice for the victims of injustice (75.5-6).
Plutarch (before AD 50 - after AD 120)74 uses SiKaioauvn more than any other
author treated in this chapter, displaying the full semantic range and the various contexts
in which this word can be used in extra-biblical Greek. In many ways, Plutarch is a
microcosm of Greek thought and his writings alone could be sampled to provide a well-
rounded lexical survey of this Greek word. Plutarch's usage is in step with that of extra-
biblical Greek usage in general. Given Plutarch's interests as a biographer and a moralist,
he speaks frequently of SiKiaoauvn as a virtue - e.g., saying of Aristides (a prominent
Athenian politician and commander during the Persian wars)75 that "of all his virtues, it
was his justice that most impressed the multitude" (7iaacov Ss xcov jxspi auxov dpsxcov fj
SiKaioauvn pdA-icxa xoic TtoAloic aiaOnaiv 7iapsTvs), and for which he earned the epithet
"the Just" (6 Aucaioc) (Aristides 6.1).76 But "righteousness" is not only a quality that one
possesses; it is also something that is exercised and thus can be used to refer to concrete
actions. Thus, when Romulus carried off the 800 Sabine women to provide wives for the
men of Rome, he showed "by the subsequent honour, love, and righteous treatment given
to these women" (xfj psxd xauxa xiufj Kai dya7ifiasi Kai SiKaioauvn xfj Ttspi xdc yuvaiKac)
that it was not an act of violence but an honorable deed intended to promote political
partnership (Comparatio Thesei et Romuli 6.2).77 The fact that the word SiKaioauvn is
Dio Chrysostom (LCL), 5.27.

4
OCD 1200.
5
BNP \.\Q94.
6
Plutarch's Lives (LCL; trans. Bemadottc Perrin; London: William Heinemann, 1914), 2.229.
7
Plutarch's Lives (LCL), 1.197
here translated "righteous treatment" is significant, since it shows that it can be used to
refer not only to the abstract virtue but also to concrete actions of righteousness.
Plutarch also uses the traditional topos that the laws of a given polis can be judged
by how well they promote virtue. He reports that some view the city of Sparta as
excelling more in the virtue of dvSpsia (courage, valor, manliness) than in that of
SiKaioauvn, since they consider the laws of Lycurgus (the legendary vopoGsxnc of
Sparta)78 to be "efficacious in producing valour, but defective in producing
righteousness" (iKavooc sxouai Tipoc dvSpsiav, svSscos; Ss Tipoc; SiKaioauvnv) (Lycurgus
28.1).79
Plutarch has another passage in which he recounts the famous meeting between
the philosopher Plato and Dion of Syracuse.80 The topic of discussion during the meeting
was "human virtue," specifically the virtue of dvSpsia. Plato maintained the paradoxical
position that "tyrants least of all men had this quality" and then, "treating of justice,
maintained that the life of the just was blessed, while that of the unjust was wretched"
(xpajcousvoc 7ispi SiKaioauvnc; sSiSaaKsv coc uaKapioc |iisv 6 xcov Sucaicov, aQXioq Ss 6
xcov dSkcov pioc;) (Dion 5.1).81 Note that the noun (SiKaioauvn) and the two adjectives
(StKaioc, aSiKoc) are inter-related, and how easily Plutarch can shift from one to the
other. But more important is the thought that those who live righteously are blessed
(LiaKdpioc), whereas those who live lives characterized by injustice are wretched
(aQXioq). This is no doubt understood in characteristically Platonic terms, since the
'* BNP 7.932.

79
Plutarch's Lives (LCL), 1.289.
so
BNP 4.465-66. Dion was a close friend of Plato and even made a failed attempt to transform Syracuse
into a city-state along the lines of the Platonic ideal.
81
Plutarch's Lives (LCL), 6.11.
blessedness and wretchedness in view are purely internal qualities of the soul
independent of the presence or absence of physical pleasure.
I found two passages in Plutarch in which the gods themselves are said to possess
SiKaioauvn or to be the font of SiKaioauvn among humans.
In the first passage, he writes that people generally have three feelings toward
divinity (xo OsTov): they envy the gods because they are immortal; they fear the gods
because of their power; but they "love and honour and revere them for their justice"
(dyaTtdv Ss Kai xiudv Kai asPsaGai Kaxd xf|V SiKaioauvnv). Ironically, however, humans
most eagerly desire the two qualities that are least within reach - immortality (of which
our nature is simply not capable) and power (which is bestowed by fortune). "While as
for virtue, the only divine excellence within our reach, they put it at the bottom of the list,
unwisely too, since a life passed in power and great fortune and authority needs justice to
make it divine" (coc; xov sv Suvdusi Kai xuxn ii£ydA,n Kai dpxf) Piov f\ jasv SiKaioauvn TCOIST
Osiov) (Aristides 6.3).82 Justice is a divine quality, both in the sense that it is an attribute
of the gods, and in the sense that when found among humans it partakes of that godlike
character.
The second passage is in Plutarch's discussion of whether there are other gods
and other worlds besides our own. He argues that it is more consistent with reason to
suppose "that the world should not be the only-begotten of God and quite alone" (xo xcp
Oscp uf| uovoysvfj pnS' spnpov sivai xov Koauov). Why? Because God, being perfectly
good, is not lacking in any of the virtues, including the social virtues of justice and
friendliness. And since God does not possess anything for no purpose, we must assume
the existence of other gods and other worlds in relation to which He exercises these social
82
Plutarch's Lives (LCL), 2.229-31.
virtues. "For not in relation with Himself nor with any part of Himself is there any
exercise of justice or benevolence or kindness, but only in relation with others" (ou ydp
Tipoc; auxov ouSs uspoc; auxou Xpf\ciq saxi SiKaioauvnc; fj xdpixog fj xP"no"i6xnxoc; dA.A,d
Tipoc; aXXovq) (De defectu oraculorum 423D).
Epictetus (c. AD 50 - c. 125)84 was a moral philosopher, a freedman who studied
under the Stoic philosopher Musonius Rufus. Epictetus uses the word a handful of times,
and in most cases it appears as Aristotle's "universal justice," that is, as the equivalent of
all virtue. We do not have anything written by Epictetus himself, but his student Arrian
collected notebooks of his teachings and discourses. In these notes, Epictetus bitterly
attacks the Epicurean philosophers, who teach "that the gods do not exist, and even if
they do, they pay no attention to men" (oxi Bsoi oiix' siaiv, si xs Kai siaiv, OUK
srciu.sA,ouvxai dvOpcimcov), and who from this starting point go on to argue that "this piety
and sanctity (xo x' suasPsc; xouxo Kai oaiov) which the multitude talk about is a lie told
by imposters and sophists, or, I swear, by legislators (vopoGexai) to frighten and restrain
evildoers" and "how righteousness is nothing" (TCCOC; f| SiKaioauvn ouSsv saxiv)
(Dissertationes ab Arriano digestae 2.23-25). With evident sarcasm Epictetus retorts,
"Well done, philosopher!"85 As the consummate moralist passionate for righteousness,
Epictetus is appalled by the moral license implicit in Epicurean thought. His argument is
clear: if one teaches that the gods do not exist, or that they have no concern for humans,
the logical implication for ethics is that there is no need to live a holy and righteous life.
In another passage, Epictetus laments those who say they are better than others on
the basis of flimsy arguments such as "my father has consular rank" or "I have been a
83
Plutarch's Moralia (LCL; trans. Frank Cole Babbitt; Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1936). 5.423.
M
BNP 4.1069.
85
Epictetus: Discourses (LCL; trans. W. A. Oldfather; London: William Heinemann, 1925), 1.369.
tribune." Making such appeals is like claiming that your horse is superior merely because
it has plenty of fodder or pretty neck-trappings. The relevant question is not its fodder or
adornment, but how fast it can run. Epictetus then asks: "Is there, then, nothing in man
like running in the case of the horse, whereby the worse and the better will be
recognized? Isn't there such a thing as reverence, faith, justice (aiScbc;, Ttiaxic;,
SiKaioauvn)? Prove yourself superior in these points, in order to be superior as a human
being" (Dissertationes 3.14.11-13).86 This is not the usual quartet of Greco-Roman
virtues, but it is nonetheless clear that SiKaioauvn here is being used in the broad sense of
moral virtue and uprightness. Interestingly, "faith" (or "faithfulness") is also mentioned
alongside "righteousness," a collocation which as we have seen is not uncommon in
extra-biblical Greek literature.
Appian (c. AD 90/95-160),87 in his Roman history, recounts the case where one
Tigranes, king of Armenia, was caught in the war between Parthia and Rome, led by the
great general Pompey. Appian writes that "Pompey's reputation among the barbarians for
justice and good faith was so great (usya SiKaioauvnc; Kai Triaxscoc; K^SOC rjv xou
noLiTtniou Ttapa xoic, PapPdpoic.)" that Tigranes decided to surrender to Pompey and
come to him as a suppliant (Mithridatica 15.104). Once again we see that "good faith" is
a species of "justice," but the part should not be equated with the whole.
Sextus Empiricus (fl. toward end of 2nd cent.),88 the skeptic philosopher, writes:
"Furthermore, if justice too has been introduced because of the connexion of men with
one another and with the Gods, if Gods exist not, neither will justice subsist (Kai uf|v
siTtsp Kai f) SiKaioauvn Kara xfjv STr.iTrA,OKf|v xcov dvOpcoTicov Tipoc; xs aXkr\kovq Kai Tipoc;
*6 Epictetus (LCL), 2.99.

87
BNP 1.897.
88
OCD 1398.
Osouc, siafJKxai, si uf| siai 0soi, ouSs SiKaioauvn auaxfjasxai)." He later repeats the
argument using slightly different language: "So that, if justice is conceived because of a
certain fellowship between men and men and between men and Gods, if Gods do not
exist, it must follow that justice also is non-existent. But justice is existent; we must
declare, therefore, that Gods also exist" (Adversus mathematicos 9.126, 131).
F. Conclusions
What conclusions can we draw about the semantic range of SiKaioauvn in extra-
biblical Greek?
The first thing we need to observe is a simple grammatical point, namely, that the
term SiKaioauvn is merely the abstract noun built from the adjective SiKaioc;. As
Westerholm argues, SiKaioauvn simply means "dikaios-ness."y0 We saw this above in
many passages where the writer moves from the adjective to the noun, or vice versa, with
perfect ease. Even the ancient Greek grammarians recognized this. For example,
Philoxenus pointed out that just as unroauvn is formed from the word ITTTCOC;, SO
SiKaioauvn is formed from SiKaioc; (Philoxenus; TLG #1240). This means it is unlikely
that we will find any radically new meanings for SiKiaoouvn that are not rooted in the
word SiKaioc;.
Second, the history of the AIK-group in extra-biblical Greek is hard to trace since
our sources before the fifth century BC are fragmentary. Nevertheless, because the word
SiKaioauvn is rarely used prior to the fifth century, whereas the words Sucn and xo
Sucaiov predominate in this earlier period, it is reasonable to assume that the origin of
89
Sextus Empiricus (LCL; trans. R. G. Bury; Cambridge: Harvard University Press. 1936), 3.69, 71.
90
Stephen Westerholm, Perspectives Old and New on Paul: The "Lutheran " Paul and His Critics (Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, 2004), 262-73.
SiKaioauvn lies in the realm of judicial procedure, picking up on the older terminology
but rising to a higher level of abstraction. Havelock writes:
In view of the common legal context of the two terms [dike and dikaion] from
Homer onwards we need not be surprised if dikaiosune at its first appearance in
extant Greek literature denotes the quality resident in a judge who (following
Homeric models) is also a prince, the repository of political power built on legal
authority and designed to enforce it.91
In our sample of texts above, we saw this original judicial Sitz im Leben of the term in the
following texts: Herodotus, Historiae 1.96 (the story of Dioces); 7.164 (the story of
Cadmus); Didorus Siculus, Bibliotheca historica 1.71.4; 5.71.11; 5.79.2; Dionysius of
Halicarnassus, Antiquitates Romanae 2.74.1; 4.9.9; 10.57.2; Plutarch, Aristides 6.1
(Aristides the Just); Dio Chrysostom 2.54; 62.3. In many of these passages, the verb
Xpdoum is used in the phrase, "to exercise justice." Additionally. SiKaioauvn when used
in these legal/political/judicial contexts can mean both the abstract concept of "justice"
and a particular instance of "just treatment."
Third, apparently building from the judicial context, SiKaioauvn comes to refer to
all sorts of upright behavior in the social realm, whereas their opposites are called dSiKia.
See Herodotus. Historiae 6.86a (honesty with regard to deposits of money); Xenophon,
Cyropaedia 1.6.27-34 (righteousness is not lying, cheating, slandering, taking unfair
advantage, or stealing from one's friends); Plato, Respublica 331c, 360b-c, 362c, 443a
(justice means not stealing, committing adultery, killing, embezzling deposits, robbing
temples, failing to honor the gods, disrespecting parents); Aristotle, E.N. 1131 al-9
(justice is the opposite of theft, adultery, imprisonment, murder, robbery with violence,
maiming, abusive speech); Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Ant. Rom. 2.26.1 (children
91
Havelock, "DIKAIOSUNE," 62. As we noted earlier, Havelock dismisses the Theognis quote as a later
interpolation, so he thinks 5iKcuocr6vr| makes its first appearance in extant Greek literature in Herodotus,
Historiae 1.96 (the account of Dioces).
respecting their parents is righteousness); Plutarch, Comp. Thesei et Romuli 6.2 (which
speaks of righteous treatment of women). It is not suiprising, then, that Aristotle views
righteousness as a virtue that is "displayed towards others" (Tipoc; sxspov) (E.N.
1129b25), and that Plutarch calls it one of the "social virtues" (ai KoivcoviKai apsxai) (De
defectu oraculorum 423D). This is also why Polybius, when attempting to explain the
origins of morality, can say that when we see other people being mistreated, we reflect on
the possibility that the same thing might happen to ourselves. Desiring to avoid becoming
the object of such mistreatment in the future, we adopt the rule that we ought not to
mistreat others ourselves. "From all this there arises in everyone a notion of the meaning
and theory of duty, which is the beginning and end of justice" (Polybius, Historiae 6.6.5-
7).
Fourth, many (but not all) of these social relationships are formalized as promises,
oaths, contracts, covenants, treaties, and so on. Thus, one finds frequent references to
"the observance of SiKaioauvn in matters of contracts" (Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Ant.
Rom. 2.75.1). Ariston of Chios even defines justice as virtue when applied to "men's
relations to one another and their commercial dealings" (fragment 375). Thus,
faithfulness or loyalty (Ttiaxoxuc;) comes to be regarded as a species of SiKaioauvn. We
have seen this in the following quotations: Herodotus, Historiae 2.151 (the 12 Egyptian
kings who kept their compact); 7.52 (the loyalty of the Ionians); Thucydides, Hist. 3.63
(the debate between the Plataeans and the Thebans); Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Ant.
Rom. 2.74-75 (Numa's temples to the goddess Faith and to Jupiter Terminalis) (cp.
Plutarch, Numa 16.1); Appian, Mithridatica 15.104 (Pompey's reputation for justice and
good faith); Epictetus, Dissertationes 3.14.11-13 (where Tciaxic; is listed alongside

SiKaioauvn as a general virtue). As noted above, however, while faithfulness can be
identified as SiKaioauvn, SiKaioauvn cannot be identified as faithfulness. Additionally,
the fact that the Greek language outside of the sphere of Hebrew or Jewish influence
knows that faithfulness is a subcategory within righteousness ought to be a warning
against those who, like Cremer, want to argue that the concept of covenant faithfulness is
a unique Hebraic meaning discontinuous with Greek thought.
Fifth, in some of the above philosophical discussions, SiKaioauvn is defined as
iustitia distributiva. Plato quotes Simonides's definition, "It is just to give to each what is
owed to him" (Resp. 33 le). And Aristotle, with whom the distributive aspect of justice is
most closely identified, argues that justice is "the proportionate" (E.N. 113 lb 17-18)
distribution of the goods of the community, whether they be material or immaterial (such
as honor). And in another place he defines justice as "a virtue by which all, individually,
have what is due to them and as the law requires" (Ars Rhet. 1366b). However, it is
misleading to equate this philosophical definition with the meaning that SiKaioauvn itself
had "for the Greeks,"93 for as we have seen, the word is capable of being used in a
multitude of senses and contexts. In fact, as we have seen, Aristotle himself begins his
treatment of justice (Book 5 of the Nicomachean Ethics) by distinguishing between
justice in the broad or universal sense (in which it is equivalent to virtue as a whole) and
Supporting my thesis that "Greek" and "Hebrew" conceptions of "righteousness" are not substantially
different, Mark Seifrid observes with regard to biblical Hebrew usage that "all 'covenant-keeping' is
righteous behavior, but not all righteous behavior is 'covenant-keeping.'" "Righteousness Language in the
Hebrew Scriptures and Early Judaism," in Justification and Variegated Nomism, Vol. 1: The Complexities
of Second Temple Judaism (WUNT 11/140; ed. D. A. Carson, Peter T. O'Brien, and Mark A. Seifrid;
Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck/Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2001), 424.
9j
For example, Stuhlmacher claims that "righteousness is for the Greeks always a relational concept, but
not the indicator of a personal relationship, but an objectively defined existence of a norm to be kept and
practiced," followed by the oft-quoted philosophical definitions of Aristotle and Plato. Peter Stuhlmacher,
Gerechtigkeit Gottes bei Paulus (FRLANT 87; 2nd ed.; Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1966), 103
(trans, mine). Since most Greeks were not philosophically trained, philosophical definitions must not be
equated with lexical analyses; at best, philosophical definitions comprise only one slice of the total
semantic range of the word.
justice in the narrow or particular sense (which is his particular concern and the focal
point of the distributive definition).
Sixth, the previous point now brings us to the next major usage of SiKaioauvn,
namely, as equivalent to virtue in general. We have already seen the statement of
Theognis, quoted by Aristotle and perhaps to be attributed to Phocylides, that "in
SiKaioauvn there is the sum total of every excellence or virtue." On numerous occasions,
we have seen that SiKaioauvn is used to refer to "morality" or "goodness" in the broadest
sense, sometimes including "piety toward the gods" and sometimes distinguished from it.
For example: Isocrates, Panathenaicus §§124, 204; Aristotle, E.N. 1130a9-10 ("Justice in
this sense is not then a part of Virtue, but the whole of Virtue"); Diodorus Siculus,
Bibliotheca historica 1.2.8 (the study of history urges men to justice); Dio Chrysostom
69.1 ("really prudent and righteous and wise and, in a word, a good man"); Plutarch
(passim); Epictetus, Diss. 2.23-25 (in his argument against the Epicureans).
Finally, let it be noted that there are several minor motifs that will be picked up by
the Greco-Jewish authors, such as the following: (1) righteousness can be defined as
observing the law (the Antiphon fragment; Aristotle, E.N. 1129a34; 1129b 12); (2) the
primary function of the laws is to promote righteousness (Demosthenes, In Aristogitonem
2, §25; Dio Chrysostom 75.5-6; and Plutarch, Lycurgus 28.1); (3) righteousness as a
human virtue is divine and in fact comes from the gods (the Thrasymachus fragment; the
Chrysippus fragment; Plutarch, Aristides 6.3; De defectu oraculorum 423D; and the
Sextus Empiricus, Adv. mathematicos 9.126, 131); and (4) there are both temporal and
eternal rewards from the gods for those who are righteous (Isocrates, Depace §§34-35;
Plutarch, Dion 5.1).

Chapter 4
Righteousness in the Old Testament
In this chapter, I examine the validity of Cremer's relational theory with respect to
the Old Testament data. In other words, I will test whether p"125/njp"12S in the Hebrew
Old Testament and SiKaioauvn in the Septuagint do in fact have a fundamentally
relational meaning as Cremer claimed.
In framing the question with reference to the Old Testament in both its Hebrew
original and its Greek translation(s), I am intentionally making a methodological move
that requires further explanation. I begin with the assumption that the Hebrew text (in all
its variety - pre-Masoretic, Masoretic, Dead Sea Scrolls, etc.) and the Septuagint (where
it represents translations of the Tanak) are fundamentally congruent at both the lexical
and theological level. This is not to deny or overlook the large number of deviations
between the Masoretic Text and the Septuagint. But these must not be allowed to eclipse
the significant degree of convergence. In their overall theological thrust, there is ultimate
harmony between the Hebrew and the Greek witnesses to the text of the Old Testament.
This is because most of the translated books that comprise the Septuagint were
fundamentally conservative translations. Anneli Aejmelaeus states that "a comprehensive
presentation of the religious and theological content of the Septuagint... would actually
150
Chapter 4. Righteousness in the Old Testament 151
be for the most part identical with a theology of the [Hebrew] Old Testament."1 This
fundamental congruence between the Hebrew and the Greek is what leads me to discuss
simultaneously the meaning of p"!?S/njp~T25 in the Hebrew Old Testament and that of
SiKaioauvn in the Septuagint. My concern is that the Hebrew be interpreted in light of the
Greek and the Greek in light of the Hebrew, since these two textual traditions are like two
pillars that stand united in bearing witness to the theology of the Old Testament. J. Ross
Wagner formulates this concern in a negative form: "It would be wrong to assume that
'the Septuagint' represents an alternative tradition disconnected from - and, indeed, in
competition with - the Hebrew Scriptures."
I begin by providing some overall statistics and semantic range of the two words
for "righteousness" in Hebrew and the one word used to translate them both in the Greek
Old Testament. I will not examine every occurrence of these terms in the Old Testament,
but I hope to provide a useful overview that will shed light on the semantic range of these
words. After the preliminary overviews I then proceed to evaluate the arguments in
support of Cremer's relational theory, both as originally made by Cremer and as
developed by those who followed him. These arguments will, I believe, prove in the final
analysis to be unconvincing and the data easily explained in other ways. Finally, I
conclude with more detailed exegesis of some of the Old Testament passages that speak
of the righteousness of God in some fashion.
1
Anneli Aejmelaeus, "Von Sprache zur Theologie: Methodologie Uberlegungen zur Theologie der
Septuaginta," in The Septuagint and Messianism (ed. M. A. Knibb; BETL 195; Leuven: Leuven University
Press, 2006), 23. As quoted and translated by J. Ross Wagner, "The Septuagint and the 'Search for the
Christian Bible,'" in Scripture's Doctrine and Theology's Bible: How the New Testament Shapes Christian
Dogmatics (ed. Markus Bockmuehl and Alan J. Torrance; Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2008), 21.
2
Wagner, "The Septuagint and the 'Search for the Christian Bible,*" 19.
A. p l ^ / n j p n ? in the Hebrew Old Testament
The p i s root occurs 523 timesJ in the Hebrew Old Testament, including the
adjective (206 times), the two nouns together (276 times), and the verb in its various
forms (41 times). The masculine noun p~I2 occurs 119 times, and the feminine form
np~J2£ occurs 157 times; the combined total is 276. These statistics are summarized in
Table 1.
Table 1. Occurrences of the p"T2J root in the

Hebrew Bible4
Part of speech Hebrew Word n
Adjective 206
pns
Noun (masculine) p-12 119
Noun (feminine)
•n? 157
Verb 41
p"j?
Total 523
(n = number of occurrences)
Although the adjective and the verb will be mentioned at various points, the focus
of this dissertation is on the two nouns. To ease our way into the discussion, I begin by
analyzing the subtle differences between the two nouns. Some scholars treat the two
terms p"12 (masculine) and Hp"]2J (feminine) as interchangeable, seeing little or no
distinction whatsoever between them.5 However, it is more accurate to say that, while the
rationale for the choice of one word over the other is sometimes difficult to discern and
may be motivated by little more than poetic or stylistic concerns, nevertheless the terms
have distinct shades of meaning that become evident in certain contexts. To the extent
3
TDOT 12.243.
4
Data from Abraham Even-Shoshan, A New Concordance of the Bible (Jerusalem: Kiryat Sefer, 1990).
5
J. J. Scullion, "Righteousness (OT)" ABD 5.725; Wilfred G. E. Watson, "Gender-Matched Synonymous
Parallelism in the OT," JBL 99 (1980): 335; Karl H. Fahlgren, "Sedaka, nahestehende und
entgegengesetzte Begriffe im Alten Testament" (Th.D. Dissertation; Uppsala University, 1932).
Chapter 4: Righteousness in the Old Testament - 153
that a distinction is discernible, the masculine form tends to be more abstract or generic
("justice, righteousness"), whereas the feminine is used more often with reference to
discrete acts of righteousness; this may explain why only the feminine occurs in the
plural (nlp"]^). 6 In addition to the fact that only the feminine occurs in the plural, there
are two additional syntactical features that set the masculine apart. Only the masculine is
used as an adjectival genitive, e.g., "righteous judgment" (p~!25~EDS5pi? / Kpiaig SiKaia)
(Deut 16:18), and as an adverbial accusative, e.g., "judge righteously (p~!2s~12SvP / Kpivs
SiKaicog)" (Prov 31:9).8 These unique syntactical features of the masculine support the
view that it has a more abstract meaning and that the feminine tends to be used in
reference to specific acts of righteousness or justice. Thus only the feminine is used as the
direct object of the verb "to do" (TWV), a locution typically translated "to
execute/administer justice." In these cases it is usually joined with DS£?!2 which has the
connotation of a verdict or judgment in reference to a specific case. For example: "And
David administered [lit. was doing] justice and righteousness (np"12J!l CDS^P 7WV "TTI
T H / Kai rjv AauiS 7ioicov Kpipa Kai SiKaioauvnv) for all his people" (2 Sam 8:15
'' HALOT 1004-5; TDOT 12.256-7; A. Jepsen, "p"JS und ?nj?"l im Alten Testament," in Gottes Wort und
Gottes Land (YS H.-W. Hertzberg; ed. H. Graf Reventlow; Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1965),
78-89; H. H. Schmid. Gerechtigkeit als Weltordnung: Hintergrund und Geschichte des alttestamentliche
Gerechtigkeitsbegriffs (BHT 40; Tubingen: Mohr Siebcck, 1968), 179; Diethelm Michel, Grundlegung
einer hebraischen Syntax (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener, 1977), 1.66; Bo Johnson, "Die
Bedeutungsuntershied zwischen sdddq und sedaqa," ASTI11 (1977-78): 31-39.
7
One possible instance of the feminine noun functioning as an adjectival genitive is Jer 33:15: "Behold, the
days are coming, declares the LORD, when I will raise up for David a righteous Branch (np"J2S nDS)"
(ESV). But the BHS text-critical apparatus indicates textual uncertainty here, noting that the parallel
passage in Jer 23:5 uses the adjective (p,rT25 ffl3X).
8
On the syntax of Hebrew nouns used as adjectival genitives and adverbial accusatives, see 1BHS §§9.5.3;
10.2.2.
NASB). Thus a distinction, while perhaps subtle at times, is discernible between the
masculine and feminine forms, a fact that warrants analyzing them separately.
Many scholars have attempted to analyze the semantic range of these two nouns,
and the results can be seen in any of the available Hebrew lexica and theological
dictionaries, e.g., BDB, HALOT, TDOT, etc., and also in other more focused studies, the
most notable of which is John Ziesler's analysis.9 However, having examined each of
these previous analyses for myself and having found them lacking, I here present the
fruits of my own contextual examination of all 276 occurrences of p~|25 and i"lp"J22 in the
Hebrew Bible.
Table 2. Categories of Usage for p"]^/np"]SJ with Statistics10

PI? ^"3? Total %
I. Legal righteousness 49 74 123 44.6
Judging, ruling, executing justice 15 12 27 9.8
Human judges or kings as subject 10 9 19 6.9
God as subject 5 3 8 2.9
Justice 19 19 38 13.8
Human (including messianic) justice 9 9 18 6.5
Divine justice 10 10 20 7.2
Righteousness of God ("my. his. your") 7 34 41 14.9
Vindication 5 4 9 3.3
Clothed with righteousness 3 2 5 1.8
Rights - 3 3 1.1
11. Ethical righteousness 41 73 114 41.3
General 12 43 55 19.9
With verbs of doing 3 15 18 6.5
Righteous laws/word 10 - 10 3.6
Gates, paths, cities, etc., of righteousness 7 - 7 2.5
Righteousness before God 9 14 23 8.3
Honesty - 1 1 0.4
III. Correctness 21 5 26 9.4
Speaking righteousness, telling the truth 6 4 10 3.6
Just balances, weights 10 - 10 3.6
Doing something correctly 5 1 6 2.2
IV. Difficult cases 8 5 13 4.7
Total 119 157 276 100
9
John A. Ziesler, 77ze Meaning of Righteousness in Paul: A Linguistic and Theological Enquiry (SNTSMS
20; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1972), 17-51.
10
See Appendix exhaustively showing all occurrences in context and categorized by usage.
Table 2 shows the semantic range of both nouns, separated into categories and
sub-categories of usage. The semantic range of usages can be divided into three main
groups, with a fourth group reserved for cases that are difficult to assign due to the
exegetical problems associated with their usage in context. The three main headings are
"legal righteousness," "ethical righteousness," and "correctness."
The category "legal righteousness" pertains to the realm of the judicial court,
whether it is a human king or judge, a Messianic figure, or God himself who is depicted
as judging, administering justice, executing judgment, or vindicating someone who has
been falsely accused or oppressed. This is the most common usage (44.6%). Here are two
examples illustrating this first category of usage, showing that the category applies to
both human and divine judicial activity:
Lev 19:15
"You shall not be partial to the poor or defer to the great, but in righteousness
shall you judge (CDSEJri p"!?23 / sv SiKaioauvn Kpivsic;) your neighbor" (ESV).
Ps 96:13 [95:13LXX]
"He will judge the world in righteousness ( p ~ S 3 / sv SiKaioauvn), and the
peoples in his faithfulness (injflOKS / ev xfj dA.n0sia auxou)" (ESV).
Arguably, the references to God "judging in righteousness" or "executing justice"
(Ps 9:4, 8 [9:5, 9 MT ' LXX ] ; 98:9 [97:9LXX]; 99:4 [98:4LXXJ; 103:6 [102:6LXX]; Jer 9:24
[9:23 M1 ,LXX]; ^ ^ ^ Q ^ p r o v jd e me kernel sentence that, as transformational grammar would
suggest, is grammaticalized as a genitive pronoun referring to the righteousness of God
("my, his, your righteousness"). Although these genitives are not always to be construed
as subjective genitives, it is reasonable to assume that "the righteousness of God" is
simply another way of saying that God judges in righteousness or that he executes
righteousness/justice. For this reason, I have included all references to "the righteousness
of God" ("my, his, your righteousness") as a sub-category under "legal righteousness."
As will be borne out in the analysis below, there are no cases where "the righteousness of
God" cannot be interpreted as in some way related to "legal righteousness" within a
judicial context in which God is figuratively seated on his throne as the great Judge who
executes justice by punishing the wicked and vindicating his people. Even the cases
where "the righteousness of God" is used in a positive, saving sense (Cremer's iustitia
salutifera) can be explained in this manner. The kernel sentence that lies behind the
phrases referring to the saving/delivering righteousness of God is made explicit in Psalm
103: "The LORD works righteousness and justice for all who are oppressed ( nip"12S TWV
Wpm-b^ D^BStfl?5) rnn;)" (Ps 103:6 ESV). This verse is highly instructive for two
reasons: first, "righteousness" is used along with "justice," which shows that the forensic
context is very much to the fore; second, both words are in the plural, literally "righteous
acts" (nip*]SS) and "judgments" (D^COEUpP), locutions that draw attention to the acts of
God the Judge in rendering judicial verdicts in favor of the oppressed, thus securing
deliverance from their oppressors.
The law-court imagery here is clear. There are three parties in the legal conflict
or controversy (3"H): (1) the opponent at law (avxiSiKoc;),12 often referred to as "the
" N . T . Wright rightly acknowledges that the Hebrew law-court imagery is the metaphorical context of
God's righteousness in both the OT and NT. What Saint Paul Really Said, 96-99. However, he ties the law-
court imagery too closely to the Abrahamic covenant, and in fact makes the covenant the primary category
for interpreting the righteousness language. As a result, the law-court imagery moves into the background
and, in his view, is merely there to provide "particular colour" to the covenant imagery. "The law court is
the metaphorical context which gives particular colour to that covenantal language" (p. 99). In this way, the
forensic character of God's righteousness is muted and the phrase ultimately becomes a cipher for God's
faithfulness to his covenant. Once the overpowering covenant motif is removed from Wright's
construction, much of what he says about the Hebrew law court is helpful and valid.
12
See Schrenk, "dvriSiKoc;," TDNT 1.373-5. Sometimes the term can be used neutrally to refer without
prejudice to the plaintiff or the defendant.
wicked," "the enemy," and "the oppressor"; (2) the godly one, who is being pursued and
oppressed by the opponent, and who is referred to by epithets such as "the poor," "the
needy," and "the humble"; (3) the judge, whose duty is to bring about justice by
rendering a verdict against the opponent at law and in favor of the one being oppressed, a
verdict that amounts to the vindication and deliverance of the oppressed. In his analysis
of major Hebrew poems, J. P. Fokkelman calls this "the triangle enemies-God-I" that so
frequently informs not only the conflictual context but even the strophic structure of the
Psalms. lj Many concrete examples of this can be seen in both the Old Testament and the
New. In the Old Testament, the Torah makes provision forjudges to hear cases and
disputes that may arise among the Israelites. Note the language of judging "between a
man and his brother" (the classic Z}"H scenario) and the adverbial use of p"T?S to modify
the verb "judge":
Deut 1:12-17
12
"'How can I bear by myself the weight and burden of you and your strife (or
your disputes, NIV) (DD3"1"! / xaq dvxiXoyiac uprov)? Choose for your tribes
wise, understanding, and experienced men, and I will appoint them as your
heads.' 14 And you answered me, 'The thing that you have spoken is good for us
to do.' 15 So I took the heads of your tribes, wise and experienced men, and set
them as heads over you, commanders of thousands, commanders of hundreds,
commanders of fifties, commanders of tens, and officers, throughout your tribes.
16
And I charged your judges at that time, 'Hear the cases between your brothers
(DD',nK~|',2 S?b2? / AuxKouexs dvd peaov xcov aSeAxpcbv upcov), and judge
righteously between a man and his brother or the alien who is with him ( DriCDBEh
1"l3 j'Q 1 ' T,DK~'p5!) ^",^~'P5 p"!-£ /KOt^ Kpivaxe SiKaicoc; dva psaov dvSpoi; Kai
dva p.saov dSstapou Kai dva psaov 7rpoanA,uxou auxou). 17 You shall not be partial
13
"In this poem [Ps 143], too, the triangle enemies-God-I is explored. Subject changes and the presence or
absence of characters arc useful criteria for the demarcation of strophes." J. P. Fokkelman, Major Poems of
the Hebrew Bible: At the Interface of Prosody and Structural Analysis (SSN; Assen: Royal Van Gorcum,
2003), 3.318.
in judgment. You shall hear the small and the great alike. You shall not be
intimidated by anyone, for the judgment is God's'" (ESV).14
In the New Testament, we have Jesus' parable of the persistent widow (Luke
18:1-8). This passage, in addition to using Kpixfjc; (2x), repeatedly employs judicial
language derived from the AIK-root, such as SKSIKECO (2x), SKSuenaic; (2x), dvxiSiKO<;
(lx), and dSiKia (lx):
And he told them a parable to the effect that they ought always to pray and not
lose heart. He said, "In a certain city there was a judge (Kpvtf|;;) who neither
feared God nor respected man. And there was a widow in that city who kept
coming to him and saying, 'Give me justice against my adversary (sKSknaov pe
d7io xou dvxiSiKOu pou).' 4 For a while he refused, but afterward he said to
himself, 'Though I neither fear God nor respect man, yet because this widow
keeps bothering me, I will give her justice (sK5iKf|aco auxfjv), so that she will not
beat me down by her continual coming.'" And the Lord said, "Hear what the
unrighteous judge (6 Kpixfjc xfjc; dSiKiac;) says. 7 And will not God give justice to
his elect (6 Ss Bsoc; ou uf| jiotrjau xfjv eKSiKnaiv xcov SKISKXOOV auxou), who cry to
him day and night? Will he delay long over them? I tell you, he will give justice
to them (7toif|asi xf|v SKSiKnaiv auxcov) speedily. Nevertheless, when the Son of
Man comes, will he find faith on earth?" (ESV).13
This parable not only illustrates the social reality of those who are in need
appealing to human judges for redress, but also highlights the divine reality that is
analogically related to the human. In its original purpose, Jesus told this parable "to the
effect that they ought always to pray and not lose heart." The indifferent human judge
and the divine Judge stand in an analogical relationship, though without implying
indifference on God's part. If the poor widow cried out to the unjust judge for justice, and
14
Compare Moses' statement in the parallel passage in Exodus: "When they have a dispute ("IST /
dvTtAoyia). it comes to me, and I judge between a man and his neighbor OHS}"] },5!! &$ 1^5 "TIDSE? /
Sioxpivco sicaatov) and make known the statutes of God and His laws'" (Exod 18:16 NASB). Sec also Deut
17:8-13 which dictates that homicide cases, or "any case within your towns that is too difficult for you," be
referred to the priests at the central shrine.
15
Cp. the following saying of Jesus which presupposes the same OT legal controversy setting: "Make
friends quickly with your opponent at law (avxidiKocJ while you are with him on the way. so that your
opponent (avitSucoc;) may not hand you over to the judge (Kpvxfjg), and the judge (icpn;f|cj to the officer, and
you be thrown into prison" (Matt 5:25 j| Luke 12:58 NASB). Satan is also called "your adversary
(av"ri5tKoc;), the devil" (1 Pet 5:8).
he eventually did respond to act in her defense, how much more (a fortiori) will God the
righteous Judge respond and not delay in giving justice to his elect who cry to him day
and night. The cries of the elect for justice in this parable are given voice in the OT
psalms of lament in which the godly cry out to God to deliver them from their enemies
"in his righteousness" (e.g., Pss 31:1; 143:1, ll) 1 6 and in the NT apocalyptic cry of the
martyrs under the heavenly altar asking God how long until he avenges their blood on
their opponents who killed them because of their testimony to Jesus (Rev 6:10).
In the OT, the duty of giving justice to the oppressed, the poor, the widow, and
the needy, fell particularly to the king. There are many passages that make this clear and,
again, they often employ judicial language of the court, including "righteous," "judge,"
"judgment," "justice," etc.:
Psalm 72:1-4
1
"Give the king your justice (^CDSEJp / xo Kpipa aou), O God,
and your righteousness C?|rip"12J / T1 l v SiKaioauvnv aou) to the royal son!
May he judge your people with righteousness,
(p"lS? "^V l"1"!^ / Kpivsiv xov X,aov aou ev SiKaioauvn)
and your poor with justice!
(tDBffi'pn TJ',:!?5?J / Kai xouc; 7r.xco%ouc; aou sv Kpiasi)
Let the mountains bear prosperity for the people,
and the hills, in righteousness!
4
May he defend the cause of the poor of the people,
(DS?-,,*2S? CD5H2T / Kpivei xouc; nxoiypxrq xou Xaou)
give deliverance to the children of the needy,
(ji"OX "'JD? V^V I Kai acbast xouc; irioucj xcov 7isvfixcov)
and crush the oppressor!" (ESV)
16
"One also catches hints of indifferent judges who need to be roused even to hear a case (Lk 18:2-6); this
situation is implied by the psalms of lament in which the speakers address God as a judge who needs to be
roused to action." "Judgment," The Dictionary of Biblical Imagery (ed. Leland Ryken, James C. Wright,
and Tremper Longman III; Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1998), 470.
Proverbs 29:14
"If a king faithfully judges (HOK5 tDSlt^ / EV dXnGsia Kpivovxoq) the poor, his
throne will be established forever" (ESV), or "with fairness" (NIV), "with truth"
(NASB).
Proverbs 31:4-5
"It is not for kings, O Lemuel, it is not for kings to drink wine, or for rulers to take
strong drink, lest they drink and forget what has been decreed and pervert the
rights (]""! I 6p0d Kpivai) of all the afflicted" (ESV).
Proverbs 31:8-9
"Open your mouth for the mute, for the rights ("p"! 7^ / Kpivs) of all who are
destitute. Open your mouth, judge righteously (p"12~CDD^ / Kpivs SiKaicocj),
defend the rights (|*"T / SidKpivs) of the poor and needy" (ESV).
Jer 22:3 - spoken to the "king of Judah, who sits on the throne of David":
"Thus says the LORD: Do justice and righteousness (ilplS 1 ) tDSt^P WV I noisixs
Kpiaiv Kai SiKaioauvnv), and deliver from the hand of the oppressor him who has
been robbed. And do no wrong or violence to the resident alien, the fatherless,
and the widow, nor shed innocent blood in this place" (ESV).
Jer 22:15-16 - spoken of Shallum, son of Josiah, king of Judah:

"Do you think you are a king
because you compete in cedar?
Did not your father eat and drink
and do justice and righteousness?
( n p " p i £D35pp H27S71 / 7ioisiv Kptpa Kai SiKaioauvnv)
Then it was well with him.
He judged the cause of the poor and needy;
(p-QiO "l2ir}',rl ]"! I OUK sKpivav Kpiaiv xa7isiva) ouSs Kpiaiv 7isvnxocj)
then it was well" (ESV).
The king was charged with defending the rights of the poor and needy, to "seek
justice, correct oppression; bring justice to the fatherless, plead the widow's cause" (Isa
1:17 ESV). For an illustration of this court room scenario, recall the two prostitutes who
came before King Solomon as parties in a legal dispute, presumably in his "Hall of
Judgment" (C0S^!2n D7&) (1 Kings 7:7),17 the one party making false accusations
against the other, with Solomon rendering a just verdict that involved the vindication of
1X
the woman who was the rightful mother of the living baby (1 Kings 3:16-28).
From this context it is a short step to making the claim that, ultimately, justice is
given by God the King of Israel and Judge of all the earth. The shift of focus from the
human to the divine judge who grants justice to the oppressed is a logical one,
considering the failure of human judges and human kings. Since the oppressed were so
often denied justice from the human king, whether because of his inability or his
corruption, they ultimately placed their hope in God to provide true, lasting and
eschatological justice. We see the transition from an appeal to the human king to relying
on justice from the divine King in passages such as these:
Proverbs 22:22-23
"Do not rob the poor, because he is poor, or crush the afflicted at the gate, for the
1
LORD will plead their cause (DZT"1 3" "]? / KpivsT auxou xfyv Kpiaiv) and rob of life
those who rob them" (ESV).
Proverbs 23:10-11
"Do not move an ancient landmark or enter the fields of the fatherless, for their
Redeemer (7^3 / 6 Ampoupsvoc;) is strong; he will plead their cause ( 13','T~K:)n
D^'HT'IN! / Kpivsi xfiv Kpiaiv auxcov) against you" (ESV).
Proverbs 29:26
"Many seek the face of a ruler, but it is from the LORD that a man gets justice
(ETi<-tDS^!2 HliT!)?1] / 7tapd Ss Kupiou yivsxai xo Sucaiov dvSpi)" (ESV).
17
"One function of the royal court was its use as a place to hear appeals, try legal cases and dispense justice
... As a place of sentencing and conviction, it arouses feelings of fear; as a place of appeal and acquittal, it
assures us that justice will prevail." "Royal Court," Dictionary of Biblical Imagery, 742.
18
Explicitly forensic terminology occurs at the end of the story: "And all Israel heard of the judgment that
the king had rendered (BSE? "It^K CDBKJBrmK / TO Kpiua TOUTO, 6 SKpivev), and they stood in awe of the
king, because they perceived that the wisdom of God was in him to do justice (CDB27B ni&I?7 / ton 7totetv
SiKaicoucc)" (1 Kings 3:28 ESV). Josephus in his retelling of the story uses the following forensic terms:
Kpioti; ("case" [2x], "judgment" [lx]), avciStKoc; ("opponent at law"), 8tKn, ("lawsuit"), 7ipooKptvco
("adjudge, award"), and KaxayivmoKoo ("pass sentence against"). Ant. 8.26-34.
If the needy cannot get vindication from earthly judges, then they must wait for
the heavenly judge to intervene. Indeed, in some cases the controversy is with a human
king or judge, so the appeal must be made immediately to the divine Judge from the
outset. We see this in the controversy between David and King Saul, who was unjustly
pursuing David in the wilderness and trying to kill him. Having no recourse but to the
divine court, David cried out, "May the LORD judge between me and you, may the LORD
avenge me against you" (1 Sam 24:12, 15 ESV).19
Note as well that I have identified "vindication" as another sub-category under
"legal righteousness." This usage, though not common, is well established and has even
found its way into the English versions. For example:
Ps 35:27 [34:27LXX]:
"May those who delight in my vindication O p l ? / xf|v SiKaioauvnv pou) shout
for joy and gladness" (NIV).
Of course, one could argue that this usage fits under "ethical righteousness" as well, since
the vindication of the righteous often involves God's bringing their ethical righteousness
to light in the face of the false accusations of his people's enemies. But I believe this
usage is best identified as legal righteousness for the reason that the focus is not on the
ethical righteousness of those vindicated but on God's judicial act of vindicating them.
A note should also be made about the cases I refer to as "clothed with
righteousness." The most famous example is:

Isa 59:17:
"He put on righteousness 0"lp*72J I SiKaioauvn) as a breastplate, and a helmet of
salvation on his head; he put on garments of vengeance for clothing, and wrapped
himself in zeal as a cloak" (ESV).
19
Various forms of the phrase "May the LORD judge between us" also occur in Gen 16:5 (Sarai vs.
Abram); 31:53 (Jacob vs. Laban); Judges 11:27 (the people of Israel vs. the people of Ammon); and Ezek
34:17, 20, 22 (the fat sheep vs. the lean sheep).
But what is not well understood is the meaning of this metaphor. That can be best
illustrated by comparing Isa 59:17 with Job's statement in 29:14:
Job 29:14:
"I put on righteousness (p"[?S / SiKaioauvn), and it clothed me; my justice
CEpSÔ / Kpipa) was like a robe and a turban" (ESV).
In other words, putting on righteousness as a robe, cloak, breastplate, or other piece of
clothing seems to be a metaphorical way of speaking of the preparation that a judge
would make before going into court. Just as a modern judge will don the judicial black
robe before entering the court, so in the biblical metaphor. Thus I have identified the
"clothed with righteousness" passages as legal.
Now that we have surveyed "legal righteousness," it is time to turn to "ethical
righteousness," that is, the moral uprightness associated with those who are considered
"the righteous" as opposed to "the wicked." This is the second most common usage
(41.3%). Under "ethical righteousness" I see several sub-categories. If the first category
("legal righteousness") can be predicated of both humans and God, the second category
("ethical righteousness") applies almost exclusively to humans. It can refer simply to
righteous conduct, often with verbs of doing,20 or to the status of righteousness that one
has in God's eyes on the basis of such righteous conduct. This category ("righteousness
before God") is placed as a sub-category under "ethical righteousness" because moral
uprightness and righteous behavior are often (though not always) the basis for the status
of "righteousness" before God. However, "righteousness before God" could just as well
E.g., "For I have chosen [Abraham], that he may command his children and his household after him to
keep the way of the LORD by doing righteousness and justice (CDBTOI ^ | ? 1 ^ niE?I?7" / notsiv 8iKatocn3vnv
Kai Kptcnv), so that the LORD may bring to Abraham what he has promised him" (Gen 18:19 ESV).
be placed as a sub-category under "legal righteousness," since the divine recognition of
righteousness is presented as a divine judicial act.
Some scholars make a strong disjunction between the "legal" and the "ethical"
dimensions. For example, for N. T. Wright, "righteousness" indicates status only,

91
meaning "in the right, vindicated." From this, he concludes that "righteousness" in Paul
means that the divine court has granted someone the status of membership in the people
of God. But my research has turned up strong evidence pointing to a much closer
conceptual relationship between righteousness as a legal status and righteousness as an
ethical or behavioral reality. When "righteousness" is used as a status term, that is, in
reference to someone's righteousness before God, it means either that God has taken note
of the person's actual moral/behavioral righteousness (e.g., Deut 24:13; Ps 18:20-24), or
that he has graciously reckoned righteousness to their account so that they are now
treated and regarded as if they were in fact ethically righteous in his sight. This latter
usage of "righteousness" to refer to a status of righteousness graciously granted to
someone even though they are not actually and personally righteous (following Paul's
interpretation in Rom 4:3-5) is evident in Gen 15:6: "And he believed the LORD, and he
counted it to him as righteousness (Hp"]2J TV rO^D-1 / Kai sAxoyiaOn auxco sic;
SiKaioauvnv)" (Gen 15:6 ESV). In the former usage - a status of righteousness before
God, grounded in a person's behavioral righteousness - the term "righteousness" does
21
"'Righteousness' was the status of the successful party when the case had been decided ... The word is
not basically to do with morality or behavior, but rather with status in the eyes of the court." N. T. Wright,
"The Letter to the Romans," NLB 10.399. "'Righteousness,' within the lawcourt setting ... denotes the
status that someone has when the court has found in their favor. Notice, it does not denote, within that all-
important lawcourt context, 'the moral character they are then assumed to have,' or 'the moral behavior
they have demonstrated which has earned them the verdict.'" Justification: God's Plan and Paul's Vision
(Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 2009), 90 (emphasis original). Cp. What Saint Paul Really Said (Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997), 98.
not refer so much to the behavioral righteousness per se, but to the divine recognition and
acceptance of that righteousness, resulting in a person's being treated as righteous in
God's sight. In the following example (Deut 24:13), note the important qualifier, "before
the LORD your God," which makes clear the additional nuance in view:
Deut 24:10-13:
"When you make your neighbor a loan of any sort, you shall not go into his house
to collect his pledge. '' You shall stand outside, and the man to whom you make
the loan shall bring the pledge out to you. 12 And if he is a poor man, you shall not
sleep in his pledge. i3 You shall restore to him the pledge as the sun sets, that he
may sleep in his cloak and bless you. And it shall be righteousness for you ( ^J 7s)
Hp"T15 rpnri / Kai eaxai aoi sX,snpoauvn) before the LORD your God" (ESV).
This special category of "righteousness before God" is significant, because it
shows that although one can discern a broad distinction between legal righteousness and
ethical righteousness, there is actually overlap between the two at this point. For
"righteousness before God" is neither purely ethical nor purely legal. In some cases, such
as Gen 15:6, it is purely legal. In most other cases, it is both ethical and legal, that is, the
ethical righteousness is the basis of the legal recognition of that righteousness in the
divine court.
Taken together, these first two major categories ("legal righteousness" and
"ethical righteousness") cover more than 85% of the usages.
The third category is a smaller category that I call "correctness." It is used to refer
to speaking the truth, to just weights and balances, or to doing something correctly. For
example, these verses illustrate "righteousness" used in reference to speaking the truth:
"All the utterances of my mouth are in righteousness (p""!?23 / psxd SiKaioauvnc;); there is
nothing crooked or perverted in them" (Prov 8:8 NASB); and "I the LORD speak the truth
(p"lS " i : n / Xak&v Sucaioauvnv)" (Isa 45:19 ESV).

The fourth category is not part of the semantic range of these words, but merely
contains a handful of verses that are difficult to interpret, thus making difficult the
decision as to which semantic category fits best.
B. AiKaioouvn in the Septuagint (excluding the Apocrypha)
Having surveyed the semantic range of the Hebrew words for "righteousness," we
turn now to the Greek translational equivalent in the Septuagint. But before examining
the categories of usage of SiKaioauvn in the LXX, it will perhaps be useful to be aware of
the fact that the LXX (excluding the Apocrypha) employs the whole panoply of Greek
words based on the AIK-root, totaling 1,293 occurrences. The most frequent word from
this group is the adjective 5ucaio<; which occurs 304 times in the LXX, not counting the
substantival adjective xo SiKaiov which occurs nine times. The next most common word
is SiKaioauvn which occurs 264 times.
Table 3. The All<C-group m LXX"

Part of speech Greek word n
Adjective SiKaioc; 304
Noun SiKaioauvn 264
Noun aSiKia 186
Noun Sucaicoua 125
Adjective aSiKoq 86
Verb SKSIKSCO 68
Noun EKSiicnaic; 56
Verb dSiKsro 54
Verb SiKaioco 29
Verb SiKa^co 00
Adverb dSiKcoc; 20
Noun Siicn 18
For all AIK-words listed here (except for otKoaoouvr)) data retrieved by performing electronic searches on
the Rahlfs Septuaginta in Libronix Digital Library. The data in Lust, Eynikel and Hausie (LEH), Greek-
English Lexicon of the Septuagint (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2003) are very close to the data
yielded electronically, but sometimes differ by small amounts. The differences could be explained by text-
critical issues, or by errors in the electronic data. For SiKonoouvri, Libronix and LEH have a count of 270
for the OT excluding the Apocrypha. However, I have determined that the correct count is 264.
Noun dSiKnua 16
Substantival adjective xo SiKaiov 9
Noun Sucaaxfjc. 8
Noun avxiSiKoc, 7
Verb KaxaSiKdtJto 6
Adverb SiKaicoc; 5
Verb SKSlKd^tO 4
Verb dvxiSiKsco 2
Verb d7iaSiKsco 1
Noun Sucaicoaic, 1
Noun SiKaaxfjpiov 1
Noun SK8lKT|xf|Cj 1
Total 1,293
Table 3 shows statistics on the number of times that words from the AIK-group
are used in the Septuagint, excluding the Apocrypha.23 This study targets the 264
occurrences of the noun SiKaioauvn for careful linguistic investigation, but it is useful to
see the statistics of the related words. The adjective SiKaioc; and the substantival adjective
xo SiKaiov are used a total of 33 times to translate p1?£/np"12£ and are therefore the most
relevant words outside of SiKaioauvn for this study. The noun SiKaicoua is typically used
as a translational equivalent for Hp!"! in the LXX and is thus almost irrelevant for our
study. It is used once to translate p"[?5 m the LXX at 2 Kgdms 19:29 and possibly two
more times at Ezek 18:21 and Prov 8:20, but these two are doubtful due to LXX text-
critical issues.
The Apocrypha will be dealt with in Chapter 5.

Table 4. LXX Translation Table 5. LXX Translation

Choices for p"[S Choices for Hp"llS
n n
SiKaioauvn 82 SiKaioauvn 133
SiKaioc;24 23 SiKaiocj"" 5
xo SiKaiov26 4 xo SiKaiov2' 1
SiKaicoc2* 3 -
SiKaioco29 1 -
- 8iKaicopajU 1
Kpiaic,3' 2 -
- Kpipa32 1-2
[[sA,snpoauvr|]] JJ 1 sXsnpoauvn 34 8
- SASOC; 3
- sucppoauvn36 1
IcoasSsK 1 -
24
Lev 19:36 (3x); Deut 16:18; 25:15 (2x); Job 6:29; 31:6; 35:2; 36:3; Prov 12:17; 16:13; Eccl 3:16; 7:15;
LXXn
Isa 32:1; 41:10; 58:2; 59:4; Jer 11:20; 31:23 [38:23LAA]; Ezek 45:10 (3x)
25
Job 37:23 (ret Sucotia); Prov 11:18, 19; 21:3; Isa 54:17.
"'TO SiKaiov = "justice" or "what is right." Deut 16:20; Job 8:3; Isa 51:1; 64:5.
27
Isa 5:23: "Woe to those ... who ... deprive the innocent of his rightV (ESV); who take away the
right of the righteous one!" (NETS).
28
Deut 1:16; 16:20; Prov 31:9.
29
Isa 42:21.
30
2 Kgdms 19:29. The translation SiKaicoua is also found at Ezek 18:21 in A only. Since Rahlfs and the
Gottingen Septuagint agree in considering SiKaicoua to be a secondary reading, I do not count it here. Hatch
and Redpath err in listing Prov 8:20 as another case.
31
Isa 11:4; 51:7.
Jer 28:10 [51:10M1]. A second possible case is Isa 9:6L (9:7 tr ) "to uphold it with justice and with
r
righteousness" (njp"123 ) EDStppS / sv 5iKatocn3vr| Kai ev Kptpaxt), but some LXX MSS switch the two
nouns. Other possibilities are (a) that the order of the two nouns was already switched in the Hebrew
Vorlage, or (b) that the LXX translators intentionally switched the order while intending 8iKoaoauvr| to
represent i"!jP"J15.
Ji
Ps 34:24 [35:24MT]. I use double brackets to indicate significant doubt about this equivalence. Rahlfs and
Gottingen agree that the reading sIen,pocr6vn, is secondary here and adopt the reading StKatoonvn.
34
Deut 6:25; 24:13; Ps 23:5LXX/24:5MT; 32:5LXX/33:5MT; 102:6LXX/103:6MT; Isa 1:27; 28:17; 59:16. In
addition, Theodotion at Dan 9:16 (but not LXX). Also, the Aramaic word np~T2S ("right action,
beneficence, charity") is translated steriuoouvn, in Dan 4:27LXXTh/4:24MT.
35
Isa 56:1; and probably Ezek 18:19, 21.
36
Isa 61:10: "He has covered me with the robe of righteousness" (njp"li£ Tî? I xrttova stxppocn3vn,c;).
Takamitsu Muraoka employs double brackets here to indicate that he regards the equivalence as
implausible. Hebrew/Aramaic Index to the Septuagint Keyed to the Hatch-Redpath Concordance (Grand
Rapids: Baker, 1998), 124. His caution is understandable, yet there is no known textual variant in the
Hebrew.
37
Jer 23:6.
Tables 4 and 5 show the Greek words used to translate p"lX/np"12S in the LXX,
along with statistics showing the number of times. The two tables are aligned so that one
can see each Greek word on the same line in both tables. If a particular Greek word is
used to translate p"|2$ but not i"lp"T2S (or vice versa), then a dash (-) is placed in the box
indicating that this word is never used in the LXX as a translation for that Hebrew word.
The most surprising fact is the use of sA,snuoauvn eight times and sA,so<; three
times to translate the feminine np~!22. These cases will be examined in detail below.
IT T :
There is also the odd use of sucppoouvn once in Isaiah 61:10, an occurrence that caused
Hatch and Redpath to doubt that there really was a Hebrew-Greek equivalence in this
place.
We turn now to another question: "What Hebrew words were translated by
SiKaioauvn in the LXX?"
Table 6. Hebrew words

translated by SiKaioauvn in
LXX
n
133
npl?
82
PI*
ion 38 9
7
T : *
p^S40 7
41 6
nax
aia42 1
nn^D 4 3 1
• T
38
Gen 19:19; 20:13; 21:23; 24:27; 32:11 [32:10EB]; Exod 15:13; 34:7; Prov 20:28; Isa 63:7.
39
Prov 16:11; 17:23; Isa 61:8; Ezek 18:17, 19, 21; Mai 2:17.
40
Ps 72:7MT/71:7LXX; Prov 2:20; 11:21, 30; 15:6; 20:7; Isa 26:2.
41
Gen 24:49; Josh 24:14; Isa 38:19; 39:8; Dan 8:12; 9:13.
42
Ps 38:20 [38:21MT/37:21LXX]: "I follow after good" (ESV); "I follow after righteousness" (NETS).
V'pt4
~ T
«T 4 6
T
[["WO]]47
[niiQ]]48
[pns]] 49
No equivalent 13
Table 6 shows the Hebrew words that are translated with SiKaioauvn in the LXX,
including one Aramaic word (IDT) in Dan 6:22. As we saw with Tables 4 and 5, the most
surprising fact is the use of SiKaioauvn nine times to translate "70n, an intriguing
translation choice that will be discussed with the use of sXsnpoauvn and sXeoq to
translate npHUS.
Now we turn to an analysis of the categories of usage of SiKaioauvn. Because of
the LXX's essential literalism, it is possible to use the same categories and sub-
categories. Here is a comparison of the categories of usage.
1 Chron 29:17: "I know, my God, that you test the heart and have pleasure in uprightness" (ESV); "And
I knew, Lord, that you are the one who tests hearts, and you love righteousness" (NETS).
44
Gen 20:5: "In the integrity of my heart and the innocence of my hands I have done this" (ESV); "I did
this with a pure heart and righteousness of hands" (NETS).
4>
Prov 21:16. "The way of good sense" (ESV); "the path of righteousness" (NETS).
46
This is the one Aramaic word in the list. Dan 6:22: "My God sent his angel and shut the lions' mouths,
and they have not harmed me, because I was found blameless before him" (ESV); "... because
righteousness was found in me" (NETS).
47
Ps 67:4 [67:5MT/66:5LXX]. Rahlfs and Gottingen read evQvq.
48
Prov 17:14. Rationale for LXX translation of "strife" (Hebrew) as "righteousness" (LXX) unclear.
4
Prov 1:22. Muraoka doubts this equivalence. Hebrew/Aramaic Index to the Septuagint, 123.
Table 7. Comparison of Categories of Usage:

MT/Hebrew (p"]^/np"l?) vs. LXX/Greek (SiKaioauvn)
MT/Heb. LXX/Gk.
n % n %
I. Legal righteousness 123 44.6 112 42.4
Judging, ruling, executing justice 27 9.8 23 8.7
Human judges or kings as subject 19 6.9 14 5.3
God as subject 8 2.9 9 3.4
Justice 38 13.8 34 12.9
Human (including messianic) justice IS 6.5 19 7.2
Divme justice 20 7.2 15 5.7
Righteousness of God ("my, his, your") 41 14.9 44 16.7
Vindication 9 3.3 6 2.3
Clothed with righteousness 5 1.8 4 1.5
Rights 3 1.1 1 0.4
11. Ethical righteousness 114 41.3 122 46.2
General 55 19.9 68 25.8
With verbs of doing 18 6.5 19 7.2
Righteous laws/word 10 3.6 10 3.8
Gates, paths, cities, etc. of righteousness 7 2.5 4 1.5
Righteousness before God 23 8.3 19 7.2
Honesty 1 0.4 2 0.8
111. Correctness 26 9.4 14 5.3
Speaking righteousness, telling the truth 10 3.6 7 2.7
Just balances, weights 10 3.6 1 0.4
Doing something correctly 6 2.2 6 2.3
IV. Difficult cases 13 4.7 16 6.1
Total 276 100 264 100
Table 7 shows the categories of usage, comparing the semantic range of
p"I^/np~T2S in the Hebrew Bible with that of SiKaioauvn in the LXX (excluding the
Apocrypha). The differences are statistically insignificant and are to be expected in any
attempt to translate from one language to another, where the semantic ranges of words
may be overlapping but not exact; such differences are especially to be expected in a
translation done by various translators over a period of several centuries. The decrease in
the "legal righteousness" category from 123 (MT) to 112 (LXX) should not be
interpreted to mean that the LXX is less interested in legal righteousness than the MT.
The explanation is that the LXX uses other words to translate "righteousness," such as
Siraiocj, SiKaicoc;, etc. The increase in the "ethical righteousness" category from 114 (MT)
to 122 (LXX) is caused primarily by the use of SiKaioauvn to render words other than
p"12/np"12J or words for which there is no Hebrew equivalent, a phenomenon that occurs
30 times in the "ethical righteousness" category and 19 times in the "legal righteousness"
category (see Table 6 for a list of these words). Table 7 confirms Anneli Aejmelaeus's
and J. Ross Wagner's claim that the religious and theological content of the LXX is for
the most part identical with the theology of the Hebrew Old Testament.
C. Analysis of arguments for the relational interpretation
Now that we have surveyed the semantic range of pnS/np'"T2S and SiKaioauvn in
the Hebrew Bible and in the Septuagint, respectively, we turn to the heart of this chapter,
that is, weighing the arguments for the relational interpretation. There are seven primary
arguments. Although Cremer himself did not enumerate them, these are the seven
arguments that I discerned by a careful analysis of the opening chapter of his book Die
paulinische Rechtfertigungslehre im Zusammenhange ihrer geschichtlichen
Voraussetzungen.5® I will focus primarily on Cremer's arguments, but along the way I
will also take note of various restatements and refinements by later scholars.
1. Righteousness as "Thoroughly Positive"
Cremer quotes dozens of passages from Deutero-Isaiah, Jeremiah, Micah, Hosea,
Malachi, and the Psalms that use "righteousness" positively, that is, in a way that at first
seems incompatible with the notion of distributive or retributive justice. On the basis of
50
Voraussetzungen (2nd ed.; Giitersloh: Bertelsmann, 1900).
these passages, Cremer argues that the fundamental concept (Grundbegriff) of
"righteousness,"51 as expressed through the words derived from the Hebrew root p~I22, is
never negative (i.e., it never denotes punishment) but always positive ~ (i.e., it always
denotes saving righteousness, or what he calls iustitia salutifera), and that the only
explanation for this is that "righteousness" in Hebrew is, at its base, a relational concept
(Verhdltnisbegriff). Cremer writes that this positive, beneficent, salvific use of
"righteousness" is "highly surprising," even "impossible," to us." Yet, Cremer goes on to
say, it is understandable that "recent" (late 19th-century) scholars - and here he cites
Ludwig Diestel, Albrecht Ritschl, and Hermann Schulz54 - have attempted to understand
the OT concept of the righteousness of God in a totally positive sense as equivalent to
God's unerring determination to fulfill the aim of his love toward his creatures.55 But
Cremer criticizes this interpretation because it does away with any judicial or forensic
aspect. He argues that, rather than totally eliminating the judicial aspect of p"12S, there is
a better solution to the problem, namely, his relational theory:
31
See Cremer, Die paulinische Rechtfertigungslehre, 33-39, where he repeatedly speaks of der
Grundgedanke/Grundbegriff der p~I2». He thinks that the relational understanding of this word-concept is
"perfectly adequate for the understanding of the whole linguistic usage" (des gesamten Sprachgebrauchs)
of all Hebrew derivatives of the p"1!S stem (p. 39). Relevant in this connection are the strictures of James
Barr against (1) the Cremer/Kittel habit of confusing words and concepts, and (2) the notion that each
Hebrew stem has a "root meaning" that underlies all of its various forms. The Semantics of Biblical
Language (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1961), 100-6, 209-11.
52
Cremer claims that righteousness in the OT is "not a negative, but thoroughly positive" concept (nicht ein
negativer, sondern ein durchaus positiver), that it "turns itself only to one side" (wendet sich nur nach
einer Seite), namely, to help those who are oppressed and need justice, and that it "always comes to the
good" of those with whom one stands in relationship (kommt... immer denen zu gute, zu denen er in
Verhaltnis steht). Die paulinische Rechtfertigungslehre, 23, 29, 37.
53
34
See Chapter 1 for discussion. Ludwig Diestel, "Die Idee der Gerechtigkeit, vorziiglich im Alten
Testament, biblisch-theologisch dargestellt," Jahrbiicherfur deutsche Theologie 5 (1860): 173-253;
Albrecht Ritschl, Die christliche Lehre von der Rechtfertigung und Versohnung, Zweiter Band: Der
biblische Stoff der Lehre (3rd ed.; Bonn: A. Marcus, 1889), 102-13; Hermann Schultz, Alttestamentliche
Theologie: Die Offenbarungsreligion auf ihrer vorchristlichen Entwickelungsstufe ( 5 n ed.; Gottingen:
Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1896), 424-5.
55
p"TU and its derivates always stand in a social and forensic sense and everywhere
refer to a relationship (Verhaltnis) in which one has to become "righteous" to the
other. So we can see that there is no conflict between God's righteousness and
God's grace, that the exercise of righteousness on God's part is grace, that his
judicial righteousness is salvific and stands in the closest connection with his
goodness and faithfulness, so that righteousness and faithfulness are synonymous,
and that righteousness and grace can stand in parallel. One must only observe
that the proper purpose of God's righteousness-activity or judging is not negative,
but thoroughly positive, not punishment, but... the defense of right, the defense
of those who are in the right and who desire to come to their right over against a
world that treats them as having no right.56
The key here is the phrase, "the defense of right." Cremer is trying to explain how
righteousness can be a totally positive thing, equivalent to salvation. His explanation is
that righteousness has to do with the establishment or defense of justice/right in cases
where it has been taken away. When God comes to restore a person to his rights, he is
acting as a righteous judge, the person involved is now in the right, and the result is an act
of judgment which brings salvation. This is actually correct and cannot be denied, but
Cremer has not yet shown how righteousness is to be conceived of as a relational concept
distinct from iustitia distributiva. God's acting as a righteous judge by vindicating the
oppressed is in fact within the orbit of iustitia distributiva, since the vindication of the
oppressed typically occurs precisely by means of a divine verdict in favor of the
oppressed and against the oppressor and sometimes even a punitive judgment upon the
oppressor.
How does Cremer see this vindication motif as connected to his thesis that
righteousness is a relational concept? It is here that Cremer's logic goes awry. He begins
with the Diestel/Ritschl presupposition that God's righteousness is a thoroughly positive
or salvific concept in the OT; yet, having rejected the Diestel/Ritschl explanation, viz.,

that God's righteousness is his acting in his government of the world (Weltregierung)
consistently with his aim of unerring love toward his creatures, Cremer puts forward a
different explanation, viz., the relational theory of righteousness. Cremer's theory goes
like this: since righteousness in general (whether divine or human) is constituted only in
the context of a relationship, righteousness is not conformity to an abstract ideal or norm
outside or above the relationship, but rather is the fulfillment of the demands that the
relationship carries with itself. "The concept of righteousness is in fact a relational
concept, which derives not from a relationship to an ideal norm, but from a relationship
between two related parties, which relationship brings claims/demands with itself, the
fulfillment of which constitutes righteousness."57 As applied to God's righteousness,
Cremer argues that the relationship in view is the covenant between God and his people,
a covenant in which he has promised to come to the defense of his people's rights.
Therefore, when he acts to punish their oppressors, thereby vindicating them, he is doing
so in fulfillment of his covenant promises. "The righteousness of God" is God's
delivering, saving activity, helping his people to their rights against those who have
trampled on their rights, in accordance with his covenant faithfulness. "The proper
purpose of God's righteousness-activity or judging is not negative, but thoroughly
positive."58
In the passages Cremer cites, especially those in the Psalms and Deutero-Isaiah, it
is evident that there is a measure of truth to Cremer's interpretation. God's
"righteousness," in many passages, consists in his activity of delivering his people by
means of judgment upon their enemies. In these contexts, "righteousness" has a salvific

meaning without losing its judicial connotations. So far Cremer is correct and indeed
quite helpful when he analyzes these passages in terms of the image of God as the divine
king who helps the oppressed to their Recht (right/justice) by vindicating them in the face
of their oppressors who trample on their rights. He speaks of this as "the defense of right,
the defense of those who are in the right and who desire to come to their right over
against a world that treats them as having no right."59 In this context, the righteousness of
God is the righteousness of the judge issuing a verdict between the two opponents at law,
the oppressor and the oppressed; and the righteousness or vindication of the oppressed by
the divine judge corresponds to the righteousness of the judge, so that God's
righteousness is a delivering righteousness, a verdict of righteousness from the righteous
divine judge to the righteous or vindicated plaintiff. All of this is helpful and in fact
correct. My objection is that Cremer goes beyond the evidence when he assumes that
"righteousness" is never negative but "thoroughly positive," and then from this he makes
the logical leap that righteousness is fundamentally relational and that "righteousness and
faithfulness are synonymous."
Cremer has not fundamentally distanced himself from the Ritchlian assault on the
notion of God's distributive justice. It is not merely that Cremer is arguing that the root
p"12J is used in an exclusively positive sense while presumably allowing other words to
fulfill the function of distributive justice. Rather, Cremer is arguing that the
"righteousness" word-concept (Begriff) in the Hebrew Bible is exclusively and
thoroughly positive. At its base, this is much more than a lexical claim; it is a theological
claim about the very concept of "righteousness" in biblical theology. In essence, Cremer

rejects the notion of God's distributive justice. Cremer's rejection of this concept of
God's righteousness - i.e., as a distributive righteousness deliberating between reward
and punishment - comes to the fore in this statement:
Not a single passage reads as if it merely presented the thought of righteousness

deliberating between reward and punishment, or as if the aim of righteousness
were a judicial balancing exercise ... I do not have in mind a forced reduction of
this concept to that of justitia distributiva. In the entire Old Testament, the
righteousness of God is and remains justitia salutifera, because its essence
accords with justitia justificatoria, that is, because its essence is to create right for
those who need it, or to exercise justice on behalf of God's people and thereby to
help them.
Note Cremer's sweeping language that "not a single passage" (keine einzige Stelle)
supports the notion of the divine distributive justice. In addition, he says that the very
"essence" (Wesen) of the righteousness of God in the Old Testament is that it is a saving
righteousness (iustitia salutifera) that creates right and salvation for those who need it. To
interpret the concept of "righteousness" in its most basic terms as distributive
righteousness (iustitia distributiva) is a "forced reduction" (Herabdruckung) to a foreign
conceptual mold. "The shrunken view of righteousness as essentially distributiva without
regard to the outcome is connected with the powerful influence of Roman law.'"1 By
contrast, righteousness in the biblical religion is "connected with the existing relationship
between [God] and Israel" and is "based on the essence of the Old Testament covenant
concept (Bundesbegriff)." "
The claim that "righteousness" is positive in every case is simply contrary to the
evidence. Whether Cremer means (a) in every instance of divine "righteousness" or (b) in
every case of "righteousness" whether divine or human is unclear, but it does not matter,
60
Cremer, Die paulinische Rechtfertigungslehre, 31-2, 33.
61
62
for counter-examples in both categories are readily available. That is, there are a number
of cases where divine "righteousness" is not salvific but simply denotes judgment.
First, there are six passages where someone recognizes that "God is righteous or
just" (five using the adjective p"HS) for bringing judgment upon them for their rebellion
or sin:
Exod 9:27
Then Pharaoh sent and called Moses and Aaron and said to them, "This time I
have sinned; the LORD is in the right (p""T7^rT niJT / 6 Kupioc; SiKaioc;), and I and
my people are in the wrong" (ESV).
2 Chron 12:1-6
When the rule of Rehoboam was established and he was strong, he abandoned the
law of the LORD, and all Israel with him. In the fifth year of King Rehoboam,
because they had been unfaithful to the LORD, Shishak king of Egypt came up
against Jerusalem 3 with 1,200 chariots and 60,000 horsemen. ... And he took the
fortified cities of Judah and came as far as Jerusalem. Then Shemaiah the
prophet came to Rehoboam and to the princes of Judah, who had gathered at
Jerusalem because of Shishak, and said to them, "Thus says the LORD, 'YOU
abandoned me, so I have abandoned you to the hand of Shishak.'" Then the
princes of Israel and the king humbled themselves and said, "The LORD is
righteous" (HIIT p"H15 / Afcaiocj 6 Kupiocj) (ESV).
Ezra 9:15
"O LORD the God of Israel, you are just (TlTliS p"1"7!? / SiKaio<; au), for we are left
a remnant that has escaped, as it is today. Behold, we are before you in our guilt,
for none can stand before you because of this" (ESV).
Neh 9:32-33
"Now, therefore, our God, the great, the mighty, and the awesome God, who
keeps covenant and steadfast love, let not all the hardship seem little to you that
has come upon us, upon our kings, our princes, our priests, our prophets, our
fathers, and all your people, since the time of the kings of Assyria until this day.
Yet you have been righteous (p'HS nniO / Kai ai) SiKaioc;) in all that has come
upon us, for you have dealt faithfully and we have acted wickedly" (ESV).
63
Compare the earlier statement: "You found his [Abraham's] heart faithful before you, and made a
covenant to give to his offspring the land of the Canaanite, the Hittite, the Amorite, the Perizzite, the
Jebusite, and the Girgashite. And you have kept your promise, for you are righteous (p,rTX)" (Neh 9:8
ESV). To keep one's promises is "righteous," but not all "righteousness" is the keeping of one's promises.
Mark A. Seifrid. "Righteousness Language in the Hebrew Scriptures and Early Judaism," in Justification
Dan 9:7
"To you, O Lord, belongs righteousness (T\^"V$7\ "l2ilK 1y? I aoi, Kupis, f)
SiKaioauvn - LXX & Th), but to us open shame, as at this day, to the men of
Judah, to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and to all Israel, those who are near and
those who are far away, in all the lands to which you have driven them, because
of the treachery that they have committed against you" (ESV).
Dan 9:14
"Therefore the LORD has kept ready the calamity and has brought it upon us, for
the LORD our God is righteous (/irHT'K HIIT p'HlJ—'S / oil SiKaioc; icupiocj 6
Qsbq fjpcbv - LXX & Th) in all the works that he has done, and we have not
obeyed his voice" (ESV).
The above six passages belong to the same genre, that is, a Gerichtsdoxologie or
confession of divine righteousness in the face of God's just judgment against human
• 64
sin.
Second, there are four passages in the Psalms that are general affirmations of the
theological truth that God is a righteous judge who punishes the wicked:
Psalm 7:11-12 [7:12-13MT/LXX]
11
"God is a righteous judge (p"1"7!? CD2i?£J D^rPK / 6 Oedc; Kpvrf|c; SiKaioc;),
and a God who feels indignation every day.
12
If a man does not repent, God will whet his sword;
he has bent and readied his bow" (ESV).
Ps 11:4-7 [10:4-7LXX]
4
"The LORD is in his holy temple;
the LORD'S throne is in heaven;
his eyes see, his eyelids test, the children of man.
The LORD tests the righteous,
but his soul hates the wicked and the one who loves violence.
Let him rain coals on the wicked;
fire and sulfur and a scorching wind shall be the portion of their cup.
7
For the LORD is righteous (HliT p"l"r!2~,,3 / oxi SiKaioc; Kupioc;);
he loves righteous deeds (377K nip"]22 / Sucaioauvac fiyaTtnaev);
and Variegated Nomism, Vol. 1: The Complexities of Second Temple Judaism (WUNT 11/140; ed. D. A.
Carson, Peter T. O'Brien, and Mark A. Seifrid; Grand Rapids: Baker Academic/Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck,
2001), 424.
64
F. Horst, "Die Doxologien im Amosbuch," ZAW41 (1929): 45-54; von Rad, Old Testament Theology
(trans. D. M. G. Stalker; Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd, 1962), 1.356-59.
the upright ("1ET / suGuxuxa) shall behold his face" (ESV).
Ps 50:3-7 [49:3-7LXX]
3
"Our God comes; he does not keep silence;
before him is a devouring fire,
around him a mighty tempest.
4
He calls to the heavens above
and to the earth, that he may judge (] , "1/ / SiaKptvai) his people:
5 4
Gather to me my faithful ones,
who made a covenant with me by sacrifice!'
The heavens declare his righteousness OTIP] D?12$ i p l ? / Kai avayysXouaiv
oi oupavoi xf|v SiKaioauvnv auxou),
for God himself is judge! (D",n7K~',rp tDS& KIH / 6xi 6 Qebq Kpvrfjc, saxiv)
Selah.
7
'Hear, O my people, and I will speak;
0 Israel, I will testify against you.
1 am God, your God'" (ESV).
Psalml29:l-4[128:1-4 LXX ]
"Greatly have they afflicted me from my youth"—
let Israel now say—
"Greatly
;atly have they afflicted
affl: me from my youth,
yet they have not prevailed against me.
3
The plowers plowed upon my back;
they made long their furrows."
4
The LORD is righteous (p'HS 71)7]*
HIPP / icupioc; SiKaioc);
he has cut the cords of the wicked" (ESV).
Finally, there are four passages in Isaiah in which the noun "righteousness"
(whether masculine or feminine) is used in reference to God's justice in punishing the
wicked. These passages are significant for being in Isaiah, because they prove that Isaiah
does not use "righteousness" in an exclusively saving sense.
Isa 5:15-16
"Man is humbled, and each one is brought low,
and the eyes of the haughty are brought low.
16
Butt the LORD of hosts is exalted injustice
injustice (D25p?23 / sv Kpipaxi),
and the Holy God shows himself holy
in righteousness (!"Ip*12S3 / sv SiKaioauvn)" (ESV).65
65
"In light of this very passage, [Isa] 5:16, one cannot agree with the generalizing conclusion of K. Koch
... that |T12S and np"122 are never used to refer to a punishing action, but only to actions which bring
Isa 10:22-23
"For though your people Israel be as the sand of the sea, only a remnant of
them will return. Destruction is decreed, overflowing with righteousness (!"7p"125 /
no
no '
ev
ev SiKaioauvn).
SiKaioauvn). For For the
the Lord GOD of hosts will make a full end, as decreed, in
Lord G
the midst of all the earth" (ESV).
Isa 28:17
"And I will make justice the line,
and righteousness (np"J!£ / f\ eA,sr|poauvn pou) the plumb line;
and hail will sweep away the refuge of lies,
and waters will overwhelm the shelter" (ESV).
Isa 42:21-25
The LORD was pleased,
for his righteousness' sake (1p"]!£ ]|???7' / iva SiKaicoOfj),
to magnify his law and make it glorious.
But this is a people plundered and looted;
they are all of them trapped in holes
and hidden in prisons;
they have become plunder with none to rescue,
spoil with none to say, "Restore!"
Who among you will give ear to this.
will attend and listen for the time to come?
Who gave up Jacob to the looter,
and Israel to the plunderers?
Was it not the LORD, against whom we have sinned,
in whose ways they would not walk,
and whose law they would not obey?
5
So he poured on him the heat of his anger
and the might of battle;
it set him on fire all around, but he did not understand;
it burned him up, but he did not take it to heart (ESV).
In addition to the above 14 texts which use "righteousness" in a punitive or
retributive sense, there are many more cases were human "righteousness" does not denote
benefit ... The punishment of the wicked person would also be part of Yahweh's acting in a righteous
way." Hans Wildberger, Isaiah 1-12: A Commentary (trans. Thomas H. Trapp; Minneapolis: Fortress,
1991), 206. Wildberger is challenging Klaus Koch's confident but clearly erroneous claim that p"IS and
np"12S "are never used to describe inflicting punisluncnt." Koch, "Is There a Doctrine of Retribution in the
Old Testament?" in Theodicy in the Old Testament (IRT 4; ed. James L. Crenshaw; Philadelphia: Fortress,
1983), 77. Wildberger notes similar generalizations by Gerhard von Rad, Old Testament Theology, 1.377,
andF. Horst, RGG1 2.1404.
Chapter 4 Righteousness in the Old Testament 182
"salvation" but simply denotes either "upright behavior," or "the right decision of a
judge,"' or something similar, as I have demonstrated in the overall analysis above. So
Cremer's claim that "righteousness" is always positive is simply false.
Having made the (incorrect) assumption that "righteousness" is always positive,
beneficent, or salvific, Cremer then tries to explain this (alleged but factually untrue)
phenomenon (that "righteousness" is always positive) by arguing that it is
understandable, since "righteousness" is a Verhdltnisbegriff ox a relational concept,
which, as he defines it, means that "righteousness" is the fulfillment of the obligations
arising from a specific relationship or covenant. On this view, God's saving acts of
delivering his people in the Psalms and Deutero-Isaiah are termed "righteousness"
because he is acting to fulfill his covenant obligations to his people. But since the
assumption that "righteousness" is always positive is incorrect to begin with, there is no
need to explain the salvific/beneficent usage of "righteousness" in the OT, much less to
resort to the Verhdltnisbegriff'hypothesis.
A better explanation is that God's saving activity is, in these passages, described
injudicial terms, since God is righteously executing justice against Israel's enemies and
righteously vindicating Israel against her oppressors. On this alternate view,
"righteousness" retains its normative meaning as a Normbegriff, without the need to
resort to the Verhdltnisbegriff"hypothesis.
In addition, the Cremer relational theory is seriously called into question by an
analysis of the analogous lexical behavior of JDS^Q ("judgment, justice") in the Old
Testament. The Hebrew word JD35Z??? belongs to the same semantic domain as
p"IS/np"ll» and is in fact the closest word to being its synonym.' Although the terms are
not interchangeable in every context, they are used interchangeably in some contexts,
e.g., in the phrase "just balances" in Lev 19:36 ( p i ? ^TKO) and Prov 16:11 (tDS^P
•^TKft). Or, again, in one verse both terms are used: "The LORD works righteousness and
justice for all who are oppressed ( D ^ t f ST^p*? D^StfOI HIPP nip"lS 7WV)" (Ps
103:6 ESV); but in another only one is used: "The LORD executes jus tice for the
oppressed (TP^Wvh DSS??? H^S?)" (Ps 146:7 ESV). Clearly the two terms are very close
synonyms. By my count, the two terms occur in parallel 69 times in the Hebrew Bible.67
Now the critical observation about JDS5S>?? is that, like p"I?S/np"]2, it can be used
in parallel with both the verb and the noun for salvation (verb: 172T - Pss 72:1-4; 76:9)
(noun: ni?^ 11 - Isa 59: ll), 6 8 the verb redeem/ransom (!~nS - Isa 1:27), lovingkindness
( T O n - P s 101:1; Hos 2:19; 12:6[7]; Mic 6:8; Zech 1:9), faithfulness (nDK-Ps 111:7;
Isa 42:3; Zech 7:9), mercy/'compassion (D^PO"! - I s a 30:18; Hos 2:19; Zech 7:9), and
wisdom (HQpn - Ps 37:30). Like pl^/Hp"!^, it can be translated vindicate (Ps 7:8 -
verb) or vindication (Ps 17:2), can signify one's defense (Ps 35:23), one's right (Ps
Bo Johnson says that, while the two terms seem synonymous on account of the frequency with which
they are used in parallelism, they nevertheless have distinct nuances. "The semantic field of 'decision,
judgment, law' attaches to mispat, while sdq focuses on the principle of'what is right, correct.'" TDOT
12.247-8.
67
Bo Johnsons says the two terms occur in parallel 80 times. TDOT 12.247.
68
Indeed, the verb CDEE? from which the noun £DS©P is formed occasionally has the connotation of
salvation or deliverance. E.g., "May the LORD therefore be judge and give sentence between me and you,
and see to it and plead my cause and deliver me (^PSSEH) from your hand" (1 Sam 24:15 ESV). The verb
BEE? is normally translated "to judge," but here it is translated "deliver" (cp. RSV, NIV, and NASB). Cp.
"Vindicate me C30SKJ), defend my cause against an ungodly people, from the deceitful and unjust man
deliver me (^B^Sn)" (Ps 43:1 ESV).
Chapter 4: Righteousness in the Old Testament • 184
9:4[5]; Mic 7:9) or one's cause (Lam 3:59), and can have a beneficent meaning (bonam
partem) of "judgments for all who are oppressed" (Ps 103:6; cp. 72:1-4; 140:12; 146:7;
Jer 21:12). Also, like p'l^/np'lSS it is used six times with possessive pronouns referring
to God's BSttfp: "my justice/judgment" (Isa 51:4; Jer 1:16; Ezek 39:21; Zeph 3:8) and
"his justice/judgment" (Zeph 2:3; 3:5). In five of these six cases, God's tD3?PP is negative
and refers to his punishment, wrath, or judgment on the wicked. Only once ("I will set
my justice for a light to the peoples," Isa 51:4) is JDS$P used in a positive sense; this is
the classic Isaianic passage that we have examined above where God's salvation and
God's p~!?5/np"l^ occur in parallel ("my righteousness draws near, my salvation has
gone out," etc. - Isa 51:5, 6, 8). So there is a functional similarity between tDS^P and
p-IS/npn? in terms of how the words are used.
And yet for all that, Cremer admits that tDSSPP is not a thoroughly positive term.69
No doubt he recognizes this because it is frequently used in a strictly negative, punitive
sense as well (e.g., Ps 149:9; Isa 3:14; 5:16; 26:9; 34:5; Jer 1:16; 4:12; 48:21, 47; Ezek
5:8; 16:38; 23:24, 45; 39:21; Hos 6:5; Hab 1:12; Zeph 3:8, 15). The analogous behavior
of US5PP sheds light on the ways in which p~I?£/np"J2S can be used. Both terms or sets of
terms can be used in positive contexts, without thereby being positive words, because
they provide a further specification of the nature of the concept with which they are in
parallel. For example, in parallel with oppression it specifies the nature of the oppression
69
"Here lies the point where the concepts of righteousness (Gerechtigkeit) and judgment (Gericht) differ
from one another: one can pray to be spared from God's judgment but not from God's righteousness."
Cremer, Die paulinische Rechtfertigungslehre, 29. In Cremer's usage, following the German Bible,
Gerechtigkeit = p-J^/Tip-J^, while Gericht = BS^Q.
as one that occurred via a miscarriage of justice in a legal context: "by oppression ("13JS?)
and judgment (DSEJO) he was taken away" (Isa 53:8 NIV). In parallel with peace it
specifies the moral basis of such well-being: "If only you had paid attention to my
commands, your peace (0172?) would have been like a river, your righteousness (np"12J)
like the waves of the sea" (Isa 48:18 NIV; cp. 60:17 for another parallel between peace
and righteousness).70
Another analogy to p""I2/np"115, in addition to ES5PP, is the phenomenon of the
"J"H terminology in the Hebrew Bible. The verb means "to bring a lawsuit," "to argue or
plead a case." The noun is "a case," "a cause." These are neutral definitions. However,
both negative and positive usages abound in addition to the neutral. When used
negatively, the verb is often translated "to quarrel," "to contend," "to dispute," "to
accuse," "to bring charges." When used positively, "2"1"! terminology is salvific and
vindicatory:
Deut 33:7
"With your hands contend for him (T? 3"! / SiaKpivouaiv auxcp), and be a help
against his adversaries" (ESV).
1 Sam 24:15
"May the LORD therefore be judge and give sentence between me and you, and
see to it and plead my cause ('O'H'rilS! 72"T / Kpivai xnv Kpiaiv uou) and deliver
71
me from your hand (^"PP "OOSST'l / Kai Sucdaat poi SK %eipoc; aou)" (ESV).
70 „
General well-being is the result when all persons in a community are concerned to do what is truly right
in the sight of God." John N. Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah (NICOT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), 2.282.
Note the parallel, "the fruit of righteousness will be peace" (Isa 32:17 NIV), and the converse, stated twice,
"There is no peace ... for the wicked" (Isa 48:22; 57:21 NIV).
71
In keeping with the discussion of the positive/salvific usage of DSE7I2 above, the RSV, NASB, and NIV
also translate JDDttf as "deliver" here.
Ps 35:23
"Awake and rouse yourself for my vindication (>11!?S£'P7 / xfj Kpiaei uou), for my
cause (,,3','~l7 / eic; xfyv Sucnv uou), my God and my Lord!" (ESV).
Ps43:l
"Vindicate me (^JDS^ / Kpivov ue), defend my cause ('Q'H !"Q',"1'1 / Kai Sixaaov
xfiv SiKnv pou) against an ungodly people, from the deceitful and unjust man
deliver me CaB^SI"! / pucai ps)" (ESV).
Ps 119:154
"Plead my cause C,7J',"1 n"JT"1 / Kptvov xr)v Kpiaiv pou) and redeem me C^/Kl?* /
Kai Ampcoaai pe); give me life according to your promise!" (ESV).
Isa 19:20
"He will send them a savior and defender, and deliver them (D T^lSm m i 5T$iQ
/ avGpcoTiov, 6c; ctioaei auxouc;, Kpivcov acoasi auxouc;)" (ESV).
Jer 50:34
"Their Redeemer (Q/K3 / 6 Auxpoupevoc; auxouc;) is strong; the LORD of hosts is
his name. He will surely plead their cause (DD'HTIK "P'V "2'H / Kpiaiv Kpivsi
3ipoc; xouc; dvxiSucouc; auxou)" (ESV).
Jer 51:36-37
"Thus says the LORD, 'Behold, I will plead your cause (•7p',*!'TlK "2~H33n /
ISoi) eycb KpivS xfjv dvxiSiKov aou) and take vengeance for you ... and Babylon
shall become a heap of ruins, the haunt of jackals'" (ESV).
Lam 3:58-59
"You have taken up my cause, O Lord C^S? 'O'H "'IpK F i m / 'ESiKaaac;, Kupis,
xdc; Sucac; xfjc; ^x>yy\q pou); you have redeemed my life f^Tf ri/iO / eXuxpwaw xf|v
^cof|v pou). You have seen the wrong done to me, O LORD; judge my cause
(fVBW n a ? ^ / eKpivac; xfiv Kpiaiv pou)" (ESV).
Micah 7:9
"... until he pleads my cause (TJ'H m T ")$K " ^ / £<*>? xou Sucaiooaai auxov xf|v
Sucnv pou) and executes judgment for me CtpSEJp n^S?l / Kai 7roif|aei xo Kpipa
pou). He will bring me out to the light; I shall look upon his vindication (inp"l!S3
/ xfiv SiKaioauvnv auxou)" (ESV).
As the above passages demonstrate, the"2"*~)terminology behaves very much like
BSEJp/tDEJE?, which can be used neutrally, negatively, and positively. All three
possibilities exist. So we have examined both the ED3$P and the m*1 terminology in the
Hebrew Bible and we have seen that in both instances these terms can be used neutrally,
negatively, and positively. Neither JDStpp, nor •J"H, nor p~I?S/np"115 are, in Cremer's
words, durchaus positiver.
2. The Appeal to Hebrew Parallelism
Perhaps the most well known argument utilized by Cremer in support of his
relational interpretation of p"!?£/np*13S in the Old Testament is the frequent occurrence of
these terms in Hebrew parallelism with other positive terms, such as "salvation" (S?2T or
STCT or ni?1ET or nittE/J7!), "lovingkindess" ( i o n ) , "faithfulness" ( n p $ or miOS), and
so on. 1 will examine these passages in more detail below, but for now it is useful to cite
three examples, one for each of the above three Hebrew words with which
"righteousness" is used in parallelism:
Isa 56:1:
"My salvation (TIVW"]) is about to come;
and my righteousness (np"125) is about to be revealed" (NASB).
Ps36:10 EB /ll MT :
"O continue your lovingkindness ("1011) to those who know you;
and your righteousness (HplS) to the upright in heart" (NASB).
Ps 143:1:
"Hear my prayer, O LORD;
give ear to my pleas for mercy!
In your faithfulness (H31QK) answer me,

in your righteousness (np~23)!" (ESV)
a. Theoretical Observations on Hebrew Parallelism
Before we look at the passages in detail, we must first make some theoretical
observations concerning Cremer's attempt to use parallelism to make "righteousness"
equal to God's saving activity as an expression of his covenant faithfulness.
The broader problem is that Cremer's wooden approach fails to take account of
the variety of ways in which Hebrew parallelism can set up semantic relationships
between the key words that are in parallel. One semantic relationship that Cremer
apparently did not consider is that of the hyponym variety of synonymity. Faithfulness is
an important sub-category within righteousness. As Mark Seifrid argues:
All "covenant-keeping" is righteous behavior, but not all righteous behavior is

"covenant-keeping." It is misleading, therefore, to speak of "God's righteousness"
as his "covenant-faithfulness." It would be closer to the biblical language to speak
T)
of "faithfulness" as "covenant-righteousness."
God's "righteousness" includes his being faithful to keep his promises and deliver
his people. But this does not mean that the word "righteousness" means faithfulness to
a promissory covenant. All instances of faithfulness to a promissory covenant may be
termed "righteousness," but not all "righteousness" is faithfulness to a promissory
covenant.
Other semantic relationships can also be set up by means of Hebrew parallelismus
membrorum. As James Kugel, Robert Alter, and J. P. Fokkelman have pointed out (as we
saw in Chapter 2 on Methodological Considerations), parallelism is almost never purely
synonymous; rather, each line brings its own semantic contribution so that the sum is
72
Seifrid, "Righteousness Language in the Hebrew Scriptures and Early Judaism," 424.
greater than the parts. Parallelism enables us to see in stereo. This is particularly relevant
to the passages where "righteousness" and "salvation" are used in parallelism: by putting
these two concepts together, the writer is helping us to view God's saving activity as at
the same time judicial activity.
Given the variety of conceptual, semantic, and even syntactical relationships that
can be utilized in Hebrew parallelism, it is methodologically unsound to attempt to
determine the semantic content of Hebrew words on this basis alone.
Cremer's relational theory of "righteousness," which is the basis of the New
Perspective claim that "the righteousness of God" is a cipher denoting "God's saving
faithfulness to his covenant," rests on Robert Lowth's outdated theory of Hebrew
synonymous parallelism. Rather than equating "righteousness" with "faithfulness" (or
"salvation"), it is better to see the instances in the Psalms and Isaiah where these terms
are used in parallelism as "binoculars" in which these different concepts mutually
interpret one another and lead to a picture that is larger than the sum of its parts.
b. "Righteousness" and "Salvation" in Parallel
I am going to examine a representative sample of the texts cited by Cremer in
which "righteousness" is parallel with "salvation." By doing some exegesis of these texts,
I hope to show that Cremer's attempt to negate the judicial dimension of "righteousness"
in these passages is invalid and that, in fact, the juxtaposition of the two concepts
suggests that the judicial element is still very much alive.

Isaiah 45:8
"Drip down, O heavens, from above,

and let the clouds pour down righteousness (p"!2S);
let the earth open up and salvation (S??T) bear fruit,
and righteousness (!"lp"J2J) spring up with it.
I, the LORD, have created it" (NASB).
In this verse, the divine blessings of "righteousness" and "salvation" are bestowed
on God's people by divine grace and power. Just as rain comes down from heaven and
the earth sprouts vegetation not of its own accord but by a supernatural power from
above, so the righteousness and salvation given to God's people are from God. "I, the
LORD, have created it." The parallelism of "righteousness" and "salvation" does not
mean that "righteousness" should be translated as "salvation" or "deliverance," for then
the passage would be redundant. Nor should the discourse concept of "saving
righteousness" be read into the lexical concept of np"135. What, then, is the meaning of
"righteousness" here? Oswalt says, "The saving of his people is the clearest expression of
God's essential character, to do right."73 The same point is made by Seitz, who
comments, "Whether experienced as salom or as violence, God's activity with Israel,
with Cyrus, and with the nations is consistent with and a manifestation of divine
righteousness."7
This explains the first occurrence of "righteousness" (masculine), but what about
the second (feminine)? The masculine is probably a reference to God's own
righteousness, that is, his right action; the feminine probably has to do with the result
among humans, namely, ethical righteousness. The second "righteousness" ("and
73
Oswalt, 2.206.
74
Christopher R. Seitz, "The Book of Isaiah 40-66," NIB 6.395.
righteousness spring up with it") is thus "earth's responsive commitment... accepting the
Lord's salvation, living his righteousness." 3
Isaiah 45:21
"And there is no other god besides me,

a righteous God and a Savior (ITE71E1 p^S _ l ?K);
there is none besides me" (ESV).
Here we have a slightly different case, since it is not one of the nouns for
righteousness but the adjective p,,7!3i that is employed in connection with salvation.
Nevertheless, it is clear that this word belongs to the same general category and must be
interpreted along with the others. The context veritably cries out with one of Deutero-
Isaiah's main themes, the polemic against idolatry and the doctrine of the Creator God's
uniqueness over against all the false claimants to deity. As for the collocation of the
words "righteous" and "Savior" to describe God, there is clearly an interpenetration of
the two ideas; perhaps it is even a case of hendiadys. Sawyer says that the two terms
overlap and mutually inteipret one another: "The Saviour is just and righteous, and the
righteous God is triumphant and saving."76 It would not make sense to say that
"righteous" here is synonymous with "saving," for that would make the statement
redundant, "A saving God and a Savior." Note a parallel passage a few chapters earlier,
Isaiah 43:3: "I am the LORD your God, the Holy One of Israel (bvn& ©lip), your
Savior (TjSTHpiO) (ESV). We would not infer from this verse that "holiness" is a
thoroughly positive term that means "salvation," or suppose that the Hebraic concept of
holiness was beneficent as opposed to the Western or Greek notion of some "abstract
75
J. Alec Motyer, The Prophecy of Isaiah (Downers Grove, InterVarsity, 1993), 360.
76
John F. A. Sawyer, Isaiah (The Daily Study Bible; Philadelphia: Westminster, 1986), 2.99.
conception of holiness" that involves making a distinction between the holy and unholy
(a distinction made by the Old Testament itself). So here in Isa 45:21. The two epithets,
"a righteous God" (p'niT^K) and "Savior" (STÎft), should not be equated with one
another, thereby swallowing up their distinctiveness; rather, each word must be allowed
to make its unique semantic contribution to the total idea. The total idea or discourse
concept is that the only true God, the only true Savior, accomplishes salvation in a
righteous mariner, that is, in such a way that the demands of his justice are satisfied.77
This interpretation is borne out a few verses later, when the noun and the verb for
righteousness are used to describe the nature of this salvation: "Only in the LORD, it
shall be said of me, are righteousness (nip"12J) and strength; to him shall come and be
ashamed all who were incensed against him. In the LORD all the offspring of Israel shall
be justified (or will be found righteous - NIV) (Ip'llT) and shall glory" (vv 24-25)
(ESV). It can be debated whether this means that those who turn to the LORD will be
made inlierently righteous or be legally pronounced righteous; nevertheless, the use of the
verb (the Qal imperfect of p"[3J) expounds the meaning of the noun (nip~!35, v 24) and
the adjective (p"1"7!?, v 21) and suggests that God's identity as "a righteous God and a
Savior" is to be understood in terms of his bringing about a salvation that involves his
making righteous or declaring righteous those who turn to him. And since this
righteousness is found only "in the LORD," it is not inappropriate to speak of "the
righteousness of/from God" in this context, a righteousness that those who turn to God
77
E. J. Young rightly says that Yahweh "has shown Himself to be just in that He has acted both in
judgment and salvation in accordance with the strictest demands of His holiness. He is also a Savior, whose
salvation is not profcrred at the expense of his justice, but is accomplished to its satisfaction." The Book of
Isaiah, Vol. Ill: Chapters 40-66 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1972), 215.
receive from him. It is even possible that Paul himself intertextually alludes to Isaiah
45:21-25 in several of the key passages that we will discuss later, especially 1 Cor 1:30; 2
Cor 5:21; Gal 2:17; Phil 3:9, which use the "in Christ" formula (or some equivalent) in
connection with righteousness or justification.78
Nor is there any thought in this verse, or anywhere in the near context, that God's
saving activity is "righteous" in the sense that his salvation is the expression of his
covenant faithfulness, or that he saves his covenant people in accordance with his
faithfulness to his election of them. Although such statements would no doubt be
perfectly good theology, the focus of the immediate context is not on God's faithfulness
to his people, but on the polemic against those - whether the rebellious covenant people
or the idolatrous nations - who turn to their false gods for deliverance. The verses that
70
immediately follow make this clear: "Turn to me and be saved, all the ends of the earth\
For I am God, and there is no other. By myself 1 have sworn; from my mouth has gone
out in righteousness a word that shall not return: 'To me every knee shall bow, every
tongue shall swear allegiance'" (vv 22-23) (ESV). The fact that God is "a righteous God
and a Savior" is thus an argument against idolatry, whether that of the nations or that of
the covenant people. All humans must turn to the one true Creator God as their source of
salvation and deliverance, since he alone provides true, righteous deliverance. Nothing in
the context suggests that "a righteous God" is code for God's covenant faithfulness to
Israel, a thought that would be out of place in the immediate context, which is a polemic
The LXX (as it has come down to us) does not employ the preposition ev directly in connection with the
verb StKcuoco. However, it does use it in the near context: fend Kupiou SiKatojOfjoovxat Kai gv x(b Qz&
evSoâaOpcovxai Jt&v TO ompua rcov utcov 'IapanX (Isa 45:25).
79
"Be saved" is the Niphal imperative of S7ET - the same root as JTHtfiO (Savior).
against Gentile idolatry and a universal call to all the nations to acknowledge the one true
God.
Thus, Isaiah 45:21 does not show that "righteousness" in Hebrew means
"salvation" or "covenant faithfulness." This verse is perfectly consistent with the
traditional understanding of righteousness as having to do with judicial correctness and/or
activity.80
Isaiah 46:12-13
"Listen to me, you stubborn-hearted,

you who are far from righteousness (np"12J).
I am bringing my righteousness (HpHlS) near,
it is not far away;
and my salvation (nS?12?ri) will not be delayed.
I will grant salvation (HÎOTl) to Zion,
my splendor (i"nK?n) to Israel" (NIV).
Unless we are going to argue that "splendor" is another synonym for salvation,
there is no need to take "righteousness" here as equivalent to salvation. The words
"righteousness" and "splendor" help to flesh out what is involved when God brings about
salvation: it is a salvation that (b) is comes by means of his righteous judicial activity
and (b) results in splendor or glory. But the terms are not equivalent.
Of even greater importance is the fact that the word "righteousness" occurs in
v 12 in a clearly moral or ethical sense: "Listen to me ... you who are far from
righteousness." Israel's glaring lack of righteousness is something that Isaiah has been at
Zech 9:9 is a parallel passage to Isa 45:21 in that it contains the same juxtaposition of the adjective p'HIS
and a form of "to save" (in this case, the Niphal participle of PSST): "Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion!
Shout aloud, O daughter of Jerusalem! Behold, your king is coming to you; righteous and having salvation
is he (Nin l?En3"! p'HX I SiKaioc; Kai ocot/ov amoq)" (ESV). The coming messianic king is characterized as
"righteous" and "having salvation," with the implication that he will bring salvation to the people by means
of royal-judicial activity.
pains to highlight from the very first chapter. "See how the faithful city has become a
harlot! She once was full of justice (tDSSPP); righteousness (p"TS) used to dwell in her -
but now murderers!" (Isa 1:21) (NIV) (cp. 5:7, 23; 26:10; 57:12; 58:2; 59:1-15; 64:6).
Against the dark backdrop of Israel's desperate lack of moral righteousness comes the
promise of God's righteousness. In God's sovereign grace, and in spite of Israel's
hardness of heart, God is going to do something unexpected - he will bring his
righteousness near, and so the unrighteous will be made/declared righteous and those
falling short of God's glory will be granted God's splendor. If in v 12 np"lS has a moral
meaning ("you who are far from righteousness"), then in v 13 it must as well ("I am
bringing my righteousness near"), although the way in which the divine righteousness is
bestowed on Israel is not developed, i.e., it could be either by making Israel inherently
righteous, or by declaring Israel forgiven, justified, and reckoned as righteous. I lean
toward the latter in view of passages like Isa 45:25 (quoted above) and 53:11 ("by his
knowledge shall the righteous one, my servant, make many to be accounted as righteous
[p"1"7!??], and he shall bear their iniquities" [ESV]), along with the consistency of this
interpretation with Paul's handling of the same theme.
But the narrow lexical point does not rest on these larger biblical-theological
decisions. Isaiah 46:12-13 makes a simple point: Israel's lack of righteousness will be
supplied by God himself. The act of doing so is an act of salvation, but this does not
mean that righteousness is salvation. Rather, righteousness is the means of salvation (cp.
Rom 1:16-18; see discussion in Chapter 6). God sovereignly brings his righteousness to
bear on the situation of Israel's sinful condition and alienation from righteousness. It is a
judicial act that has a salvific result. And righteousness here is certainly not God's
covenant faithfulness, a thought that is totally foreign to the context.
Isaiah 51:5, 6, 8
Verse 5:
"My righteousness is near,
my salvation has gone forth."
Verse 6:
"My salvation will be forever,
and my righteousness will not wane."
Verse 8:
"My righteousness will be forever,
and my salvation to all generations."
Oswalt agrees with Cremer and interprets God's righteousness here as "his
faithfulness to the ancient promises," "his faithfulness to his own nature and promises
that culminate in human salvation." These ideas may be present in the broader context
as discourse concepts, but they should not be read into the lexical concept of the word
"righteousness" per se. In fact, the opening line, "Listen to me, you who pursue
righteousness (masc), you who seek the LORD" (ESV),82 suggests that "my
righteousness" (3x in vv 5, 6, and 8) also has an ethical meaning or at least an ethical
context, but with a slight shift to the notion that the pursuit of righteousness in itself is
nothing unless acknowledged by God. Thus "my righteousness" would mean
"righteousness before God." Although Oswalt himself adheres to the Cremer view, he
also recognizes the ethical dimension of righteousness in v 1 and says, "Such persons will
81
Oswalt, 2.334, 337.
82
Some translate it, "you who pursue deliverance." John L. McKenzie, Second Isaiah (AB 20; Garden
City: Doubleday, 1968), 118; Claus Westermann, Isaiah 40-66: A Commentary (OTL; trans, by D. M. G.
Stalker; Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1969), 232. But clearly "righteousness" is the correct translation
here, as is demonstrated by the use of the verb "pursue" and the parallel phrase, "you who seek the LORD."
R. N. Whybray, Isaiah 40-66 (NCB; London: Oliphants, 1975), 154-5.
eventually come to lcnow that the only righteousness they can ever produce is that which
is given to them as a gift by the God they seek."83 This is particularly clear when one
recognizes Isaiah's indictment of Israel up to this point, that they are a people who lack
righteousness and who are in fact characterized by profound wickedness. Seitz makes the
helpful connection with the Servant Song to follow in chapter 53: "In the suffering
servant poem to follow, the servants will reach the conclusion that 'the righteous one, my
servant, shall make many righteous' (53:11). Without his yet knowing it, it will be
through the servant that God's righteousness is manifested and shared." The ethical
starting point of "righteousness" (righteousness sought, righteousness lacking, and
righteousness provided by God) is reinforced by verse 7: "Listen to me, you who know
righteousness (masc), the people in whose heart is my law" (ESV).
In view of the tendency of many commentators to translate "my righteousness" as
"my deliverance," Motyer makes an excellent point:
Here, righteousness and salvation are parallel; the latter being what the Lord
does; the former, the quality of that which infills it. The saving work satisfies
every standard of the Lord's righteous nature, meets every legal claim and
discharges every debt before the eternal law. The tendency to offer translations
like "deliverance" (RSV) must be resisted. There is no instance that actually
demands such a translation, but the real problem is that what is essentially a
description of the character of God is turned into a description of his acts.
Righteousness infills all that he does because that is what he is.85
There are other passages that could be examined, but the above are sufficient to
demonstrate that Cremer's iustitia salutifera theory requires substantial modification.
Cremer and his followers appeal to these Hebrew parallelisms, and others not examined
here, to argue that "God's righteousness" always denotes God's saving activity as an
Oswalt. 2.334.
Seitz, 448.
Motyer, 405.
expression of God's covenant faithfulness. Yet as we have seen, the appeal to Hebrew
parallelism does not support the desired conclusion, since it either presupposes Robert
Lowth's outdated theory of synonymous parallelism or involves what James Barr calls
"totality transfer" in which discourse concepts are illegitimately transferred into lexical
concepts. Hebrew parallelism does not always mean that the two members of the
parallelism are synonymous. The relationship can be more nuanced. In this case,
"righteousness" is the broader category, of which "faithfulness" is a non-
exhaustive subset. God is righteous when he keeps his promises: "You have kept your
promise, for you are righteous (p'HE)" (Neh 9:8 ESV). He is also righteous when he
judges the wicked. In his article on the root for "salvation" words based on the S?^"1 root
in TDOT, John F. A. Sawyer acknowledges that in Deutero-Isaiah "salvation" and
"righteousness" are closely related, even "virtually synonymous." However, he does
acknowledge the distinction between them.
The distinction between these two closely related words can probably best be
expressed in terms of the common secular usage of sedeq, saddiq, etc. with a
human subject, in contrast to the almost exclusively theological application of
yeshua, which has less explicitly forensic overtones.'
The words p~!2 and <~!p"125 are commonly used in the secular sense with a human
subject, e.g., a king or a judge (see analysis in section A above), whereas "salvation" is
almost exclusively attributed to God. God alone saves, but when he does so, he saves in a
manner that has analogies with human judicial activity. To simplistically translate
p""!?s!/npl2J as "salvation" is to leave out the forensic overtones uniquely contributed by
p""I?5/np"125 when used in parallel with "salvation." The discourse concepts in the
86
JohnF. A. Sawyer, "tf©\" TDOT6.459 (=ThWAT3.1054).
surrounding context should not be allowed to overpower the lexical concepts of the
words themselves.
A number of possible connections between the two terms can be envisioned. One
Isaiah commentator, commenting on Isa 51:6 ("my salvation will be forever, and my
righteousness will not wane"), explains the parallelism by suggesting that "the underlying
principle of 'salvation' is God's justice." Or it could be that the manner in which God
effects salvation is by a judicial act of defeating (and thus condemning) Israel's foes and
saving (and thus vindicating) formerly exiled Israel. The judicial and the salvific are
intertwined and mutually illuminating aspects of the same event. The key is that while
this does occur in a number of passages in Deutero-Isaiah, we cannot reduce p"|5S/np"]!!S
to salvation. To do so would be to confuse discourse concepts with lexical concepts and
to reduce all Hebrew parallelism to synonymous parallelism.
c. "Righteousness" and "Faithfulness" in Parallel
Now I would like to examine the cases where the Hebrew words for
"righteousness" occur in parallelism with the two Hebrew words commonly translated
"faithfulness" (HSIfDK and HEX). These words, in and of themselves, do not denote
"covenant" faithfulness per se, much less "faithfulness to the Abrahamic or Davidic
covenant." Such ideas would have to be supplied by the context. For example, "Lord,
where is your steadfast love (1011) of old, which by your faithfulness (i"I31ftK) you swore
to David?" (Ps 89:49 ESV). Or, "He has remembered his steadfast love OPn) and
87
Jan L. Koole, Isaiah III, Vol. 2: Isaiah 49-55 (Historical Commentary on the Old Testament; trans.
Anthony P. Runia; Leuven: Peeters, 1998), 157; cp. 151.
faithfulness (njflOK) to the house of Israel" (Ps 98:3 ESV). The use of covenantal verbs
such as "swore" and "remembered" and the reference to "the house of Israel" provide
semantic clues as to the covenantal character of God's faithfulness in these cases.
Covenantal discourse concepts are clearly present in the context of these particular
passages, but that does not mean that covenantal overtones are inherent in the lexical
content of the words rttlEK and n p $ every time they are used.
The terms are commonly used in non-covenantal contexts. When David and
Abishai stole into Saul's camp while he and his men were asleep, and David decided not
to take Saul's life even when he could have, David said, "The LORD rewards every man
for his righteousness ( H p l ? ) and his faithfulness (HJIOK), for the LORD gave you into
my hand today, and I would not put out my hand against the LORD'S anointed" (1 Sam
26:23 ESV). The meaning here seems to be something akin to "moral integrity,
uprightness." During the reign of Jehoash, when repairs were being made to the temple,
the king's secretary and the high priest "did not ask an accounting from the men into
whose hands they delivered the money to pay out to the workmen, for they dealt honestly
(H3p^5)" (2 Kings 12:16 ESV; cp. 2 Kings 22:7; 2 Chron 31:12, 15; 34:12).
There are even cases where "faithfulness" would seem to be closer semantically
to "justice" and "righteousness." Consider, for example, Deut 32:4:
"The Rock, his work is perfect,

for all his ways are justice (£DS$P / Kpiaeic).
A God of faithfulness (PDIftN 7K / Geoc; taoxoq)
and without iniquity (712? "pX / OUK saxiv dSiKia),
just (p'HS / 5kaioc;) and upright ("IST / oaioq) is he" (ESV).
God's faithfulness, righteousness, and uprightness are then contrasted with
Israel's sinfulness, verse 5:
"They have dealt corruptly with him;

they are no longer his children because they are blemished;
they are a crooked and twisted generation" (ESV).
God's faithfulness, then, in this context is not his faithfulness to the Abrahamic
covenant in spite o/Israel's failure,88 but his justice and moral perfection in contrast with
Israel's sinfulness.
Consider also Psalm 96:13:
"Then shall all the trees of the forest sing for joy
before the Lord, for he comes,
for he comes to judge the earth.
He will judge the world in righteousness (p~|2(Q),
and the peoples in his faithfulness (in21Q#5)" (ESV).
What does it mean for God to "judge the world ... in faithfulness"? Here it likely
means that he judges "with integrity and truth, with perfect fairness." Note that the
parallel passage, Ps 98:9 replaces rniQX with D'HttTO ("uprightness, equity"): "He will
judge the world with righteousness, and the peoples with equity'" (ESV; cp. Ps 9:7-8;
99:4). Clearly it does not mean that God judges the world by means of his faithfulness in
keeping his covenant promises to his people, since God is here said to be judging the
entire world "in his faithfulness."
Another noteworthy case is the statement, "I will faithfully (Tip&Q / Sucaioic;) give
them their recompense" (Isa 61:8). Although "recompense" (7l7i?S) has a positive
connotation in this context, i.e., "reward, wages," it is significant that the divine iustitia
88
As James D. G. Dunn claims in The Theology of Paul the Apostle (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998),
342.
distributiva can be described using the term npK. When God recompenses human
behavior, blessing the righteous and meting out punishment on the wicked, he is a
"faithful" judge. God as the divine judge executes justice, not like human judges, but
with utter consistency, integrity, and fairness - in a word, "faithfully."
Compare the description of the Messiah in Isaiah 11, especially verse 5:

1
"There shall come forth a shoot from the stump of Jesse,
and a branch from his roots shall bear fruit.
2
And the Spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him,
the Spirit of wisdom and understanding,
the Spirit of counsel and might,
the Spirit of knowledge and the fear of the Lord.
3
And his delight shall be in the fear of the Lord.
He shall not judge by what his eyes see,
or decide disputes by what his ears hear,
4
but with righteousness he shall judge the poor,
and decide with equity for the meek of the earth;
and he shall strike the earth with the rod of his mouth,
and with the breath of his lips he shall kill the wicked.
5
Righteousness (p"l?) shall be the belt of his waist,
and faithfulness (7\m$) the belt of his loins" (ESV).
Compare Isaiah 16:5:
"... then a throne will be established in steadfast love ("1011),

and on it will sit in faithfulness (J"ipN)
in the tent of David
one who judges and seeks justice (tDSEJp)
and is swift to do righteousness (p"12)" (ESV)
See also Isa 42:3:
"A bruised reed he will not break,

and a faintly burning wick he will not quench;
he will faithfully ( H P ^ ) bring forth justice (BS^p)" (ESV).
The meaning of "faithfully bring forth justice" is explicated in the subsequent
verse:
He will not grow faint or be discouraged

till he has established justice (£DS$P) in the earth;
and the coastlands wait for his law" (ESV).
The Servant of the Lord will see to it that justice is established, in spite of all
opposition. It has nothing to do with keeping one's promises, i.e., covenant faithfulness.
A parallel usage of njllOK/ripX with reference to truth, justice, and integrity in
ordinary human judicial contexts can also be found: Prov 12:17; 29:14; Isa 59:4; Jer 5:1.
So what are we to make of the passages that speak of God's "faithfulness" and
"righteousness" in parallelism?
Psalm 40:10:
"I have not hidden Your righteousness (np"125) within my heart;
I have spoken of Your faithfulness (n31IDX) and Your salvation (HlJI^ri);
I have not concealed Your lovingkindness ("Tpn) and Your truth (HON)
from the great congregation" (NASB).
Psalm 143:1-2:
"Hear my prayer, O LORD;
In your faithfulness (njrlQK) answer me,
in your righteousness (Hp"7!15)!
Enter not into judgment with your servant,
for no one living is righteous before you" (ESV).
It seems to me that in these cases, "faithfulness" has a connotation of "reliability,
commitment, and loyalty." God is loyal to his servants and so he can be relied on to
deliver them from their enemies when they call to him in their time of need. It is a
personal relationship between God and the psalmist. God will be faithful to deliver his
servant who has been faithful to him. There is no need to bring in the notion of God's
fulfillment of his covenant obligations to Israel as a nation.

But what about the following verses? Surely here, if anywhere, "faithfulness"
would seem to mean "covenant faithfulness." And since the terms for "faithfulness" are
in parallel with "righteousness," the terms for "righteousness" would also seem to carry
the connotation of "covenant faithfulness."
Hosea 2:19-20:
"And I will betroth you to me forever. 1 will betroth you to me in righteousness
( p i ? ) and injustice, in steadfast love and in mercy. I will betroth you to me in
faithfulness (HJ1QK). And you shall know the Lord" (ESV).
Zech 8:7-8:
"Thus says the Lord of hosts: behold, 1 will save my people from the east country
and from the west country, and 1 will bring them to dwell in the midst of
Jerusalem. And they shall be my people, and I will be their God, in faithfulness
(DJ?£) and in righteousness (nj?lX)" (ESV).89
But note that in both verses the phrase is "in faithfulness." In other words, when
God makes the new covenant, he will establish it in such a thoroughgoing manner that he
will betroth his people to himself "forever," "in faithfulness." They shall be his people
and he will be their God "in faithfulness." In other words, it will be an unbreakable
covenant, an irrevocable bond. God will secure a covenant bond that is characterized on
both the divine and the human side by utter fidelity, "and you shall know the LORD" (cp.
Isa 54:13; Jer 31:33-34). The term "faithfulness" provides insight into the unique,
unbreakable quality of the new covenant itself, a quality that arises particularly from the
inner transformation of the human covenant partner, in contrast to the breakability of the
Compare also: "You found his [Abraham's] heart faithful before you, and made a covenant to give to his
offspring the land of the Canaanite, the Hittite, the Amorite, the Perizzite, the Jebusite, and the Girgashite.
And you have kept your promise, for C3) you are righteous (p,rT12)" (Neh 9:8 ESV). This is a different
construction using the adjective, but it shows that keeping one's promises is a subset of righteousness. But
it would be a mistake to argue from this verse that righteousness is keeping one's promises. As Mark
Seifrid has argued, "All 'covenant-keeping' is righteous behavior, but not all righteous behavior is
'covenant4ieeping.'" ("Righteousness Language in the Hebrew Scriptures and Early Judaism," 424.) This
semantic hierarchy is demonstrated by the use of the word "for" ( 1 3).
old covenant due to Israel's unfaithfulness. It does not denote God's fulfillment of his
covenant obligations to his people, but the people's fulfillment of their obligations to
God. So, yes, the term H31QK is covenantal here, but the precise focus is different from
what Cremer claimed.
What, then, is the significance of the parallelism between "faithfulness" and
"righteousness" in Hosea 2:19 and Zech. 8:8? In accordance with the Kugel-Alter theory
of Hebrew parallelism, it would not be appropriate to interpret them as exact synonyms
but rather as binoculars that provide depth-perception. In the new covenant, God will
betroth his people to himself in faithfulness because his grace, love and mercy, on the one
hand, and the demands of his justice, on the other, are both satisfied. This judicial
dimension of the new covenant is ultimately fulfilled in the penal substitutionary death of
Christ. So the uniqueness of the new covenant consists in not only the inner
transformation of the human covenant partner but also its judicial aspect in which God's
righteousness comes to expression.
d. "Righteousness" in Parallel with a Variety of Other Terms
Finally, it is telling that p"|2S/np"1S occurs in Hebrew parallelism with a wide
variety of terms, each having its own meaning quite distinct from "righteousness." The
Hebrew words for "righteousness" are used in parallel with npK ("truth, faithfulness"),
I p n ("steadfast love, grace"), D^pni ("mercy"), 01^2? ("peace"), BS^P ("judgment"),

T D 3 ("glory"), etc.90 Here is the complete list of words with which p"1S/np"TS is found
in parallel:
Righteousness parallel with judgment words (72x):

BS#» (69x)
BD& ("judge," Ps 50:6)
Dp2/npp? ("vengeance," Isa 59:17; Jer 11:20)
Righteousness parallel with straightness words (13x):

D-IBTO ("equity," 7x; e.g., Ps 9:9)
T)ETp ("uprightness," Isa 11:4)
"IK?; ("straight, upright," Ps 11:7; Prov 16:13; Isa 45:13)
rner ("uprightness," 1 Kings 3:6)
niD2 ("straightness, uprightness" Isa 59:114)
Righteousness parallel with grace words (1 lx):

I D n ("steadfast love," lOx; e.g., Ps 36:10)
D^prn ("compassion," Hos 2:19)
Righteousness parallel with salvation words (16x):

n&mi ("salvation," 7x; e.g., Ps 98:2)
nSHtflTi ("salvation," 4x; e.g., Ps 71:15)
STCT ("salvation," 5x; e.g., Isa 61:10)
Righteousness parallel with faithfulness words (22x):

nOK ("faithfulness, truth," 12x; e.g., 1 Kings 3:6)
n31B£ ("faithfulness, fidelity" 9x; e.g., Ps 143:1)
D"3JP8 ("faithfulness," Isa 26:2)
Righteousness parallel with miscellaneous positive terms:

TiK ("light," Isa 58:8)
rDm*f ("healing," Isa 58:8)
H-p-13 ("blessing," Ps 24:5)
nnia? ("might," Ps 71:18-19)
T D 3 ("glory," Isa 62:2)
TS? ("strength," Isa 45:24)
H13S7 ("humility," Ps 45:4)
See TDOT 12.246-49 for survey of related terms.

D ^ S ("wonders," Ps 88:12)
nbti ("complete," Deut 25:15)
ahp ("peace," Ps 72:3)
OD ("name," Ps 89:16)
n'pni^ ("praise," Isa 61:11)
n"1in ("law," Ps 119:142)
If we take p"|3S/np"l!S as synonymous with each word with which it is used in
parallel, then all of these words become synonyms of one another, which is absurd. It is
better to see p135/np*12J as contributing its own judicial nuance regardless of whatever
term it is paired with. The terms with which it is paired also transfer their nuances to
p"IS/np*125, resulting often in a hendiadys in which a new meaning that is greater than
the sum of its parts emerges from the dyad.
e. Conclusion
God's salvation is the result of his faithfulness to his covenant with Abraham.
God's salvation is also an expression of his righteousness, because he executes salvation
in a manner that is consistent with his justice and holiness; indeed, salvation itself is an
essentially judicial activity, for salvation comes through judgment. For example, at the
exodus, God's deliverance of his people was accomplished by judgment on the
Egyptians. At the cross, salvation was accomplished because the judgment we deserved
was borne by Jesus as our substitute. When "God's salvation" or "God's faithfulness" are
found in parallel with "God's righteousness," the conclusion we are to draw is not that
the word "righteousness" itself means "salvation" or "faithfulness," but that God's saving
activity comes in fulfillment of his covenant promises and is an expression of his

righteousness. Especially in those cases where "salvation" and "righteousness" are
parallel (see, e.g., Psalm 98:2; Isaiah 51:5-8; 56:1), the point is that God's salvation has a
strongly judicial dimension. Robert Lowth's static theory of synonymous parallelism has
been superseded in the last 30 years by a more nuanced understanding, and this scholarly
shift in the interpretation of Hebrew poetry undermines one of the pillars of both
Cremer's relational theory and the New Perspective interpretation of righteousness that is
dependent on Cremer's theory. When properly understood, Hebrew parallelism provides
no support for the theory that SiKaioauvn, 6eou is a cipher for God's faithfulness to his
covenant.
3. LXX's rendering of "ion with SiKaioauvn and of Hp*123 with eA,£rmoauvn/£Xsoq
Cremer's next argument rests on an appeal to the way in which the Septuagint
translators understood the word SiKaioauvn in reference to the underlying Hebrew. As I
noted above (see Tables 4-6 and associated commentary), a surprising feature of the LXX
as a translation is the use of eXsr|poauvn eight times and eXeoq three times to translate
the feminine !"!p"1S, and, on the other hand, the use of Sucaioauvri nine times to translate
Ipn. 9 3 These features were noted by Hermann Cremer as well; he argued that they
supported his interpretation of "righteousness" in the Hebrew Bible as a fundamentally
positive concept, practically equivalent to grace.94 Even before Cremer, Edwin Hatch had
argued that this evidence shows that "the two words SiKaioauvn, and eXenjaoouvri had
91
Deut 6:25; 24:13; Ps 23:5 LXX /24:5 MT ; 32:5 LXX /33:5 MT ; 102:6 LXX /103:6 MT ; Isa 1:27; 28:17; 59:16.
92
Isa 56:1; Ezek 18:19, 21.
93
Gen 19:19; 20:13; 21:23; 24:27; 32:11 [32:10™]; Exod 15:13; 34:7; Prov 20:28; Isa 63:7.
94
interpenetrated each other." 5 J. A. Ziesler has a lengthy section in which he picks up and
expands Hatch's and Cremer's proposals. He argues that the Greek word SiKaioauvn, by
being chosen to translate "Ipn in the LXX, has taken on a gracious and covenantal
meaning. Ziesler writes:
The meaning of the Greek words seems to be dominated by the Hebrew words
they render ... The LXX translators seem to have perceived that ts-d-q was
basically covenantal... We conclude ... that the Greek noun has taken over the
range of meanings of np"12J, and that this is shown by its use for chesed ... What
evidence we have suggests that the translators knew what they were doing and
proceeded with sensitivity and intelligence. For them, Sucai- had acquired the
gracious (because covenantal) associations of the Hebrew words.
By way of response, it bears pointing out that the argument depends on the
assumption that "ipn is an inherently covenantal word. But it is more accurate to say that
"ipn is kindness that can be exercised in both covenantal and non-covenantal
relationships. "It is ... unwise to regard hesed... as if it were an aspect or ingredient of
covenant as such. Rather, the covenant comes in to reinforce the commitment to hesed in
situations where its exercise is not naturally to be expected."97 The fact that the LXX
translators do not appear to have seen in the word "Ipn any connotation of covenant
faithfulness is made clear in Gen 19:19 where Lot was shown "Ipn /SiKaioauvn, even
though God made his covenant with Abraam and not with Lot. That the LXX
5
Edwin Hatch, Essays in Biblical Greek (Oxford: Clarendon, 1889), 50.
96
J. A. Ziesler, The Meaning of Righteousness in Paul: A Linguistic and Theological Enquiry (SNTSMS
20; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1972), 67-68.
97
D. A. Baer and R. P. Gordon, ""ion," NIDOTTE 2.212; cp. Katharine Doob Sakenfeld, The Meaning of
Hesed in the Hebrew Bible: A New Inquiry (HSM 17; Missoula, Montana: Scholars Press, 1978).
9S
John William Wcvcrs, Notes on the Greek Text of Genesis (SBLSCS 35; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1993),
277.
translators did not ordinarily interpret I p n as "covenant faithfulness" is further
corroborated by their usual choice of sA-eoc; ("mercy") to translate the word.
Furthermore, Cremer's argument also depends on the assumption that npn
always means an act of grace or mercy shown to the undeserving. It can mean this, but
there are also cases where nplj denotes an act of kindness or beneficence that is morally
required on the part of the superior party and which the inferior party is in some sense
worthy of receiving.
Hesed is never performed randomly; a responsibility must always be implicit or

explicit... While hesed is not exchanged quid pro quo, it is rooted in
responsibility ... Because of his powerful status, the superior party is always free
not to perform the act of hesed ... Nevertheless, the potential actor has a privately
and even publicly recognized responsibility to do hesed because of the
relationship in which he stands.99
Hence, the LXX translators' decision to render npn as SiKaioauvn, ("an act of
righteousness") in some cases is quite logical. We as modern interpreters may think the
translators overplayed the "responsibility" dimension of non in some of the nine cases,
but our modern exegetical sensibilities are irrelevant. The LXX translators seem to have
thought that npn, in at least these nine instances, meant "an act of righteousness."100
David Hill is therefore correct when he observes: "Perhaps we may find in this
translation evidence that npn was not conceived of as entirely a spontaneous feeling, but
in terms of what could be expected within a relationship: if so, the idea would be more
adequately conveyed by SiKaioauvn, than by the word sXeoc;."101
99
Sakenfeld, The Meaning of Hesed, 82, 91, 234.
100
Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of Genesis, 295, 311.
101
David Hill, Greek Words and Hebrew Meanings, 106.
Chapter 4: Righteousness in the Old Testament -211
These observations are borne out when we examine each of these 20 verses in
detail.
A. LXX's Use of Sucaioauvn, (9x) to Render "Ipn
(1) Genesis 19:19
MT: "Now behold, your servant has found favor (}!!) in your sight, and you have
magnified your lovingkindness (^non), which you have shown me by saving my
life" (NASB).
LXX: "I pray, Lord, since your servant has found mercy (sXsoc;) before you and
you have magnified your righteousness (rf|v SiKaioauvnv aou), with which you
have dealt with me that my soul may live" (NETS modified).
These are Lot's words to one of the angels who had come to rouse him and his
family so that they would escape the city of Sodom before the judgment began.
Normally, the word }n is rendered with yfiaxq in the LXX, but here zkzoq is chosen.
However, this then made it more difficult to use sXeoq for npn in the next clause, and so
perhaps SiKaioouvri was chosen to render npn partly on stylistic grounds, to avoid
repetition of ekeoq. I say "partly" because there also appears to be another motive at work
here, namely, the sense that the LORD (through the agency of the angels) has acted
righteously in providing deliverance for righteous Lot and his family. For as Abraham
had argued in his intercession before the LORD in the preceding chapter, it would be
unjust for God to sweep away the righteous along with the wicked in the overthrow of
Sodom, thus treating the righteous and the wicked the same (Gen 18:22-33). It was
102
Consider Abraham's plea to God in Gen 18:25: "Far be it from you to do such a thing, to put the
righteous (p,~12 / 8tKcuoc;) to death with the wicked, so that the righteous (p,r!25 / 6 SVKOUOC,) fare as the
wicked! Far be that from you! Shall not the Judge of all the earth do what is just (DBtpi? / Kpimc;)?" (ESV).
therefore righteous for God to warn Lot (identified in context as the one "righteous" in
the city) and allow him to escape before the judgment fell. Yet Lot was slow to heed
the angels' warnings and had to be pulled out of the city by the hand before it was too
late.104 Because of the narrative's qualified assessment of Lot as a basically righteous but
somewhat double-minded individual, it makes sense for the LXX translator to have Lot
attribute the saving of his life both to God's "mercy" (sXeoq) and to God's
"righteousness" (SiKaioauvn).
(2) Genesis 20:13
MT: "This is the kindness ("^"Ipi! nt) you must do me: at every place to which
we come, say of me, 'He is my brother'" (ESV).
LXX: "This righteousness (xauTrrv xf|v SiKaioauvnv) you shall do for me: in
every place, there where we enter, say about me, He is my brother" (NETS).
Abraham is here recounting to Abimelech king of Gerar the agreement that he and
Sarah made prior to coming to any foreign city. Abraham fears that the godless king will
kill him and take her for the royal harem (Gen 20:11).105 So he has Sarah say, "He is my
brother," which, as Abraham points out, is partly true since she was the daughter of his
father but not of his mother (v. 12). The MT has Abraham refer to Sarah's thus protecting
her husband, even at some peril to herself, as an act of npn. It might be tempting to think
of this in relational terms as an act of loyalty to Abraham based on Sarah's commitment
to him in the marriage covenant, but there is no basis for this in the context. Rather, it
seems that Abraham views Sarah's act as one that only she can perform in order to
103
"Lot may also be understood as a 'righteous man' in the narrative: since there were not ten, the city was
not saved, but the one, Lot, proved himself by protecting the messengers against the Sodomites."
Sakenfeld, 100.
104
Gen 19:16: "But he lingered. So the men seized him and his wife and his two daughters by the hand, the
LORD being merciful to him, and they brought him out and set him outside the city" (ESV).
105
Nahum M. Sarna, Genesis (JPSTC; Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society, 1989), 144.
protect his life while he is in the vulnerable position of being a ger or sojourner in a
foreign country.106 From Abraham's perspective, then, and given his perceived mortal
danger, the proposed "kindness" or "favor" is in some sense one that Sarah is obligated to
fulfill as his wife. We must not forget the cultural reality that Sarah's compliance with
Abraham's request would have been a matter of simple obedience for her. Conversely,
failure to fulfill it would put Abraham's life in jeopardy, at least in his view.107 As a
result, "this kindness" is not so much an optional act of mercy or grace as an act that
Sarah is in some sense duty-bound to fulfill ("this is the kindness which you shall do for
me").1 8 If this reading is plausible, then the LXX translators may have had some
justification for rendering "^npn HT as xauxnv xfiv SiKaioauvnv, "this [is] the
righteousness." Thus Wevers writes:
The use of SiKaioauvn, to render n p n refers to Sarra's action which Abraam

proposes; as her husband he could tell her what to do. What he tells her to do is an
act of Tightness, a SiKaioauvrj. The Hebrew would probably be translated "favor,"
i.e. "do me this favor," which is not what [the LXX translator] has made of it.109
In any event, even if we cannot be totally confident that we are correctly
discerning the LXX translators' intent, there is little reason to think that a Greek-speaking
reader of the LXX would have interpreted SiKaioauvn, here as having a specialized
Hebraic meaning, as if some covenantal or relational overtones were infused into the
"Ger is a man who, either alone or with his family, leaves his village and tribe, because of war (2S 4:3),
famine (Ru 1:1), pestilence, blood-guilt, etc., and seeks shelter and sojourn elsewhere, where his right to
own land, to marry, and to participate in the administration of justice, in the cult, and in war is curtailed:
sojourner, alien." William L. Holladay, A Concise Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament
(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans/Leiden: Brill, 1991), 64.
107
Sakenfeld, The Meaning of Hesed, 27.
108
Sakenfeld, quoting Glueck, speaks of the "requirement form" of the statement. "This is your hesed
which you 'must' do." Sakenfeld, 26.
109
Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of Genesis, 295.
words by virtue of representing the Hebrew word npn, since the ordinary meaning of
SiKaioouvri reasonably suits the context and does not demand a more arcane meaning.
(3) Genesis 21:23
MT: "Now therefore swear to me here by God that you will not deal falsely with
me or with my offspring or with my posterity, but according to the kindness
( I p n ? ) that I have shown to you, you shall show to me and to the land in which
you have sojourned" (NASB).
LXX: "Now then swear to me by God that you will not injure me nor my
offspring nor my name, but according to the righteousness (Kara xf|v
SiKaioauvnv) with which I have dealt with you, you will deal with me" (NETS).
Abimelech and Phicol the commander of his army are here speaking to Abraham,
requesting him to make a covenant with them. Abimelech appeals to his past actions of
right dealing, referring to his uprightness in restoring Sarah to Abraham and adding a
significant honor price besides as a public vindication of her innocence (Gen 20:14-
16). no Now it is true that, unlike the other cases, we have an explicitly covenantal context
here. A few verses later we are told that Abimelech's servants had seized one of
Abraham's wells of water (Gen 21:25). Once they had resolved the matter, "the two men
made a covenant" (v. 27) which was confirmed by an oath and sealed by Abraham's gift
of seven ewe lambs sent to Abimelech (vv. 27-31). But the concept of npn is distinct
from the covenant per se. It is part of the terms of the covenant: Abimelech asks
Abraham to swear that "according to the kindness ( I p n ? ) that I have shown to you, you
shall show to me." Abimelech recognizes that God is with Abraham in all that he does (v.
22) and perceives that Abraham's family is only going to grow more and more successful
Sarna, 149; Sakenfeld, 71 n. 91.

in the land. 1 '' Just as he had extended n p n to Abraham in the previous incident with
Sarah, so he now asks Abraham to show kindness to him and his descendants in the
future as Abraham's family grows more powerful. Clearly, then, "Tpn is not an inherently
covenantal word, for the covenant was made on the basis of Abimelech's past n p n to
Abraham. Furthermore, Abraham's promise to show n p n to Abimelech and his
descendants in the future is one of the primary terms of the covenant. With regard to the
LXX's translational decision, Wevers rightly notes: "Abimelech wants Abraam to
respond in kind not on the basis of eXsoq but rather of 'righteousness.' The covenant
between two human beings is to be based not on grace but on rightness defined in terms
of past actions."112
(4) Genesis 24:27
MT: "Blessed be the LORD, the God of my master Abraham, who has not forsaken
his steadfast love and his faithfulness (inftXI "HOD) toward my master" (ESV).
LXX: "Blessed be the Lord, the God of my lord Abraam, who has not left behind
his righteousness and truth (xfiv SiKaioauvnv auxou Kai xf|v aXijOeiav) from my
lord" (NETS modified).
This is part of the prayer of Abraham's servant who has been sent by Abraham to
go and find a wife for Isaac. In the Hebrew, there is nothing out of the ordinary here. The
hendiadys "steadfast love and faithfulness" (TipKI "TOO) is a common phrase in the
Hebrew Bible that functions as a single lexical item signifying a covenant relationship
111
Gordon J. Wenham, Genesis 16-50 (WBC 2; Dallas: Word Books, 1994). 92.
112
that is reliable and unwavering.113 Ordinarily the phrase HPKI n p n is rendered ekeoq Kai
dA-ijOeia in the LXX. Here, however, SiKaioauvn, was selected to stand for n p n , a
translation choice that stands out, since normally the stereotype sXsoq is chosen to stand
for n p n , as evidenced elsewhere in the same chapter (Gen 24:12, 14, 49). It is difficult to
discern the LXX translators' motives for this atypical translation decision in this one
verse. Perhaps it has to do with the translators' desire to capture the notion that God's
covenant faithfulness is in fact an expression of his attribute of righteousness, since
keeping one's promises and commitments is a subset of righteousness. But if we take the
Greek text as it stands, Abraham's servant is depicted as blessing the Lord, his master's
God, for his righteousness and his truth toward Abraham. Noting the coordination of
StKaioouvn and dX-ijOeta, WTevers argues that the appeal to this pair of divine attributes
indicates that God "has displayed his providential care in terms of his righteousness and
truth, i.e. he has allowed a sign imposed by the patriarchs Abraam/Jacob to be fulfilled,
with all the conditions carried out as imposed and in correct fashion.""4 The term
SiKaioauvn in the Greek text makes sense as it stands without needing to resort to a
Hebraic, relational meaning that would in any case be inaccessible to Greek-speaking
readers of the LXX.
(5) Genesis 32:10
MT: "I am not worthy of the least of all the deeds of steadfast love and all the
faithfulness (710X777301 D'HDnn 73Q) that you have shown to your servant"
(ESV).
,n
Gordon R. Clark. The Word Hesed in the Hebrew Bible (JSOTSup 157; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic
Press, 1993), 254-55.
114
LXX: "It is sufficient for me because of all the righteousness and because of all
the truth (dub 7idar|c; SiKaioauvnc; Kai d7io 7idan,c; dXnBsiac;) that you have brought
about for your servant, for with my staff I crossed this Jordan, but now I have
become two companies" (NETS).
Gen 32:10 is unique insofar as it is the only case of npn in the plural ("deeds of
steadfast love") being rendered by SiKiaoauvn (singular) in the LXX. Afraid that Esau
may still be harboring anger all of these years, Jacob is here pleading with God to deliver
him from the hand of Esau. Jacob reminds God of his covenant promises to Abraham and
Isaac, and also of the reiteration of those promises to Jacob himself (vv. 9, 12). In this
context he says (according to the MT) that he is "not worthy of the least of all the deeds
of steadfast love and all the faithfulness" that God as shown him thus far. In the LXX,
this is rendered, "It is sufficient for me because of all the righteousness and because of all
the truth" that God has shown him. The change of verb from "I am not worthy" to "it is
sufficient for me" is unexpected but may be related to the decision to render npn with
SiKaioouvrj, since the locution "I am not worthy of all the righteousness you have shown
me" may have been deemed confusing. This, in turn, suggests that even for the LXX
translator StKaioouvr) has not become a mere cipher for covenant kindness and grace.
Though we cannot be sure why SiKaioauvr) rather than the usual translational equivalent
£X,soq was chosen, nevertheless it is apparent that the word SiKaioauvn, has not taken on
the gracious and covenantal overtones of the Hebrew word it renders.
(6) Exodus 15:13
MT: "You have led in your steadfast love (*jnprQ) the people whom you have
redeemed; you have guided them by your strength C?J-T50) to your holy abode"
(ESV).
LXX: "You led by your righteousness (xfj SiKaioauvr) aou) this people of yours
whom you redeemed; you summoned by your power (xfj ia^ni aou) into your holy
abode" (NETS).
Whereas the MT has "you have led in your steadfast love the people whom you
have redeemed," the LXX reads, "you led by your righteousness this people of yours
whom you redeemed." The meaning is not radically different, but it does cast the basis of
God's "leading" in a different light. Instead of focusing on God's grace in leading them,
the LXX places the emphasis on the Tightness of God's leading activity. The LXX
reading is probably justified on the ground that if God redeemed his people, then it is
only right and just for him to lead and guide them thereafter. It would not be righteous for
him to abandon the people he had just brought out of Egypt with a mighty hand and an
outstretched arm. The reference is to God's provision and protection during the
wilderness journeys leading ultimately to their being planted in his mountain, the place
that he made for his own abode (v. 17).
Another possible (and not mutually exclusive) motive for rendering n p n with
SiKaioauvn, is that it provides a better parallel with the second half of the verse which
uses the prepositional phrase "by your strength" (MT) or "in your power" (LXX). Wevers
comments that n p n "really means steadfast love, loyal graciousness, but [the LXX
translator] uses 'righteousness' as a better parallel to the dative xfj ia^ni of line two."
Again, this supports the conclusion that SiKaioauvn has not become a Greek word with a
Hebrew meaning but retains its standard meaning of "righteousness" or "justice."
115
John William Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of Exodus (SBLSCS 30; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1990),
232.
Chapter 4: Righteousness in the Old Testament -219
(7) Exodus 34:6-7
MT: "The LORD, the LORD, a God merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and
abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness (TipKI npn~D"l), 7 keeping steadfast
love ( n p n n^3) for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, but
who will by no means clear the guilty, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the
children and the children's children, to the third and the fourth generation" (ESV).
LXX: "The Lord, the Lord God is compassionate and merciful, patient and very
merciful and truthful (noXvekeoq Kai dA,n9iv6c;) 7 and preserving righteousness
and doing mercy (SiKaioauvnv Siaxnparv Kai 7ioi(5v ekeoq) for thousands, taking
away acts of lawlessness and of injustice and sins, and he will not acquit the
guilty person, bringing lawless acts of fathers upon children and upon children of
children, upon the third and fourth generation" (NETS)
Where the Hebrew has "keeping steadfast love (npn n^2) for thousands," the
LXX has "preserving righteousness and doing mercy (SiKaioauvnv Siaxipcov Kai 7ioic5v
sêoc;) for thousands." One way of looking at it is that the LXX translators took the
divine attribute or activity of "keeping n p n " and split it into its two component parts:
"maintaining 5iKaioauvr| and doing sTxoc;." In other words, they regarded the concept of
n p n as having both a component of responsibility/rightness and a component of mercy,
an insight that, as we have seen, is largely reinforced by modern exegesis.116 It is also
likely that this interpretation was not merely derived from a semantic analysis of the word
n p n alone, but was suggested by the immediately following lines: "forgiving iniquity
and transgression and sin, but who will by no means clear the guilty." God is gracious
and merciful, as expressed in his freely forgiving iniquity, but he is also a righteous God
who does not wink at sin or pass over it lightly. It is possible that the LXX translators
even intended there to be a chiasm in the Greek text:
116
Katharine Doob Sakenfeld, The Meaning of Hesed in the Hebrew Bible.
a Maintaining SiKaioauvn,
P Doing 8^£0c;
P' Taking away acts of lawlessness and of injustice and sins
a' And he will not acquit the guilty person
Does this mean that for the LXX translators, "righteousness" is fundamentally a
relational concept rather than a norm concept? It is hard to see how such a conclusion can
be responsibly drawn from the evidence. Rather than telling us something about their
understanding of SiKaioauvn,, this verse tells us much more about their understanding of
n p n . For them, God's nOF! is a richly textured concept not easily reducible to one single
concept, such as eXsoq ("mercy"), even though that is the most common rendering. In
their mind, the term n p n also contained an element of responsibility, justice, and right.
To capture this fullness of meaning, the translators felt that both SiKaioauvn, and £X.£Oc;
were necessary to unpack the richness of meaning contained in n p n , at least as used here
in Exodus 34:6-7, a classic text in rabbinic Judaism defining God's fundamental
attributes.117
(8) Proverbs 20:28
MT: "Steadfast love and faithfulness (TipXI n p n ) preserve the king, and by
steadfast love pOPD) his throne is upheld" (ESV).
LXX: "Compassion and truth (£A£n,poouvr| Kai dX,f|0£ia) are a guard to a king,
and they will encircle his throne with righteousness (EV SiKaioauvn,)" (NETS).
The BHS apparatus notes that the LXX has Sucaioouvri, and suggests that the
translators probably read p"!S (cp. Prov 16:12; 25:5, "the throne is established by
117
In rabbinic Judaism, this text is referred to as "The Thirteen Forms of Mercy." It may not be recited by
an individual, but is recited by the whole congregation on every holy day when the Torah scroll is taken
from the Ark. "Middot, Shelosh-'Esreh," The Jewish Encyclopedia (ed. Isidore Singer; New York: Funk &
Wagnalls, 1904), 8.546-47.
righteousness"). So one possibility is that the LXX translators may have had a different
Vorlage that read p"!?£, and thus this verse would not count toward the nine instances
where n p n is translated as SiKaioauvn,.
The other possibility is that the LXX translators had n p n before them but took
the liberty of providing a free translation that more accurately conveyed the sense as they
understood it. Toy seems to lean toward this option: "The repetition of only one of the
two qualities mentioned in the first cl. is strange, and the substitution, in the Grk. of the
other quality which should characterize royal administration is probably right."118 If this
was an intentional substitution, then the Greek word SiKaioauvn, has not taken over the
gracious, covenantal associations of the word n p n , but retains its usual meanings,
"justice, righteousness," especially in royal contexts. This is particularly clear when one
reads the verse as a whole in the LXX: "Compassion and truth are a guard to a king, and
they will encircle his throne with righteousness" (NETS).
In any case, several modern English versions (e.g., RSV, NRSV, NASB) follow
the LXX over the MT at this point, probably because doing so provides an improved
sense.
(9) Isaiah 63:7
MT: "I will recount the steadfast love of the LORD, the praises of the LORD,
according to all that the LORD has granted us, and the great goodness to the house
of Israel (T>N*li£r TTQ? TJItDTjni) that he has granted them according to his
compassion, according to the abundance of his steadfast love ( Dnpl Tlpn""D
THDn)" (ESV).
118
Crawford H. Toy, The Book of Proverbs (ICC; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1899, 1970), 395-6.
LXX: "I called to mind the mercy of the Lord, the excellencies of the Lord in all
the things with which the Lord rewards us; the Lord is a good judge to the house
of Israel (Kupioc; Kpixfjc; dyaBoc xcp O'IKCO IcpanX); he provides for us according to
his mercy, according to the abundance of his righteousness (xaxb. xo zkzoq auxou
Kai Kaxa xo 7tAfj9oc; xfjc SiKaioauvnc; auxou)" (NETS).
This is the last of the nine instances in the LXX where n p n is translated as
SiKaioauvn,. Interestingly, it is also one of the occurrences of "the righteousness of God"
in the LXX since it adds the pronoun "his" (ij SiKaioauvn auxou). Thus, given the
gracious context, the usage of SiKaioauvn, to translate np7J, and the fact that it is a case of
divine righteousness, this verse may seem to provide prima facie support for Cremer's
relational theory.
But there are important exegetical considerations that put this verse in a different
light. The LXX interpretation of this verse is interesting. In addition to the usage of
SiKaioauvn to translate n p n , the LXX also translates an earlier clause differently than
the Masoretic Text. Whereas the MT has "I will recount the steadfast love of the
LORD, the praises of the LORD, according to all that the LORD has granted us, and the
great goodness to the house of Israel," the LXX takes "YHWH" with the subsequent
clause, eliminates the 1 ("and") and then apparently vocalizes niC0~3"1 ("great
goodness") as U1D~3n,119 where "J"1 is parsed as the Qal participle of the verb TJ'H ("to
bring a lawsuit, to argue or plead a case").120 The result is: "the Lord is a good judge to
the house of Israel" (icupioc; Kpixf|c dyaGoc; xcp O'IKCO IapanX). As a good judge, he then
provides for Israel according to both his mercy and his righteousness. The LXX reads:
119
P.-E. Bonnard, Le secondIsaie, son disciple et leurs editeurs: Isai'e 40-66 (Paris: Gabalda, 1972), 443.
120
Takamitsu Muraoka, Hebrew/Aramaic Index to the Septuagint, 137. Under 3 , "1 see "#Kpvxh,c; 791a (Is.
63.7)," where # indicates that Muraoka is suggesting a different Hebrew equivalent at this verse than the
one identified by Hatch and Redpath, who had listed D"l with a question mark.
"I called to mind the mercy of the Lord ... the Lord is a good judge (Kpixfjc;
dyaOoc;) to the house of Israel; he provides for us according to his mercy (sXeoq),
according to the abundance of his righteousness (SiKaioauvn,)" (NETS).
It would appear that, as in Exodus 34:6-7, the LXX translators have split nOP!
into its two component concepts, eXsoq and SiKaioauvn,, a reading that is supported by the
context of Isa 63 as a whole unit: God's mercy is emphasized in vv. 7-9, 11-14; his
judgment in vv. 10, 15-19. In fact, this bifurcation is traceable back to v. 1: "I discourse
about righteousness and judgment of salvation" (£ycb SiaAiyopai SiKaioauvnv Kai Kpiaiv
acoxripiou); where the Hebrew has "mighty to save" (STttJin^ 3~1) the Greek has
"judgment of salvation" (Kpiaic; acoxripiou). The MT's 72 "1 ("mighty") was apparently
vocalized as the noun n n or 3"'"} ("lawsuit," then "decision") by the LXX translators.121
In conclusion, Greek-speaking readers of the LXX probably would have taken
these nine occurrences of SiKaioauvn, at face value and would not have known that they
represented the Hebrew word npn, nor would they have had any contextual reasons to
overhear specialized, Hebraic "covenantal" connotations.
B. LXX's Use of £^£i]poouvr| (8x) and £A,£oc; (3x) to render npniJ
(1,2) Deut 6:25; 24:13
6:25 MT: "And it will be righteousness (njp*12) for us, if we are careful to do all
this commandment before the LORD our God, as he has commanded us" (ESV).
121
R. R. Ottley, The Book of Isaiah According to the Septuagint (Codex Alexandrinus) (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1906), 2.374. Throughout the canon, the LXX frequently (49 times) renders
3"~1 (both the noun and the verb) with Kpivco or Kptotq.
6:25 LXX: "If we are watchful to perform all these commandments before the
Lord our God, as he has commanded us, there will also be mercy (£X,£npoai3vn)
for us" (NETS).
24:13 MT: "You shall restore to him the pledge as the sun sets, that he may sleep
in his cloak and bless you. And it shall be righteousness (npniS) for you before
the LORD your God" (ESV).
24:13 LXX: "By giving back you shall give his pledge back by sunset, and he
shall sleep in his garment and bless you, and to you shall be mercy (EÊripoauvn,)
before the Lord your God" (NETS).
The Hebrew seems to be saying that if Israel keeps the commandments of the
Mosaic Law, then their law-keeping will become their "righteousness" before God. This
is a righteous behavior that is accepted by God and treated as the basis of their righteous
status in his sight. It is righteousness before God.
The LXX, however, has taken this verse in a different direction by rendering
np"]^ as £X£r|poauvn ("mercy"). The thought seems to be that Israel's obedience to the
Law, though imperfect, will become the basis for receiving mercy from God. How did
the LXX arrive at this? Did the translators have a different Hebrew Vorlage which read
npn? This is plausible, given that npn - though usually translated using the stereotype
ekeoq - is rendered with £X£T|poauvn eight times in the LXX (Gen 47:29; Prov 3:3;
14:22; 15:27a; 19:22; 20:28; 21:21; 31:28). But we have no independent evidence for
such a textual variant in the Hebrew manuscripts of these two verses in Deuteronomy.
Did the LXX translators think that the word njp"]S could mean "an act of
ITT
charity," as it came to mean in later rabbinic literature? " This is possible, but it does not
122
"The Hebrew word tsedaqah, which in the Bible refers to any kind of righteous conduct, is limited in the
Talmud to one aspect of righteousness, namely, the giving of alms or assistance to the poor through
material gifts." Shmuel Himelstein, "Charity," The Oxford Dictionary of the Jewish Religion (ed. R. J. Zwi
Werblowsky and Geoffrey Wigoder; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997), 154; cp. Raphael Posner,
fit their own translation, "to you shall be mercy (£A,£T|poauvr|) before the Lord your God"
(Deut 24:13). The thought is not that these acts will be reckoned to them as acts of charity
but that those who keep the Law will receive mercy from the Lord.
What, then, is the explanation for the LXX translators' interpretation of these two
verses? It is difficult to be certain, but since the above possibilities are not convincing, 1
hypothetically suggest that the LXX translators have betrayed a certain theological
tendency here. It is almost as if they regarded these verses as smacking too much of a
merit theology. After all, on the surface, these two verses seem to teach that Israel can
achieve "righteousness" before God by keeping the Law. The LXX translators may have
desired to avoid giving the wrong impression, and therefore they "corrected" the text to
make it conform to their theological assumptions.
If my hypothesis is correct, then these two verses do not provide evidence that
npniJ was understood by the LXX translators in a relational sense. In fact, they seem to
have understood the word in its ordinary sense and it was precisely this sense that was a
stumbling block to them, requiring a creative translation to avoid what they perceived to
be the legalistic implication of the Hebrew text.
(3) Psalm 24:5
MT: "He will receive blessing from the LORD and righteousness [or vindication
(NIV)] (npn^) from the God of his salvation" (ESV).
LXX: "He it is that will receive blessing from the Lord and mercy (£7.£r|poauvn)
from his divine deliverer" (NETS).
"Charity," Encyclopaedia Judaica (ed. Fred Skolnik and Michael Berenbaum; 2 nd Ed.; Detroit: Thomson
Gale, 2007), 4.569. Posncr adds the qualification that tsedaqah is not exclusively used for charity in the
Talmud.
More than likely, they knew that the word nj7H2S could mean "vindication," in
other words, a divine judgment in one's favor pronouncing a positive verdict. To capture
this meaning, rather than translate it literally with SiKaioauvn, which probably would not
be comprehensible to Greek-speaking readers, the LXX translators chose to translate it
more idiomatically. As Bultmann suggested, "Since the judgment in which God's npniJ
is active will be in favour of His people or of the righteous, we can understand the
rendering £^£n,pocuvn."123 The translation choice does not mean that they thought
npniS itself means "mercy," but that the word, as used in this context, bore an essentially
positive meaning which the translators thought would be best captured by the dynamic
translation EkEr\iioavvr\.
(4) Psalm 33:5
MT: "He [the LORD] loves righteousness (njTHlS) and justice (ttS$Q); the earth
is full of the steadfast love ( i p n ) of the LORD" (ESV).
LXX: "He [the Lord] loves mercy (£^£n,poauvn) and justice (Kpiaiq); the earth is
full of the mercy (eXsoq) of the Lord" (NETS).
The LXX translators may have felt that, rather than commit the redundancy of
saying that the Lord loves "righteousness and justice," it made more sense to say that the
Lord loves "mercy (£A,£r|poauvri) and justice." The Hebrew is ambiguous here. Is it
saying that the LORD loves the divine attributes of righteousness and justice, as evidenced
by his own acts of righteousness and justice? This interpretation may be justified by the
second line, "The earth is full of the steadfast love of the LORD." Or is the Hebrew text
saying that the LORD loves the expression of righteousness and justice among humans?
123
Rudolf Bultmann, "eXeoq, KTX," TDNT 2.486.
This would seem to be more in line with the use of the verb "loves" with God as the
subject, since it seems a little odd to speak of God loving his own attributes. God loves it
when humans imitate his own attributes and do righteousness and justice. It would seem
that this is the interpretation taken by the LXX translators. Then, having seen that the
term "righteousness" refers to a human quality or activity, it was not a big leap from there
to the assumption that "righteousness" is here basically tantamount to £X£r|poauvr|, that
is, human charity, perhaps even with a focus on almsgiving. This is a reasonable
explanation of the LXX translators' intent, an explanation that makes sense on its own
terms without resort to the Cremer theory that "righteousness" is a relational concept.
(5) Psalm 103:6
MT: "The LORD works righteousness (TlipnSS plural) and justice (D^tpStpQ
plural) for all who are oppressed" (ESV).
LXX: "One who performs acts of pity (£A,£T|poauvac; plural) is the Lord and
judgment (Kpipa singular) for all who are being wronged" (NETS).
This verse is really the key to understanding the positive usage of "righteousness"
in the Hebrew Bible. When God provides justice for the oppressed, he does so in a
judicial manner and as an expression of his justice, that is, he comes to the aid of the
oppressed by finding in their favor and, conversely, by judging their oppressors. The
most dramatic, celebrated, and paradigmatic moment when God intervened in history this
way is alluded to in the next verse: "He made known his ways to Moses, his acts to the
people of Israel" (Ps 103:7). This is then followed by a quotation of the well-known
revelation of divine mercy in Exodus 34:6: "The LORD is merciful and gracious, slow to
anger and abounding in steadfast love" (Ps 103:8). The divine mercy and grace toward
his people is not unrelated to the divine righteousness, for God's deliverance of his own -
an act of mercy and grace - comes by means of his judicial punishment executed upon
the oppressor. Therefore, these acts of deliverance can also be called God's "acts of
righteousness" (TllpniS plural; cp. Judges 5:11; 1 Sam 12:7; Micah 6:5; and Dan 9:16).
Now the LXX translators chose not to render the plural of "righteousness"
literally but instead adopted the rendering £^£npoauvac; ("acts of pity"). This is certainly
a less literal and more free translation. It was probably motivated by several factors: (1) a
desire to enhance understanding for a Greek-speaking Jewish readership, since
SiKaioouvac; might have been felt to be too opaque; (2) a sense that the "justice"
dimension was already adequately covered by the usage of Kpipa in the next line; and (3)
a desire to avoid redundancy, which would have arisen if both SiKaioouvac; and Kpipa
had been used. Rather than having two words in close proximity covering the judicial
dimension of God's mercy in delivering his people from oppression, it was felt to be
more in line with Hellenistic thought to replace the double judicial terminology with the
two halves of the bifocal concept, one word focusing on the "mercy aspect"
(EXETipoouvac;) and the other on the "justice aspect" (Kpipa).
(6) Isaiah 1:27
MT: "Zion shall be redeemed by justice (CDS^PP), and those in her who repent,
by righteousness (npniSp)" (ESV).
LXX: "For her captivity shall be saved with judgment (p£xd Kpipaxog) and with
mercy (p£xd £A,sr|poauvric;)" (NETS).
In rabbinic literature, the Hebrew text of Isa 1:27 was taken as a proof text for the
saving benefits of almsgiving.124 This is an anachronistic reading of a later, rabbinic
124
Although the meaning is not entirely clear, this seems to be the implication of b Shabb. 139a and b.
Sanh. 98a. The medieval Jewish scholar Moses Maimonides quotes Isa 1:27 in his treatment of the Jewish
usage of npni5 back into the scriptural text. It is clearly anachronistic because while
npnUS may be used this way in the Talmud, it never means "almsgiving" in the Hebrew
Bible. One might then be tempted to argue that the LXX translators had the same
anachronistic view, and that this explains their decision to render the word with
£^£npoouvr|, which frequently means "alms" or "acts of charity" in Tobit and Sirach.125
However, we should be cautious about taking this approach, for two reasons.
First, there is no evidence that £A.£r|poai3vr| means "almsgiving" at this early stage. It is
possible that £X£npoouvn came to mean "almsgiving" only at a later point, when Tobit
and Sirach were translated.
Second, the rabbinic use of Isa 1:27 is clearly a proof text taken out of context. It
is quite unlikely that God would tell the Jewish exiles in Babylon that if they want to be
restored to the land, the way for them to do this would be to ramp up their charitable
giving. Rather, the context makes clear that God's restorative, gracious activity on
Israel's behalf will be "to those in her who repent." The restoration of those who repent
will then be an expression of God's "righteousness."
Thus it is not at all surprising that the LXX translators would render npnS with
£X£npoouvn understood in the sense of "mercy." Both God's justice and his mercy will
be on display in his activity of restoring the repentant remnant of the people. Besides, it
might have appeared redundant to translate, "For her captivity shall be saved with
duty of giving alms to the poor: "And Israel will be redeemed solely through charity, as [Isa 1:27] states:
'Zion will be redeemed through judgment and those who return to her through charity.'" Maimonides,
Mishneh Torah, Sefer Zeraim, Matnot Aniyiim 10:1; ET available on the Chabad website,
www.chabad.ora/library/articlc cdo/aid/'682956/jcwish7Mishneh-Torah.htm (accessed Sept. 11, 2010).
125
Tobit 1:3, 16; 2:14; 4:7, 8, 10, 11, 16; 7:7; 12:8, 9 ("almsgiving delivers from death"); 14:2, 10, 11;
Sirach 3:14, 30 ("charity will atone for sins"); 7:10; 12:3; 16:14; 17:22; 29:8, 12; 31:11; 35:4; 40:17, 24.
judgment and with righteousness." The LXX translation is not slavishly literal. The
translators were willing to engage in interpretive paraphrase at times.
(7) Isaiah 28:17
MT: "And I will make justice (tDStpP) the line, and righteousness (TIpnH) the
plumb line; and hail will sweep away the refuge of lies" (ESV).
LXX: "And I will turn judgment (Kptaic;) into hope, and my mercy (f\ £A,£npoauvr|
pou) will become weight balances, and as for you who trust vainly in falsehood, I
tell you that the tempest will not pass you by" (NETS).
As with Isa 1:27, the LXX translators have taken the liberty here of providing an
interpretive rendering of the Hebrew. What in the Hebrew is entirely negative and
judgmental becomes in the Greek a double-sided message of hope ("I will turn judgment
into hope") for the godly remnant and of judgment "for [those] who trust vainly in
falsehood." Another similarity with Isa 1:27 is that the paired Hebrew terms - "justice"
(tDStpp) and "righteousness" ( n p n ? ) - occur together and are translated one negatively
(Kpiaic;) and the other positively (fj £A,£n,poauvr| pou - though with the added personal
pronoun pou which has no basis in the Hebrew).
(8) Isaiah 56:1
MT: "Thus says the LORD, 'Preserve justice (CDS^P) and do righteousness
(npn?), for My salvation (Tll?15£r) is about to come, and My righteousness
fnpn:2J) to be revealed'" (NASB).
LXX: "This is what the Lord says: 'Keep judgment (Kpiaic;); do righteousness
(SiKaioauvn), for my salvation (xo acoxf|pi6v pou) has drawn near to arrive and
my mercy (xo ekeoq pou) to be revealed'" (NETS).
It is difficult to discern the intent of the translators with certainty. However, as we
have seen, the Greek translators of LXX Isaiah feel free to take liberties with the text in
order to enhance its meaning and readability for a Greek-speaking Jewish audience. Since
the words for justice and righteousness have already been used in the first half of the
verse - "Keep judgment (Kpiaic;); do righteousness (SiKaioauvn,)" - it seems that the
translators shied away from repeating SiKaioauvn in the second half, even though this
would have been a more literal translation.
Furthermore, the translators apparently feel the need to reduce what might be, to
their Greek-speaking readers, a jarring contrast between "my salvation" and "my
righteousness" in the second half of the verse by using the term eXeoq to translate np"]lJ.
This produces a smoother and more coherent thought: "for my salvation has drawn near
to arrive and my mercy to be revealed" (NETS). The translator undoubtedly felt that this
translation, though less literal, was nevertheless justified by the theological insight that
when God's righteousness takes on the form of his delivering and saving activity, the
result is that it is an expression of God's mercy.
However, it must not be assumed that the LXX translator was uncomfortable with
the parallel between God's "salvation" and his "righteousness," for he lets this literal
parallel stand in six other passages:
'{ I ' - : - f: j " 1fflfo$i%Mmi&sfapi parallelmt^c^TiijjifaiflrcynljjiiovfaLXXisaiafo

Isa 46.13 "I brought near mv righteousness, and I will not dclav the salvation (acotnpioO that i
comes from me: I have provided salvation (acoxripia) in Sion to Israel for glorying"
(NETS). \
Isa 51.5 "Mv righteousness draws near swiftlv: mv salvation (ocomipiov) will go out. and the I
nations will hope in my arm" (NETS). \
Isa 51.6 "... but mv salvation Cotoxfipiov) will be forever, and mv righteousness will not fail" i
(NETS). |
Isa 51.8 "... but mv righteousness will be forever and mv salvation (atoriipiov) for generations of \
generations" (NETS). |
Isa 59.17 "And he put on righteousness like a breastplate and placed a helmet of salvation >
(acotripiov) on his head, and he clothed himself with a garment of vengeance and with
his cloak" (NETS). |
Isa 63.1 "Who is this that comes from Edom, a redness of garments from Bosor. so beautiful in j
apparel, in might, with strength? 'I discourse about righteousness and judgment of 1
salvation (Kpicru; acoxripiou)1" (NETS). |
In addition, the decision to render n p n ? with eXeoq in Isa 56:1 in no way detracts
from the reality that God's righteousness can also be brought to bear in judgment and
punishment. The LXX translator of Isaiah knows of the judging aspect of God's
SiKaioauvn, in other passages. For example, in Isa 5:16 the LXX has:
"But the Lord Sabaoth shall be exalted in judgment, and the Holy God shall be
glorified in righteousness (Kai u\|/co8f|a£xai KDpioc; aa(3aco0 EV Kpipaxi, Kai 6 0£oc
6 ayioc; 5o£,aa0fjasxai ev diKawovvrjy" (NETS).
And again at Isa 10:22-23 the LXX reads:
"And if the people of Israel become like the sand of the sea, the remnant will be
saved, for he is completing and cutting short a reckoning with righteousness
Ckoyov yap auvxE^cov Kai auvx£pvcov sv diicaioavvn), because God will perform a
shortened reckoning (A-oyoy auvx£xpnp£VOv) in the whole world" (NETS).126
There is both salvation and judgment here: judgment on the apostate majority of Israel
and also the whole world; salvation of the remnant that remains. This passage indicates
that God will accomplish the decreed reckoning "with righteousness," that is, with perfect
justice and thoroughness.127
(9) Isaiah 59:15b-17
MT: "The LORD saw it, and it displeased him that there was no justice (£332713).
He saw that there was no man, and wondered that there was no one to intercede;
then his own arm brought him salvation, and his righteousness (inpnX) upheld
him. He put on righteousness ( n p n ? ) as a breastplate, and a helmet of salvation
on his head; he put on garments of vengeance for clothing and wrapped himself in
zeal as a cloak" (ESV).
For the translation of Xoyoq as "reckoning," see LSJ loyoq I; BDAG Xoyoc, 2. The concept of Xoyoc. as
"reckoning" can be benign (in the sense of "calculating, counting," see TDNT4.13 for classical usage) or
judgmental (see Thayer Xoyoq II.3: "account, i.e., answer or explanation in reference to judgment"). Its
usage in reference to divine judgment is also found in the NT (Matt 12:36; Lk 16:2; Rom 14:12; Heb 4:13;
13:17; 1 Pet 4:5).
12/
Commenting on Isa 10:22, J. Alec Motyer writes, "'Righteousness' is the outworking of holiness in the
application of righteous principles of world government (c/ 5:16)." Motyer, The Prophecy of Isaiah, 117.
LXX: "The Lord saw it, and it did not please him that there was no judgment
(Kpiaic;). And he saw, and there was no man, and he took notice, and there was
none who helped; so he defended them with his own arm, and with his
compassion (xfj £A,£r|poauvri) he upheld them. And he put on righteousness
(SiKaioauvnv) like a breastplate and placed a helmet of salvation on his head, and
he clothed himself with a garment of vengeance and with his cloak as one about
to render retribution" (NETS).
It is likely that the use of Kpiaic in v. 15 and Sucaioauvri in v. 17 is what
motivated the LXX translators to avoid Sucaioauvri here in v. 16. Thus £^£T|poauvr| was
chosen in v. 16, not because n p n ? was itself understood to mean "compassion," but
because God's righteousness in this context, where it is active simultaneously in the
punishment of Israel's oppressors and in the deliverance of Israel, is the result of God's
compassion for Israel. The LXX translators may have departed from a literal, word-for-
word translation, but the resultant text accurately conveys the meaning of the underlying
Hebrew.
(10, I l)Ezekiel 18:19,21
18:19 MT: "When the son has done what is just and right (H27J7 nj?"!?5! BS5PJ?),
and has been careful to observe all my statutes, he shall surely live" (ESV).
18:19 LXX: "Because the son did justice and mercy (SiKaioauvnv Kai eXeoq
£7ioir|a£v), he observed all my precepts and did them; he shall live by life"
(NETS).
18:21 MT: "But if a wicked person turns away from all his sins that he has
committed and keeps all my statutes and does what is just and right
(npnai D32>ft ne?»), he shall surely live; he shall not die" (ESV).
18:21 LXX: "And if the lawless turns back from all his lawless acts that he
committed and keeps all my commandments and does justice and mercy (7ioif|ar|
SiKaioauvnv Kai ekeoq), he shall live by life; he shall not die" (NETS).
These two verses are taken together since they represent the same phenomenon
involving the translation of the phrase, "to do t332??3 and n p n ? , " rendered as "to do
Sucaioauvri and sXeoq." If we assume that the LXX translators were attempting to
translate following the word order of the Hebrew, then SiKaioauvnv stands for tD32?D and
sXeoq for n p n ? . This seems more likely than that sXeoq stands for ED32>f3, which is never
rendered by that Greek word in the LXX.128 Not counting Ezek 18:19, 21, CD32>I3 is
rendered by Sucaioauvri on five occasions in the LXX (Prov 16:11; 17:23; Isa 61:8; Ezek
18:17; Mai 2:17), thus making it the likely equivalence here.
But why have the LXX translators creatively rendered n p n ? with eXeoq in Ezek
18:19, 21? It is interesting to note that, as we have seen, there are four parallel instances
(Pss 33:5; 103:6; Isa 1:27; 28:17) where £332773 and n p n ? occur as apair and where the
term n p n ? is rendered with £X£n,poauvn, a word closely related to eXsoq. It is as if the
pairing of these two words is problematic for the LXX translators and so they are tempted
to change two seemingly redundant judgment terms ("justice and righteousness") to a
pair that covers both the negative and the positive side ("justice and mercy"). In these
cases, the LXX translators are willing to engage in interpretive paraphrases and appear to
1 7Q
be less concerned with maintaining literal fidelity. "
" Muraoka, Hebrew/Aramaic Index to the Septuagint, 90.

129
In addition to the above, there is also Daniel 9:16 in Theodotion. Where the MT/LXX reads "according
to all your righteous acts CnTlpnS - ? ? ? / Kara xf|v StKatocnJvnv), Theodotion has "because of all your
mercy (evrcacm,eA^riuocnjvr))."
Given that this is the case, then, we should not use these verses as evidence that
for the LXX translators SiKaioauvn "had acquired the gracious (because covenantal)
associations of the Hebrew words" (Ziesler).
4. Criticism of the norm-idea
We continue now with a fourth argument employed on behalf of Cremer's
relational theory. The Hebrew scholar Emil Kautzsch (editor of the famous Hebrew
grammar by Gesenius13 ) had argued that "righteousness" in Hebrew is to be understood
under the fundamental concept of normativity. The norm is "partly an objective
(physical) norm, partly a spiritual standard of judgment, as determined by the idea of
God, as well as by the idea and determination of humans from themselves."131 But the
vagueness of this definition suggested to Cremer that the norm-idea itself was
problematic: "The idea of a somehow-to-be-defined ideal normativity is much too
abstract for it to be distinguished as a fundamental concept." " Similarly, von Rad asks:
"What is the norm that the Old Testament presupposes? But, oddly enough, no matter
how urgently it was sought, no satisfactory answer to this question of an absolute norm
could be found [by Kautzsch]." And Klaus Koch says that the "nature of such a norm
... [is] unclear."134
It is true that the norm defining "righteousness" is never explicitly stated in the
Old Testament. But, as we saw in Chapter 3, the norm is almost never explicitly defined
130
Gesenius' Hebrew Grammar (edited and enlarged by E. Kautzsch; 2nd English edition by A. E. Cowley;
Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1910).
1,1
Emil Kautzsch, Uber die Derivate des Stammes p"T22 im alttestamentlichen Sprachgebrauch (Tubingen:
Eberhard-Karls-Universitat Tubingen, 1881), 39.
132
lj3
Gerhard von Rad, Old Testament Theology, 1.371.
134
K. Koch, TLOT 1051.
in extra-biblical Greek literature either. And yet, in spite of this lack, proponents of the
relational theory willingly grant that "righteousness" in Greek involves conformity to a
norm, as evidenced by their claim that the Hebraic "relational" meaning allegedly stands
1 ^S
in contrast to the Greek "abstract" meaning. " A clear and precise definition of the norm
is clearly not necessary; all that is needed is an implicit or intuitive norm defining what is
right in any given context. The norm is "implicit" in Israelite situations governed by the
Mosaic Law. The norm is "intuitive" in cases outside of the sphere of the Mosaic Law,
where humans are governed by the moral will of God as revealed through the light of
nature and imprinted on the conscience of all humans (i.e., natural law).1 6 David J.
Reimer argues extensively for the concept of natural law as an implicit norm in his article
on "pn^J" in the New International Dictionary of Old Testament Theology and
Exegesis.
Examples from the Old Testament are easy to find. When Abraham pleaded with
the LORD not to sweep away "the righteous" with "the wicked" in Sodom (Gen 18:22-
33), there is no clear statement of the norm defining who "the righteous" are in clear
distinction with "the wicked." But the subsequent story describing the horrific treatment
that the angelic visitors received at the hands of the citizens of Sodom provides a graphic
illustration of what sort of people might be included under the label "the wicked" (Gen
19:4-11). When the Mosaic Law commands the use of "just" (or "honest") weights and
lj5
This comment by James D. G. Dunn is representative: "In the typical Greek worldview, 'righteousness'
is an idea or ideal against which the individual and the individual action can be measured ... In contrast, in
Hebrew thought 'righteousness' is a more relational concept." Dunn, The Theology of Paul the Apostle,
341.
136
Cp. Romans 1:18-32; 2:12-15.
137
David J. Reimer, "p~II2," NIDOTTE 3.744-69. "It will be seen that sdq terms regularly deal with
behavior that, usually by implication, accords with some standard. The standard might be the law, but often
this is not the case or, at least, revealed law is not to be understood but rather some natural law or assumed
standard" (p. 746).
measures (Lev 19:36; Deut 25:15; Job 31:6; Ezek 45:10), some sort of norm is implied-
e.g., the notion that weights and measures must be accurate and that buyers must not be
cheated by unscrupulous sellers - even though this norm is assumed rather than explicitly
spelled out. And when a human judge or king is exhorted to judge "righteously," the
thought is clearly that he must render verdicts that are fair, not distorted by bribes, and
which conform to some legal standard (Deut 1:16; 16:18). Similar language is ascribed to
God (Ps 98:9) and to the messianic king (Isa 11:4-5).
Thus, the absence of an explicit definition of the norm does not prove that
"righteousness" in the OT is not a Normbegriff. In fact, the implicit norm (the Mosaic
Law) and the intuitive norm (natural law) presupposed throughout the biblical texts
suggest just the opposite, that in fact "righteousness" does involve conformity to a norm.
5. Antithesis between "the righteous" and "the wicked"
Another argument for the relational theory is Cremer's appeal to the frequent Old
Testament antithesis between "the righteous" and "the wicked." One famous text giving
classic expression to this antithesis is Psalm 1, which concludes (vv 5-6):
"Therefore the wicked ( D ^ ^ n / doEpdc;) will not stand in the judgment,

nor sinners in the congregation of the righteous (D^p^n? / Sucaioi);
for the LORD knows the way of the righteous (D^p^n? / Sucaioi),
but the way of the wicked (WW"! I dasfteic;) will perish" (ESV).
Clearly "the righteous" are not perfectly righteous; rather they are those who are
faithful to God, who repent of their sin, and try to please him. Conversely, "the wicked"
are those who have rejected God and his covenant. This seems to imply that the terms are
"relational" rather than absolute. Absolute righteousness is not being ascribed to the
righteous, merely relative righteousness, since they live in a right relationship with God, a
relationship characterized not by perfection but by general faithfulness which includes
repentance and a commitment to a godly life according to the terms of the covenant
between YHWH and Israel.
Cremer argues that a godly Israelite's standing of being "righteous" before God
was not a mechanical fulfillment of legal obligations but a relationship. "The right
standing of the righteous includes his fear of God, the acknowledgment and confession of
his sins, his trust and hope in God, and the fulfillment of the claims/demands which God
and men make on him." lj8 At this juncture, Cremer cites Psalm 103:17-18:
"But the steadfast love of the LORD is from everlasting to everlasting

on those who fear him,
and his righteousness (iHpn? / fi SiKaioauvn, auxou) to children's children,
to those who keep his covenant
and remember to do his commandments" (ESV).
Cremer also points to verse 10 a few verses earlier: "He does not deal with us according
to our sins." This suggests that God's "righteousness" is given to those who fear him,
even though they have committed sins. How can this be? Cremer appeals to the provision
for atonement in the Old Covenant via confession of sin and the sacrificial system:
Again, we must not forget that the acknowledgment and confession of sins
obviously includes the self-subordination to the righteous ordinance of God, cp.
Ps 25:10ff; 39:1, 8; so that Israel's Law with regard to the sacrificial system
offered, in order to offset transgressions, and that from here the NT statements
like Luke 1:6; Phil 3:6, 9 are explained. Indeed, one must say: the more
energetically the Law and the covenant relationship (Bundesverhdltnis)
determined the consciousness of Israel, the more the concept of righteousness
stepped into the foreground. So, then, the right standing, for which God intervenes
justly, is not an ideal ethical disposition and the righteousness of life that
corresponds to it... The right standing of the sinful people is repentance and
faith, or (to speak in OT idiom) the fear of God and trust in his promises,
Cremer, Die paulinische Rechtfertigungslehre. 53.

acknowledgment and confession of sins and the willing submission to God's Law,
1 ^Q
the first act of which is submission to God's judgment.
So the fear of God, trust in his promises, acknowledgement and confession of sin,
together with offering the appropriate sacrifices and submission to God's Law, are the
essence of the Old Covenant, and on that basis individual Israelites were regarded as
"righteous." They were therefore righteous in terms of the covenant relationship
(Bundesverhdltnis), not in terms of mechanical fulfillment of the moral requirements of
an external norm.
This is a good argument. How should we respond? I think we have to say that
there is a difference between proving that "righteousness" can be relative and proving
that "righteousness" is relational in the sense that Cremer claims, i.e., that the
relationship itself is the norm. There is a norm here, and the norm is the covenant
between YHWH and his people, a covenant that includes provisions for atonement in
case of sin. Thus, an Israelite can be considered "righteous" when he is living in
faithfulness to the covenant, which includes a commitment to a Law-abiding life, together
with repentance and bringing of the appropriate sacrifices for failures. Although
"righteousness" is defined covenantally, the covenant constitutes an external norm that
defines the meaning of "righteousness." The fact that sinful Israelites can be called
"righteous" does not prove that "righteousness" is a relational concept.
The righteous are designated as such, not strictly because of their ethical
righteousness (which they have only inconsistently, imperfectly, and relatively), but
because of their godly fear of the LORD. They are not like the wicked, who have no fear
of God before their eyes (Ps 36:1; Rom 3:18), who arrogantly persist in their evil ways,
139
and who oppress the righteous. The difference is most marked in the contrasting attitudes
of their heart, their spiritual posture before God. The wicked "speak insolently against the
righteous in pride and contempt" (Ps 31:18), but the righteous are "the upright in heart"
p b " ' " ! ^ / oi evQelq xfj icapSia) (Pss 7:10; 11:2; 32:11; 64:10; 95:14; 97:11).140
Ultimately, the issue has to do with arrogance versus trust in God, just as Habakkuk put it
so classically in his contrast between the Assyrian oppressor and the godly Israelite:
"Behold, his soul is puffed up; it is not upright within him, but the righteous shall live by
his faith" (Hab 2:4 ESV).
When these contrasting attitudes of the heart are brought before the scrutiny of the
divine tribunal, one stands condemned as "wicked" while the other is pronounced
"righteous" before God. The Old Testament teaches that there is a God in heaven who, as
the righteous Judge of all the earth, weighs the hearts of all men and determines who is
"wicked" and who is "righteous." This judicial correlation between the
"wicked/righteous" distinction and the court-room scene of "the Judge of all the earth" is
first made clear in Genesis 18, the famous story of Sodom and Gomorrah, specifically
Abraham's repeated intercession on behalf of the righteous in the city:
Then Abraham drew near and said, "Will you indeed sweep away the righteous
with the wicked? Suppose there are fifty righteous within the city. Will you then
sweep away the place and not spare it for the fifty righteous who are in it? Far be
it from you to do such a thing, to put the righteous to death with the wicked, so
that the righteous fare as the wicked! Far be that from you! Shall not the Judge of
all the earth do what is just? (C332>?3 nfrlT * 6 f n.Krr^D B32>n / 6 Kpivcov
jcaaav xfiv yfjv ou 7iovrja£ic; Kpiaiv;)" (Gen 18:23-25 ESV).
140
Note that in three of these verses (Pss 32:11; 64:10; and 97:11), "the upright in heart" stands in
parallelism with "the righteous" (D,p"Hl» / StKatoi). Referentially they are synonymous, but semantically
they arc looking at the concept from different points of view - the subjective point of view of the inner
heart attitude ("upright in heart"), and the objective point of view of the divine Judge who has recognized
their faith and judicially declared that they are accepted before God ("the righteous").
The Judge of all the earth is the one who alone can weigh a man's heart and assign him to
a lot with the wicked who will be condemned or with the righteous who will be spared in
the judgment. Again, in Solomon's prayer at the dedication of the temple, he prayed:
"If a man sins against his neighbor and is made to take an oath and comes and
swears his oath before your altar in this house, then hear from heaven and act and
judge your servants, repaying the guilty (S72H) by bringing his conduct on his
own head, and vindicating the righteous (p'H?) by rewarding him according to
his righteousness" (2 Chron 6:22-23 ESV).
God is the one who "judges his servants," indentifying the righteous man who swears an
oath in truth and providing him with vindication, while setting apart the wicked man who
swears an oath in deceit and marking him out for judgment.
The same point is made in the Psalms: "Oh, let the evil of the wicked come to an
end, and may you establish the righteous - you who test the minds and hearts, O
righteous God!" (Ps 7:9 ESV). "Surely there is a reward for the righteous; surely there is
a God who judges on earth" (Ps 58:11 ESV). Since fear of God and faith are the
determinants of right standing before God (Hab 2:4), it is only those who have faith in
God who are "enrolled among the righteous" (Ps 69:28 ESV).
The epithet "the righteous" is best understood not in terms of the Verhdltnisbegriff
theory of "righteousness" - i.e., that they are righteous because they are conforming to
the norms of the covenant relationship (though the thought is certainly implicit in the
background) - but in terms of the divine surveillance and judicial recognition of those
who are in a right covenant relationship with God. They have been pronounced by the
divine Judge to be "righteous" because they have the requisite fear of God, uprightness of
heart, and faith/trust in the LORD. They are therefore "righteous" before God.
There is a clear connection between the righteousness of the Judge and the
righteous status of those whom he approves: "For the LORD is righteous (p'H?); he
loves righteous deeds (Tlipn?); the upright shall behold his face" (Ps 11:7 ESV). "As for
me, I shall behold your face in righteousness (p"7?5 / EV SiKaioauvn); when I awake, I
shall be satisfied with your likeness" (Ps 17:15 ESV). Then there is the interesting
statement in Proverbs: "Whoever pursues righteousness ( n p n ? ) and kindness will find
life, righteousness (npn?), and honor" (Prov 21:21 ESV). "Whoever pursues
righteousness ... will find righteousness" seems redundant to our ears, but if the first
occurrence of n p n ? is ethical righteousness and the second occurrence of n p n ? is
understood as righteousness before God - i.e., righteousness as approved, a status of
righteousness before God - then the statement as a whole makes much more sense.
In conclusion, those who in biblical revelation are termed "the righteous" in
contrast to "the wicked" are described as such for four interlocking reasons: (1) their
own inconsistent, imperfect, and relative ethical righteousness; (2) their ethical
righteousness as a manifestation of their heart attitude of fear of the LORD, uprightness of
heart, and faith; (3) the righteousness of the divine Judge of all the earth who sees this
heart attitude and thus (4) graciously grants them a status of "righteous" in God's sight by
faith (Gen 15:6; Hab 2:4). The righteousness of God "the righteous Judge" is therefore
correlative with the righteous status of those humans qualified by the epithet "the
righteous." To bring in the relational theory as the explanation for this epithet is neither
apropos nor necessary. The Normbegriff understanding of "righteousness" - both in terms
of ethical righteousness, and in terms of the status of righteousness before the righteous
divine Judge - suffices to provide a reasonable explanation for the biblical habit of
referring to the godly as "the righteous." Cremer's fifth argument is thus found to be
lacking.
6. "May they not come into your righteousness" (Psalm 69:27)
We come now to the sixth argument in favor of the Diestel/Ritschl/Cremer claim
that righteousness is a fundamentally positive concept involving salvation, deliverance,
and help for the needy. In Psalm 69:27 [69:28MT/68:28LXX], the Psalmist prays against his
oppressors: "Add iniquity to their iniquity; and may they not come into your
righteousness" (NASB) (Sjnj?"]?? W i T - ^ ! 0 ? ^ " ^ V?'71^ ' ^POoBeq dvopiav &ti
xfiv dvopiav aux&v, Kai pf] £ia£^0£xcoaav sv SiKaioauvn aou). Admittedly, the English
word "righteousness" makes little sense in this locution, "to come into God's
righteousness," as if that were a good thing that one would not want to miss out on. In
English, we would want to avoid coming into God's "righteousness," for that would seem
to imply coming into his judgment. Perhaps this is why the NIV does not translate
literally but boldly translates, "Do not let them share in your salvation."141 Cremer quoted
this verse six times as evidence that "the righteousness of God" in the OT is thoroughly
positive, tantamount to salvation and grace.142 Klaus Koch, following Cremer, argued
that the use of n p n ? here "excludes the possibility of a distributive justice," since God's
"Salvation" is also the translation choice of Artur Weiser. The Psalms: A Commentary (trans. Herbert
Hartwell; OTL; Philadelphia: Westminster, 1962), 492.
1
Cremer, Die paulinische Rechtfertigungslehre, 14-15, 29, 44, 49, 57, 70. Cremer seems to place special
reliance on Ps 69:27 as a "silver bullet" argument that righteousness is a thoroughly positive concept. But
Ludwig Diestel and Albrecht Ritschl, though they do not make as much of it as Cremer does, paved the
way by making use of the verse to support the same revisionist claim. Diestel, "Die Idee der
Gerechtigkeit," 186; and Ritschl, Die christliche Lehre. 2.109.
righteousness is clearly a positive blessing that only the righteous may enjoy and from
which the wicked are excluded.143
This argument may seem plausible at first. But upon closer examination it proves
to be misleading. The first thing we have to examine is the meaning of ]il? used twice in
the first line of the verse. The Hebrew lexica (Gesenius, BDB, Koehler-Baumgartner,
Holladay, HALOT) all agree that the word can have three meanings: (1) iniquity; (2)
guilt; and (3) punishment. It is hard to distinguish these three meanings, of course, since
iniquity (sinful action) leads to guilt, and guilt ordinarily brings punishment. Still, it is
useful to ask which of the three meanings fits best here, in the sense of being the focus of
meaning, without denying that shades of the other two meanings are unavoidably present
by implication. All three options are found in the major English versions. The NASB
translates: "Add iniquity to their iniquity." The NRSV has: "Add guilt to their guilt."
The RSV and ESV have: "Add to them punishment upon punishment." However, it is
possible to narrow down the options to the last two, since it does not make sense for God
to add sin or iniquity to someone's existing sins. The second two meanings are more
within the realm of probability. God can increase someone's guilt or someone's
punishment. The two are very close in meaning, since increased guilt normally leads to
increased punishment. Increased "guilt" makes the most sense, since it implies that the
request of the psalmist is that God would not forgive them, while also wishing that they
would then receive greater punishment in proportion to the increased guilt.144 This
143
7X07: 1056.
144
"Increase this guilt, make them more and more guilty." Charles Augustus Briggs, A Critical and
Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Psalms (ICC; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1907), 2.120. Mitchell
Dahood translates, "Charge them with crime upon crime," and comments: "Put down on the debit side of
the ledger; the metaphor is that of the divine bookkeeper." Dahood, Psalms II: 51-100 (AB 17; Garden
City: Doubleday, 1968). 155, 163.
interpretation fits with several cross-references. In response to the jeers of Sanballat and
Tobiah the Ammonite, who were trying to stop the work of rebuilding the walls of
Jerusalem, Nehemiah prayed:
"Hear, O our God, for we are despised. Turn back their taunt on their own heads
and give them up to be plundered in a land where they are captives. 5 Do not
cover their guilt, and let not their sin be blotted out from your sight, for they have
provoked you to anger in the presence of the builders" (Neh 4:4-5 ESV).
Jeremiah prayed a similar prayer against his persecutors:
"Yet you, O LORD, know

all their plotting to kill me.
Forgive not their iniquity,
nor blot out their sin from your sight.
Let them be overthrown before you;
deal with them in the time of your anger" (Jer 18:23 ESV).
These parallel texts lead me to suggest, then, that the prayer of Ps 69:27 is that God
would "add guilt to their guilt" in the sense of not forgiving their sins but taking them
into account and punishing them. One commentator paraphrases: "Instead of taking away
their iniquities by forgiveness, let one iniquity accumulate upon another."145
If this is correct, then we have a clue to the proper interpretation of the clause in
question: "And may they not come into your righteousness" (NASB). Rather than taking
away their guilt by forgiveness, may they not come into God's n p n ? . In other words,
may they not experience God's judicial act of acquitting them of their sins and
vindicating them. This interpretation is the one chosen by the RSV/NRSV/ESV: "May
they have no acquittal from thee/you." This translation aptly conveys the positive sense
required by the context while maintaining the forensic overtones of n p n ? . This
interpretation is further supported by the next verse (v 28): "Let them be blotted out of
143
A. F. Kirkpatrick, The Book of Psalms (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1902), as quoted by
Marvin E. Tate, Psalms 51-100 (WBC 20; Dallas: Word Books, 1990), 191.
the book of the living; let them not be enrolled among the righteous" (ESV). In other
words, not entering into God's righteousness/acquittal is tantamount to not being enrolled
"among the righteous," that is, those who have been granted the status of "righteous"
before God on the basis of his forgiving grace.146
Reasonable sense can be made of this verse on the assumption that n p n ? retains
a forensic and judicial meaning here. The entire statement, "May they not come into your
righteousness" (NASB), clearly means, at least by implication, "May they not enjoy
salvation." But that broader meaning arises from the statement as a whole, including the
verb "to come" plus the preposition "into" (3 + K13), and draws upon the discourse
concepts associated with the immediate context, such as the reference to one's name
being written in the book of life (vv 27-28). It is to commit the fallacy of "illegitimate
totality transfer" to claim that the lexical concept of n p n ? itself is "salvation" or a
totally positive concept.
7. Judah and Tamar: "She is more righteous than I" (Genesis 38:26)
The final argument for a relational interpretation of righteousness in the Old
Testament is the appeal to the incident involving Tamar and Judah narrated in Gen 38
and climaxing in Judah's admission, "She is more righteous than I" CSQP npniJ) (Gen
38:26). This argument has been enormously influential in the century since Cremer, as
evidenced by the fact that Gen 38:26 is frequently cited in the literature as a compelling
proof for the Hebraic/relational interpretation of righteousness. My impression is that this
146
For the tradition of having one's name written in or blotted out of "the book of the living," see Exod
32:32-33; Ps 109:13-14; Isa 4:3; Dan 12:1; Mai 3:16; Jubilees 30:22; 1 Enoch 47.3; 108.3; Joseph and
Aseneth 15:4; 1QM XII, 2-5; Luke 10:20; Rev 3:5; 13:8; 20:12, 15.
argument, after the appeal to Hebrew parallelism, is the one cited next most frequently by
scholars who are convinced of the truth of Cremer's theory.147
How, exactly, does Gen 38:26 allegedly prove that righteousness is a relational
concept (Verhdltnisbegriff) rather than a norm concept (Normbegriff)'! James D. G. Dunn
asserts that righteousness here has to do with conformity to a norm - not, however,
conformity to a norm as "some abstract ideal," but to "a norm concretized in a relation."
He bases this on Gen 38:24, 26: "The peculiarities of the relationship may result in an
action being judged 'righteous', even when it appears to break a norm governing society
(the case in point being Judah and Tamar in Gen. 38.24, 26)."148 The reference to v 24 is
relevant to his argument ("About three months later Judah was told, 'Your daughter-in-
law Tamar is guilty of prostitution, and as a result she is now pregnant'" [NIV]), for it
explains what Dunn means by "even when it appears to break a norm governing society."
I take Dunn to be arguing that although Tamar formally violated the moral norms
governing sexuality, i.e., by engaging in (apparent) prostitution, she is nevertheless
deemed righteous because her conduct was in accord with the mutual obligations arising
from the relationship between Judah and Tamar.
Before critically engaging this argument, it will be helpful to review the story of
Judah and Tamar as narrated in Genesis 38 in order to set the context. The story runs as
follows. In blatant disregard for the concern of his patriarchal forebears to avoid
intermarriage with the Canaanites, Judah as a young man departed from the covenant
147
The original scholar who raised this argument is Cremer, Die paulinische Rechtfertigungslehre, 54-55.
After Cremer, Gen 38:26 is quoted by the following scholars: Gerhard von Rad, Old Testament Theology,
1.374; K. Koch, TLOT1050-51; E. R. Achtemeier, "Righteousness in the OT," IDB 80-81; J. A. Ziesler,
The Meaning of Righteousness in Paul, 43; Dunn, The Theology oj Paul the Apostle, 342 n. 28; Richard B.
Hays, "Justification," ABD 3.1129; Michael F. Bird, The Saving Righteousness of God, 11; N. T. Wright,
"The Letter to the Romans," NIB 10.399 n. 5; idem, Paul in Fresh Perspective, 159.
148
Dunn, "The New Perspective: whence, what and whither?" in The New Perspective on Paul: Collected
Essays (WUNT 11/185; Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2005), 59. Emphasis mine.
family to live among the Canaanites (v 1). There, he saw and took a Canaanite woman
as his wife, and she bore him three sons, Er. Onan, and Shelah (vv 2-5). The narrator
skips ahead to when his firstborn son is a young man and informs us that Judah took a
wife, named Tamar, for his firstborn son (v 6).lD° Next we learn that the LORD put Er to
death for some unspecified wickedness (v 7); then, in keeping with the custom of levirate
marriage, Judah told his second son, Onan, to perform the duty of brother-in-law and
raise up offspring for his dead older brother (v 8). However, knowing "that the offspring
would not be his" (v 9) and not wishing to have his share of the inheritance reduced,151
Onan practiced coitus interruptus, and so he too was put to death by the LORD (vv 9-10).
At this point, Judah should have given Tamar to his third son. Shelah; however,
suspecting Tamar of being the cause of the first two sons' deaths and fearing that he
might run out of male heirs, Judah sent Tamar back to her father's house, promising to
give her to Shelah when he grew up (v 1 l). l i 2 As time passed, Shelah grew up and Tamar
realized that Judah had no intention of keeping his word. So Tamar dressed herself up
like a prostitute, concealing her identity with a veil, and tricked Judah into sleeping with
Abraham made his servant swear that he would not take a wife for Isaac from the daughters of the
Canaanites (Gen 24:3). Rebekah said that her life would not be worth living if her son Jacob married a
Canaanite (Hittite) girl (Gen 27:46), prompting Isaac to direct Jacob, "You must not take a wife from the
Canaanite women" (Gen 28:1). With this context in view, it is reasonable to assume that the narrator wants
us to infer that Jacob would have adopted his parents' and grandparents' feelings and would have objected
to Judah's marriage to a Canaanite girl. Gordon Wenham, Genesis 16-50 (WBC 2; Dallas: Word Books,
1994), 365. Cp. Bruce K. Waltke with Cathi J. Fredricks, Genesis: A Commentary (Grand Rapids:
Zondervan, 2001), 506-10.
1,0
Most commentators, ancient and modern, thmk Tamar was probably a Canaanite girl herself. E.g., Philo,
Virt. 220-22: Waltke, 506-16; Wenham, 366; E. A. Speiser, Genesis (AB 1; 3 rd ed.; Garden City, NY:
Doubleday, 1986), 300; Victor P. Hamilton, The Book of Genesis: Chapters 18-50 (NICOT; Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1995), 434; Gary H. Oiler, "Tamar (person)," ABD 6.315.
151
"The death of a childless man would result in larger portions of the paternal estate going to the surviving
brothers. Levirate marriage, if 'successful', results in the original distribution of property being
maintained." Dvora E. Weisberg, "The Widow of Our Discontent: Levirate Marriage in the Bible and
Ancient Israel," JSOT28 (2004): 410-11. Cp. Eryl W. Davies, "Inheritance Rights and the Hebrew
Levirate Marriage," FT 31 (1981): 257-8.
132
"Women who seemed prone to become widows were in danger of being suspected of witchcraft ...
[Judah] considered it possible that the death of his first two sons was the result of some sort of hex put on
them by Tamar." John H. Walton, Genesis (NIVAC; Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2001), 668-9.
her, but not before receiving some tokens of his identity (his signet, cord, and staff) as a
pledge for his promised payment of a young goat from the flock (vv 12-19). Later, Judah
tried to send the goat to pay the unknown prostitute, but no prostitute was found (vv 20-
23). Three months later, Judah was informed that his daughter-in-law had become
pregnant as a result of prostitution. Judah called for her to be brought out and burned (v
24). But Tamar revealed the identity of the baby's father by sending the tokens Judah had
left with her and elicited these words from Judah: "She is more righteous than 1, since I
did not give her to my son Shelah" (v 26 [ESV]).
It is perhaps useful to provide some background on the levirate institution. The
levirate institution was not unique to Israelite society; similar practices can be
documented in other Ancient Near Eastern cultures around Israel, e.g., the Hittites and
the Assyrians.154 Scholars lack agreement on the purpose of the levirate institution. Some
suggest that the purpose was to resolve the anomaly of the young childless widow,
3
thereby "reaffirmfing] the young widow's place in the home of her husband's people."
Others focus on the economic advantages that accrue to the widow, who would otherwise
not be entitled to receive any portion of her deceased husband's estate.156 Others think
Millar Burrows, "Levirate Marriage in Israel," JBL 59 (1940): 23-33; Donald A. Leggett, The Levirate
and Goel Institutions in the Old Testament: With Special Attention to the Book of Ruth (Cherry Hill, N.J.:
Mack, 1974); Eryl W. Davics, "Inheritance Rights and the Hebrew Levirate Marriage," Parts 1-2, FT 31
(1981): 138-44, 257-68; Richard Kalmin, "Levirate Law," ABD 4.296-7; Dvora E. Weisberg, "The Widow
of Our Discontent: Levirate Marriage in the Bible and Ancient Israel," JSOT2& (2004): 403-29.
154
"The Middle Assyrian Laws," Tablet A §33 in ANET 182; and "The Hittite Laws," §193 inANET 196.
ANET= James B. Pritchard, Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament (3rd ed.; Princeton:
Princeton University Press, 1969). Although there are parallels between the biblical institution and the
ANE customs, there are also important differences. Millar Burrows claims that "nothing corresponding
exactly to the Israelite form of levirate marriage has been found" in the ANE ("Levirate Marriage in
Israel," 27). Cp. Burrows, "The Ancient Oriental Background of Hebrew Levirate Marriage," BASOR 11
(1940): 2-15; Timothy Willis, The Elders of the City (Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2001), 243-50
155
Susan Niditch, "The Wronged Woman Righted: An Analysis of Genesis 38," HTR 72 (1979): 146.
1,6
"If a man died childless, his estate reverted to his brothers or other male kin; in these circumstances a
widow would be left with no source of support... Levirate marriage would ensure a childless widow a
home and the possibility of children." Weisberg, 410.
that, while the widow obviously benefited economically and socially, the real objective
was to preserve the deceased brother's name and continue his line "in a society that set
great store by blood ties." 15 ' This interpretation is supported by the explicit statements in
Genesis 38, where Judah enjoins Onan to "raise up offspring for [his] brother" (v. 8) but
he does not want "to give offspring to his brother" (v. 9) (ESV). Note as well the
emphasis on preserving the deceased brother's "name" in Deut 25:6-7: "The first son
whom she bears shall succeed to the name (D$~7l? Wlpl) of his dead brother, that his
name may not be blotted out (if3ffi> nniT~KT|) in Israel... to perpetuate his brother's
name (0$ ... D^pPi?) in Israel" (ESV). Further confirming that the primary purpose of
the levirate institution was the raising up of an heir to continue the dead man's name is
the fact that the story of Judah and Tamar does not end with Tamar married to anyone,
whether Shelah or Judah. Noticing this seemingly unresolved conclusion, George W.
Coats argues that the story makes most sense if we assume "that the levirate custom, at
I CO
least at this stage in history, concerns only the widow's right to conceive a child."
Although Josephus recognizes that a secondary purpose of the custom was to alleviate the
misfortune of childless widows, he makes clear that its primary purpose was to raise up
an heir; in fact, Josephus interpreted Deut 25:6 as literally requiring that the child be
called by the name of the deceased.159
157
Speiser, 300; idem, "'People' and 'Nation' of Israel," JBL 79 (1960): 161-2.
158
George W. Coats, "Widow's Rights: A Crux in the Structure of Genesis 38," CBQ 34 (1972): 466.
159
"When a woman is left childless on her husband's death, the husband's brother shall marry her, and
shall call the child that shall be born by the name of the deceased (xov 7tat5a TOV ysvrioopevov xcp ton
TeOvecoToq Kakeaaq ovoucm) and rear him as the heir of the estate" (Ant. 4.254). Josephus VI: Jewish
Antiquities: Books 1V-V1 (LCL; trans. H. St. J. Thackeray and Ralph Marcus; Cambridge: Harvard
University Press, 1998), 123-5.
Why was God angry enough to kill Onan for failure to raise up seed for his
deceased brother, Er? It would appear that Onan's failure was more than mere neglect of
a cultural practice. This seems evident from the fact that the text explicitly states that
"what [Onan] did was wicked in the sight of the LORD, and he put him to death also" (v
10). This is the second case of death at God's hand reported in the Old Testament, with
the first being Er's death for unspecified wickedness (v 7).160 The context makes it clear
that the LORD'S anger was directed not at Onan's act of coitus interruptus per se, but at
Onan's refusal to raise up seed for his brother, more specifically, his attempt to appear as
if he were fulfilling the levirate institution while at the same time deliberately frustrating
it so that it would not produce an heir.' [ One might surmise, furthermore, that in so
doing he was also guilty of incest.162 And we may go still further in our attempt to
understand why Onan's act was worthy of death in God's eyes. The LORD had made
1 /TO
solemn promises to Abraham, sealed with a self-maledictory oath (Gen 15:7-20), that
Abraham would have innumerable descendants who would inherit the land of promise
and that, through Abraham's seed, the LORD would cause all the nations of the earth to be
blessed (Gen 12:1-3; 13:14-17; 15:5; 17:4-8; 22:16-18). These promises concerning the
seed and the land were reaffirmed to Isaac (Gen 26:1-5) and to Jacob (28:3, 13-15).
Onan's actions were therefore particularly reprehensible to God and far more than a
departure from Ancient Near Eastern social customs. His actions constituted a willful
16U
Waltke, 510; Hamilton, 434.
161
"What makes Onan's sin so offensive is that he appears to undertake his responsibility, but he fakes it...
Such subterfuge does not escape Yahweh's notice." Hamilton, 436.
162
"By frustrating the purpose of the levirate institution, Onan has placed his sexual relationship with his
sister-in-law in the category of incest - a capital offense." Sarna, 267.
163
Meredith G. Kline, Kingdom Prologue: Genesis Foundations for a Covenantal Worldview (Eugene, Or.:
Wipf and Stock, 2006), 295-7.
disregard for the promises of God and demonstrated an irreligious spirit, a lack of faith in
the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.
With this context in view, we must now examine Dunn's argument that although
Tamar formally violated the moral law, she is nevertheless deemed righteous because her
conduct was in accord with the mutual obligations arising from the relationship between
Judah and Tamar. But is it true that Tamar formally violated the moral law? What action
of hers could be construed as such? Perhaps it might be thought that she engaged in
prostitution. But her "prostitution" was a one-time act for the purpose of getting pregnant
in order to raise up seed in the name of Judah's firstborn, Er, in fulfillment of the levirate
obligation and, even more importantly, in keeping with God's promises to Abraham that
he would have an innumerable seed who would inherit the land God had sworn to give to
Abraham. Perhaps it might be argued that she committed sexual immorality by sleeping
with her father-in-law, Judah. That is not quite accurate either, since she slept with Judah
as a surrogate for Shelah. Obviously, it would not have been an act of sexual immorality
to sleep with Shelah, since she was in fact legally betrothed to him the moment her
second husband died.165 Since Judah was the one who obstinately refused to fulfill his
duty and give Tamar to Shelah as his wife, Tamar took matters into her own hands and
got herself pregnant by Judah as a surrogate for Shelah. This was not sexual immorality;
it was the fulfillment of the aim of the levirate institution, namely, the production of an
heir. As Dvora Weisberg states, "There is no indication that the union between Tamar
)64
Wenham, 365. 367, 369.
165
"The tie between the childless widow and the levir exists automatically from the moment of
widowhood. Tamar's status was thus what is termed shomeretyavam ('awaiting the levir') in rabbinic
parlance, and any extralevirate sexual relationship would have been adulterous." Sarna, 269. For more on
rabbinic interpretations and modifications of the levirate institution, see Richard Kalmin, "Levirate Law,"
ABD 4.296-7.
and Judah is not a levirate union."166 The only act, so far as I can see, that could in any
way be construed as a violation of the moral law was Tamar's act of procuring Judah's
seed by means of deception. Tamar deceived Judah into thinking that she was an ordinary
prostitute rather than his daughter-in-law, and such deception is technically a sin.
But deception is not what Tamar was accused of. Judah wanted to have her
burned on the ground that she had committed prostitution or some form of adultery in
violation of her betrothal to Shelah (v 24). But when she produced the evidence that
Judah was in fact the father of the baby and the one who had committed the greater sin of
withholding Shelah from marrying Tamar, in sinful violation of the levirate institution, it
became immediately obvious that Tamar was innocent of the charges Judah brought
against her and that Judah was in fact the guilty party. And to the degree that Tamar
"sinned" by tricking Judah, it was in fact Judah's sin of violating the levirate institution
by withholding his third son from Tamar that forced her to do what she did in the first
place.167 Tamar, then, is totally vindicated.
This brings us, then, to the question of how to translate Judah's declaration in v.
26: "'{IBfp npniS. There are two interlocking exegetical issues that need to be addressed.
First, is the verb p n ^ (here in the Qal) being used in a declarative, judicial sense ("she is
proved innocent") or in a stative, virtue sense ("she is righteous")? Second, is the
166
Weisberg, "Widow of Our Discontent," 415. She adds that the text's approval of Tamar's bold action
may suggest that "a levirate union with a kinsman other than a brother is preferable to no levirate union."
Both Hittite and Middle Assyrian law included provisions for the father-in-law to serve as a surrogate in
case the brother-in-law (the levir) also died. Cf. "The Middle Assyrian Laws," Tablet A §33 in ANET 182;
and "The Hittite Laws," §193 in ANET 196. Waltke points out that "the Mosaic law did not go this far, but
[Tamar's] actions are not inconsistent with the principle: '[the deceased brother's] widow must not marry
outside the family' (Deut. 5:5)." Waltke, 512; cp. Walton, 668.
167
"She is innocent, he admits, because I forced her to take this action by refusing to give my son Shelah to
her in marriage. She, unlike me, was concerned to perpetuate the family line, to produce descendants for
Abraham." Wenham, 370.
comparative "^ftp a positive comparison ("than me") or a comparison of exclusion
("and not me")? The two questions are connected, for if one takes the verb in a judicial
sense, one will be more likely to take the comparative exclusively: "She is innocent (or in
the right); I am not" (option one).169 On the other hand, if one takes the verb in a virtue
sense, one will be more likely to take the comparative as a positive comparison: "She is
more righteous than I" (option two).170 David J. Reimer argues for the comparison
interpretation: "Judah is not admitting his guilt and Tamar's innocence; rather, he
recognizes that her behavior in this affair was more virtuous than his. This does not turn
on legal questions, but moral."171
To determine which interpretation is more likely here, we must examine the same
construction as it is used elsewhere. There are six additional passages besides Gen 38:26
in the Hebrew Bible where the preposition | P is used with the p*122 root (three with the
verb; three with the adjective):
With the verb (]!? p i S )
Forensic-exclusive: Job 4:17- "Can mortal man be in the right before God?"
(ESV; cp. "just before God," NASB)172 (pn?^ ni^Kp ^12Kn) (Qal).
Forensic-exclusive: Jer 3:11: "Faithless Israel has proved herself more

righteous than treacherous Judah" (NASB) ( ^"TCT n 3 ^ p n^S3 n p n ?
nnin11 nnipP) (Piel); note context of preceding chapter: The LORD says,
The comparison of exclusion is when "the subject alone possesses the quality connoted by the adjective
or stative verb, to the exclusion of the thing compared." IBHS §14.4e; cp. GKC §133b note 2.
169
Klaus Koch, TLOT 1050; Waltke, Genesis, 513; Wenham, 362.
170
NASB, ESV, NIV.
171
David J. Reimer, "piS,"NIDOTTE 3.747-48.
17
' But it is also possible to translate, "Can a mortal be more righteous than God?" (NIV), which would
support the comparative over the judicial interpretation. However, the context of Job's controversy with
God would suggest that the ESV/NASB forensic reading is more appropriate here. The question is not,
"Who is more righteous?" but "In this controversy, who is in the right?"
"How can you say, T am not unclean'?" (Jer 2:23); "Why do you contend
with me?" (v 29), "You say, T am innocent'" (v 35).
Forensic-exclusive: Ezek 16:52: "Bear your disgrace, you also, for you have
intervened on behalf of your sisters. Because of your sins in which you
acted more abominably than they, they are more in the right than you"
(ESV) (Tjai? n3pn?n) (Qal); note context: the use of the Piel of pIX
twice (vv 51-52) to mean, "to make to appear righteous," along with the
judicial language of "intervening, interceding" (7y3) to make judgment
favorable for another (NASB).
With the adjective (]» p"HS)
Forensic-exclusive: 1 Sam 24:17: Saul to David, "You are more righteous

than I" (ESV) 03130 nFIN p'H?); note context of the controversy between
David and Saul: "May the LORD therefore be judge and give sentence
between me and you" (v 15 ESV).
Ethical-comparative: 1 Kings 2:32: Joab "attacked and killed with the sword
two men more righteous and better than himself (ESV) ( D,,^3^"",35PI1
lasp n^nbi D^pn?).
Ethical-comparative: Hab 1:13: "You who are of purer eyes than to see evil
and cannot look at wrong, why do you idly look at traitors and are silent
when the wicked swallows up the man more righteous than he?" (ESV)
03i3p pnn?).
In four of these cases, the context indicates that there is some kind of controversy
that either is explicitly judicial or has implicit judicial overtones. In these cases, because
of the m . context, a forensic usage with a comparison of exclusion is more likely: "This
party is in the right and innocent of the charges, not that party." In the remaining two
cases (1 Kings 2:32; Hab 1:13), there is no controversy explicitly stated in the context
and so an ordinary comparative meaning seems more likely - although a forensic
interpretation cannot be totally ruled out. In any case, the construction itself does not
determine the question of exclusion versus comparison. Context is determinative.

Applying this finding to Gen 38:26, we see that the judicial context of Judah's
declaration is so strong that a forensic-exclusive interpretation seems required. Judah has
received a report that Tamar is pregnant by means of prostitution, and as a one-man
"judge, jury, and executioner," he has summarily commanded that she be burned to
death. Thus, when Tamar produces the tokens identifying Judah as the father of the baby,
he immediately reverses his verdict and declares that she is innocent or in the right, and
that he is in the wrong.173 Since it would not make sense to say that Tamar is "more
innocent than" Judah, the comparative should be taken as a comparison of exclusion:
"She is in the right and I am in the wrong." In addition, the LXX seems to interpret Gen
38:26 judicially, using the perfect of SiKaioco: 5e5iKaitoxai 6apap fj Eycb ("Thamar has
been justified rather than I") (NETS).174 Therefore, since the verse is best interpreted in a
forensic-exclusive sense, there is no basis for a relational interpretation of the verb.
More importantly, neither reading requires or even suggests a relational
interpretation of "righteousness." A reasonable explanation of Judah's declaration can be
found, with due attention to the historical and social context, and with due attention to the
exegetical possibilities, without resorting to Cremer's Verhdltnisbegriff'theory. In fact, I
would go further and suggest that Gen 38:26 reinforces the traditional notion that
"righteousness" in the Hebrew Bible involves the notion of "conformity to a norm"
1/3
N. T. Wright takes this approach to Gen 38:26. "There is an implicit court case going on." Wright, Paul
in Fresh Perspective, 159. "This states a legal position; only secondarily, and by implication, does it
comment on the morality of their respective behavior." Idem, M S 10.399 n. 5.
174
The word fj, like its Hebrew equivalent }!?, can be used with the idea of exclusion, "rather than" (BDAG
f\ 2by). BDAG cites: ueuxpsoOs TOV saurtov i] sue = "blame your own king, not me" (Ps.-Callisth. 1,37,4);
jtpeflTOTOKoe; syib fj on = "I am first-born rather than you" (LXX 2 Kgdms 19:44). The best parallel to LXX
Gen 38:26 is Luke 18:14 since it uses the construction with a form of the verb SiKaioco: KaTsPn, OUTOC,
SgStKcucopevog sic; TOV OIKOV CUJTOU tj yap EKEIVOC; = "this man went home to his house justified rather than
that man" (Lk 18:14 in A W © *P 063. 0 1 3 5 / " Majority Text syh). Here, the UBS/NA committee opts for
the reading nap' EKEIVOV on the basis of better external evidence, but whether it is fj or 7tapd, the Greek
probably translates the same Aramaic word (jP) used in an exclusive sense, just as in Hebrew (I. Howard
Marshall, The Gospel of Luke [NIGTC; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1978], 680).
(Kautzsch). Whether the passage is interpreted forensically ("She is innocent; not I") or
relatively ("She is more righteous than I"), the norm idea is unmistakable. If we interpret
the verse as saying that Tamar is declared innocent of the charges and is totally
vindicated, then it is because she did not actually commit prostitution or adultery (the
norm being the moral prohibition against prostitution/adultery). Alternatively, if we think
the verse says that Tamar is more righteous than Judah, then even though she did engage
in trickery and apparent prostitution, she is comparatively more righteous because her
motives were right and she was actually forced into it by Judah's greater sin of
withholding his third son from her (the norm in this case being the levirate institution,
which places a premium on raising up seed in line with God's purposes as covenanted to
Abraham). Whichever direction we go, it would be completely misleading to say that
Tamar was merely acting faithfully within the context of her relationship with Judah, for
her trickery and apparent prostitution were, to some degree, a violation of that
relationship and trust, but they were justified - even praiseworthy - in view of the greater
good, as Judah himself acknowledged in the end.
We have examined seven arguments raised by Cremer and his followers in
support of the theory that "righteousness" is a relational concept in the Old Testament. I
believe I have shown that the seven arguments are not persuasive and that reasonable
alternative explanations of the data can be provided.

D. The righteousness of God in the Old Testament
Having subjected Cremer's arguments for his relational theory to a critical
analysis, we must now focus specifically on some of the OT passages that refer to God's
righteousness ("my, his, your righteousness"). We cannot deal with every single text as
there are too many (41 by my count), but this is not necessary since they are all
fundamentally capable of being interpreted along the same or similar lines.
Fundamentally, "the righteousness of God" in the Old Testament refers to God's justice
in executing judgment on the enemies of his people and thereby vindicating his people in
the face of their oppressors. Thus, it can refer to either side of the equation: (a) the act of
punishing Israel's enemies; or (b) the deliverance that results when Israel's enemies are
thus extinguished and Israel is vindicated. This may apply to Israel as a nation or to the
individual godly Israelite who is suffering unjustly at the hands of his oppressors.
The law court imagery is present in the following forms:
I. Legal conflict absent or not explicit

A. God's justice as king
B. God's justice as lawgiver
II. Legal conflict (^"H) present in context

A. Individual: God's righteousness = deliverance from one's adversaries
B. Corporate:
1. God's righteous triumphs in holy war
2. Salvation for Israel = vengeance on Israel's oppressors
3. Judgment on Israel
Table 9. "ltighteiitt$B0ss «f Gfld**,inWMMwBijjjfe("mjjMk7&#*) ,*"..'

Sub- v :
B-bis- •M-ref H4era , ' '*)f--i mebrewcowtes* | - .-, ff\'• "" ' ' '"'-;"-'-" Jtot«s-;.' f- '. ' -,.; -
sat
Ps 72.1 tsedaqah l.A "Of Solomon. Give the king your justice Human king as one who (like God) \
[NASB: judgments], 0 God, and your judges the poor with justice j
"righteousness to the royal son!" (ESV). i
Ps 89.17 tsedaqah LA "Blessed are the people ... who exult in "Righteousness and justice are the |
your name all the day and in your foundation of your throne" (v 14); but j
*righteousness are exalted" (ESV). enemies in background (vv 9-10, 22-23,
42,50-51) 1
Table 9. "mghtummm af God* k Hebrew Bibte ("nay, life, two1*)

H-fek H-ref H-lem Hebrew eontexf Not«s
eat
Ps 97 6 tsedeq IA "The hea\ens pioclaim his ""righteousness, God as king/judge, but no enemies m
and all the peoples see his glory" (ESV) context
Ps 98 2~"~" tsedaqah I A "The LORD has made known his sah anon, God as kmg/judge/savior, no enemies in
he has revealed his "righteousness m the context
sight of the nations" (ESV)
Ps 1113 tsedaqah I A "Full ot splendor and majesty is his woik,
and his *nghteousness endures forever"
(ESV)
Ps 145 7 tsedaqah I A "They shall pour forth the tame of your "I will extol you. my God and King" (\
abundant goodness and shall sing aloud of 1), refeience to God saving those who
your ""righteousness" (ESV) cry to him ( w 18-20)
Ps 119 142 tsedaqah I B "Your ""righteousness is righteous forever, £
and your law is true" (ESV)
Ps 59 tsedaqah II A "Lead me, 0 Lord, in your "righteousness "because of my enemies"
because of my enemies, make youi way
straight before me" (ESV)
Ps 7 18 tsedeq II A "I will give to the Lord the thanks due to "Arise, 0 LORD, m your anger, lift
youi self up against the tury of my
his "righteousness, and I will sing praise to
the name of the Lord, the Most High" enemies" (\ 6), "judge me, 0 LORD
(ESV) according to my righteousness" (v 8).
"God is a righteous judge" (v 11)
Ps 22 32 tsedaqah 11 A "they shall come and proclaim his Plea for deliverance fiom enemies (v\
"righteousness to a people vet unborn, that 16-21)
he has done it" (ESV)
Ps 31 2 tsedaqah II A "In you, 0 Lord, do I take refuge, let me Enemies, persecutors (vv 4, 8, 11, 13,
ne\ er be put to shame, in youi 15)
•righteousness deliver me'" (ESV)
Ps 35 24 tsedeq II A "Vindicate [lit judge] me. 0 Lord, my Enemies described as those who contend
God, according to your ""righteousness" with the psalmist (v 1), who seek his life
(ESV) (v 4), malicious witnesses (v 11),
gnashing at him with their teeth (\ 16),
who hate him without cause (\ 19)
Ps 35 28 tsedeq 11 A "Then my tongue shall tell of your Those who rejoice at the psalmist's
*nghteousness and of your praise all the calamity and magnify themselves
day long" (ESV) against him (v 26)
Ps 36 7 tsedaqah II A "Your "righteousness is like the mountains See w 1-4
of God, youi judgments are like the great
deep, man and beast vou save, 0 LORD"
(ESV)
Ps 36 11 tsedaqah II A "Oh, continue your steadfast love to those Scew 11-12
who know you, and youi ""righteousness to i
the upright "of heart'" (ESV) 5
Ps 40 11 tsedaqah II A "I have not hidden Your *nghteousness See w 14-15

within my heart, I have spoken of Your
faithfulness and Your salvation, I have not
concealed Your lovingkmdness and Your
truth from the great congregation" (NASB)
Ps 51 16 tsedaqah II \ "Deliver me from bloodguiltmcss, O God, Enemies are not literal, David pleads for
0 God of my salvation, and my tongue will deliverance from bloodguiltmess
sing aloud of your ""righteousness" (ESV)
Ps 69 28 tsedaqah II A "Add to them punishment upon "those who hate me without cause" (\
punishment, may they have no ""acquittal 4), enemies ( w 14, 18), persecutors (v
from you" (ESV), "and may thev not come 26)
into your ""righteousness" (NASB)
Table 3, "MghtoKiiMtess of G»dw k Hebrew Bible (wg»y, $fe» $mt*)

Sub-
H-bk H-ref H-tari H e b r e w eqnteit N«t«s
eat
Ps 712 tsedaqah II A 'In your ""righteousness deliver me and Enemies (\ 10) accusers (v 13) ' w h o
rescue me, incline youi eai to me and save sought to do me hurt" (\ 24)
i
m e ' " (ESV)
Ps 7U5~ tsedaqah IIA" 'My mouth shall tell of Your Ditto
""righteousness and of Youi salvation all
day l o n g ' ( N A S B ) i
Ps 71 16""" tsedaqah I~IA~"~ I will remind them of your ""righteousness Ditto
yours alone" (ESV)
Ps 71 19 tsedaqah I I A ' until I proclaim vour might to anothei Ditto
geneiation, your powei to all those to
come | Your ""righteousness 0 God,
i
reaches the high heavens You who have
done gieat things, 0 God, who is like you*-''
(ESV)
Ps 7124 tsedaqah I I A ' M y tongue also will utter Your Ditto
""righteousness all day long, for they are
ashamed, for they are humiliated who seek
my h u r t ' ( N A S B )
Ps 88 13 tsedaqah I I A "Is youi steadfast love declared in the Is God himself the ' enemy '
grave or your faithfulness m Abaddon"? j
Are your wonders known in the darkness,
[
or your "righteousness in the land of
forgetfulness >" (ESV)
Ps 103 17 tsedaqah I I A "But the steadfast love of the LORD is 'The LORD w orks righteousness for all
from everlasting to evei lasting on those who are oppressed" (v 6) \
who fear him, and his *nghteousness to
childien's children' (ESV)
Ps 119 40 tsedaqah II 4. "Behold I long for your precepts, in vour Enemies are those who reject God s law
""righteousness give me life'" (ESV)
i
Ps 143 1 tsedaqah I I A "Heai my prayer, 0 LORD, give ear to mv "The enemy has pursued my s o u l ' (v 3) 1
pleas for mercy' In your faithfulness
answer me, in your "righteousness 1 "
(ESV)
Ps 143 11 tsedaqah I I A "For your name's sake, O LORD, preserve "Deliver me from mv enemies ( w 9,
my life 1 In your ""righteousness bring my 12)
soul out of trouble'" (ESV)
Deut 3321 tsedaqah II B 1 "And [Gad] came with the heads of the ' Gad crouches like a lion, he tears off
people, w ith Israel he executed the "justice arm and scalp the commandei 's
of the LORD, and his judgments portion" |
(mishpatey) for Israel" (ESV)
Judg 5 11 tsedaqah II B 1 "there they repeat the ""nghteous triumphs The Song of Deboiah and Barak I
ot the LORD" (ESV) celebrating the defeat of Jabm king of i
i
Canaan and his commander Sisera
1 Sam 127 tsedaqah II B 1 "Now therefore stand still that I may plead When the Egyptians (v 8), Sisera (v 9),
with you befoie the L O R D concerning all the Philistines (v 9), the Ammonites (v
the ""righteous deeds of the LORD that he 12) oppressed them, God raised up
performed for you and for your fathers" Moses & 'various judges to deliver them
(ESV) militarily >
Isa 46 13 tsedaqah II B 2 "I bring near my ""righteousness, it is not God will both be the "Redeemer" of j
far off and my salvation will not delay, I Israel and "take vengeance" on Babylon i
will put salvation in Zion, for Israel my (47 3-4)
glory" (ESV)
Isa ^1 5 tsedeq II B 2 "My ""righteousness draws near, my ' My arms will judge the peoples" i
salvation has gone out and my arms will
Chapter 4 Righteousness m the Old Testament 261
Table & gMghtwusaess &t God" to Hebrew Bible ("my, Ms, yaur1*)
W-fek H-ref H-lem 1 Bu*~ Hebrew context Notes
1 ea * I
judge the peoples" (ESV)
Isa 51 6 tsedaqah II B 2 " but my salvation will be forever, and "Fear not the repioach of man, nor be >
my ""righteousness will never be dismayed" dismayed at their revihngs" (\ 7)
(ESV) i
Isa 51 8 tsedaqah II B 2 " but my ""righteousness will be forever, "And where is the wrath of the
and my salvation to all geneiations" (ESV) oppressor'" (v 13), "your tormentois" (v !
23)
Isa 56 1 tsedaqah II B 2 "Thus says the LORD, 'Preservejustice and Immediate context does not specify,
do righteousness, for My salvation is about must lely on previous contexts (Isa
to come, and My *nghteousness to be 46 13,515-8)
revealed'" (NASB) I
Isa 59 16 tsedaqah II B 2 "He saw that there was no man, and "Garments of vengeance for clothing \
wondered that there was no one to wiath to his adversaries a Redeemer
intercede, then his own arm brought him will come to Zion" ( w 16-20)
salvation, and his ""righteousness upheld
him" (ESV)
Micah 6 5 tsedaqah II B 2 "My people, remember now what Balak "Vengeance on the nations" (5 15), "The,
king of Moab counseled and what Balaam LORD has an indictment against his
son of Beor answered him, and from people (v 2), "I brought you up from the
Shittim to Gilgal, so that you might know land of Egypt" (v 4), God brought them
the ""righteous acts of the LORD" (NASB) safely "from Shittim to Gilgal" <
Ps 50 6 tsedeq II B 3 "The heavens declare his ""righteousness, God as judge of hypocntes among
for God himself is judge'" (ESV) covenant people
Isa 42 21 tsedeq II B 3 "The LORD was pleased, for his Punitive, negative - because Israel
"righteousness' sake, to magnify his law sinned and disobeyed God's law, he has j
and make it glorious" (ESV) poured out the heat of his anger (vv 24-
25)
Dan 9 16 tsedaqah II B 3 "0 LORD, according to all youi ""righteous "To you, 0 Lord, belongs
acts, let your anger and your wrath tam righteousness" (v 7), "The LORD our !
away horn your city Jerusalem, your holy God is nghteous m all the woiks that he
hill" (ESV) has done" (v 14), "according to all youi
nghteous acts" means "give us now as
much mercy as you have given us
righteous punishment up to this point" j
With the above overview of the data and the fundamental 3"H context in mind, let
us now briefly examine a representative sample of the passages that speak of God's
righteousness.
Psalm 7:17
"I will give to the LORD the thanks

due to his righteousness (ip"7S3 / Kara xnv SiKaioauvnv auxou),
and I will sing praise to the name
of the LORD, the Most High" (ESV).
Psalm 7 is a lament attributed to David in which he calls upon God, asking him to
deliver him from his enemies. Because of this reference to the righteousness of God in
the final verse, the whole psalm attracts our attention to see what the context might
suggest is the content of this divine righteousness. The opening verse is a call for God to
"save me from all my pursuers and deliver me" (v 1 ESV). The way this will take place is
clear from the rest of the psalm: the psalmist hopes that God will deliver him from his
enemies by judging them. "Arise, O LORD, in your anger; lift yourself up against the fury
of my enemies" (v 6 ESV). Then we read this stanza:

o
The LOR.D judges the peoples;

judge me, O LORD, according to my righteousness17^
and according to the integrity that is in me.
9
Oh, let the evil of the wicked come to an end,
and may you establish the righteous—
you who test the minds and hearts,
O righteous God!
10
My shield is with God,
who saves the upright in heart.
11
God is a righteous judge,
and a God who feels indignation every day (ESV).
Notice the high concentration of judgment and righteousness terms here. "O
righteous God! ... God is a righteous judge." There can be no doubt from the above that
God's righteousness is his perfect justice in judgment, expressed on the one hand in his
vindication of the righteous or innocent and on the other hand in his judgment against the
wicked.
Peter Craigie comments:
How can the psalmist appeal to his own righteousness and integrity as the basis for God to vindicate
him? "Such prayers were composed for a person who was in the right in comparison with the antagonist.
They are the expressions of a good conscience before hostility and opposition ... The innocence claimed by
the petitioner was not an absolute righteousness but a Tightness with respect to the charges." James Luther
Mays, Psalms (Louisville: John Knox, 1994), 64, 433.
The terminology as a whole conjures the image of a court of law; peoples gather
around and God takes his lofty seat of judgment (v 8). In this context, in the
presence of the one who "adjudicates the nations" (v 9a), the psalmist asks to be
judged according to his "righteousness" and "integrity"; he does not for one
moment claim absolute righteousness or sinlessness, but only complete innocence
with respect to the false charges which have been laid against him. Only in this
divine court will the wicked "come to an end" (v 10) and the righteous be
established; God, the Judge, is righteous, and by virtue of his divine ability to
scrutinize the innermost thoughts and emotions of the persons standing in court —
figuratively, the psalmist and his accusers - he will establish the righteous and
terminate the wicked.176
According to Psalm 7, then, "the righteousness of God" is not a thoroughly
positive or relational concept. The heavenly courtroom is the metaphorical context for
understanding God's righteousness, which is expressed in his judicial verdict in favor of
the innocent sufferer who calls upon him for deliverance, a verdict rendered by means of
his judgment upon the wicked oppressors of his servants. This is close to Cremer's
thought insofar as he focused on God's activity of restoring the rights of the defenseless.
But Cremer's analysis failed to take account of the bi-directional flow of God's
righteousness, that is, the fact that God is described as "a righteous judge" because he
righteously defends the innocent and punishes their oppressors. The second element, the
punishment on the wicked oppressor of the innocent, ' is the focus of attention in Psalm
7 and is what elicits the psalmist's declaration that "God is a righteous judge" and his
concluding note of praise, "I will give to the LORD the thanks due to his righteousness."
Clearly, God's righteousness is not a thoroughly positive concept that entails only
salvation. It does entail salvation or vindication for the innocent sufferer; but for the
176
Peter C. Craigie, Psalms 1-50 (WBC 19; Waco: Word Books, 1983), 102.
177
The psalmist protests his innocence in w 3-5: "O LORD my God, if I have done this, if there is wrong in
my hands, if I have repaid my friend with evil or plundered my enemy without cause, let the enemy pursue
my soul and overtake it, and let him trample my life to the ground and lay my glory in the dust" (ESV).
wicked it entails God's just punishment. Both sides of the coin are involved in "the
righteousness of God," but in Psalm 7, the punitive side receives the emphasis.
Psalm 35:23-28
no
Awake and rouse yourself for my vindication

OPSUtfp? / xfj Kpiost pou),
for my cause CO"1"!? / eiq xf|v SiKnv pou),
my God and my Lord!
24
Vindicate me, O LORD, my God,
according to your righteousness
C?]p"12p ',3??2? / Kptvov pe Kara xf|v SiKaioauvnv aou),
and let them not rejoice over me!
25
Let them not say in their hearts,
"Aha, our heart's desire!"
Let them not say, "We have swallowed him up."
Let them be put to shame and disappointed altogether
who rejoice at my calamity!
Let them be clothed with shame and dishonor
who magnify themselves against me!
Let those who delight in my righteousness
(or my vindication, NASB) p p l ? / xf|v SiKaioauvnv pou)
shout for joy and be glad and say evermore,
"Great is the LORD,
who delights in the welfare of his servant!"
no
Then my tongue shall tell of your righteousness

C?Jp"12J / xf|v 5ucaioauvT]v aou)
and of your praise all the day long. (ESV)
Although Goldingay translates the two references to God's righteousness as "your
faithfulness" (vv. 24, 28), he provides no rationale for this misleading translation and
simply repeats the common view since Cremer that righteousness equals faithfulness.
But repeated usage of judicial language - "my vindication" PPSKJI? in v 23 and *p~\¥ in
178
John Goldingay, Psalms, Vol. 1: Psalms 1-41 (BCOT; Grand Rapids: Baker Academic. 2006), 500-2. In
his glossary he has an entry for "Faithful, faithfulness," which are his translations for p'H^ and np"12J,
respectively. He defines the terms as "acting in the right way in relation to people with whom one is in a
relationship" (p. 593). Clearly, Goldingay has been strongly influenced by Cremer's relational
interpretation of righteousness.
v 27), "my cause" ("Q'H in v 23), and the verb "to vindicate" (BSttf in v 24) - in the
immediate context makes clear that the setting is a judicial one: "Awake and rouse
yourself for my vindication, for my cause, my God and my Lord! Vindicate me, O LORD,
my God, according to your righteousness, and let them not rejoice over me!" There is a
controversy here between the psalmist and his adversary. The psalmist is crying out to
God to judge between him and his adversary, to decide in his favor and vindicate him by
giving him justice against his enemies. It is thus more in keeping with the context to
render all three occurrences of p~f^ in this Psalm with the English word "justice."179
1 Samuel 24 provides a real-life, historical situation in which just this sort of plea
for divine vindication and justice might have been uttered. After passing up an
opportunity to kill him, David says to King Saul:
"See, my father, see the corner of your robe in my hand. For by the fact that I
cut off the corner of your robe and did not kill you, you may know and see that
there is no wrong or treason in my hands. I have not sinned against you, though
An
you hunt my life to take it. May the LORD judge (tDSET / Sucdaai) between me
and you, may the LORD avenge me against you, but my hand shall not be against
you. 13 As the proverb of the ancients says, 'Out of the wicked comes
wickedness.' But my hand shall not be against you. After whom has the king of
Israel come out? After whom do you pursue? After a dead dog! After a flea!
May the LORD therefore be judge (]*"]? HIIT iTrn / ysvoixo Kupioc eiq Kpixfiv)
and give sentence (£33271 / Kai Sucaaxfjv) between me and you, and see to it and
plead my cause ('O'HTIN! 3~T / Kpivai xfyv Kpiaiv pou) and deliver me from your
hand (TJ"ri? ^BS^H /ml Sucdaai poi 8K xzipoq aou)" (1 Sam 24:11-15 ESV).180
As Robert Alter does: "Judge me by Your justice, LORD my God ... May they sing glad and rejoice,
who desire justice for me ... and my tongue will murmur Your justice" (vv. 24, 27, 28). Alter, The Book of
Psalms: A Translation with Commentary (New York: W. W. Norton, 2007), 124-5. So also J. P.
Fokkelman, Major Poems of the Hebrew Bible. 2.137.
iso 'VTfe n a r r a t j v e sc tting [of 1 Sam 24] is a clue to the kind of situation for which [Ps 35] is composed,"
noting the verbal parallels between 1 Sam 24:14-15 and Ps 35:1, 3, 23-24. Mays, Psalms, 154.
Thus the judicial component of the divine p"1?3 in Ps 35:24, 28 is not to be
overlooked, nor can it rightly be reduced to God's faithfulness. Though the idea may be
theologically legitimate, the psalmist is not asking God to judge/vindicate him according
to his faithfulness as the divine promise-maker and promise-keeper, but according to his
righteousness or justice as the divine Judge: "Judge-and-vindicate me according to your
justice (ÎplSJ? "^J??^ / Kpivov pe Kaxd xf]v SiKaioauvnv aou), O LORD my God."
Psalm 51:14
"Deliver me from bloodguiltiness, O God, the God of my salvation;

then my tongue will joyfully sing of your righteousness'" (ESV).
Clearly, God's righteousness here is salvific, and the oppressor from which the
psalmist seeks deliverance is not an external foe such as the persecutor of Ps 35 but his
own sins. But this does not mean that there is no judicial aspect here. As Erich Zenger
says, this righteousness is a "judging-saving" righteousness.181 The judicial context is
clear from the context mentioned in v 4 (v 6 in Hebrew):
"Against you, you only, have I sinned

and done what is evil in your sight,
so that you may be justified (p'lSn / SiKaicoOfjc;) in your words
and blameless in your judgment (?J£3S20 / sv xco Kpivsa9ai os)" (ESV).
In other words, the psalmist is in an implied controversy (3"H) with God. In other psalms
(e.g., Ps 35), the controversy is between the psalmist and his enemies, with God as the
impartial judge who renders a decision between them. Here, the psalmist is in a
181
Frank-Lothar Hossfeld and Erich Zenger, A Commentary on Psalms 51-100 (cd. Klaus Baltzcr;
Hermeneia; Minneapolis: Fortress, 2005), 22, 24.
182
In all likelihood, TJBSEQ is to be taken in the active sense, "when you judge" (NIV. NASB), but the
LXX (cp. Paul's quotation in Rom 3:4) interprets it as a judicial proceeding in which God is the one being
judged (evra>KpiveoOai as). Hossfeld and Zenger, 24. Either way, a judicial controversy between God and
the sinner is in view.
controversy with God; presumably before he came to recognize his guilt, he had accused
God of unjustly causing him to suffer.183 But now he has come to realize that he is the
one who is in the wrong and that God is in the right. God is now "justified" in this
judicial controversy. By the same token, as the reverse-side of this justification of God,
the psalmist is judged and pronounced guilty; it is not, however, a purely negative
judicial condemnation but a positive pronouncement that, through acknowledging his
guilt, casting himself on the mercy of God and receiving inner cleansing and restoration,
he himself is now restored to a forgiven and righteous status as well.184 God's saving
righteousness thus involves judicial activity - for salvation comes through a judicial act
in which God declares the sinner to be guilty before him and then, by his grace providing
atonement for sin that "blots out iniquities" (v 9), declares him to be no longer one who is
reckoned among "transgressors" and "sinners" (v 13) but one who has been delivered
from blood-guiltiness (v 14) and therefore by implication one of the righteous who enjoy
God's favor. "The beginning of salvation from sin is God's judgment upon the
,,185
sinner.
Psalm 98:1-3
"Oh sing to the Lord a new song,

for he has done marvelous things!
His right hand and his holy arm
have worked salvation for him (i? niT2Jin H2?!? / eacoasv auxco).
1
The psalmist's sickness (as punishment for his sin) is implied in these words: "Let the bones that you
have broken rejoice" (v 8). Some even call Ps 51 a "sick person's psalm." Ernst Wiirthwcin, "Bemerkungcn
zu Psalm 51," in Neue Wege der Psalmenjorschung: FS W. Beyerlin (eds. Klaus Seybold and Erich Zenger;
2nd ed.: HBS 1; Freiburg: Herder, 1995). 381-88.
184
"The confession of sin seeks renewal as well as forgiveness. The psalm leads the penitent to seek both
justification and sanctification." Mays, Psalms, 202. The plea for justification is stated in vv 7-9 ("purge
me with hyssop ... blot out my iniquities"), while the plea for sanctification is stated in v 10 ("create in me
a clean heart, O God, and renew a right spirit within me").
m
Mays, Psalms, 200.
2
The LORD has made known his salvation (IHi?^ 1 / xo cGyrfjptov auxou);
he has revealed his righteousness
(inp"lSS n?3 / a7rsKaA,uv|/cv xf|v SiKaioauvnv auxou)
in the sight of the nations.
3
He has remembered his steadfast love and faithfulness
(InSIDKI l^lpn / xov eXsovq auxou ... Kai xfjc; aXxfiziaq auxou)
to the house of Israel.
All the ends of the earth have seen the salvation of our God
OTTib^ n*?12T J1K / xo atoxf|piov xou Gsou f|pav)" (ESV).
Sigmund Mowinckel categorized Psalm 98, along with Psalms 47, 93, 95-97, as
enthronement psalms, that is, psalms with the cultic Sitz im Leben of an enthronement
festival in ancient Israel, an annual celebration of YHWH's kingship.186 This view has
been quite influential among OT scholars. Tremper Longman takes issue with this view,
especially the speculative nature of the thesis concerning an annual festival, and argues
rather that Psalm 98 is a song celebrating the victory of the Divine Warrior as the
commander of the heavenly armies. ' The idea is that upon a successful campaign in
Israel's holy war, the people would use this psalm and others like it to reaffirm God's
kingship (cp. the victory songs in Exod 15:20-21; Judges 5:1-31; 11:34; 1 Sam 18:6-7; Ps
68:24-27; usually in reference to the women singing with timbrels and dancing). If
Longman is correct, then it sheds light on the correlation between "salvation" and
"righteousness" in Ps 98:2, for the divine Warrior is seen as accomplishing Israel's
victory and deliverance by means of a royal-judicial judgment upon Israel's enemies, and
so in this way God reveals his righteousness. The kingly office of ancient Israel involved
two primary activities: the military aspect (to provide victory and security for the people
against the surrounding nations) and the judicial aspect (to provide judicial rulings of
defense on behalf of the poor, the orphan, and the widow against their oppressors). So it
186
Sigmund Mowinckel, The Psalms in Israel's Worship (Nashville: Abingdon, 1962), 1.107ff.
187
Tremper Longman, III, "Psalm 98: A Divine Warrior Victory Song," JETS 27/3 (1984): 267-74.
is not surprising that the two ideas would be welded into a single image when referring to
the divine King: as the divine Warrior he comes to the aid of his oppressed people by
granting them victory over their foes; God reveals his righteousness/justice by judicially
deciding in favor of his people through a military victory that is at once the
punishing/defeating of their oppressors and their vindication in the sight of the nations.
This argument is reinforced by the observation that the language of Ps 98:2 is
highly reminiscent of the passages in Deutero-Isaiah that we looked at earlier in the
section on passages where "salvation" and "righteousness" are used in parallelism. No
doubt there is some degree of inner-biblical exegesis or intertextuality at work here,
though whether it is Psalm 98 reflecting on Deutero-Isaiah or vice versa is impossible to
determine.188 Whichever direction the influence flows, the intertextual linkage supports
my thesis because we see the same dynamic at work in Deutero-Isaiah: God will reveal
his righteousness and his salvation by judging the Babylonians who took his people into
exile, then redeeming and restoring them to the land. "The Divine Warrior both saves his
people and judges his enemies in the same act. In addition, Yahweh establishes his
kingship through his military victories. This last point recognizes the Near Eastern
background to the Divine Warrior motif in the OT and further the strong association
between Yahweh's warfare and his role as king."189
In addition to YHWH's "salvation" and "righteousness," we also have his
"lovingkindness" and "faithfulness," so that all four terms are in parallelism with one
Hossfeld and Zenger, A Commentary on Psalms 51-100,480-1. Delitzsch thinks the language is taken
from Deutero-Isaiah. Franz Delitzsch, Biblical Commentary on the Psalms, vols. 1 -3 (trans. David Eaton;
London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1889), 3.62. Craig C. Broyles argues that the dependence is the other way
around, since he regards Psalm 98 as prc-exilic and Deutero-Isaiah as exilic. Broyles, Psalms (NIBC;
Peabody: Hendrickson, 1999), 381.
189
Longman, "Psalm 98: A Divine Warrior Victory Song." 272.
Chapter 4: Righteousness in the Old Testament •• 270
another. Yet it is important to note that the verbs with which they are connected differ.
YHWH has "made known" OTIin [Hiphil of VT] I eyvobpiasv) his salvation and
"revealed" (!"D3 [Piel of i"H3] / d7t£KdA,u\|/ev) his righteousness, but he has "remembered"
(1?T [Qal] / spvfjaOn,) his lovingkindness and his faithfulness to the house of Israel. The
LORD is the King of the cosmos (v. 6) who will judge the earth in righteousness (v. 9),
and through that judgment he will bring salvation to his people.190 The remembering verb
has strongly covenantal overtones in Scripture,'91 and so we may deduce that the LORD'S
saving activity not only is accomplished through his righteousness in royal-judicial
action, but also is an expression of his covenant faithfulness in keeping his promises to
the house of Israel. But, as we have seen, the nuanced nature of Hebrew parallelism
suggests that we have here a complex of theological ideas in which each word or concept
complements but does not coincide with the others, producing a three-dimensional
theological affirmation larger than the sum of its parts. That broader theological
affirmation is part of the discourse concept that resides in the statement, "he has revealed
his righteousness (TlpISS 1^3 / d7t£Kd>a)\|/£v xfiv SiKaioauvnv auxou) in the sight of the
nations," a statement that must be read in the context of God's cosmic kingship affirmed
in the Psalm as a whole. But that theological affirmation is made by the clauses, strophes,
and verses of the Psalm as a whole and does not reside in the lexical concept of the word
190
Mays, Psalms, 312.
191
The construction "to remember one's covenant" (with God as the subject) is used around a dozen times
in the OT (Gen 9:15, 16; Exod 2:24; 6:5; Lev 26:42,45; 1 Chron 16:15; Pss 105:8; 106:45; 111:5; Jer
14:21; Ezek 16:60) and once in the NT (Luke 1:72).
192
Robert Lowth's old paradigm of Hebrew parallelism leads one commentator to make the astonishing
claim that "Psalm 98 forms the synonymous parallelism ntfW 1 —HplIS, through which H p I S moves
completely into the meaning 'salvation.'" Hans-Joachim Kraus, Psalms 60-150: A Commentary (trans.
Hilton C. Oswald; ET of Biblisher Kommentar; Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1989), 264 (emphasis mine).
ilpHSS in and of itself. The lexical concept of the word IpISS makes its own contribution
to the broader discourse concept of Psalm 98, but that broader discourse concept must not
be transferred back into the lexical concept.
Psalm 143:1-2, 11-12

1
"Hear my prayer, O Lord;
In vour faithfulness answer me, in your righteousness]
(inplSSS) "OSS? in3!2K5 / sv xfj dA,nfMa aou, £7tdKouaov pou
EV xfj SiKaioauvT] aou)
for no one living is righteous before you.
For your name's sake, O LORD, preserve my life!

In your righteousness (IHplSSSS / EV xfj SiKaioauvn aou)
bring my soul out of trouble!
And in your steadfast love you will cut off my enemies,
and you will destroy all the adversaries of my soul,
for I am your servant" (ESV).
While it may be tempting to interpret "righteousness" as equivalent to
"faithfulness," such an identification is not in keeping with what we now know of
Hebrew parallelism.193 It is more likely that the "righteousness" of God in v. 1 is related
to the "righteousness" that the psalmist lacks but desires in his relationship to God in v. 2:
"Enter not into judgment (£3S2?P) with your servant, for no one living is righteous (Qal of
pISS) before you." In other words, the psalmist is asking God to deliver him from his
foes by a judicial act of righteousness, that is, by vindicating him against his enemies.
' One commentator falls prey to this error when he says, "Alongside H31f3X ('faithfulness,' 'constancy'),
np*72J has the meaning: 'covenant faithfulness,' 'salvation faithfulness.'" Hans-Joachim Kraus, Psalms 60-
150, 536. Another translates ^np"]i53 in Ps 143:1, 11 as "in your consistency" and says "it refers to
Yahweh's doing what is right in the light of his covenantal commitments." Leslie C. Allen, Psalms 101—
150 (WBC 21; Waco: Word Books, 1983), 280.
The psalmist "pleads for divine interposition in righteousness and a righteous judgment
on enemies."
The forensic significance of God's righteousness in vv 1 and 11 is evident from
several considerations. First, the context has to do with the psalmist's cry for deliverance
from his enemies, which are mentioned three times: "For the enemy has pursued my soul;
he has crushed my life to the ground ... Deliver me from my195 enemies, O LORD! I have
fled to you for refuge ... And in your steadfast love you will cut off my enemies, and you
will destroy all the adversaries of my soul, for I am your servant" (vv 3, 9, 12 ESV). The
adversarial context of the psalm therefore points us in the direction of a controversy
(SSÎ) that is to be decided as both parties stand before the heavenly Judge and await his
verdict (£3S2?f3).196 This is the precise significance of the imperative, "Hear my prayer, O
LORD; give ear to my pleas for mercy! ... Answer me quickly, O LORD! ... In your
righteousness bring my soul out of trouble!" (vv 1,7, 11 ESV). The psalmist is crying
out to God for a judicial verdict of vindication for him and condemnation against his foes.
Second, the statement "for to you I lift up my soul" OKJSS T1K&3 I^K - "':? / oxi
npbq a£ rjpa xfiv \|/uxfjv pou) in verse 8 implies that the psalmist has placed the outcome
of the controversy in God's hands. The construction "to lift" (K2?3) + "my soul" 02733) +
"to you [God]" ( 1 vN) occurs also in Psalm 25 (cp. Ps 86:4), where it is clearly in a legal
194
Charles Augustus Briggs, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Psalms (ICC;
Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1907), 2.515. "The divine attributes are the sanctions of the pleading:
faithfulness], to His covenant and people; righteousness], in their vindication against their enemies."
193
Briggs thinks assonance requires '?J",5,K ("your enemies") and that a later scribe changed the suffix to
"my enemies" r5'N). Briggs, The Book of Psalms, 2.517, 519. This makes good sense theologically
(Briggs: "The enemies of the people of Yahweh are the enemies of Yahweh Himself), but there is no
manuscript or version that supports this reading (the LXX has SK TSV sÔpav pou).
196
Derek Kidner interprets the appeal to God's righteousness as "the integrity of a judge" which is
"welcomed by those who brought a case to court." Psalms 73-150 (London: InterVarsity, 1975), 475.
controversy context, with the hoped-for outcome of shame upon the enemies and
vindication for the godly suppliant:
Psalm 25:1-3
1
"To you, O LORD, I lift up my soul.
(K27K ^SS nirP "T/X I Hpog ae, Kupis, fjpa xfrv \|/uxijv pou)
2
O my God, in you I trust;
let me not be put to shame;
let not my enemies exult over me.
Indeed, none who wait for you shall be put to shame;
they shall be ashamed who are wantonly treacherous" (ESV).
Who will be put to shame? The righteous who are being oppressed by the enemy, or the
enemy who is gloating over the suffering of the righteous? The suppliant lifts up his soul
to the LORD in confidence that "none who wait for [him] shall be put to shame." As in
Psalm 143, the psalmist of Psalm 25 does not appeal to his own righteousness as the basis
for God's vindication; in fact, he pleads for God's forgiving grace: "Remember not the
sins of my youth or my transgressions ... For your name's sake, O LORD, pardon my
guilt, for it is great ... Consider my affliction and my trouble, and forgive all my sins" (Ps
25:7, 11, 18 ESV). The psalmist therefore lifts up his soul to God for a vindication that is
ultimately grounded in God's grace.
Third, the second verse of Psalm 143 must be brought into play here: "Enter not
into judgment with your servant, for no one living is righteous before you" (ESV). The
construction "to enter into judgment with" (£3S2?EQ Si!S / £ia£pxopai rig Kpiaiv) is used
107 1QS
also in Job 22:4 and demonstrates the forensic context of the whole Psalm. The
197
"Is it for your fear of him that he reproves you and enters into judgment with you? (CD2t£JQ3 "^QS? Xini1 /
ouvetasA-suoerat oot etc, Kpiaiv)" (Job 22:4 ESV).
198
Although he incon-ectly (in my view) interprets God's righteousness in Ps 143:1, 11 as God's
faithfulness, Goldingay rightly notes the forensic context based on the "enter into judgment" construction
of v 2: "More literally 'enter into a decision' (bo' bemispat; cf. Job 22:4). Similar phrases can refer to a
more open, mutual process of decision making (e.g., Job 9:32, where the verb is plural), but this second-
person expression takes the perspective of the person bringing the case, one who (the speaker also knows)
psalmist has just pleaded with God to hear him in the judicial sense of coming to
vindicate him against his foes (v 1). Having just appealed to the heavenly court, he is
immediately conscious of his sinfulness. "Israel as the servant of Yahweh is here
conscious of sin and guilt, that makes him dread the divine judgment, which the previous
context has implored."199 The following statement, "for no one living is righteous before
you" (v 2b), indicates further that what is expected is a vindication, a judicial
pronouncement of the status "righteous before God." This statement in the LXX (ou
SiKaicoGfjaexai SVCOJUOV aou Jiag C,&v) provided the apostle Paul with the language for his
teaching concerning the righteousness that sinners can have before God by faith in Christ
(Rom 3:20; Gal 2:16).
Micah 7:7-9
' "But as for me, I will watch expectantly for the LORD;
I will wait for the God of my salvation;
My God will hear me.
8
Do not rejoice over me, O my enemy;
Though I fall I will rise;
Though I dwell in darkness, the LORD is a light for me.
9
I will bear the indignation of the LORD
Because I have sinned against Him,
Until He pleads my case OSTI I T T "l#H! IS? /
£cog xou Sucaicbaai auxov xf|v Sucnv pou)
and executes justice for me ("£332?P H2?S?1 / Kai 7toif]a£i xo Kpipa pou).
He will bring me out to the light,
And I will see His righteousness (InplSSSS H^HX /
6\|/opai xf|v Sucaioauvnv auxou)*' (NASB).
It is important to recognize that the context of this passage extends back to
chapter 6, which is the opening of YHWH's covenant lawsuit against his covenant-
can be confident of winning ... It is Yhwh who makes the authoritative decisions about whether a person
counts as faithful." John Goldingay, Psalms, 3.673.
199
Briggs, The Book of Psalms, 2. 515.
breaking people: "Listen, you mountains, to the indictment (SVI) of the LORD, and you
enduring foundations of the earth, because the LORD has a case (SS'H) against His people;
even with Israel He will dispute" (Micah 6:2 NASB).200 It is a cosmic lawsuit, for even
the mountains and the foundations of the earth are called to serve as witnesses or judges
against Israel, a common feature of Ancient Near Eastern suzerainty treaties.2 ' The
covenant that Israel has broken is the Sinai Covenant, and thus the curses of that covenant
are about to be invoked against her: "Therefore I strike you with a grievous blow, making
you desolate because of your sins" (Micah 6:13 ESV).
But all is not lost. God's bringing the punitive curses of the covenant upon Israel
is not an end in itself, nor is it the end of the story, for in accordance with God's earlier
promises to the fathers he will not let judgment be the last word. A remnant will pass
through the judgment and come out on the other side forgiven, restored, and
vindicated.202 Thus in Micah 7:7-9, the prophet looks ahead to that vindication. Although
Israel is guilty and must suffer the punitive dimension of God's righteousness, the
prophet, speaking on behalf of the people, will wait until God "pleads my case and
executes justice for me." God's role will change from the plaintiff bringing the charge
' YHWH is the plaintiff; Israel is the defendant; Micah is YHWH's prosecuting attorney bringing the
lawsuit on God's behalf; and all creation serves as the witness. Bruce K. Waltke, A Commentary on Micah
(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2007), 373-5; Delbert R. Hillers, Micah (Hermeneia; Minneapolis: Fortress,
1984), 77. For an analysis of the rib-pattem in the prophets, see H. B. Huffmon, "The Covenant Lawsuit in
the Prophets," JBL 78 (1959): 285-95 and Julien Harvey, '"Le Rib-Pattern,' Requisitoire prophetique sur la
rupture de l'alliance," Biblica 43 (1963): 172-96.
201
George E. Mendenhall, Law and Covenant in Israel and the Ancient Near East (Pittsburgh: Biblical
Colloquium, 1955), 40; Delbert R. Hillers, Covenant: The History of a Biblical Idea (Baltimore: Johns
Hopkins University Press, 1969), 36-37. For more on the Ancient Near Eastern suzerainty treaty format as
a literary-legal genre after which the Mosaic Covenant was modeled, see Meredith G. Kline, The Structure
of Biblical Authority (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1972).
202
"Those who live in violation of God's laws arc condemned and those who love Yahweh arc vindicated.
The whole nation will be judged, even Micah himself; however, the remnant which repents will be
delivered and granted honor." Ralph L. Smith, Micah-Malachi (WBC 32; Waco: Word Books, 1984), 60.
against Israel to the judge who decides in favor of the oppressed against their enemies.
"The expectation that Yahweh will 'plead one's cause' and 'accomplish justice' for a
person is metaphor derived from the judicial scene where the poor man needed a
protector against a powerful enemy."204 The context, of course, is that Israel feels she has
been unjustly treated by the Babylonians, whom God sent in judgment on her for her
covenant breaking. The enemy has gloated over Israel in her darkest hour, derisively
calling out, "Where is the LORD your God?" (Micah 6:16; 7:10). And so it is that, just as
the victims look to human judges for redress of the wrongs they have suffered at the
hands of their enemies, so the divine Judge will now become Israel's champion,
deliverer, and vindicator.
With this strongly judicial context in view, then, the rest of the verse makes sense:
"He will bring me out to the light and I will see His righteousness." The phrase "his
righteousness" is not to be translated "his salvation"206 (even though God's righteousness
is certainly salvific in its effects), but "his righteousness" (NASB). What Micah beholds
is not the salvific effects but the righteousness of God himself. Micah and the nation as a
whole will experience God's deliverance and vindication, in spite of their sins; and
having experienced such grace, they will then look upon and marvel at the righteousness
of God. This language has strong intertextual echoes with Deutero-Isaiah and Ps 98:2,
which we analyzed in a similar manner above. God's "righteousness" in Micah 7:9 is
203
"To describe that transition [from judgment to salvation] they use language of a court of law to interpret
the history of judgment as a process in which the judge marvelously becomes advocate and defender. He
will plead their case ... and defend their right (Pss. 17.2; 9.4; 140.12). This outcome of their trial before
God will occur as an event of salvation." James Luther Mays, Micah: A Commentary (Philadelphia:
Westminster, 1976), 159.
2<M
Hillers, Micah, 90.
203
Leslie C. Allen, The Books of Joel, Obadiah, Jonah and Micah (NICOT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
1976), 395.
206
E.g., Waltke, Micah, 435, quoting from Klaus Koch's article on p i S in TLOT.
therefore a judicially-stamped Normbegriff 'focused here on the notion of God's
vindication and justification of his servants: "God's righteousness is the action he takes to
vindicate his election of his people."207 Thus, this passage in Micah comes very close to
the Pauline notion of "the righteousness of God" as a judicial vindication, an act of
justification in which the sinner receives a gift of righteousness that does not arise from
himself (who has no righteousness) but from God. Zion's "confidence is not in herself-
she has sinned and that characterization is total - but in the righteousness of God."208
E. Conclusion
Cremer posited that the Hebrew usage of "my/his/your righteousness" in
reference to God's judicial activity of delivering those who are oppressed and who fly for
redress to his court should be classified as iustitia salutifera in opposition to and in
contrast to the Greek/Latin iustitia distributiva. But as I have shown, the "righteousness
of God" terminology in both the Hebrew Old Testament and the Septuagint is actually
best understood in light of the judicial context of legal controversy (JH'H), so that God's
righteousness is precisely iustitia distributiva. The 41 (Hebrew MT) or 44 (LXX, not
including Aprocrypha) occurrences of "my/your/his righteousness" are focused on God's
judicial activity of issuing D^JSS^P / Kpipaxa (judgments, verdicts, legal decisions) on
behalf of the oppressed and against their adversaries. Cremer set up a false dichotomy
between iustitia salutifera and iustitia distributiva that has haunted scholarship ever
since.
' Mays, Micah, 160.

* Mays, Micah, 160.
Chapter 5
Righteousness in Jewish Literature
The question we have been seeking to address is the meaning of the phrase
SiKaioouvri Beou in Paul's epistles.1 This question involves both the meaning of
SiKaioauvn, and the significance of the genitive Osou. In Chapter 1,1 argued that, aside
from a number of minor interpretations and setting aside the distinction between infused
and imputed righteousness, one may speak of a traditional view held by the church
fathers up to and including the Protestant Reformation and its evangelical heirs. The
traditional view takes the noun SiKaioauvn as referring to "righteousness before God" in
the soteriological sense and Osou as a genitivus auctoris. That is, SiKaioauvn. 9sou in Paul
is not God's own attribute of righteousness but the righteousness that he gives us by faith.
In his anti-Pelagian treatise, "On the Spirit and the Letter," Augustine made the following
statement about Rom 3:21:
He does not say, the righteousness of man, or the righteousness of his own will,
but the "righteousness of God," - not that whereby He is Himself righteous, but
that with which He endows man when He justifies the ungodly.2
Augustine's interpretation was hugely influential throughout the medieval period, and
even Luther, Calvin and the Reformation tradition followed the same general path,
1
Rom 1:17; 3:5, 21, 22; 10:3 [2x]; 2 Cor 5:21; Phil 3:9, with the precising preposition SK. There are also
two occurrences of "his righteousness" (r) SiKouocruvn, cokou) in reference to God's righteousness - Rom
3:25, 26.
2
Augustine, De spiritu et littera 9.15. NPNFX 5.89.
278
Chapter 5: Righteousness in Jewish Literature - 279
although they emphasized that the righteousness was given to humans by a forensic
declaration rather than by the transformation of the new life in Christ. In any case, the
traditional view is united in holding that the righteousness of God is the righteousness of
the justified person, the homo iustificatus. It is "of God" because God bestows it (whether
by infusion or by imputation) on those who believe.
It was not until 1860 that a new view began to be articulated by Diestel and
Ritschl, in which the notion of God's distributive justice was called into question and
flatly rejected, while "righteousness" in OT language and thought was viewed as a
thoroughly positive term equivalent to God's grace and love. This was developed further
by Cremer in his 1899 treatise on Paul's Rechtfertigungslehre in the context of its
historical presuppositions, in which he argued for the first time that the reason the OT
concept of "righteousness" is positive is because it is a Verhdltnisbegriff. This view, in
various permutations, influenced a stream of 20th-century scholars such as Schlatter,
Kasemann, and Stuhlmacher in their interpretation of the Pauline SiKaioouvri Oeou as
God's saving activity in fulfillment of his covenant promises. This view was then picked
up by the more recent New Perspective writers such as Dunn and Wright.
The traditional view begins with the assumption that "righteousness" is essentially
a Normbegriff'having to do with ethical righteousness such that, according to God's
distributive justice, that righteousness is acknowledged and approved by God. In line
with this, the traditional view then takes the term SiKaioouvri, when used by Paul in
soteriological contexts, as referring to the righteousness that believers receive by faith on
the basis of the atoning death of Christ.

The new view begins with the starting point that "righteousness" is a
Verhdltnisbegriff and then takes Paul's phrase, "the righteousness of God," as a
subjective genitive that means either God's saving activity or his covenant faithfulness or
some combination of the two concepts.
We have seen that the relational starting point of the new view is not borne out
by the evidence. It rests on a false contrast with extrabiblical Greek usage, as if the
Greco-Roman and the Hebraic concepts of righteousness were radically divergent. We
have seen that in extrabiblical usage, the Greek term SiKaioauvn, can have a relational
usage as well. In other words, faithfulness to one's covenants and promises is deemed to
be a subset of "righteousness." We have also seen that the Old Testament usage does not
support the relational theory, since "righteousness" is used neutrally (in reference to
judicial activity in general), negatively (in reference to punitive judicial activity), and
positively (in reference to judicial activity that involves vindication or deliverance by
means of judgment upon the oppressors of God's people). Cremer's relational theory can
get off the ground only if the usage of "righteousness" in the Old Testament (both
Hebrew and Greek) is thoroughly positive (durchaus posit iver). But it clearly is not. Thus
Cremer's relational theory breaks down.
Where does this leave us? Usage in extrabiblical Greek or in the Old Testament
does not determine Paul's usage, but it does narrow the possibilities. At this point there is
a presumption in favor of assuming that the Pauline SiKaioauvn 9eou presupposes that
SiKaioouvri is a Normbegriff and that it probably does not mean God's covenant
faithfulness. However, before proceeding to the exegesis of Paul, it is important that we
examine the Jewish literature of the Second Temple period in order to see if our
preliminary conclusion is borne out, qualified, or overturned. We will therefore examine
the following corpora to see whether the relational theory of righteousness is a semantic
possibility for Paul: (a) the Dead Sea Scrolls; (b) the Apocrypha and Old Testament
Pseudepigrapha composed in Hebrew; (c) the Apocrypha, Old Testament
Pseudepigrapha, and other Hellenistic Jewish literature composed in Greek; and (d) the
New Testament itself viewed as Jewish literature composed in Greek.
The litmus test will be a comparison of (a/b) with (c/d), since we are most
concerned to see to what extent alleged salvific or covenantal meanings of "the
righteousness of God" have entered the linguistic bloodstream of the Jewish community
that thought and wrote in Greek. In Chapter 4, we saw that the relational interpretation -
in which "righteousness" is conformity to the terms of a relationship rather than to an
external norm - is incorrect. We also saw that "the righteousness of God" in the OT is not
a cipher for God's covenant faithfulness. So we do not expect to see these meanings
carried over into Jewish Greek usage, since they do not exist in the OT (either in Hebrew
original or in Greek translation) to begin with. However, we did find that "righteousness
of God" is frequently used in the OT in the iustitia salutifera or vindicatory/delivering
sense, understood not in Cremer's sense but as a subdivision of God's iustitia
distributiva. We also found that "righteousness" could be used, in addition to its primary
ethical and judicial sense, in reference to correctness, truthfulness in speech, and hence
integrity, and that this category of usage, in a small handful of cases, occurs in covenantal
contexts (e.g., Neh 9:8; Hos 2:19; Zech 8:8). Thus it is within the realm of possibility that
we may find that these limited Hebraic usages - occurring much less frequently in the OT
than Cremer thought, and without in any way offering support for his Verhdltnisbegriff
theory - were carried over into Jewish Greek usage via the Septuagint. This chapter will
therefore test that hypothesis by examining and comparing the usage of "righteousness"
in Jewish literature composed in Hebrew and in Jewish literature composed in Greek.
A. The Dead Sea Scrolls
To begin with, we must recognize some basic methodological issues. First, the
DSS are highly fragmentary, which means that in many cases it is difficult to determine
the meaning or semantic usage of a word since not enough context has survived to make
such a determination of meaning. Of the 300 occurrences of p1^/njp"12J, 74 fall into this
category, so the statistics below will not take these 74 into account, leaving 226
meaningful occurrences. Second, the DSS are not exclusively sectarian writings but also
contain Scripture scrolls, copies of Apocrypha and OT Pseudepigrapha (such as Tobit,
Jubilees, and portions of the Enochian literature), and miscellaneous other writings that
cannot with certainty be considered as authored by the Qumran sect. Nevertheless, with
these caveats in place, it is still legitimate to examine the usage of the two nouns for
"righteousness" in the DSS in order to get an idea of the semantic range in this important
collection of Jewish texts.
There are some notable contrasts between the usage of these two nouns in the
DSS and their usage in the Old Testament. First, in the DSS the masculine noun is used
more frequently than the feminine (masculine 73%; feminine 27%), whereas in the
Hebrew Bible the feminine noun is used more frequently (masculine 43%; feminine
57%). Second, the feminine noun is used to mean "alms" on four occasions in the DSS, a
meaning not attested in the Hebrew Bible." Third, there are some usages in the Hebrew
Bible that are not attested in the DSS (e.g., "rights").
However, the DSS usage is overall quite similar to that of the OT itself. First, as
in the Hebrew Bible, the feminine form alone occurs in the plural (this occurs 12 times).
- = TaW« m All s12 Occurrences of the Plant! nipTS to the BSS !.

!: !
Scroll Kef ]:'Lemma ; :. : =, •;-' . ' ' Costext ; - , , , ' :
1QS 1,21 tsedaqah "The priests shall rehearse the *righteous acts of God" (my trans.).
1QS X.23 tsedaqah "For thanksgiving shall I open my mouth, the "righteous acts of God shall my tongue j
recount always" (DSSR modified). J
1QS XI, 3 tsedaqah "By his *righteousness he shall blot out my h'ansgression" (PTSDSSP). J
4Q260 V,5 tsedaqah "In songs of thanksgifving I will o]pe[n ] vacat my mouth [and] my tongue shall j
recfount] the *righteous acts of God contin[uously, as well as the faithlessness] of men, \
unftil] their sinfi.il rebellion [comes to an e]nd" (DSSR). \
11Q5 XIX. 11 tsedaqah "I was in death's thrall through my sins ... but You saved me. 0 Lord, according to Your|
boundless compassion, Your myriad *righteous acts" (DSSR) 1
1105 XIX, 5 tsedaqah "according to Your boundless compassion, Your myriad *righteous acts" (DSSR) |
11Q5 XIX, 7 tsedaqah "Blessed be the Lord, worker of *righteousness, who crowns the pious with mercy and \
compassion" (DSSR) j
11Q6 4-5,7 tsedaqah "according to] Your [boundless compassion,] Your myriad *righteous acts" (DSSR) \
1QH IV, 17 tsedaqah "I will [fjind the proper reply to declare Your *righteous deeds, patience, [abundant |
lovingkindne]ss. the deeds of Your strong right hand, forgiveness of the sins of myj
ancestors" (DSSR) |
4Q200 2,6 tsedaqah "According to your ability, my son, gi[ve] *alms, and hi[de] not [your face from any]!
[p]oor person" (Tobit 4:6) (DSSR) :
4Q200 2,8 tsedaqah "If you have [much, my] son, [according to (your) bounty] [giv]e *al[m]s from it" (Tobit'
4:8) (DSSR) :
4Q521 7+5 II, 7 tsedaqah "[when] the One who revives [rai]ses the dead of His people, vacat Then we shall [giv]e;
thanks and relate to you the *righ[teous acts] of the Lord (tsidqot adonai)" (DSSR) \
Second, as in the Hebrew Bible, the masculine form is commonly used both
adjectivally and adverbially. Third, as in the Hebrew Bible, the primary usage is ethical,
followed by a significant percentage injudicial contexts, and then with a handful of
remaining usages having to do with correctness. And fourth, "the righteousness of God"
occurs 35 times, most often in hymnic or poetic literature.
3
The word HplX is used three times with the meaning "alms" in the Hebrew fragments of Tobit found at
Qumran (4Q200). There is also one occurrence of the word in a non-biblical text with this sense: "A man of
generosit[y perfo]rms charity (np"12») for the poor ... he takes care of all who lack property" (4Q424 3,9-
10; DSSR 4.268-69). DSSR = The Dead Sea Scrolls Reader, 6 vols. (ed. Donald W. Parry and Emanuel
Tov; Leiden: Brill, 2004-2005).
laMe IX. All 35 O ^ g m m o of "GodÊigfetetmsness** la the BBS

\ MS R
Scroll Jftef , \unma. Context-' ., / Cat RGS
f
1QS 1,21 1 tsedaqah "The priests shall rehearse the *righteous acts of God" (my trans.). I.C Yesj
1QS X,23 1 tsedaqah "For thanksgiving shall 1 open my mouth, the *righteous acts of God I.C Yes)
shall my tongue recount always" (DSSR modified).
1QS X,25 1 tsedaqah "keeping faithfulness and strong judgment (mishpat) according to the I.C Yes;
*righteousness of God" (my trans.).
1QS XI, 3 1 tsedaqah "By his ""righteousness he shall blot out my transgression" I.C his Yesj
(PTSDSSP)4
1QS XI, 5 1 tsedaqah "From the fountain [maqor] of his "righteousness is my justice I.C his Yes)
(mishpat)" (PTSDSSP).
1QS XI, 12 1 tsedaqah "My judgment (mishpat) is by God's Righteousness" (PTSDSSP). I.C Yes)
1QS XI, 14 1 tsedaqah "In the righteousness of his tmth he judges me. In his great goodness I.C his Yess
he atones for all my iniquities. In his Righteousness he cleanses me
of the impurity of the human and of the sin of the sons of Adam"
(PTSDSSP).
___
1QH IV, 17 5 tsedaqah "I will [f]ind the proper reply to declare Your Righteous deeds, your Yes:
patience, [abundant lovingkindne]ss, the deeds of Your strong right
hand, forgiveness of the sins of my ancestors" (DSSR)
dQH IV, 20 5 tsedaqah "Your Righteousness" (DSSR) I.C your Yes-
1QH VI, 16 5 tsedaqah "All injustice [and ]wickedness You destroy for ever. Thus Your I.C your Yes!
1
Righteousness is revealed before all Your creatures" (DSSR)
1QH XII, 37 5 tsedaqah "For You atone for iniquity and purifjy] man from guilt by Your I.C your Yes!
Righteousness" (DSSR)
1QH XV, 19 5 tsedaqah "For in] Your Righteousness You have stood me in Your covenant" I.C your Yes!
(DSSR)
1QH XVI, 2 5 tsedaqah "Your Righteousness endures for ever" (DSSR) I.C your Yesj
I1QH XIX, 31 5 tsedaqah "Gladden the soul of Your servant with Your truth and cleanse me in I.C your Yes!
Your Righteousness. For just as I waited for Your goodness, so I
hope in Your mercy and [Your] forgiveness" (DSSR)
1QH XXI, 2 5 tsedaqah "Your Righteousness" (DSSR) I.C your Yesj
4Q260 V,5 1 tsedaqah "In songs of thanksgifving I will o]pe[n ] vacat my mouth [and] my I.C Yesj
tongue shall rec[ount] the Righteous acts of God contin[uously, as j
well as the faithlessness] of men, un[til] their sinful rebellion [comes
to an e]nd" (DSSR).
4Q511 201. 1 6 tsedaqah "in] His *[righte]ousness He shall clean[se me]" (DSSR) I.C his Yesj
4Q521 7+5 II, 6 tsedaqah "[when] the One who revives [rai]ses the dead of His people, vacat I.C Yes :
7 Then we shall [giv]e thanks and relate to you the Righ[teous acts] of
the Lord (tsidqot adonai)" (DSSR)
11Q5 XIX, 3 5 tsedaqah "when You make them know Your mercy, when You teach them I.C your Yesi
Your Righteousness" (DSSR)
11Q5 XIX, 5 5 tsedaqah "according to Your boundless compassion, Your myriad Righteous I.C your Yes)
acts" (DSSR)
11Q5 XIX, 11 5 tsedaqah "I was in death's thrall through my sins ... but You saved me, O Lord, I.C your Yesj
according to Your boundless compassion, Your myriad Righteous i
acts" (DSSR) 1
•11Q6 4-5,5 5 tsedaqah "[when You make them know] Your mercy, [when You teach them] I.C your Yesi
Your Righteousness" (DSSR) i
1
4
James H. Charlesworth, ed., The Dead Sea Scrolls: Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek Texts with English
Translations (Princeton Theological Seminary Dead Sea Scrolls Project; Tubingen: Mohr
Siebeck/Louisville: Westminster/John Knox, 1993-).
Chapter 5 Righteousness in Jewish Literatuie 285
Table II, AM 35 Octanrenm of "C<HTS &ighteOMme$sw ia the BiSS

&SSM
Scroll Ref Lemma Context * Cat Sfc FUG
11Q6 4-5, 7 5 tsedaqah "according to] Your [boundless compassion.] Your myriad Righteous I C your Yes
acts" (DSSR)
IQS XI, 15 1 tsedeq "to the end that I praise God for His Righteousness, the Most High I C his Yes
for His glory" (DSSR)
1QM IV, 6 1 tsedeq "When they go to battle they shall write on then banners, 'The truth I C Yes
of God,' 'The Righteousness of God,' 'The glory of God,' 'The justice
of God'" (DSSR)~
1QH 2 1,5 5 tsedeq "According to the abundance of Your mercy appoint a guard over I C your Yess
Your Righteousness" (DSSR)
4Q176 1-2 1, 1 2 tsedeq "and perform thy wonder and Righteousness among thy people" I.C Yes
(DSSR)
4Q258 XIII, 3 1 tsedeq "[He shall pa]rdon [all] my [miqmfjics [ And in His righteousness i c " his Yes
He shall purify me from the uncleanness of man . so that I may give
thanks to God for ]His Righfteousness]" (DSSR).
4Q287 2. 13 ~ 5 tsedeq "And they shall bless there] Your holy [name] in the dwellings of the I C your Yesj
ajngels of Your Righteousness" (WAC)
4Q372 1,28 3 tsedeq "to teach sinners your laws and all who abandon you [your] Toi[ah ] I C your Yes
and evil so that youi testimonies do not reproach me and to tell the
woids of [your] Righteousness" (DSSR)
4Q381 33+35, 5 tsedeq "For [you judge ] your servants in your Righteousness, and according I C jyour Yes
6 to your lovingkindness"
4Q428 19,6 5 tsedeq "[all the deeds of] your *[ng]hteousness for iniquity" (DSSR) I C your Yes
4Q443 1, 12 5 tsedeq "your [saljvation and in [your] Righteous[ness" (DSSR) I C iyour Yes>
4Q511 48- 6 tsedeq "the praises of His Righteousness" (DSSR) I C ,his Yes
49+51. I
2
\
4Q511 63 III, 1 6 tsedeq "And as for me, my tongue shall sing out Your Righteousness, for I C syour Yes?
You set it free" (DSSR) i
The following table seeks to summarize the data for all occurrences of
"righteousness" (masculine and feminine) in the DSS, using nearly the same categories
that were used in our analysis of OT usage in Chapter 4.
The Dead Sea Scrolls

Table 12. Categories of Usage for p~!2S/nj?"]25 with Statistics
plS npi* Total %
I. Legal righteousness 51 38 89 39.4
Judging, ruling, executing justice 13 1 14 6.2
Justice 25 13 38 16.8
Righteousness of God ("my, his, your, of God") 12 23 35 15.5
Vindication 0 1 1 0.4
Clothed with righteousness 1 0 1 0.4
Rights 0 0 0 0
II. Ethical righteousness 102 23 125 55.3
General 78 7 85 37.6
With verbs of doing 0 7 7 3.1

Righteous laws/word 8 0 8 3.5
Gates, paths, cities, etc., of righteousness 5 1 6 2.7
Righteousness before God 11 3 14 6.2
Honesty 0 1 1 0.4
Alms 0 4 4 1.8
III. Correctness 8 0 8 3.5
Speaking righteousness, telling the truth 4 0 4 1.8
Just balances, weights 3 0 1.3
Doing something correctly 1 0 1 0.4
IV. Difficult cases 4 0 4 1.8
Total 165 61 226 100
Ethical and Judicial Righteousness
As can be seen from the table above, the ethical meaning of righteousness
predominates in the DSS. This can be seen right at the outset of the Damascus Covenant,
"Listen, all who recognize/know righteousness" (CD I, 1), and at the outset of the
Community Rule, which speaks of the Teacher's responsibility to instruct the members of
the Yahad "to do that which is good and upright before Him, just as He commanded
through Moses and all His servants the prophets ... to distance themselves from all evil
and to hold fast to all good deeds; to practice truth (TlOK), justice (HpIS) and
righteousness (EDDEJQ) in the land, and to walk no longer in a guilty, willful heart and
lustful desires" (IQS I, 1-6; DSSR 1.2-3). These opening texts demonstrate the
importance of ethical righteousness for the Qumran sectarians. They are calling Israel to
return to the correct interpretation of the Law and to live in accordance with it, in order to
be obedient and live the righteous life that God demands.

A further illustration of this ethical usage is the phrase "The Teacher of
Righteousness" (plUSH miQ). 5 A minority of scholars have argued that the nomen
rectum should be taken adjectivally and the whole phrase translated "right or legitimate
teacher," in contradistinction to a false teacher.6 But it probably should be understood as
"the one who teaches (ethical) righteousness," a reading that is corroborated by the
reference to "the appearance of one who teaches righteousness in the Last Days" (CD VI,
ID-7
The usage of "righteousness" in a judicial sense is also found throughout the DSS,
though not as frequently as the ethical sense. It is found, for example, in the references to
the human kings or judges who are not to be blinded by bribes, alluding to or
commenting on the relevant OT passages (e.g., 11Q19L1, 11-17 [cp. Deut 16:18-20];
LVII, 19-20; DSSR 3.190-91, 200-1). Judicial usages are also frequent in reference to
God as judge. One fragment reads: "with a judgjment of righteousness (p*T2 CDS[E7Q) He
will [judge" (4Q418 Frg. 214; DSSR 4.172-73). Another affirms that "God is a righteous
judge (b& p l S CDSIttf)" (4Q423 Frg. 6; DSSR 4.194-95). We also have a poetic passage
where the psalmist acknowledges his sinfulness as "a melting pot of iniquity" and
confesses that he is "terrified by [God's] righteous judgments ( p I S ''ffiSIPft)" (1QH IX,
23; DSSR 5.16-17). The fact that "God's righteousness" is not thoroughly positive but is
5
The phrase occurs 12 times in the DSS: twice in the Damascus Document (CD I, 11; XX, 32); seven times
in the Habakkuk Pesher (lQpHab I, 13; II, 2; V. 10; VII, 4; VIII, 3; IX. 10; XI, 5); twice in the Psalms
Pcsher (4Q173 1,4; 2, 2); and once in the Micah Pesher (1Q14 8-10, 6).
6
Frank Moore Cross, The Ancient Library of Qumran and Modern Biblical Studies (London: G.
Duckworth, 1958), 83; J. Weingreen, "The Title Moreh Sedek," JSS 6 (1961): 162-74; Matthew Black, The
Scrolls and Christian Origins: Studies in the Jewish Background oj the New Testament (originally 1961;
reprinted in BJS 48; Chico: Scholars Press, 1983), 20; and others.
7
Benno Przybylski, Righteousness in Matthew and His World of Thought (SNTSMS 41; Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1980), 18. Translation from Michael Wise, Martin Abegg, Jr.. and Edward
Cook (WAC), The Dead Sea Scrolls: A New Translation (New York: HarperCollins, 1996).
also used punitively is proved by this passage: "All injustice [and ]wickedness You
destroy for ever. Thus Your righteousness (inp"IS) is revealed before all Your
creatures" (1QH VI, 15-16; DSSR 5.8-9).
"The righteousness of God" in IPS XI and 1QH
Having set the context of the ethical and judicial framework of "righteousness" in
the DSS, we come now to the famous passage in IQS XI that has been so widely quoted
because of the strong linguistic parallel with Paul. In this passage, the psalmist
acknowledges that it is "by the righteousness of God" that his sins are atoned for and that
he is made righteous and kept in perfection of way.
"As for me, my justification CDSÊ) lies with God. In His hand are the
perfection of my walk and the virtue of my heart. [3] By His righteousness is my
transgression blotted out. For from the fount of His knowledge has my light shot
forth; upon his wonders has my eye gazed - the light of my heart upon the
mystery [4] of what shall be.
"He who is eternal is the staff of my right hand, upon the Mighty Rock do
my steps tread; before nothing shall they retreat. For the truth of God - [5] that is
the rock of my tread, and His mighty power, my right hand's support. From
His righteous fount comes my justification CDS27Q), the light of my heart from
His wondrous mysteries.
"Upon the eternal [6] has my eye gazed - even that wisdom hidden from
men, the knowledge, the wise prudence from humanity concealed. The source
of righteousness, gathering [7] of power, and abode of glory are from fleshly
counsel hidden.
"To them He has chosen all these has He given - an eternal possession. He
has made them heirs in the legacy [8] of the Holy Ones; with the Angels has He
united their assembly, a Yahad society. They are an assembly built up for
holiness, an eternal Planting for all [9] ages to come.
"As for me, to evil humanity and the counsel of perverse flesh do I belong.
My transgressions, evils, sins, and corrupt heart [10] belong to the counsel of
wormy rot and those who walk in darkness.
"Surely a man's way is not his own; neither can any person firm his own
steps. Surely justification (2DSE7D) is of God; by His power [11] is the way made
perfect. All that shall be, He foreknows, all that is, His plans establish; apart from
Him is nothing done.
"As forme, if [12] I stumble, God's loving-kindness forever shall save

me. If through sin of the flesh I fall, my justification CCDDE7Q) will be by the
righteousness of God which endures for all time.
"[13] Though my affliction break out, He shall draw my soul back from
the Pit, and firm my steps on the way. Through His love He has brought me near;
by His loving-kindness shall He provide [14] my justification CCDSUPQ).
"By His righteous truth has He justified me; and through His exceeding
goodness shall He atone for all my sins. By His righteousness shall He cleanse me
of human [15] defilement
"And the sin of humankind - to the end that I praise God for
His righteousness, the Most High for His glory.
"Blessed are You, O my God, who has opened to knowledge [16] the
mind of Your servant. Establish all of his works in righteousness; raise up the son
of Your handmaiden - if it please You - to be among those chosen of humankind,
to stand [17] before You forever.
"Surely apart from You the way cannot be perfected, nor can anything be
done unless it please You." (IQS XI, 2-17; DSSR 1.40-41).
There are several questions that must be addressed. First, what is meant by
''BStPO (lines 2, 5, 12, 14) and BSC2I2 (line 10)? The rendering of CDS&E in IQS XI as
"justification," and with the suffix, ^tDS^Q, "my justification," goes back to one of the
earliest translations of the DSS, that by Andre Dupont-Sommer, itself translated into
English by Geza Vermes. Vermes retained "my justification" in his widely used Penguin
edition, The Dead Sea Scrolls in English (1962-1995), then The Complete Dead Sea
Scrolls in English (1997, 2004).9 This tradition is continued by the Wise-Abegg-Cook
translation10 quoted above and which has now become another standard English
translation rivaling and perhaps replacing Vermes. This translation tends to find support
among scholars who want to highlight the parallel between Paul and Qumran, some even
Andre Dupont-Sommer, Les ecrits esseniens decouvertspres de la mer Morte (Paris: Payot, 1959); ET:
TheEssene Writings from Qumran (trans. Geza Vermes; Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1961).
9
Geza Vermes, The Dead Sea Scrolls in English (New York: Penguin Books, 1962, 1975, 1987, 1995);
idem, The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls in English (New York: Penguin Books, 1997, 2004).
10
Michael WTise, Martin Abegg, Jr., and Edward Cook (WAC), The Dead Sea Scrolls: A New Translation
(New York: HarperCollins, 1996).
going so far as to argue that Paul was influenced by Qumran.11 But Joseph Fitzmyer is
critical of this translation, finding it "a bit too 'Christian'" for his understanding and
"tendentious," arguing that "the Pauline nuance of the term has been read into the
Qumran texts."12 He opts for the translation "my judgment," a translation that is perhaps
less Pauline-sounding but still ambiguous. Joachim Jeremias is also among those
questioning the translation "my justification," but he argues that JDEE7I2 refers to God's
gracious decision to allow the suppliant to enter the community, thereby making possible
a life of perfect obedience to the Torah. "Thus mishpati is not the justification of the
ungodly (justificatio impii), but rather predestination to the path of perfect obedience to
the Torah."13
Old Testament usage sheds light on that of the DSS. In the OT, there are 12 cases
where E3SE7E is used with the suffix "my" (^CDB^ft) in reference to a human being. In
these cases, it is never translated "my justification" but typically something along these
lines: "my right" (Job 27:2; 34:5-6; Isa 40:27; 49:4), "my just cause" (Ps 9:5), or "my
vindication" (Ps 17:2; 35:23) (ESV).14 The usage of tD2E?ft in the DSS is in fundamental
11
Siegfried Schulz, "Zur Rechtfertigung aus Gnaden in Qumran und bei Paulus," ZTK 56 (1959): 155-85;
Walter Grundmann, "Der Lehrer der Gerechtigkeit von Qumran und die Frage nach der
Glaubensgerechtigkeit in der Theologie des Apostcls Paulus," RevQ 2 (1960): 231-54; revised/ET: "The
Teacher of Righteousness of Qumran and the Question of Justification by Faith in the Theology of the
Apostle Paul," in Paul and Qumran: Studies in New Testament Exegesis (ed. Jerome Murphy-O'Connor.
London: Geoffrey Chapman, 1968), 85-114. To be fair, both Schulz and Grundmann also emphasize the
chasm between Paul and Qumran with regard to justification: for Paul, Christ is the end of the Law for
righteousness to everyone who believes; for Qumran, justification ultimately rests on obedience to the Law.
12
Joseph A. Fitzmyer, "The Biblical Basis of Justification by Faith: Comments on the Essay by Professor
Reumann," in "Righteousness" in the New Testament: "Justification" in the United States Lutheran-
Catholic Dialogue (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1982), 201; idem, Responses to 101 Questions on the Dead Sea
Scrolls (New York: Paulist Press, 1992), 127.
13
Joachim Jeremias, The Central Message of the New Testament (London: SCM Press, 1965), 66-68 =
idem, Jesus and the Message of the New Testament (Fortress Classics in Biblical Studies; ed. Kenneth C.
Hanson; Minneapolis: Fortress, 2002), 94.
14
Electronic search using Logos Bible Software.
continuity with the OT usage. The term basically refers to a judgment, decision or
verdict. The suffix "my" implies that it is God's decision/verdict with respect to the
suppliant.
Second, what is the meaning of the references to "the righteousness of God" (line
12) or "His righteousness" (lines 3, 5, 14. 15) in this passage? Grundmann is influenced
by Oepke15 and Kasemann16 (whom he cites) at two points: (1) he thinks "the
righteousness of God" is "a Jewish formula which Paul adopted while radically altering
its sense,"17 and (2) he interprets the phrase as having reference to God's fidelity to his
covenant, citing 1QH XV, 19-20 ("In Your righteousness You have stood me in Your
covenant, and I have taken hold of Your truth") and IQS XI, 14 ("By His righteous truth
has He justified me"), making reference especially to the use in both contexts of the word
1R
"truth" in the sense of fidelity or reliability.
But there is slim basis for translating "the covenant faithfulness of God." The
judicial dimension of the phrase is evident from the fact that "the righteousness of God"
is used adverbially with either the noun or the verb of the s-p-t root: "from His righteous
fount comes my CDSE7Q" (line 5); "my EDS^fD will be by the righteousness of God which
endures for all time" (line 12); "in the righteousness of his truth he judges me" (line 14;
cp. "For [you judge ] your servants in your righteousness, and according to your
lovingkindness" [4Q381 33+35, 6]). It is not that God judges his servants in his covenant
faithfulness, but that he judges them in his righteousness. There is nothing in the context
that would suggest the notion of covenant faithfulness here. E. P. Sanders appeals to the
15
Albrecht Oepke, "Aucatoauvn, ©gofj bei Paulus in neuer Beleuchtung,'" Theologische Literaturzeitung 78
(1953): 257-64.
16
Ernst Kasemann, "Gottesgerechtigkeit bei Paulus," Z7X58 (1961): 367-78.
17
Grundmann, "The Teacher of Righteousness," 99.
18
Grundmann, "The Teacher of Righteousness," 89, 100.
parallelisms and draws the conclusion that "the righteousness of God" in the DSS is
tantamount to "God's mercy." However, as we have seen in a previous chapter when
dealing with Hebrew parallelism in the Old Testament, parallelism does not necessarily
eliminate the judicial dimension of the term, which brings its own semantic contribution
to the overall parallelismus membrorum.
It is much more likely that "the righteousness of God" in these passages is a
development of the Old Testament motif of the saving righteousness of God, that is, his
judicial activity that results in the vindication of his servants and, in some cases, the
destruction of their oppressors. As we saw in Chapter 4, in the Old Testament, especially
in the Psalms and Isaiah, the overwhelming majority of the occurrences of this usage
have a strongly judicial context in which God is the judge, the wicked are oppressing the
righteous, and the righteous are appealing to the divine Judge for a verdict (JDS^Q) that
involves simultaneously the punishment of the oppressor and the vindication of the
righteous who are being oppressed by them. God's righteousness is, in these cases, both
his attribute of being a righteous judge who rightly executes his iustitia distributiva and
the act of deliverance itself so that God's righteousness is conceived of as coming from
God and being bestowed on the righteous oppressed.
As an extension of this usage, the enemies become spiritualized so that they are
the righteous man's own sins, guilt, death (the punishment for sin), or even Satan himself
(the evil spirit who leads into sin). Then, when God delivers the righteous who repent of
their sins, it is an expression of his righteousness. For example: "Deliver me from
bloodguiltiness, O God, O God of my salvation, and my tongue will sing aloud of your
19
Sanders, Paul and Palestinian Judaism, 305-12.
righteousness" (Ps 51:14 ESV). The righteousness of God is expressed in a judicial
activity of delivering the psalmist from bloodguiltiness, essentially an acquitting
judgment that includes the forgiveness of sins. My argument is that these passages in the
DSS are a further development of this OT usage. For example, the Qumran suppliant
prays, "Gladden the soul of Your servant with Your truth and cleanse me in Your
righteousness. For just as I waited for Your goodness, so I hope in your mercy and [Your]
forgiveness" (IQH XIX, 31; DSSR 5.54-55). The righteousness of God here is parallel to
his truth, mercy, and forgiveness. That does not mean that all of these terms are
synonymous or interchangeable; rather, it shows that the judicial activity of God in
providing forgiveness is an expression of his truth and mercy.
The notion that the enemies of the psalmist can be extended to include even Satan
is made clear in 11Q5 XIX, 1-17:
[1] Indeed, no worm gives You thanks, nor any weevil recounts Your loving-
kindness. [2] "The living, the living, they thank You" (Isa 38:19), they of
uncertain step give You praise when You make them [3] know Your mercy, when
You teach them Your righteousness (nDnp12S). For the soul of all the living is in
Your [4] hand, You alone breathe life into flesh. Render to us, O LORD, [5] by
Your goodness; according to Your boundless compassion, Your myriad righteous
acts ( T C m p - l S 3113). The LORD [6] hears the voice of those who love His
name, of His loving-kindness He deprives them not. [7] Blessed be the LORD,
worker of righteousness (mp"7!S HÎU), who crowns the pious [8] with mercy
and compassion. My soul clamors to praise Your name, to praise [9] Your loving-
kindness with a joyous cry - to tell of Your faithfulness; of praise due You there
is no measure. I was in death's [10] thrall through my own sins; my iniquities had
sold me to Sheol - but You saved me, [11] O LORD, according to Your boundless
compassion, Your myriad righteous acts (rDTHpTS D11D). I, too, have loved
[12] Your name and sought shelter in Your shadow. When I recall Your might, I
take [13] heart and throw myself on Your mercy. Forgive, O LORD, my sins, [14]
cleanse me from my iniquities! Favor me with a constant and knowing spirit and
let me not be shamed [15] by ruin. Let Satan have no dominion over me, nor an
unclean spirit; let neither pain nor the will [16] to evil rule in me. Surely You, O
LORD, are my praise; in You I place my hope [17] all the day (11Q5 XIX, 1-17;
DSSR 5.192-93).20
In this prayer, the psalmist mentions several spiritual enemies - his own sin,
death/Sheol, and dark spiritual forces behind both - all of which combined to form a
powerful triumvirate of evil from which he needed deliverance by God's saving judicial
activity: "I was in death's thrall through my own sins; my iniquities had sold me to
Sheol" (lines 9-10), and "Let Satan have no dominion over me, nor an unclean spirit; let
neither pain nor the will to evil (VI ""IIP) rule in me" (lines 15-16). But God, in his grace,
compassion, mercy, and faithfulness, "saved" the psalmist ('127',2n) (line 10) from these
formidable enemies by forgiving his sins and by giving him a renewed, obedient heart
(lines 13-14). Because the deliverance involves an implicit judgment on the psalmist's
foes (sin, death, and the evil inclination from Satan) and a judicial vindication of the
pious psalmist who is crying out to God for help, the psalmist casts these deliverances in
judicial terms, specifically thanking God for acting "according to Your boundless
compassion ( H D ^ r n 31"D), Your myriad righteous acts (!"DTnp"1!S 21"D)" (lines 5,
11). He even employs the very language of the oppressed in the canonical Psalms:
"Blessed be the LORD, worker of righteousness (mp~I2S HÎS?), who crowns the pious
[8] with mercy and compassion" (lines 7-8) (cp. Psalm 103:6). The Qumran psalmist is
"oppressed" by his own sin, death, and Satanic spiritual forces that lie behind his sin,
especially the evil inclination (VI ~)2T). And although the more literal forces are not
mentioned in this particular psalm, we should also recall that the Qumran community was
20
11Q5 is sometimes also signified 1 lQPsa. In addition, 11Q6 (1 lQPsb) is parallel; it is essentially a
reproduction of 11Q5 but in a more fragmentary state.
keenly aware of the persecutions that they and their leader, the Teacher of Righteousness,
endured at the hands of the Jews whom they perceived to be apostate, "the wicked priest"
(IQpHab VIII, 16; IX, 9; XII, 2, 8), "the man of the lie" (IQpHab II, 2; CD XX, 15), "the
man of mockery" (CD I, 14), and "the traitors to the new covenant" (IQpHab II, 3). With
these considerations in view, then, it is perfectly understandable that God's deliverance of
his pious servants - including their receiving atonement for sin, a renewed heart, and the
grace of becoming a member of the Yahad- would be regarded using the p"lU root, thus
expressing the judicial aspect of God's gracious salvific activity. The judicial aspect is
most clearly seen in his judgment on the various spiritual forces of oppression, together
with his vindication of his servants and placing them within the community where they
may learn God's righteousness.
Further demonstrating that God's mp"!i! in 11Q5 is not God's covenant
faithfulness but his righteousness (or more accurately, his righteous acts) is the
correspondence between the righteousness of God and the righteousness of man. The
righteousness of the one (God) leads to the righteousness of the other (the pious Yahad
member). "They of uncertain step give You praise when You make them know Your
mercy, when You teach them Your righteousness" (lines 2-3). God's gracious activity of
saving, forgiving, renewing, and teaching the psalmist God's righteousness leads to the
righteousness of the psalmist in that he is now, because of God's mp~!2£, an obedient and
righteous member of the community. In his righteousness, God has caused the psalmist to
be cleansed of his former sins, has taught him his righteousness, and has caused him to
become righteous in imitation of God himself. If Yahweh's mpl!5 in 11Q5 were

translated as God's "covenant faithfulness," this correspondence would be lost or at least
obscured.
Other divine qualities and actions - such as God's IDrl ("loving-kindess/mercy,"
lines 1, 3. 6, 8, 9, 13), 31B ("goodness," line 5), O W I ("compassion," lines 5, 8, 11),
H31QK ("faithfulness," line 9), and | i n ("favor," line 17) are mentioned throughout this
passage. But while these divine qualities are related to God's "righteous acts," these are
not all interchangeable terms. The most striking parallelism is the usage - twice - of the
phrase "according to Your compassion, Your myriad righteous acts," in which God's
DÎDrl") and God's mp"12J are parallel. But the parallelism is not synonymous; each term
brings its own semantic contribution to the overall meaning, just as each optic piece in a
pair of binoculars contributes to the overall stereo vision. God's enacting a judicial
verdict against the pious man's oppressors, both literal and spiritual, is certainly an
expression of God's loving-kindness, mercy, goodness, compassion and faithfulness. But
the judicial activity, gracious and saving though it may be, remains just that, God's
judicial activity. "The LORD works righteousness (filpn2S) and justice for all who are
oppressed" (Ps 103:6 ESV).
To summarize our investigation of the use of "righteousness" in the DSS, we see
fundamental continuity between Hebrew OT usage and that of the DSS. All of the major
categories and subcategories of OT usage are continued in the DSS, with only a handful
of minor changes (e.g., the OT category "rights" is not found in the DSS, and the DSS
adds the usage of "alms"). With regard to "God's righteousness," the usage can be
neutral, positive, or punitive, just as in the OT. With regard to the positive, salvific usage,
the judicial aspect continues, so that iustitia salutifera is a species of iustitia distributiva
- only that in the DSS the enemies are spiritualized to a much greater degree than in the
OT.
B. Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha Composed in Hebrew
In this section, we turn to the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha composed in a
Semitic language, usually Hebrew, though in some cases scholars speculate that the
language of composition may be Aramaic. However, the Semitic originals have in most
cases been lost or exist only in fragments, so our investigation will proceed using the
versions - usually Greek, Latin and/or Ethiopic - in which these works have come down
to us.
There are only four Apocryphal works composed in Hebrew that use the word
"righteousness" (Tobit, 1 Maccabees, Sirach, and Baruch). We will examine the usage of
8iKaioouvq in these works, on the assumption that it renders p~!2/rtjp"]lS in the original.
There are similarities and differences between the usage in the Apocrypha and the
usage in the Hebrew OT and the portion of the LXX that translates the Tanak. The
similarities are: (1) the usage can be divided roughly in half between "legal
righteousness" and "ethical righteousness;" (2) there are some Hebraic usages that are
continued in the Aprocrypha, such as the language of being clothed with righteousness,
the category of righteousness before God, and the usage of verbs of doing with ethical
righteousness. The differences are as follows: (1) there are no instances of "the
righteousness of God" ("my, his, your") that fall into the category of legal righteousness;
(2) the usage of SiKaioauvq with reference to alms is a usage found in Tobit21 but not in
the Hebrew OT or the LXX (there may be one exception, but it is not an unambiguous
reference to alms); (3) specialized Hebrew OT usages such as "vindication," "rights,"
"honesty," "gates, paths, cities of righteousness," "just balances," etc., do not occur in the
Apocrypha although they do occur in the LXX when translating the Hebrew canonical
text.
Tobit22
There is no doubt that Tobit was originally composed in Hebrew, since about one
fifth of the original Hebrew text has been recovered at Khirbet Qumran.2j However, the
complete text is extant in Greek translation, a shorter recension called Greek I (G ) and a
longer recension called Greek II (G11) by Robert Hanhart, the editor of the Gottingen
Septuagint critical edition of Tobit.24 The word SiKaioouvn occurs 11 times in G and 8
times in Gn, for a total of 19 times, although it occurs 13 times if one counts only the
unique occurrences in G1 and G combined. Since this textual situation is complex, I have
summarized the data in the following table showing all 19 occurrences comparing the
two recensions:
21
Tobit 2:14; 12:8-9 (3x in the shorter text, Greek I); 14:8-9 (once in the longer form, Greek II); 14:11.
22
There is general agreement that Tobit was written after the canonization of the prophets (because of the
reference to "the prophets of Israel" at 14:4) and before the Maccabean period (since the book does not
reflect the issues stemming from the Hellenization crisis), that is, within the window from 250 to 175 BC.
David A. deSilva, Introducing the Apocrypha: Message, Context, and Significance (Grand Rapids: Baker
Academic, 2002), 69; Daniel J. Harrington, Invitation to the Apocrypha (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999).
12; L. R. Helyer, "Tobit." DNTB 1239; Carey A. Moore, "Tobit, Book of," ABD 6.591. The book was not
written later than 100 BC, since several Aramaic fragments of Tobit dating from the first century BC were
found at Qumran (4Q196-200; see J. A. Fitzmyer, "The Aramaic and Hebrew Fragments of Tobit from
Cave 4," CBQ 57 [1995]: 655-75).
23
Fitzmyer, "The Aramaic and Hebrew Fragments of Tobit," 675.
24
Robert Hanhart, Septuaginta: Vetus Testamentum Graecum Auctoritate Academiae Scientiarum
Gottingensis editum VIII. 5: Tobit (Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1983).
Chapter 5 Righteousness in Jewish Literature 299
Table 13. All Occurrences of SiKatocuvn in Tobit (NETS)

The Longer Recension (G11) The Shorter Recension (G1)
I, Tobith, walked in the ways of truth and in I. Tobith, walked in the ways of truth and
Tobit 1 3
righteous acts all the days of my life righteousness all the days of my life
Now where are your acts of chanty'7 Where Where are your acts of chanty and youi
Tobit 2 14
are your righteous deeds'' righteous deeds9
Do righteous acts all the days of youi lite, Do righteousness all the days of your life, and
Tobit 4 5
and do not walk in the ways of injustice do not walk m the ways of injustice
And to all those who do righteousness And to all who do righteousness give alms
Tobit 4 6
the Lord will give them good counsel from your possessions
Prayer is good with fasting, but almsgiving Prayer is good with fasting and almsgnmg and
Tobit 12 8 with righteousness is more than wealth and righteousness A little with righteousness is
injustice bettei than much with injustice
Those who give alms will enjoy life to the Those who practice almsgiving and
Tobit 12 9
full righteousness will have fullness of life
And bless the Lord of righteousness and exalt
And bless the Lord of righteousness and
Tobit 13 6 the king of ages Turn back, you smneis, and
exalt the king of ages
do « hat is just before him
And they will bless the God of the ages in
Tobit 14 7a And all the nations will bless the Loid
righteousness.
And all who love the Lord God in truth and
Tobit 14 7b And those who love God m truth will rejoice
righteousness will rejoice
Also your childien are to be commanded to But you, keep the law and the ordinances, and
Tobit 14 8-9 practice righteousness and almsgiving and be merciful and just so that it may go well with
to be mindful of God you
So now, my children, see what almsgiving So now, my children, see what almsgiving does
Tobit 14 11
does and what m]ustice does and how righteousness delivers
Subtotals 8 11
The ethical usage of 5iKaioouvq predominates in this book. It occurs in the
description of Tobit as a man who walked in the ways of truth and righteousness all the
days of his life (Tob 1:3), and in Tobit's exhortation to his son not to transgress God's
commandments but to pursue righteousness all the days of his life (Tob 4:5-6). But even
more frequent is a subcategory of the ethical use of SiKaiocruvq in the context of
almsgiving. In these passages, StKaiorjuvq still retains its fundamentally ethical sense,
with almsgiving as a specific and representative type of righteous behavior. Thus
SiKaioauvn, does not itself denote "almsgiving," but "almsgiving" is a hyponym of
StKaiorjuvq.
In addition, the concept of "righteousness before God" is found in Tobit's
exhortation to sinners in his closing prayer to turn back and "do what is just before [God]
(7rotf|aaT8 SiKaioauvnv evdmtov auxou)" (Tob 13:6 NETS). Righteousness is therefore an

ethical concept that in some cases is closely related to the divine recognition of that
righteousness.
Although the locution "the righteousness of God" does not occur in the Tobit,
there is one passage that uses "righteousness" as a divine quality; it is a reference to "the
Lord of righteousness" (6 Kupioc; xfjc; SiKaioauvnc;) (Tob 13:6) in Tobit's prayer of
thanksgiving near the end of the book named after him (Tob 13:1-17). The thrust of the
prayer is that although God afflicts, he will show mercy to those who turn to him with all
their heart. Tobit seems to be extrapolating from his own experience of suffering in the
exile to the experience of the nation as a whole: the people of God in exile can expect
that if they turn to him, "he will gather you from all the nations among whom you have
been scattered" (Tob 13:5 NRSV). It is in this context that Tobit exhorts the people to
"bless the Lord of righteousness, and exalt the King of the ages" (Tob 13:6 NRSV). But
the precise import of the phrase is difficult to determine. In view of the return-from-exile
theme, it is perhaps possible that the phrase refers to God's covenant faithfulness, but this
is not clear and there are no references in the context to God's covenant promises to
Israel. It is more likely that the phrase refers to God's righteousness in his dealings with
mankind. God is righteous in that if you turn back to him, he will turn back to you. "Turn
back, you sinners, and do what is right before him (Tioifjaaxe SiKaioauvnv svco7tiov
auxou); perhaps he may look with favor upon you and show you mercy" (Tob 13:6).
God's righteousness is manifest in that he shows favor to those who repent and do
righteousness.
Sirach23
Martin Hengel believes that Jesus ben Sirach was a pious Jew who looked
askance at the developing Hellenistic tendencies of the Jewish aristocracy (as exemplified
in Tobias and his family) and who sought to call the younger generation away from the
blandishments of advancement in the Hellenistic world to a renewed loyalty to the Torah
and the ancestral customs of Israel. However, in so doing, he employed certain
Hellenistic ideas, such as the eternalizing and cosmicizing of Torah, identified now with
a hypostasized Wisdom figure, in a bid to provide a revealed alternative to Stoicism's
eternal logos which permeates all things.26
Sirach employs SiKaioauvn in ordinary ethical and judicial senses. For example,
in the hymn in honor of the ancestors and patriarchs - Enoch. Noah, Abraham, Moses, all
the way down to David - we come to the concluding verse: "May he [God] grant to
you27 wisdom in your heart, to judge his people in righteousness (Kpiveiv xov Xabv auxou
sv Sucaioauvri) so that their good things might not vanish and their glory be to their
generations" (Sir 45:26 NETS). The ethical usage is found in a list of things that grieve
2S
Sirach is almost universally acknowledged to have been written in a Semitic original between 200 and
175 BC and probably closer to the end of that window, e.g., around 180 BC, to allow sufficient time
between Sirach and his translator grandson. An important clue to the date is ben Sirach's detailed, eye-
witness description of the high priest Simon II (219-196 BC) "ascending the holy altar ... to arrange an
offering for the Most High" (Sirach 50:1-21). On the other hand, Sirach appears to have been written before
the Hellenization crisis under Antiochus Epiphanes. De Silva, Introducing the Apocrypha, 157-58;
Alexander A. Di Leila, "Wisdom of Ben-Sira," ABD 6.932; Harrington, Invitation to the Apocrypha, 79.
Sirach's grandson translated the work from Hebrew into Greek in (or soon after) 132 BC, "for in the thirty-
eighth year, in the reign of Euergetes the king [Ptolemy VII Physkon Euergetes II], when I had arrived in
Egypt and stayed a while, when I had discovered an exemplar of no little education, I myself too made it a
compulsory task to bring some speed and industry to the translating of this tome" (Sirach, Prologue;
NETS).
*6 Martin Hengel, Judentum und Hellenismus, Studien zu ihrer Begegnung unter bosonderer
Berucksichtigung Palastinas bis zur Mitte des 2. Jh. vor Chr. (WUNT 10; Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 19691,
1973"). ET: Judaism and Hellenism: Studies in their Encounter in Palestine during the Early Hellenistic
Period (transl. John Bowden; 2 vols.; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1974).
27
The word "you" (uutv) is plural and is probably addressed to the high priest Simon II and his sons.
Patrick W. Skehan and Alexander A. di Leila, The Wisdom of Ben Sira (AB 39; New York: Doubleday,
1987), 514.
God, one of which is when a person is "brought from righteousness to sin (eTtavaycov duo
Sucaioauvnc; S7ti dpapxiav)" (Sir 26:28 NETS).
With regard to the righteousness of God, there is one passage that attracts our
attention. In the course of Sirach's reflection on God's judgment on sinners, we read:
"Who is to announce his acts of justice (epya 5iKaioauvr|c;)? Or who can await them? For
his decree is far off (Sir 16:22 NRSV). The context is Sirach's recounting of some of the
events in biblical history that demonstrate the truth that God judges the wicked. God
judged the ancient giants who rebelled (v 7); he punished Lot's neighbors in Sodom (v
8); he showed no mercy to the Canaanites whom he dispossessed of their land because of
their sins (v 9); and he even put 600,000 Israelite men to death when they sinned (v 10).
"Great as his mercy, so also is his chastisement; he judges a person according to one's
deeds. The sinner will not escape with plunder ... Everyone receives in accordance with
one's deeds" (vv 12-14 NRSV). The wicked think they will be hidden from the Lord (v
17), but how can that be when even the mountains and the foundations of the earth
tremble when God comes in judgment (vv 18-19)? It is at this point that the reference to
God's acts of righteousness occurs: "Who is to announce [the Lord's] acts of justice
(spya SiKaioauvnc;)? Or who can await them?" (v 22 NRSV). Mere mortals cannot plumb
the depths of God's acts of justice; his judgments are sometimes hidden from view (v 21)
and foolish people devoid of understanding may think they have nothing to fear (v 23),
but the Lord's justice is real and cannot be wished away. There can be little doubt that
"righteousness" in this context is being used in reference to God's distributive justice.

Baruch28
Baruch is comprised of four sections: (a) a narrative introduction (1:1-14); (b) a
prayer of confession and repentance modeled after Daniel's prayer of confession in Dan 9
(1:15-3:8); (c) a hymn in praise of wisdom (3:9-4:4); and (d) a prose message to the
exiles in Babylon that the captivity is about to end (4:15-5:9). The first and the last
sections are prose and the middle two sections are poetry.
There is general agreement that the first two sections were originally composed in
Hebrew, but there is uncertainty about the language of composition of the last two
sections. I am convinced by David G. Burke's reconstruction that all four sections of
Baruch were originally composed in Hebrew, although I am agnostic about the question
of compositional unity.29
The following comes from the prayer of confession and repentance:
"And you shall say: To the Lord, our God, belongs righteousness (xcp Kupico Oeco
fipcov f| SiKaioauvn) but to us shame of faces as this day ... for which things we
have sinned before the Lord, and we disobeyed him and have not listened to the
voice of the Lord, our God, to walk by the decrees of the Lord that he gave before
us ... To the Lord, our God, belongs righteousness (xcp Kupico Oscp f]pcov r\
SiKaioauvn,) but to us and to our fathers shame of faces, as this day. All these bad
things which the Lord spoke to us have come upon us. And we did not entreat the
face of the Lord to turn away, each from the designs of their wicked heart. And
" The fact that Baruch has always been attached to LXX Jeremiah, and has linguistic similarities with it,
suggests that the translator of LXX Jeremiah was also the translator of Baruch. And since Sirach's
grandson, who translated Sirach from Hebrew into Greek by 116 BC, refers to the Law and the Prophets as
well-known documentary entities, this would suggest a date of composition for Baruch 1:1-3:8 in Hebrew
well before 116 BC. Anthony J. Saldarini, "The Book of Baruch: Introduction, Commentary, and
Reflections," NIB 6.931. The second half (Bar 3:9-5:9) may have been composed by a different author at a
later stage, but we have no way of knowing when.
29
David G. Burke, The Poetry of Baruch: A Reconstruction and Analysis of the Original Hebrew Text of
Baruch 3:9-5:9 (SBLSCS 10; Chico: Scholars Press, 1982). Burke is following J. J. Kncucker, Das Buch
Baruch: Geschichte und Kritik, Ubersetzung und Erkldrung auf Grund des wiederhergestellten
hebrdischen Urtextes (Leipzig: F. A. Brockhaus, 1879). In contrast to Burke, Emanuel Tov only provides a
Hebrew reconstruction of the first half (Bar 1:1-3:8). He is more confident that the first half had a Hebrew
Vorlage, because of more than 30 linguistic parallels with LXX Jeremiah, whereas the second half has far
fewer linguistic parallels. Tov leaves open the question of the language of composition of the second half
of Baruch. Tov, The Septuagint Translation of Jeremiah and Baruch: A Discussion of an Early Revision of
the LXX of Jeremiah 29-52 and Baruch 1:1-3:8 (HSM 8; Missoula: Scholars Press, 1976), 126.
the Lord kept watch over the bad things, and the Lord brought them upon us, for
the Lord is just (Skaioc;) in all his works" (Bar 1:15-18; 2:6-9 NETS).
The entire prayer (Bar 1:15-3:8) is steeped in the language of the Hebrew
Scriptures, but especially Daniel's prayer of confession in Dan 9:4-19. It was Daniel who
first said: "To you, O Lord, belongs righteousness, but to us open shame, as at this day ...
for the LORD our God is righteous in all the works that he has done" (Dan 9:7, 14 ESV).
These two sentences are picked up virtually word for word in Baruch. There is little need
to dwell on them, for they are strongly judicial in their stamp, focusing not on the notion
of God's faithfulness to his promises, but on his justice in bringing punishment on Israel
for her covenant breaking. God's justice, of course, is not the last word, and Baruch will
go on to appeal to God's mercy in the course of the prayer of confession. Nevertheless,
the judicial significance of the words Sucaioauvri and Sucaioq in this context is
unmistakable. These verses provide no support for Cremer's theory that righteousness is
a thoroughly positive concept or that it always refers to God's saving activity in
fulfillment of his covenant faithfulness.
There is one occurrence of "the righteousness of God" in the ordinary ethical
sense. The context is Mother Jerusalem grieving over her sons and daughters whom she
reared (Bar 4:8). She is left desolate because of the sins of her children who "turned
away from God's law" (Bar 4:12). "And they did not recognize his statutes; neither did
they walk in the ways of God's commandments nor tread on the paths of instruction by
his righteousness (ouSe xpi|3oucj 7iaiSeiac; sv Sucaioauvri auxou ejieprjaav)" (Bar 4:13
NETS). "His [God's] righteousness" here seems to be basically equivalent to the moral
uprightness taught in God's law/statutes/commandments.

This ethical righteousness is not only derived from keeping the Law, it is further
understood in the sense of "righteousness before God," that is, the righteousness that he
recognizes and rewards: "For God will show your splendor in the whole earth beneath
heaven. For your name will be called by God forever, 'Peace of righteousness and glory
of piety"' (KA,n9f|aexai yap aou xo ovopa 7iapd xou Oeou sic xov aicova Eipfrvri
SiKaioauvnc; Kai 56c;a OeoasPeiac)" (Bar 5:4 NETS). The righteousness that the nation
will achieve by keeping the law will lead to the new creation ("splendor in the whole
earth beneath heaven ... forever") in which will come the bestowal of a new name 7iapd
xou Geou, namely, "Peace, righteousness, and the glory of piety." This reminds one of
Isaiah's promise that "the effect of righteousness will be peace ... forever" (Isa 32:17).
The fact that "peace" and "glory" are the result of "righteousness" and "piety" is also
reminiscent of Deuteronomic theology.
This leads, in the concluding chapter (Bar 5), to two remarkable instances of the
righteousness of God in a sense that seems to approach the Pauline idea of "the gift of
righteousness from God." The transition is logical. We have moved from ethical
righteousness, to righteousness as eschatologically rewarded by God, and finally to the
thought that all of this - both the ethical transformation and the reward itself- is a gift
from God.
sicSuaai, IspoucaA,r|p, xf|v axoAfiv xou 7iev9oucj Kai xfjc; KaKcoaecbc; aou Kai
evSuaai xf|v simpeTtsiav xfjc; 7iapa xou 9sou 86c;r|c; sic; xov aicova. 7repiPaA.ou xf|v
SurXoiSa xfjc 7rapd xov Osou SiKaioauvnc. £7ii6ou xf|v pixpav S7ti xfiv K£cpaA.f|v aou
xfjc; 56^r\q xou aicoviou ... fjyf|a£xai yap 6 Oeoq IapanX, psx' £ucppoauvr|c; xcp tpcoxi
xfjc; 86c;r|c; auxou auv s>.sripoauvr| Kai SiKaioauvn xfj nap' auxou.
Take off your robe of mourning and affliction, O Ierousalem, and put on the
dignity of the glory from God forever. Put on the double-cloak of the
righteousness that is from God; and put on your head the headband of the glory of
the Everlasting ... For God will lead Israel with merriment, by the light of his
glory, together with the mercy and righteousness that is from him (Bar 5:2, 9
NETS).
Qfj
In addition to echoing Isaiah 61:10, this remarkable passage almost seems to prepare
the way for Paul's thought of "righteousness from (EK) God" (Phil 3:9). Although Baruch
uses the prepositional phrase 7iapot xou Gsou rather than Paul's EK GEOU, the thought is
quite similar. However, in keeping with OT usage, the thought here is more the idea of
"vindication from God"31 than the strictly Pauline notion of receiving from God the gift
of the status of righteousness before God.
1 Maccabees
The first occurrence of SiKaioouvri in 1 Maccabees is in the account of the
beginnings of the Maccabean revolt in response to the forced Hellenization and
persecution of the Jewish people under Antiochus Epiphanes. In the town of Modein, the
priest Mattathias and his five sons witnessed a Jewish man coming forward to offer a
pagan sacrifice at the king's command, and so, inflamed with zeal33 like Phinehas of old,
"I delight greatly in the LORD; my soul rejoices in my God. For he has clothed me with garments of
salvation and arrayed me in a robe of his righteousness, as a bridegroom adorns his head like a priest, and
as a bride adorns herself with her jewels" (NIV, from the Hebrew). Oddly, the LXX does not use
SiKaiocrovn, here but instead has "a tunic of joy" (xvrcovcc encppoauvrn;). See discussion in Chapter 4.
31
"No weapon that is formed against you shall succeed, and you shall confute every tongue that rises
against you in judgment. This is the heritage of the servants of the LORD and their vindication (lit.
righteousness) is from me, declares the LORD" (Isa 54:17 ESV).
32
1 Maccabees must have been written after John Hyrcanus became high priest in place of his brother
Simeon in 134 BC (see the final chapter of 1 Mace). And given the book's favorable view of the Romans
(cp. the glowing report in 1 Mace 8:1-16), it was likely written before Pompey captured Jerusalem and
defiled the temple in 63 BC. DeSilva, Introducing the Apocrypha, 248.
33
It is important to distinguish between the Zealot movement that later attempted to overthrow the Roman
government (AD 66-74) and the earlier Jewish model of zeal of which Phinehas was the biblical prototype
(cp. Jub. 30:18; Gal 1:13-14; Phil 3:6; Acts 21:20; 23:12-14; m. Sank. 9.6). This concept of zeal is
essentially vigilante justice spuned by the intense emotion of witnessing gross violations of the Torah such
as idolatry. As Philo argued, outrageous acts of impiety must be punished "without any delay," bypassing
the usual legal processes (Philo, Spec 1.54-55; cp. 2.253). It is anachronistic to view Jewish individuals
acting with violent zeal to defend the honor of God as revolutionaries. Gedalyahu Alon, Jews, Judaism and
the Classical World (trans. Israel Abraham; Jerusalem: Magnes, 1977), 112-24; David Rhoads, "Zealots,"
Mattathias slew the man on the spot and tore down the pagan altar (1 Mace 2:23-26).
Then he cried out, "Let everyone who is zealous in the law and is upholding the covenant
follow me" (1 Mace 2:27 NETS), and fled with his sons into the mountains. The narrator
then records that many other Jews followed them: "At that time many who were seeking
righteousness and judgment (noXXoi L^XOUVXEC; Sucaioauvnv Kai Kpipa) descended to the
wilderness to live there" (1 Mace 2:29 NETS). Initially one might be tempted to think
that this language refers to all who were seeking obedience to the Law, that is, ethical
righteousness. But it probably refers to seeking righteousness and judgment by means of
armed zeal activity on behalf of the holiness of God. A parallel in Jubilees suggests that
they were seeking justice and vengeance for the Jewish nation: "And Levi and his sons
will be blessed forever because he was zealous to do righteousness andjudgment and
vengeance against all who rose up against Israel" (Jub. 30:18).
The second occurrence of Sucaioauvri in 1 Maccabees falls under the subcategory
of righteousness before God: "Was not Abraham found faithful in temptation, and it was
accounted to him as righteousness (EôyicGri auxco EIC; SiKaioauvnv)?" (1 Mace 2:52
NETS, taking the language of Gen 15:6 and applying it to Abraham's obedience in Gen
22).
The third and final occurrence is a little more subtle since it involves the use of
the word "faith" in the same context. This is later in the story of the Maccabean revolt,
when the second son of Mattathias, Simon, is chosen by the people to be their leader after
his more famous older brother, Judas, has died in battle. The narrator says that they made
him their leader and high priest "because he had done all these things, and for the justice
ABD 6.1044-45; Torrey Scland, "Saul of Tarsus and Early Zealotism: Reading Gal 1,13-14 in Light of
Philo's Writings," Biblica 83 (2002): 449-71.
34
ET: O. S. Wintermute, "Jubilees," OTP 2.113.
and faith that he preserved in his nation (Sid xo auxov 7t£7ioinKsvai 7idvxa xauxa Kai xfiv
Sucaioauvnv Kai xfjv Tiicxiv, fjv auv£xf|pna£v xcp EGVEI auxou)" (1 Mace 14:35 NETS).
The correlation of Sucaioauvri and ataxic; in this text should not be viewed in a Pauline
sense, for the word 7ticxic; here most likely refers to faithfulness and loyalty to the Law of
Moses. This then implies that Sucaioauvri means ethical righteousness, viewed here in
terms of obedience to the Law.
Jubilees
The word "righteousness" (iustitia) occurs 26 times in the extant Latin version
of Jubilees. 7 We cannot examine every one of these, but they fall in the same general
pattern that we have seen: (1) when used of humans, iustitia usually denotes ethical
righteousness, usually in reference to observing the Mosaic Law; (2) there are a handful
of cases of "righteousness" used in reference to correctness or fidelity in speaking the
truth (as in the Old Testament); and (3) when used of God, iustitia is God's distributive
justice.
Jubilees is considered by scholars to be a 2n -century BC Jewish document in the genre of re-WTitten

Bible. The earliest fragment of Jubilees at Qumran is dated to ca. 75-50 BC, which provides us with an
absolute terminus ad quern, indicating that it was probably written in the century before then. But given the
allusions to Maccabean history, it was probably written in the decades after the Hellenization crisis, ca.
161^0 BC. O. S. Wintermute, "Jubilees," OTP 2.43-44.
36
Since 1 am not equipped to read Ethiopic, and no concordance of the Ethiopic text is known to me. to
identify the passages in which "righteousness" occurs, I relied on the Latin text of R. H. Charles, Masehafa
Kufase, or the Ethiopic Version of the Hebrew Book of Jubilees (Anecdota Oxoniensia; Oxford: Clarendon,
1895). Charles helpfully prints the Ethiopic on one page, and the corresponding Latin, when present, on the
facing page. I have also consulted the Latin text of Hermann Ronsch, Das Buch der Jubilden, oder Die
kleine Genesis (Leipzig: Fues, 1874). I accessed both volumes online via the searchable, digital American
Theological Library Association (ATLA) Historical Monographs Collection: Series 1.
37
As the Qumran fragments demonstrate, Jubilees was originally composed in Hebrew, then translated into
Greek (ca. 200 AD?) and Syriac (ca. 500 AD?). The Greek and Syriac versions of Jubilees are no longer
extant apart from fragmentary quotations. From the Greek it was translated into Latin (ca. 450 AD?) and
Ethiopic (ca. 500 AD?). Access to Jubilees, then, is primarily through the Latin and the Ethiopic, although
the Latin only has chs. 13, 15-42, and 45-49, while all 50 chapters are extant in Ethiopic. See James C.
VanderKam, Textual and Historical Studies in the Book of Jubilees (Harvard Semitic Monographs 14;
Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1977), 1-16, esp. the diagram of the textual history, with hypothetical
dates, on p. 15.
To illustrate the first class of instances, consider the following passages. In
Abraham's farewell to Ishmael and Isaac and their children, he exhorts his sons and
grandsons to guard themselves against all sexual immorality and idolatry. He commands
them to worship the Most High God alone and to "do what is true and righteous before
him, so that he might direct you aright and grant you mercy (facite veritatem et justitiam
TO
in conspectu ejus, ut dirigat vos et det vobis misericordiam)" (Jub. 20:9-10). This is not
only an instance of righteousness in the ethical sense; it also contains the notion of
"righteousness in the sight of God" (justitia in conspectu ejus), indeed, even adding the
notion that doing what is upright and righteous before God will elicit his favor and
39
mercy.
Another critically important passage in Jubilees that falls under this first usage is
the rewriting of the story of Levi and Simeon exacting revenge on the people of Shechem
for defiling their sister Dinah. In the biblical account, the two sons of Jacob are
condemned for their rashness. In the rewritten account of Jubilees, they are highly
praised for their zeal, using the language of "the reckoning of righteousness" later used of
Phinehas for his zeal (Ps 103:31).40 In the immediately preceding context, the author of
Jubilees takes the moral of the story to be a warning against "any man in Israel who
wishes to give his daughter or sister to any man who is from the seed of the gentiles"
(Jub. 30:7).41 Endogamy is one of the major motifs of Jubilees.,42 It flows from the desire
38
ET mine. O. S. Wintermute's translation (OTP 2.52-142) is based mainly on the Ethiopic, but since the
Ethiopic and the Latin arc in substantial agreement, I have used Wintermute as a base, making alterations
where the Latin differs from the Ethiopic.
39
The Ethiopic more explicitly affirms that doing righteousness elicits God's favor: "Do what is upright
and righteous before him, so that he might be pleased with you" (Wintermute, OTP 2.94). On the basis of
the Ethiopic, R. H. Charles suggests that the Latin dirigat should be emended to diligat. APOT2.43.
40
"Then Phinehas stood up and intervened, and the plague was stayed. And that was counted to him as
righteousness from generation to generation forever" (Ps 103:30-31 ESV).
41
ET: Wintermute, OTP 2.112.
to ensure that the Jews keep themselves separate from the Gentiles, since the Gentiles are
viewed as hopelessly corrupt, wicked, unclean, and characterized by idolatry.43 And so in
this context, the author of Jubilees uses the word "righteousness" several times:
Therefore I command you, saying, "Proclaim this testimony to Israel and see
how it was for the Shechemites and their sons, how they were given into the hand
of the two children of Jacob and they killed them in judgment. And it was
reckoned to them for truth44 and it was written down for them for righteousness
(et conputatum est illis in veritate et conscriptum est illis in justitia).'" And the
seed of Levi was enrolled for the priesthood and levitical (orders) to minister
before the Lord for all days just as we [angels] do. And Levi and his sons will be
blessed forever because he was zealous for the truth and performed judgment and
defense against all who were set over Israel. And thus is registered for him as a
testimony in the heavenly tablets blessing and righteousness in the sight of the
God of all (Et sic refertur illi in testimonium in tabulis caeli benedictio et justitia
in conspectu Dei omnium). And the righteousness which a man did during his
life will be remembered (et memorabitur justitia, quamfeciet homo in vita sua) in
all of the (appointed) times of the year; to a thousand generations it appears and
comes to him and to his seed after him, and he was written down as a friend and a
righteous one in the heavenly tablets (et scriptus est amicus et Justus in tabulis
caeli) (Jub. 30:17-20).45
The next few verses make clear that this is not merely a one-time incident, but is an
example for all Israel to follow.46 If the Jewish people of the author's day are faithful to
follow the principle of endogamy, separation from Gentiles, and zeal for the Mosaic Law,
Endogamy is a kinship value in which marriage is preferred within one's extended family or tribe, and
certainly a Jew may marry only another Jew. The high value placed on endogamy is found in the OT (Gen
24:3; 27:46-28:2) and continues in the Apocrypha (e.g., Tobit) and Pseudepigrapha (e.g., Jub. 22:20; 30:7).
See deSilva, Introducing the Apocrypha, 45, 76, 289-92.
4
"' When Abraham gave his blessing to Jacob, he said: "Separate yourself from the gentiles and do not eat
with them, and do not perform deeds like theirs. And do not become associates of theirs. Because their
deeds are defiled, and all of their ways are contaminated, and despicable, and abominable. They slaughter
their sacrifices to the dead, and to the demons they bow down. And they eat in tombs. And all their deeds
are worthless and vain ... Be careful, my son, Jacob, that you do not take a wife from any of the seed of the
daughters of Canaan, because all of his seed is (destined) for uprooting from the earth" (Jub. 22:16-17, 20;
ET: Wintermute, OTP 2.98).
44
The Ethiopic has "righteousness" twice where the Latin has it only once: "And it was a righteousness
[Latin: Veritas] for them and it was written down for them for righteousness" (Wintermute, OTP 2.113). I
was able to verify this by checking the Ethiopic text as found in Charles.
45
ET: Wintermute. OTP 2.113 (modified).
46
"All of these words 1 have written for you, and 1 have commanded you to speak to the children of Israel
that they might not commit sin or transgress the ordinances or break the covenant which was ordained for
them so that they might do it and be written down as friends" (Jub. 30:21; ET: Wintermute, OTP 2.113-14).
Chapter 5: Righteousness in Jewish Literature -311
then they too will have "righteousness" written down for them in the heavenly tablets.
This implies that "righteousness" here is "righteousness before God," since it is divinely
recognized and recorded in the heavenly tablets. In addition, it is clear that there are
eschatological consequences, for those who do not have "righteousness" recorded in the
heavenly tablets are blotted out of the book of life.47
In the second class, the word "righteousness" is used in reference to doing
something correctly, acting with integrity, or speaking the truth.
And he will renew his covenant with you (et renovabit testamentum eius cum
ipso), so that you might be a people for him, belonging to his inheritance forever.
And he will be God for you and for your seed in truth and righteousness (et ipse
erit tibi et semini tuo in Deum in veritate et justitia) throughout all the days of the
earth (Jub. 22:15).48
The covenantal language in the immediate context ("he will renew his covenant with
you") does not mean that "in righteousness" here means "in covenant faithfulness."
Rather, it means that God will be their God "in truth and righteousness," that is, really,
truly, and with integrity. The language of this passage echoes that of Zech 8:8: "And they
shall be my people, and I will be their God, in faithfulness and in righteousness" (ESV;
cp. Hos 2:19-20), a passage that we examined in Chapter 4.
This interpretation is supported by the following parallel, which also uses "in
truth and righteousness," but this time when characterizing the activity of humans:
And those who are preserved will not be turned back from their wickedness to the
way of truth, because they will all lift themselves up for deceit and wealth so that
one shall take everything that belongs to his neighbor; and they will pronounce
the great name but not in truth and not in righteousness (et nomen magnum
nominabunt non in veritate et non in justitia) (Jub. 23:21).
4/
"But if they transgress and act in all the ways of defilement, they will be recorded in the heavenly tablets
as enemies. And they will be blotted out of the book of life and written in the book of those who will be
destroyed and with those who will be rooted out from the land" (Jub. 30:22; ET: Wintermute, OTP 2.114).
48
ET: Wintermute, OTP 2.98 (modified).
49
This language echoes that of Isaiah 48:1: "Hear this, O house of Jacob ... who swear by
the name of the LORD and invoke the God of Israel, but not in truth nor in righteousness"
(NASB). The point is not that the people of Israel are unfaithful to the covenant, but that
their religious profession is insincere (cp. Isa 29:13). "It is neither reliable (truth) nor
correct (righteousness). It is in fact a lie."50
In the third class, that is, cases where righteousness is attributed to God in some
way, we have a passage such as the following, where Abraham is giving his farewell to
Isaac. Abraham says that he is old and has sought to do God's will all his life, in
particular, hating idols and serving only the one true and living God. He gives the
following reason for his doing so:
For he is the living God, and holy and faithful and more righteous than all (quia
Deus vivens est et sanctus etfidelis et iustus ex omnibus), and there is no
accepting of persons with him, to accept gifts, because God is righteous and one
who executes judgment (quoniam Deus iustus est et iudicium exercens) with all
who transgress his words and despise his testimony (Jub. 21:4).
In sum, the usage of "righteousness" language in Jubilees is similar to that of the
Hebrew OT, since all three main categories are present -judicial, ethical, and
correctness. There is no evidence of "righteousness" as a relational concept, and there is
strong evidence of "God's righteousness" as distributive justice. The OT use of "God's
righteousness" as vindicatory/delivering righteousness is not present in Jubilees.
First Enoch
50
JohnN. Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah, Chapters 40-66 (NICOT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), 261.
51
52
First Enoch is a composite work comprised of strata written at various times, stretching from the 4th
century BC to the 1st century AD. The complexities involved in the analysis of the textual history of the
Enochian literature prohibit extensive discussion here. One of the verses we will examine (7 Enoch 71:14)
There are three passages in / Enoch that use the language of the righteousness of
God (/ Enoch 71:14; 99:10; 101:3). Since 1 Enoch tends to be regarded as the
quintessential example of apocalyptic literature, Stuhlmacher cited these three passages
as evidence that "the righteousness of God" is not God's attribute as a judge but his
saving power.5 Therefore we will examine each in turn.
In the first passage, I Enoch 71:14, an angel (or perhaps God himself) is heard
saying to Enoch: "You are that son of man who was born for righteousness, and
righteousness dwells on you, and the righteousness of the Head of Days54 will not forsake
you."55 This is related to an earlier passage in which the angel said, "This is the son of
man who has righteousness, and righteousness dwells with him" (46:3).56 The subsequent
context (46:4-8) makes clear what is meant by the statement that he has righteousness or
that righteousness dwells in him: he will raise kings and mighty ones from their couches
of luxury so that worms will be their couch, with no hope of rising from the couch of
death; he will crush the teeth of sinners; he will overturn kings from their thrones and
their kingdoms because they do not worship the true God, but gods they have made with
their hands, or acknowledge that their kingship was given to them by God, and because
falls in the youngest stratum, the Book of Similitudes (chs. 37-71), which is considered by most recent
scholarship to belong to the 1st century AD, the consensus reached by the SNTS Pseudepigrapha Seminar
(1977-78). The other two verses we will examine (1 Enoch 99:10; 101:3) belong to the Epistle of Enoch
(chs. 91-105/7), which most scholars date to sometime in the 2nd century BC. George W. E. Nicklesburg,
"Enoch. First Book of," ABD 2.508-16; E. Isaac, "1 (Ethiopic Apocalypse of) Enoch," OTP 1.6-7; J. J.
Collins, "Enoch, Books of," DNTB 313-18.
53
Peter Stuhlmacher, Gerechtigkeit Gottes bei Paulus (FRLANT 87; 2nd ed.; Gottingen: Vandenhoeck &
Ruprecht, 1966), 167-69.
54
"The Head of Days" in Enoch is God himself, "the Ancient of Days" of Daniel 7:9, 13. See 1 Enoch
46:1-2: "There I saw one who had a head of days, and his head was like white wool. And with him was
another, whose face was like the appearance of a man ... And I asked the angel of peace, who went with
me and showed me all the hidden things, about that son of man - who he was and whence he was (and)
why he went with the Head of Days." English translation from George W. E. Nicklesburg and James C.
VanderKam, 1 Enoch: A New Translation Based on the Hermeneia Commentary (Minneapolis: Fortress,
2004), 59-60.
55
ET: Nicklesburg and VanderKam, 1 Enoch, 95.
56
ET: Nicklesburg and VanderKam, 1 Enoch, 60.
they persecute the godly. Thus "the righteousness of the Head of Days" that will not
depart from the Son of Man is a judicial righteousness that involves his role as God's
vice-regent who executes judgment on the world.
In the second passage, 1 Enoch 99:10, we read: "Then blessed will be all who
listen to the words of the wise, and learn to do the commandments of the Most High; and
walk in the paths of his righteousness (Kai Jiopsuaovxai EV oSoic; 5ucaioauvr|c; auxou), and
do not err with the erring [or do not become wicked with the wicked]; for they will be
saved.""7 "Path(s) of righteousness" is a biblical phrase58 with strong ethical
connotations, and the addition of the pronoun "his" does not change its fundamentally
ethical meaning. With the pronoun, the phrase does not denote the judicial righteousness
of God, whether saving or punitive, but the ethical righteousness demanded by God, as
indicated by the parallel phrase, "the commandments of the Most High." The
immediately preceding context warns of God's coming judgment on those who carve
images of gold, silver, wood, stone, and clay (99:6-9). The immediately following
context pronounces a woe on those who spread evil for their neighbors, who lay the
foundations of sin and deceit, and who practice lawlessness and unrighteous deeds
(99:11-16). The strongly ethical character of the surrounding context suggests that
walking "in the paths of his [God's] righteousness" in 99:10 has to do with walking in the
paths of God's moral law, and has nothing to do with God's covenant faithfulness or his
eschatological deliverance of his people. Stuhlmacher was wrong to cite this text in
support of his saving-power interpretation of the righteousness of God.
57
ET: Nicklesburg and VanderKam, 1 Enoch, 152; translation in brackets from E. Isaac, OTP 1.80. Greek
from "Apocalypsis Hcnochi Graece," ed. M. Black, in Fragmenta Pseudepigraphorum Quae Supersunt
Graeca (ed. Albert-Marie Denis; PVTG 3; Leiden: Brill, 1970).
58
Ps 23:3; Prov 8:20 (cp. 4:11); Matt 21:32; 2 Pet 2:21.
The third instance is 1 Enoch 101:1-3 where we read: "So contemplate, O human
beings, the deeds of the Most High and fear to do evil in his presence ... If he sends forth
his wrath against you and your deeds, will you not be entreating him? Why do you speak
with your mouth proud and hard things" against his majesty [Ethiopic: against his
righteousness]? You will have no peace."6 Here we have a textual issue. The Greek
manuscripts have "against his majesty" (tax xfj psyaXcoouvT] auxou), while the Ethiopic
has "against his righteousness." Nicklesburg opts for the Greek textual tradition, "against
his majesty," arguing that it is supported by the subsequent context where even sailors are
afraid of the storms of the sea, yet sinners do not fear the Most High (101:4-9).61 In any
case, even if the Ethiopic reading were adopted as original, "his [God's] righteousness"
in this context would be neither his covenant faithfulness nor his saving deliverance of
his people, but, given the apocalyptic context of the scenes of final judgment, God's
righteousness in executing judgment upon sinners.
Thus, Stuhlmacher's citation of these three passages from 1 Enoch does not
support his interpretation of "the righteousness of God." The first passage refers to God's
distributive justice, the second to ethical righteousness; and the third is textually
3
Cp. "Look, he comes with the myriads of his holy ones, to execute judgment on all, to destroy all the
wicked, and to convict all humanity for all the wicked deeds that they have done, and the proud and hard
words that wicked sinners spoke against him" (1:9; famously quoted in Jude 14-15) (ET: Nicklesburg and
VanderKam, 1 Enoch, 20). The hard words that sinners have spoken against God would seem to be against
"his majesty," but even if they are against "his righteousness," it is against his righteousness as the holy
judge coming "to execute judgment on all (7toifjooti Kpicuv KOT& Ttdvxtov)" and "to convict all humanity
(ilkycpi Ttfioav a&pKa)" for their wicked deeds.
60
ET: Nicklesburg and VanderKam, 1 Enoch, 156; translation in brackets from E. Isaac, OTP 1.82.
61
Nicklesburg also points to a parallel passage (7 Enoch 5:4) where the Ethiopic translator has the same
confusion: "You have spoken proud and hard words with your unclean mouth against his majesty" (Greek:
Kara xfjc; psyaA.a)cuvr|cj anion / Ethiopic: sedqa zi'ahu ["against his righteousness"]). George W. E.
Nicklesburg, / Enoch 1: A Commentary on the Book oj 1 Enoch, Chapters 1-36; 81-108 (Hermeneia;
Minneapolis: Fortress, 2001), 504.
62
God's "wrath" is mentioned in the same verse (1 Enoch 101:3). See also the description of the final
judgment in the next chapter, "when [God] hurls against you the flood of the fire of your burning," when
"the heavens and all the luminaries will be shaken" and "all the sons of earth will seek to hide themselves
from the presence of the Great Glory" (102:1-3). ET: Nicklesburg and VanderKam, 1 Enoch, 157.
uncertain, but even if the reading "righteousness" is adopted, it denotes God's distributive
justice in the context of the final judgment. The eschatological saving righteousness of
God is simply not present in 1 Enoch, the quintessentially apocalyptic text where, if
anywhere, we would expect to find it.
Psalms of Solomon
The Psalms of Solomon (Pss. Sol.), written just prior to the Christian era in the
first century BC, have tended to attract the greatest interest on account of their explicit
witness to Jewish messianism in the last century of the pre-Christian era (cf. Pss. Sol. 17
and 18). I will not address this issue here. What interests me is their potential as a source
for understanding Paul's soteriology. Their relevance for Pauline studies is increased if,
as many scholars believe, the Pss. Sol. were written by Pharisees, although such an
identification is not necessary for my argument.64
Words derived from the AIK-root are plentiful in the Psalms of Solomon. The
adjective SiKaioc; occurs 34 times, and the noun SiKaioouvri occurs 25 times. These terms
are used in reference to human ethical righteousness and in reference to God's judicial
righteousness (iustitia distributiva). There are no references to the righteousness of God
that would support the translation, "the covenant faithfulness of God." Let us now
examine several of the key passages.
"' A number of historical references in the Pss. Sol. place them firmly in the 1st century BC. "Arrogantly the
sinner broke down the strong walls with a battering ram" (Pss. Sol. 2:1) is regarded by most scholars as
referring to Pompey's invasion of Jerusalem in 63 BC. His death in Egypt is also alluded to (Pss. Sol. 2:25-
27). M. Lattke, "Psalms of Solomon," DNTB 855; Joseph L. Trafton, "Solomon, Psalms of," ABD 6.115; R.
B. Wright, "Psalms of Solomon," OTP 2.640-41.
64
Pharisaic authorship is argued by Dieter Luhrmann, "Paul and the Pharisaic Tradition," JSNT 36 (1989):
75-94. Others argue that the Pss. Sol. were authored by the Essenes, the Hasidim, or others. See J. O'Dell,
"The Religious Background of the Psalms of Solomon (Re-evaluated in the Light of the Qumran Texts),"
RevQ 3 (1961): 241-57; R. B. Wright, "Psalms of Solomon," OTP 2.639-70.
There are three references to God's "righteous judgments" (xd Kpipaxa aou [or
xou Geou] xd Sucaia) (Pss. Sol. 2:10; 5:1; 8:8). On one occasion, it is stated that "the
Lord's judgments [are] in righteousness" (xd Kpipaxa Kupiou EV SiKaioouvri) (9:5 NETS);
on another occasion, the psalmist proclaims that "our Lord is righteous and devout in his
judgments forever (SiKaioc; Kai oaioc 6 Kupioc; fipcov EV Kpipaaiv auxou siq xov aicova)"
(10:5 NETS).
Three times it is stated that God is a righteous judge: "You have exposed their
sins, that your judgment might be evident... God is a righteous judge (6 GEOC; Kpixf|c;
SiKaioc;), and he will not marvel at a person" (2:17-18 NETS); "May God remove those
who arrogantly do all injustice; for the Lord our God is a great and mighty judge in
righteousness (Kpixfjc; psyac; Kai Kpaxaioc; Kupioc; 6 GEOC; fjpcov EV SiKaioauvn)" (4:24
NETS); "The dispersion of Israel was among every nation ... that you may be justified, O
God, in your righteousness (iva SucaicoGfjc;, 6 GEOC;, EV xfj SiKaioauvn aou) by reason of
our acts of lawlessness; for you are a righteous judge (ou Kpixf|c; SiKaioc;) over all the
peoples of the earth" (9:2 NETS). In all of these cases, God's righteousness as judge is
manifested in his punishment of the sinners among the nation of Israel. Indeed, the
dispersion of Israel among the nations was God's righteous punishment upon the nation
for its "acts of lawlessness" (dvopiai). The language of the "justification" of God, that is,
the acknowledgment that God is right and just in his judgments, occurs seven times in the
Pss. Sol. (2:15; 3:5; 4:8; 8:7, 23, 26; 9:2).65
0
The fact that the language of the justification of God in the Pss. Sol. is used in the context of defending
God's distributive justice supports my reading of Rom 3:4 in Chapter 6 below. Paul explicitly quotes Ps
50:6 lxx /51:4 MT ("that you may be justified in your words"); it is likely that the Pss. Sol. are also drawing
upon the same canonical language.
We see much the same thing in Pss. Sol. 2, which is subtitled, "A Psalm.
Pertaining to Salomon. Concerning lerousalem" (NETS). It is a meditation on a recent
military attack on the city of Jerusalem by the Roman forces under Pompey the Great.
The psalmist attributes this distressing event to God's judgment on the inhabitants of
Jerusalem because of their sins. It is in this context that we find one reference to God's
"righteous judgments," two references to God being a righteous judge or king, and one
reference to God's righteousness. "For in your judgments is your righteousness, O God,
(oxi EV xoic; Kpipaoiv aou f) SiKaioauvn aou, 6 GEOC;). For you have repaid sinners
according to their works" (2:15-16 NETS). "And now see, the nobles of the earth, the
judgment of the Lord (xo Kpipa xou Kupiou), for he is a great and righteous king (oxi
psyac; (3aau\£uc Kai SiKaioc;); judging (Kpivcov) what is under heaven ... to separate
between righteous and sinner, to repay the sinners forever according to their works"
(2:32-33 NETS). The righteousness of God in this context has to do with his role as king
and judge, a role that involves rewarding the righteous and punishing sinners, i.e.,
distributive justice.
Another important psalm for understanding not only the Jewish usage of
"righteousness" terminology but also Jewish soteriology is Pss. Sol. 9. This latter point is
important, since Paul's soteriology is generally regarded as involving, on some level, a
response to Jewish soteriology. At this point we enter into a highly contested issue with
scholars polarized into two main camps. The first camp, represented by H. Braun,66 holds
H. Braun, "Vom Erbarmen Gottes iiber den Gerechten: Zur Theologie der Psalmen Solomos," ZNW43
(1950-51): 1-54. Agreeing with Braun, but with qualifications: William L. Lane, "Paul's Legacy from
Phariseeism: Light from the Psalms of Solomon," Concordia Journal 8 (1982): 130-38; Mark A. Seifrid,
Justification by Faith: The Origin and Development of a Central Pauline Theme (NovTSup 68; Leiden:
Brill, 1992), 109-33; Simon Gathercolc, Where is Boasting? Early Jewish Soteriology and Paul's Response
in Romans 1-5 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002), 63-7.
that the Pss. Sol. reflect a legalistic piety that oscillates between hope in God's mercy and
confidence in one's own righteousness, with the latter being more basic. The second
camp, led by E. P. Sanders, reacted strongly against Braun's characterization, and holds
that the psalms do not betray any hint of legalism but fit within the paradigm of
covenantal nomism, that is, the idea that salvation is by grace on the basis of God's
covenant with Israel and that obedience is merely the means by which one remains within
the covenant.67 In my view, both Braun and Sanders overstated their case. Against
Sanders, Pss. Sol. 9:4-5 makes it very clear that the performance of good deeds -
righteousness - is the means of obtaining eschatological life:
Our works are in the choosing and power of our soul, to do righteousness or
injustice in the works of our hands, and in your righteousness (EV xfj SiKaioouvri
aou) you visit human beings. The one who does righteousness stores up life for
himself with the Lord, and the one who practices injustice is responsible for the
destruction of his own soul, for the judgments of the Lord are in righteousness (xd
ydp Kpipaxa Kupiou EV SiKaioauvn) for each man and household (NETS).
Td Epya fjpcov EV EicXoyfj Kai £c;ouaia xfjc; \|ruxfjc; fipcov xou 7toifjaai SiKaioauvnv
Kai dSuciav sv Epyoic; xElP^v W&V Kai EV xfj SiKaioouvri aou £7tiaK£7rxri uiouc;
dv6pcb7icov. 6 7toicov Sucaioauvnv GnaaupiÊi ^coiiv auxco 7iapa Kupico, Kai 6 uoicov
dSuciav auxoc; aixioe; xfjc; yuxnc; EV d7icoA,sitx' xd yap Kpipaxa Kupiou EV Sucaioouvn
Kax' dvSpa Kai oucov.
This passage establishes a strong connection between the righteousness of humans
and the righteousness of God. Three stages of righteousness can be discerned here: (1)
humans, by their own choosing and power, do righteousness (7toicov Sucaioauvnv); (2) in
so doing, they store up life for themselves with the Lord, which implies that a second
stage has occurred, namely, the divine recognition of this righteousness so that the doers
E. P. Sanders. Paid and Palestinian Judaism: A Comparison of Patterns of Religion (Minneapolis:

Fortress, 1977), 387-409. Cp. Mikael Winninge, Sinners and the Righteous: A Comparative Study of the
Psalms of Solomon and Paul's Letters (ConBNT 26; Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell International, 1995),
74-5; and Daniel Falk, "Psalms and Prayers," in Justification and Variegated Nomism, Vol. 1: The
Complexities of Second Temple Judaism (WUNT 11/140; ed. D. A. Carson, Peter T. O'Brien, and Mark A.
Seifrid; Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck/Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2001), 35-51.
of righteousness are now "righteous" before God; and (3) God in his righteousness (EV xfj
SiKaioouvri aou) visits human beings, determines who has achieved this status of being
"righteous" before God, and bestows the eschatological reward of life - and thus "the
judgments of the Lord are in righteousness (xd Kpipaxa Kupiou EV Sucaioauvri)"
according to both the individual and the household. In this context, the righteousness of
God is his distributive justice in rewarding the righteous with eternal life.
On the other hand, Sanders has rightly pointed out that the Pss. Sol. do not require
perfect obedience and make much of God's mercy (3:5-8; 9:6-8; 15:13). Furthermore,
Law-keeping is not viewed as meritorious, since the Law is part of God's gracious
covenant with Israel (9:10; 10:4). Sanders's correction needs to be heard. But in the end,
the soteriology of the Pss. Sol. includes both elements. Yes, there is mercy for those who
repent, but repentance is turning oneself back to the Law. It is a way of getting back onto
the path of righteousness. In the final analysis, righteousness by Law-keeping is still the
necessary means of obtaining eschatological life.
Pss. Sol. 2 focuses on the righteousness of God in his historical judgments on
Israel, whether in the dispersion among the nations or in the more recent military action
of Pompey in Jerusalem. But in Pss. Sol. 9, the righteousness of God is oriented toward
the individual, eschatological reward of the righteous by means of their doing the
righteousness demanded by the law and achieving a status of being "righteous" before
God. The concept of the righteousness of God in Pss. Sol. 9 is diametrically opposed to
Paul's concept of a righteousness from God attained by faith in Christ apart from the
works of the law. But in spite of this Christological difference, both the author of Pss.
Sol. and Paul are working within the same conceptual framework of distributive
righteousness, and neither adopts the notion that "the righteousness of God" is a cipher
for his covenant faithfulness. The difference between them is not linguistic but
theological. Both affirm the need for righteousness before God; they differ on the means
of attaining that righteousness.
Liber Antiquitatum Biblicarum
Pseudo-Philo's Liber Antiquitatum Biblicarum (L.A.B.) was composed originally
in Hebrew, subsequently translated into Greek, and is extant now only in a flawed Latin
translation of the Greek.69 The word iusticiae occurs most frequently to refer to God's
commandments, i.e., his "statutes,"70 a Latin rendering that was inspired by the LXX's
choice of SiKaicbpaxa to render D^prl. The word is used once with reference to ethical
righteousness. David, speaking to Jonathan regarding King Saul's persecution, makes
reference to his own father Jesse's outstanding ethical righteousness: "The righteousness
of my father (lusticia patris mei) helps me so that I should not fall into the hands of your
father" (L.A.B. 62.5).71 A contrast is obviously being drawn here between Jonathan's
wicked father and David's righteous father. In the Midrash, Jesse was one of the four
most outstanding righteous men since the world began, and so David is here appealing to
'* Most scholars favor a date toward the end of the first century AD. Craig A. Evans, Ancient Texts for New
Testament Studies: A Guide to the Background Literature (Peabody: Hendrickson, 2005), 49. Daniel
Harrington thinks the Hebrew original was composed in Palestine prior to the destruction of Herod's
temple in AD 70, although some have argued for a post-AD 70 date based on possible allusions to the
destruction of the temple (L.A.B. 19:7; 26:13). Harrington points out that it was definitely written before
AD 100, since biblical texts were suppressed in Palestine after that time. Harrington, "Pseudo-Philo,"
DNTB 864; idem, "Philo, Pseudo-," ABD 5.345; idem, "Pseudo-Philo," OTP 2.299; idem, "The Biblical
Text of Pseudo-Philo's Liber Antiquitatum Biblicarum," CBQ 33 (1971): 1-17.
6
Howard Jacobson, A Commentary on Pseudo-Philo's Liber Antiquitatum Biblicarum with Latin Text and
English Translation (AGJU 31; 2 vols.; Leiden: Brill, 1996), l.ix.
10
L.A.B. 9.8; 11:15; 12:2; 19.9; 30.2; 48.5; 54.5.
71
ET: D. J. Harrington in OTP 2.375. Latin text prepared by Harrington and published as Pseudo-Philon,
Les Antiquites Bibliques (SC 229-30; Paris: Editions du Cerf, 1976).
the ethical righteousness of his father as the explanation for Saul's inability to harm
him.72
A few verses later in the same chapter, the word lusticia occurs again, but this
time it is unclear whether it means ethical or legal righteousness. The conversation has
now shifted and Jonathan is answering David. Jacobson translates:
Come to me, my brother David, and 1 will tell you of your judgement (dicam tibi
iusticiam tuarn). My soul pines away greatly over your sadness, because we are
now separated from each other. Our sins (peccata nostra) have caused this ... But
let us be mindful of one another day and night while we live ... For your kingdom
is in this world, but from you will be the beginning of a kingdom which will come
in its time (L.A.B. 62.9).73
Harrington has a different rendering: "Come to me, my brother David, and I will tell you
of your righteousness."74 But Harrington's rendering does not fit the context that follows:
Jonathan is not boasting of David's ethical righteousness but telling David, in oracular
fashion, the outcome of what is going to happen based on God's decision to hand the
kingdom over to David and to take it away from Saul. In fact, as Jacobson points out, not
only is there nothing in Jonathan's speech about David's ethical righteousness, but
Jonathan even says that the reason they have to be separated is because of "our sins"
(peccata nostra). Thus, iusticiam tuam most likely refers to "what God and the future
hold in store for David."75 Jacobson's legal interpretation seems to better fit the context.
The language of "the righteousness of God" does not occur explicitly in L.A.B.,
either in the form iustitia mea/tua/sua or in the full form iustitia Dei. However, before we
leave L.A.B., it is worth pointing out that the concept of God's distributive justice is
Baba Bathra 11 a. Cited by Jacobson, 2.1190; Harrington, OTP 2.375 note c.

ET: Jacobson, 1.190-1.
ET: Harrington, OTP 2.375.
ET: Jacobson, 2.1194.
clearly present even if the terminology is not. For example, after the flood, L.A.B. has
God say these words:
"But when the years appointed for the world have been fulfilled, then the light
will cease and the darkness will fade away. And I will bring the dead to life and
raise up those who are sleeping from the earth. And hell will pay back its debt,
and the place of perdition will return its deposit so that I may render to each
according to his works (ut reddam unicuique secundum opera sua) and according
to the fruit of his own devices, until 1 judge (quousque iudicem) between soul and
flesh ... And no one who has been pardoned [lit. justified] by me (qui in me
iustificatus est) will be tainted. And there will be another earth and another
heaven, an everlasting dwelling place" (L.A.B. 3.10).76
This passage is interesting because it employs the language of justification in the context
of God's distribution of reward and punishment at the final day of judgment when the
dead have been raised. The wicked will go to the place of perdition, whereas the
77
righteous who have been "justified" (or perhaps "vindicated") are those who will be
free from all pollution or taint and will dwell forever in the new creation. This is similar
to L.A.B/s version of Hannah's prayer, where she says that God will bring the righteous
to life but the wicked he will shut up in darkness until they perish - all of which will
occur as a result of God's sure "judgment" (judicium) (L.A.B. 51.5).
Fourth Ezra
76
ET: Harrington, OTP 2.307.
77
ET: Jacobson, 1.93.
7S
Fourth Ezra was clearly written as a theological response to the destruction of Herod's temple in AD 70.
It claims to have been written in the thirtieth year after the destruction of the first temple by the
Babylonians ("In the thirtieth year after the destruction of our city," 4 Ezra 3:1), but this is to be taken in a
typological sense as the thirtieth year after the destruction of Herod's temple in AD 70, thus yielding a date
of AD 100 for the composition of the book. B. M. Metzger, "The Fourth Book of Ezra," OTP 1.520. This is
corroborated by the three-headed eagle in Vision 5 of 4 Ezra, which is taken as code for the Flavian
dynasty of Roman emperors (Vespasian, Titus, and Domitian), whose reigns collectively spanned 69-96
AD. Michael E. Stone, "Esdras, Second Book of," ABD 2.612; idem, Faith and Piety in Early Judaism:
Texts and Documents (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1983), 166.
Like L.A.B., 4 Ezra was probably written in Hebrew, then translated into Greek,
and from there into Latin. Although Syriac, Ethiopic, Armenian, and other versions exist,
I will be using the Latin text. The word iustitia occurs in the first and third visions of the
so-called Ezra Apocalypse (chs. 3-14). In the first vision, it occurs once, in chapter five,
which is a description of the signs of the coming end of the age. Unrighteousness and
unrestraint (iniustitia et incontinentia) will increase on the earth beyond anything known
before. So bad will it be that one country shall ask its neighbor, "Has righteousness
(iustitia). or anyone who does right (iustum faciens), passed through you?" and the reply
will be in the negative (4 Ezra 5.11).79 It is clear that the usage of "righteousness" here
falls under the category of ethical righteousness.
In the third vision, the word occurs six times, this time with more variety. After a
temporary messianic kingdom that lasts 400 years, the world will return to primeval
silence; then, after seven days, the world and all the dead will be awakened for judgment.
"And the Most High shall be revealed upon the seat of judgment (sedem iudicii),
and compassion shall pass away, and patience shall be withdrawn; but judgment
alone (indicium solum) shall remain, truth (veritas) shall stand, and faithfulness
(fides) shall grow strong. And recompense (opus) shall follow, and the reward
(merces) shall be manifested; righteous deeds (iustitiae) shall awake, and
unrighteous deeds (iniustitiae) shall not sleep. Then the pit of torment shall
R1
appear, and opposite it shall be the place of rest" (4 Ezra 7.33-36).
The term "righteous deeds" (iustitiae), as the antonym of "unrighteous deeds"
(iniustitiae), obviously has reference here to ethical righteousness. But it is noteworthy
that this occurs in the context of an apocalyptic description of the day of judgment, which
7
ET: B. M. Metzger, OTP 1.532. For the Latin text. 1 have consulted both Robert L. Bensly, ed., The
Fourth Book of Ezra: The Latin Version Edited from the MSS (Texts and Studies 3.2; Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1895), and A. Frederik J. Klijn, ed., Der Lateinische Text der Apokalypse des
Esra (TUGAL 131; Berlin: Akademie, 1983).
80
"The divine judgment is a clearly judicial function; the judgment seat is also a legal characteristic. In the
Hebrew Bible, the judgment scat is often specifically connected with the king's judicial function." Michael
E. Stone, Fourth Ezra (Hermeneia; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1990), 220.
81
ET: B. M. Metzger, OTP 1.538.
is viewed in strictly legal terms as God's judicial activity of executing distributive justice,
that is, reward for the righteous and punishment for the wicked, a common motif in
Jewish apocalyptic literature. Note as well that the judgment of God will be in
accordance with perfect truth (veritas), fidelity (fides), " and the complete withdrawal of
divine mercy and compassion ("compassion shall pass away, and patience shall be
withdrawn"). As a result, "judgment alone shall remain (iudicium solum remanebit)/''
Two additional instances of iustitia in an ethical sense, i.e., "righteousness" as upright
human behavior, occur later in the same chapter (4 Ezra 7.105, 114) in the same
apocalyptic context of a description of the day of judgment. Given the severity of this
passage's emphasis on God's impartial and merciless judgment, it strongly militates
against the Cremer hypothesis that righteousness is a thoroughly positive, relational
concept.
Finally, in 4 Ezra 8, we have potentially two occurrences of iustitia that at first
seem to provide support for Cremer's perspective, since one is an instance of divine
righteousness used in a positive, saving sense. However, these two occurrences of iustitia
are in doubt because of the existence of two divergent Latin textual traditions at 4 Ezra
8:20-36, the so-called "Confessio Esdrae" or "Prayer of Ezra."83 The first textual tradition
is that found in the Latin text as edited by Robert Bensly at the end of the 19th century;
this tradition is the textual basis for Bruce Metzger's English translation of 4 Ezra in
Charlesworth's Old Testament Pseudepigrapha. The first textual tradition has both
occurrences of lusticia. The second textual tradition is found in the Latin text edited by
82
"Faithfulness" (fides) in this context does not mean "covenant" faithfulness, or keeping one's promises of
grace, but God's faithful adherence or fidelity to his own internal divine moral standards grounded in his
unchanging holy nature. Here fides signifies judicial rectitude and the rendering of verdicts that are in
accordance with the truth and with God's moral law.
83
Klijn, 15, 57-61; Stone, Fourth Ezra, 269-75.
A. F. J. Klijn in 1983, the edition which supplies the foundation for Michael Stone's
English translation in his Hermeneia commentary on 4 Ezra. The word lusticia, which
occurs twice in the first textual tradition, does not occur at all in this second textual
tradition. Here are the two texts side by side. Continuing in the dialogue between Ezra
and God from the previous chapter, in chapter 8, Ezra now pleads with God to have
mercy on frail human beings who are inevitably sinful.
Table 14. Two Textual Traditions at 4 Ezra 8:31-36

Bensly Klijn
3 31
' For we and our fathers have passed our lives For we and those who were before us have
in ways that bring death, but you, because of us done deeds in ways that bring death, but thou,
sinners, are called merciful (misericors). because of us sinners, art called merciful
(misericors).
32
~'2 For if you have desired to have pity on us. For if thou hast desired to have pity on us,
who have no works of righteousness (nobis non who have no good works (qui non habemus
habentibus opera iusticiae), then you will be facta bona), then thou wilt be called merciful
called merciful (misericors). (miserator).
3 33
"' For the righteous (iusti), who have many For the righteous (iusti), who have many
works (operae multae) laid up with you, shall works (opera multa) laid up with thee, shall
receive their reward in consequence of their receive their reward in consequence of their
own deeds (ex propriis operibus recipient own deeds (de suis operibus habent mercedem
mercedem). recipere).
34 34
But what is man, that you are angry with him; But what is man, that thou art angry with
or what is a mortal race, that you are so bitter him; or what is a corruptible race, that thou art
against it? so bitter against it?
j5 35
For in truth there is no one among those who For in truth there is no one among those who
have been bom who has not acted wickedly, and have been born who has not acted wickedly,
among those who have existed there is no one and among those who have existed there is no
who has not transgressed. one who has not transgressed.
36 36
For m this, O Lord, your righteousness and For in this, O Lord, thy goodness will be
your goodness will be declared, when you are declared, when thou art merciful to those who
merciful to those who have no store of good have no store of [good] works (In hoc enim
works (In hoc enim adnuntiabitur iusticia tua et ostendetur bonitas tua, Domine. quando
bonitos tua, Domine. cum misertus fueris eis qui misertus fueris illorum qui non habent
non habent substantiam operum bonorum)." substantiam operum [bonorum]).
The Bensly tradition has been recorded mostly in liturgical manuscripts, whereas
the Klijn tradition is supported by the most reliable Latin manuscripts.84 Particularly in v
Klijn, 13-15; Stone, Fourth Ezra, 4. According to R. H. Charles, "The beauty of the prayer itself [the
Confessio Esdrae = 4 Ezra 8:20-36] led to its being excerpted and used for liturgical and devotional
purposes. As a consequence, it occurs in a separate form in a number of MSS. of the Latin Bible." APOT
2.594. Charles also recognizes the two textual traditions; however, unlike Klijn and Stone, Charles thinks it
impossible to determine which textual tradition is older.
36, lusticia tua is lacking in the primary manuscript tradition and thus appears to be a
secondary addition due to the liturgical use of the Prayer of Ezra (= 4 Ezra 8:20-36) in
Or
the church. " This is supported by internal considerations as well. In the midst of the
ongoing description of the day of judgment, including the emphasis on God's distributive
justice in rewarding the righteous "in consequence of their own deeds," it would be quite
unexpected and out of place to find the phrase "your righteousness" (lusticia tua) used in
a positive, merciful sense in conjunction with "your goodness" (bonitas tua). It is quite
possible that the liturgical text-form was corrupted by Christian scribes who were
familiar with Pauline usage.
Life of Adam and Eve
In the Life of Adam and Eve (L.A.E.), the word SiKaioouvri occurs only once, and
in a sense that means "ethical righteousness before God." It is used in the account of
Adam's moment of sin and fall. As soon as he eats of the forbidden fruit, at that very
moment, his eyes are opened "and I knew that I was naked of the righteousness with
which I had been clothed" (gyvcov oxi yupvf] Tjpnv xfjc; Sucaioauvnc fjc; fipnv EvSESupEvn,)
(L.A.E. 20:1). It is significant that this thought of Adam being clothed with righteousness
is then explained in terms of Adam's possession of divine glory, for as soon as he realizes
"This remarkable prayer (vss. 20-36) played a significant role in the liturgy of the early church as may be
seen from its quotation in the Apostolic Constitutions, its separate status in numerous manuscripts of the
Vulgate and the Mozarabic Liturgy, and its transmission in two recensions." Jacob M. Myers, / andII
Esdras: Introduction, Translation and Commentary (AB 42; Garden City: Doubleday. 1974), 258. The
Mozarabic Liturgy, which goes back to the seventh century, may be found in Migne, Patrologia latina
85.878-79. The term "Mozarabic" applies to Roman Catholics living under Muslim rule in the Iberian
Peninsula.
86
Although M. de Jonge and J. Tromp have argued that the Life of Adam and Eve is of Christian
provenance, most scholars have held that it is a Jewish text composed in Hebrew in the 1st century AD. M.
de Jong and J. Tromp, The Life of Adam and Eve and Related Literature (GAP; Sheffield: Sheffield
Academic Press, 1997); John R. Levison, "Adam and Eve, Life of," ABD 1.64-66; idem, "Adam and Eve,
Literature Concerning," DNTB 1-6.
that he is naked he cries out, weeping, "Why have you done this to me, that I have been
estranged from my glory with which 1 was clothed?" (d7rr|A,>tOxpicb6r|v EK xfjc; 56c;rjc; pou
rjc; fjpnv EVSESUPEVT]) (L.A.E. 20:2). And a few verses later, Adam casts blame upon Eve:
"Why have you wrought destruction among us? You have estranged me from the glory of
God" (d7tnXA,oxpicoodc; ps EK xfjc; Socjnc; xou OEOU) (21:6).87 This shows that the glory with
which Adam was clothed was the divine glory, possibly related to the concept of the
image of God. It is also significant that the two concepts are interchangeable, since
Adam's nakedness is defined as the loss of the primal righteousness with which he had
been clothed, which is equivalent to being estranged from the divine glory with which he
had been clothed. Thus there is good reason to think that SiKaioauvn in this passage
means not just "ethical righteousness" but, more specifically, "ethical righteousness
before God," that is, a status of righteousness in which one is treated as righteous in the
sight of God.
In addition to the noun, the adjective SiKaioc; is attributed to God in L.A.E. It
occurs in the passage where the angels are expelling the primeval couple out of paradise
after they sinned. As they are being driven out, Adam pleads with the angels to permit
him a moment to seek mercy from God. So they stop driving him out and Adam begs
God for mercy. Then the Lord asks the angels why they have stopped driving Adam out
of paradise. He asks, "Is the guilt mine, or did I judge badly?" (pf| £pov EOXI xd dpdpxn_pa
fj KaKcoc; EKpiva;). At this rebuke, the angels immediately fall to the ground, as if to
retract their questioning of God, and say, "You are righteous, Lord, and you judge
8/
ET: M. D. Johnson, OTP 2.281. Greek text from A.-M. Denis, Concordance grecque des
pseudepigraphes d'ancien Testament (Louvain-la-Neuve: Univcrsite Catholiquc de Louvain, Institut
Orientaliste, 1987), 815-18. Denis's Greek text is derived from Marcel Nagel, La Vie grecque d'Adam et
d'Eve: Apocalypse de Mo'ise (3 vols.; Ph.D. Dissertation; University of Strasbourg, 1972).
uprightly" (SiKaioc; si KupiE Kai EuOuxnxac; Kpiveic) (L.A.E. 27.1 -5). The affirmation that
the Lord is SiKaioc; is equivalent to the affirmation that he judges uprightly - in particular,
in the case of Adam and Eve, that he has not erred in his judicial verdict and that the
penal execution by means of the angels is just and right.
Our survey of "righteousness" terminology in the Apocrypha and OT
Pseudepigrapha composed in Hebrew and now extant in another language (Ethiopic,
Greek, or Latin) has shown that the OT usage is generally followed, with the three major
categories: (1) judicial righteousness; (2) ethical righteousness; and (3) a handful of cases
having to do with speaking the truth or doing something correctly and with integrity.
When used in the ethical sense, "righteousness" is most commonly understood in the
sense of obedience to the Mosaic Law. And an important subcategory of the ethical usage
is "righteousness" as a status of righteousness before God, usually on the basis of
intrinsic righteousness. We saw this in the following passages: "do what is just before
him" (Tob 13:6); "it was accounted to him as righteousness" (1 Mace 2:52); "do what is
true and righteous in his sight" (Jub. 20:9-10); the references to Simeon and Levi's
zealotry as being "written down for them as righteousness" in the heavenly tablets (Jub.
30:17-20); the exhortation to "do righteousness" and thus "store up life for oneself with
the Lord" (Ps. Sol. 9:4-5); and the account of Adam's fall in which he reflects upon the
fact that he is now naked of the righteousness in which he had originally been clothed
(L.A.E. 20:1). These are all significant, because they prepare the way for Paul's use of
SiKaioauvn as denoting a status of righteousness before God. There is, of course, a major
difference between the understanding of this status in these Jewish writings and in Paul's
88
ET: M. D. Johnson, OTP 2.285.
Chapter 5: Righteousness in Jewish Literature • 330
theology: whereas for these Jewish writers, this status of righteousness before God is
grounded in one's inherent righteousness that comes from obeying the law (what Paul
would refer to as "the righteousness of the law"), for Paul it comes from God as a gift of
grace received by faith on the ground of Christ's atoning death and resurrection (i.e., "the
righteousness of faith").
When applied to God in this body of literature, "righteousness" is his distributive
justice in punishing the wicked and rewarding the righteous. God's righteousness or
iustitia salutifera ("my, his, your righteousness"), viewed not in terms of Cremer's theory
as a relational concept but in terms of God's delivering/vindicating righteousness as a
subset of God's iustitia distributiva, has not been continued in this body of literature to
the degree that it was in the Qumran sectarian writings. In this body of literature, it
appears only in Bar 5:2, 9, where it is essentially a quotation of the "robe of
righteousness" passage in Isa 61:10. The closest that we come in this body of literature to
an OT covenantal usage of "righteousness" is the one passage in Jub. 22:15 that speaks of
God being "God for you and for your seed in truth and righteousness throughout all the
days of the earth," echoing the OT language of Zech 8:8 and Hos 2:19-20. This usage,
however, is not to be taken as support for Cremer's relational theory, but only for the
category of "correctness" that we already saw in the OT usage of "righteousness."
C. Apocrypha, OT Pseudepigrapha, and other Hellenistic Jewish Writings
Composed in Greek
Having examined the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha composed in a Semitic
language (usually Hebrew, possibly Aramaic), we turn now to the Apocrypha and OT
Pseudepigrapha composed in Greek. We will look first at two books of the Apocrypha
composed in Greek: the Wisdom of Solomon and Fourth Maccabees. Then we will
examine three OT Pseudepigrapha composed in Greek: the Testaments of the Twelve
Patriarchs, the Testament of Job, and the Paraleipomena of Jeremiah (also known as 4
Baruch). In this section, we will also examine the usage of "righteousness" in some of the
major writings or authors from Hellenistic Judaism, none of which can be classified as
Apocrypha or OT Pseudepigrapha. In this subcategory, we will examine three Jewish
writings composed in Greek: the Letter ofAristeas, Book 3 of the Sibylline Oracles, and
the Sentences of Pseudo-Phocylides. Although these three texts are pseudonymous, they
do not belong to the category of OT Pseudepigrapha proper, since none claims the
authority of a biblical figure. We will conclude this section with a survey of
"righteousness" in two Jewish authors who wrote exclusively in Greek: Philo and
Josephus. There is a fundamental similarity among all of these writings or authors, since
their provenance is clearly that of Greek-speaking Hellenistic Judaism.
As I argued in Chapter 2, "Methodological Considerations," this body of Jewish
literature is significant, since it will enable us to test whether the Hebraic/relational
theory of righteousness has resulted in a transference of linguistic meaning, with the
result that SiKaioouvri is a "Greek word with a Hebrew meaning" (or so it is alleged).
Wisdom of Solomon89
89
The Wisdom of Solomon has been dated as early as 220 BC and as late as AD 100. Appealing to the fact
that the author uses 35 words or usages not attested in extra-biblical Greek prior to the Augustan age, David
Winston argues that the work was likely composed after 30 BC. He further argues that the reign of Gaius
Caligula (AD 37^41) provides the most likely setting for the work, but he has not been able to convince
other scholars of this specific date. David Winston, The Wisdom of Solomon (AJ3 43; Garden City:
Doubleday, 1979), 20-25; idem, "Solomon, Wisdom of," ABD 6.122-23. In agreement with Winston's
terminus post quern and arguing for a 1st century AD date without necessarily specifying the Caligula
The Wisdom of Solomon uses Sucaioauvri in ordinary human judicial contexts.
For example, in the very first verse, human judges are exhorted, "Love righteousness,
you who judge the earth (dyaTtfjaaxE SiKaioauvnv, oi Kpivovxsc; xf)v yfjv)" (Wis 1:1
NETS). Later, in the context of Solomon's prayer for wisdom to fulfill his royal task, we
are informed that God created humans for three purposes: "to rule over the creatures that
were made by you and to manage the world in holiness and righteousness and to
pronounce judgment in uprightness of soul (Kai SiETm xov Koapov EV oaioxnxi Kai
SiKaioauvn Kai EV £u8uxn,xi yuxfjc; Kpiaiv Kptvn)" (Wis 9:2-3 NETS). Solomon then
concludes his prayer by affirming that he seeks wisdom so that "I will judge your [God's]
people justly (SiaKpivco xov X,a6v aou SiKaicoc)" (Wis 9:12 NETS).
If SiKaioauvn, can be used in reference to human judicial activity, it is not
suprising that the term is also applied to the judicial activity of God himself. This can be
seen in the passage in Wisdom 12, which contains a discussion of whether God's
destruction of the Canaanites was just:
But being righteous (SiKaioc), you manage all things righteously (SiKaicoc;),
considering it alien to your power to condemn (KaxaSucdoai) anyone who does
not deserve to be punished. For your strength is the beginning of righteousness
(SiKaioauvnc; dpxii,), and your sovereignty over all causes you to spare all (Wis
12:15-16 NETS).
The author of Wisdom argues that God's punishment of the Canaanites was just, because
they were guilty of sorcery, slaughter of children, and human sacrifice (Wis 12:3-6). No
one can come before God to plead as an advocate for the unrighteous Canaanites. "Who
will say, 'What have you done?' Or who will resist your judgment? ... For neither is
there any god besides you ... to whom you should prove that you have not judged
connection is D. A. deSilva, "Wisdom of Solomon," DNTB 1268-69; idem, Introducing the Apocrypha,
132-33.
unjustly (oxi OUK dSuccoc; EKpivac)" (Wis 12:12-13 NRSV). In this passage, God's
righteousness is his just punishment of those who deserve it, not saving righteousness or
covenant faithfulness.
Another passage that falls under the category of God's justice is the following:
"He will take his zeal as his whole armor and make creation his weapons for vengeance
on his enemies; he will put on righteousness as a breastplate and wear impartial justice as
a helmet (svSuoExai QcbpaKa SiKaioauvnv [S -uvnc] Kai 7i£pi9fia£xai KOpuOa Kpiaiv
dvu7roKpixov); he will take holiness as an invincible shield and will sharpen stern anger
for a sword, and creation will fight with him against those without sense" (Wis 5:17-20
NETS). There is a strong echo of the language of Isaiah 59:17 here. God puts on
"righteousness" and "impartial justice" as part of his "vengeance" and "anger" (vv 17,
19) in order to judge the lawless and evildoers (v 23) and to provide a warning to kings
and judges (6: Iff).
In addition to the judicial usages, the standard ethical usages of SiKaioouvri are
also found in the Wisdom of Solomon. Lady Wisdom teaches the four virtues of
Hellenistic moral philosophy: "And if anyone loves righteousness, the fruits of her labors
are virtues, for she teaches self-control and understanding, righteousness and courage
(Kai si Sucaioauvnv ayana xic, oi 7r6voi xauxric. Eiaiv dpExaf acocppoauvnv yap Kai
cppovnoiv EKSiSdaKEi, Sucaioauvnv Kai avSpsiav); nothing is more useful in life than
these for human beings" (Wis 8:7 NETS).
It is significant that the passages that use SiKaioauvn in an ethical sense also
indicate that ethical righteousness is the basis of eschatological life. For example, the
author exhorts his readers not to zealously seek death by the error of their life, or bring
destruction on themselves by their sinful deeds, "for righteousness is immortal
(SiKaioouvri yap dGdvaxoc; EOXIV)" (Wis 1:15 NETS). In another passage, the impious are
amazed at the salvation of the righteous (now "counted amongst divine sons" and "their
lot amongst the holy ones," v 5). So the ungodly lament how foolish they were and
repent, saying, "Surely we strayed from the way of truth, and the light of righteousness
did not shine on us (xo xfjc; SiKaioauvnc; cpcoc; OUK £7i£Xap\|/sv fipiv), and the sun did not
rise on us. We were entangled in the thorns of lawlessness and destruction" (Wis 5:6-7
NETS). A little further on in the same chapter, it is clearly affirmed that "the righteous
live forever (SiKaioi EK; xov aicova ^toaiv). and in the Lord is their reward ... Therefore
they will receive a glorious crown and a beautiful diadem from the hand of the Lord"
(Wis 5:15-16 NETS). Righteousness is again connected with immortality later in the
book, where it is stated that "to know you [God] is perfect righteousness, and to
recognize your might is the root of immortality (xo ydp £7iioxaa0ai as oAdicXripoc;
SiKaioauvn, Kai EiSsvai aou xo Kpdxoc; pitâ dOavaaiac;)" (Wis 15:1-3 NETS). The
eschatological linkage between righteousness and immortality is significant, for it shows
that SiKaioauvn, in the ethical sense elicits the divine recognition and approval of that
righteousness, so that it is "righteousness before God" and, as such brings, with it an
eschatological reward.
4 Maccabees90
90
4 Maccabees has been dated by scholars as early as the beginning of the first century AD and as late as
the time of the emperor Hadrian (d. AD 138). Following Elias Bickerman, a date firmly within the first
century is most likely, without necessarily adopting his view that the second temple was still standing.
Bickerman argued that the reference to Apollonius as "governor (axparriyoi;) of Syria, Phoenicia, and
Cilicia" (4 Mace 4:2) was a modernizing statement intended to reflect contemporary political arrangements
(cp. 2 Mace 3:5; 4:4 where Apollonius is identified as the "governor of Coele-Syria and Phoenicia"). Since
Syria, Phoenicia, and Cilicia formed a single Roman administrative unit only during the period AD 19-72
Fourth Maccabees was written in highly polished Greek that employs a plethora
of philosophical terms and rhetorical devices, and even shows the influence of Hellenistic
ideas.91 Whoever wrote this work clearly had an excellent Greek education and could in
that sense be characterized as a thoroughly Hellenized Jew, at least at the level of
acculturation. Nevertheless, 4 Maccabees is essentially a powerful polemic against
apostasy and a clarion call to loyalty to the Torah and the ancestral religion of the Jews,
even to the point of martyrdom.
The author's stated aim is to demonstrate that "pious reason is absolute master of
the passions (auxo5£07toxoc EOXIV XCOV 7ia0cov 6 £uo£|3fic ôyiopoc)" (4 Mace 1:1 NETS).
To make his case, he appeals to the story of the aged Jewish priest Eleazar, the famed
seven brothers, and their mother, who suffered martyrdom for their commitment to the
Jewish Law during the Hellenization crisis in the time of Antiochus Epiphanes (ca. 167
BC). This was the time when decrees were passed making the observance of the law a
crime punishable by death, and even mothers were thrown down headlong for
circumcising their infant sons (4:24-25). Indeed, the tyrant Antiochus "tried through
tortures to compel everyone in the nation to renounce Judaism" (4:26). That Eleazar, the
seven brothers, and their mother were able to endure excruciating tortures shows that the
passions can be conquered only through reason. "The holy man died nobly in his tortures;
(Acts 15:23, 41; Gal 1:21; Columella 2.10.18; Pliny. Nat. Hist. 18.122; Tacitus, Annals 2.58; and
Inscriptiones Graecae XIV, 746), the book was probably composed in that window. Elias Bickerman, "The
Date of Fourth Maccabees," in Studies in Jewish and Christian History (3 vols.; AGJU 9; Leiden: Brill,
1976-86), 1.275-81. See also the refinement of Bickerman's terminus ad quern in David A. deSilva, 4
Maccabees (Guides to Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1998), 14-18;
idem, 4 Maccabees: Introduction and Commentary on the Greek Text in Codex Sinaiticus (Septuagint
Commentary Series; Leiden: Brill, 2006), xiv-xvii. DeSilva's refinements are in light of the criticisms of
Bickerman by Jan Willem van Henten, "Datierung und Herkunft des Vierten Makkabaerbuches," in
Tradition and Re-interpretation in Jewish and Early Christian Literature: Essays in Honour oj'Jurgen C.
H. Lebram (Studia post-Biblica 36; ed. J. W. van Henten, et al; Leiden: Brill, 1986), 136-49.
91
deSilva, Introducing the Apocrypha, 352-79.
he stood firm even in tortures unto death, by virtue of reason, in defense of the law. By
common acknowledgement, then, pious reason is master of the passions" (6:30-31
NETS). If reason can overcome torture, then it can overcome passions and pleasures as
well (6:35).
Although the author is totally opposed to Jewish assimilation to Hellenism, he
unhesitatingly appropriates the categories of Hellenistic moral philosophy to make his
case, and packages the whole argument in a highly rhetorical Greek style. But in spite of
his interpretation of the Law in terms of Hellenistic moral philosophy, the author
remained devoutly committed to "the ancestral law (6 7idxpioc vopoc)" (4:23; 5:33;
16:16; cp. 8:7; 9:1, 29: 18:5).92 This he interpreted literally as including the dietary
restrictions (1:34; 4:26; 5:2-3, 14, 25-27; etc.), the cancelation of debts every seventh
year (2:8), the law of gleaning (2:9), and the prohibition against cutting down the
cultivated trees of Israel's enemies (2:14), just to name a few Mosaic commandments
cited in this work. This demonstrates that the author's interpretation of the Law in light of
Hellenistic moral philosophy involved no relaxation of the literal requirements of the
Law.93
The word SiKaioouvri occurs five times in 4 Maccabees, and all five occurrences
are in the context of the author's conviction that the moral teaching of the Mosaic Law
and Hellenistic moral philosophy are one and the same. The first two occurrences come
in the opening paragraph, where the author is explaining his thesis. He argues thus:
92
"His chief aim is to show that the highest Greek virtues were subsumed under loyalty and devotion to the
Law of Moses ... Despite his orientation to Greek philosophy, he remains in every respect absolutely
faithful to the Law of Moses ... The work stands as a unique memorial to an unknown loyalist Jew of the
Diaspora, who was open to Greek philosophy and learning without for a moment compromising his Jewish
faith." Hugh Anderson, "Maccabees. Books of: Fourth Maccabees," ABD 4.452-54.
93
Cp. Philo's critique of those who took the allegorical method too far, to the point of disregarding literal
observance of the Law (Migr. 89-93).
If, then, it is apparent that reason prevails over the passions hindering self-
control, namely, gluttony and lust, then it is also plainly apparent that it holds
sway over the passions impeding justice (xcov xfjc; 5ucaioauvr|c; Ep7io5ioxiKcov
raxOcov KupiEUEtv), such as malice, and over the passions impeding courage,
namely, anger, fear and pain ... 6 For reason does not overcome its own passions
but those opposed to justice, courage and self-control (ou ydp xcov auxou 7ia9cov 6
Xoyiapoc Kpaxa, d?tXd xcov xfjc; Sucaioauvric; Kai dvSpsiac; Kai acotppoauvue
Evavxicov), and it overcomes these not so that it destroys them but so that one does
not give way to them (4 Mace 1:3-6 NETS).94
It is clear that SiKaioouvri here is one of the four cardinal virtues of Hellenistic moral
philosophy, and the passions are being classified according to the virtues that they
impede. Like the Hellenistic moralists, he defines reason as "the mind preferring, with
sound judgment, the life of wisdom" (1:15 NETS). But when asked what wisdom is, he
answers straightforwardly that "it is ... the training of the Law (auxr) ... Eoxiv fi xou
vopou TiaiSEia), by means of which we learn divine matters reverently and human matters
advantageously" (1:17).95 This then leads to the next verse, where the author states that
the wisdom which comes from the training of the Law is comprehended in the four
cardinal virtues: "Now the kinds of wisdom are prudence (cppovnoic;), justice
(SiKaioouvri), courage (dvSpeia), and self-control (ococppoouvr|)" (1:18 NETS).
How does the Law do this? Our author gives several illustrations. In view of our
craving for the pleasure of eating, the Law prohibits all sorts of foods, thus causing our
appetites to be restrained and checked by reason (1:33-35). In view of the passion of
sexual lust, the Law commands, "You shall not covet your neighbor's wife," and so
reason is enabled to overcome sexual passion "since the law has told us not to covet"
9
A similar usage of 5iKouocn3vr| is found in 2:6, which also makes reference to "the passions that hinder
justice" (XCL)V KCOÛTIKCOV xf\q Succuoauvn,!; TiaOcov), and immediate reference is made to gluttony,
drunkenness, and love of money (2:7-8).
95
ET mine. Cp. "it [the Law] trains us injustice (5iKatocn>vnv 7tat8enet)" (5:24 NETS).
(2:1-6).96 In view of our love of money, the Law commands us to lend without interest, to
cancel all debts every seventh year, and to leave some of the harvest for poor gleaners
(2:8-9). And so on. Thus, as we live in conformity with the Law, the Law instructs our
reason and places a check upon our sinful passions. The result, then, is that we become
righteous, SiKaioc;, by means of the Law.
This brings us to the final occurrence of SiKaioauvn in 4 Maccabees, where this
thought is stated plainly. The context is Eleazar's speech before the tyrant Antiochus,
who was trying to force him to eat pork and threatening to torture him:
But it [the Law] teaches us self-control so that we overcome all pleasures and
desires, and it also exercises us in courage so that we endure all pain willingly;
it trains us in justice so that in all our dealings we act impartially,97 and it teaches
us piety so that we worship the only living God in a way that befits his greatness
(NETS).
acocppoouvnv XE ydp fipac; EKSiSdoKEi COOXE 7taacov xcbv fjSovcov Kai ETriGupicov
Kpaxsiv Kai dvSpsiav £c;aaK£i COOXE 7idvxa TTOVOV EKOUOICOC; ujropEVEiv Kai
SiKaioauvnv 7iaiS£U£i COOXE Sid 7idvxcov xcov f|9cov ioovopEiv Kai £ua£[3siav
EKSiSdoKEi coaxs povov xov ovxa Osov OEPEIV p£yaXo7tp£7icoc;.
In other words, God's Law trains (7rai5£U£i) us in self-control, courage, justice, and piety.
The author of 4 Maccabees, then, adopts the central tenets and framework of
Hellenistic moral philosophy, especially the central concern for the cardinal virtues and
for reason as that which can control the passions that hinder the exercise of the virtues.
However, our author argues that the only way reason can be truly equipped to control the
96
Whereas the author of 4 Maccabees thinks the Law's prohibition of coveting actually enables reason to
overcome this sinful desire, Paul thinks it only stirs up the sinful passions: "I would not have known what it
is to covet if the law had not said, 'You shall not covet.' But sin, seizing an opportunity tlirough the
commandment, produced in me all kinds of covetousness" (Rom 7:7-8 ESV).
97
NETS has a note indicating that roore Sta 7tdvrcov xcov f)0cbv ioovoustv could alternatively be translated
"so that we hold in balance all our inclinations." DeSilva translates: "so that we render what is due in all
our interactions." 4 Maccabees: Introduction and Commentary on the Greek Text in Codex Sinaiticus, 17.
passions is by means of the moral training of a "law-observant life" (vopipoc; pioc; - 5:36;
7:15), "conducting one's life by the law" (xcp vopcp 7ioXix8u6p£voc; - 2:8; 4:23; 5:16).98
In addition to SiKaioauvn, the related word 8ucr| is used even more frequently in 4
Maccabees. The phrase, "the divine justice" (f\ Osia Sucr|), is employed around nine times
in this book, and clearly in the sense of God's retributive justice in punishing evil. In
keeping with the author's view that divine judgment comes both on earth in this life and
spiritually after death,99 the term is used in both senses. It refers to divine judgment in
this life in his narrative of the Hellenization crisis, where the author describes how the
high priesthood was removed from Onias and handed over to Jason (because of bribery),
and how Jason then took the opportunity to change the Jewish way of life by an enforced
Hellenization "in complete transgression of the law" (4:19), including the erection of a
Greek gymnasium on the citadel of Jerusalem. "The divine justice (fj 9£ia 5ucr|),
provoked by these acts, caused Antiochus himself to wage war against them" (4:21
NETS). But in most of the other occurrences, "divine justice" has to do with post-mortem
judgment - sometimes in a neutral sense in which the future judgment is in view (8:14,
22), but most frequently in a clearly punitive sense, having to do with the future
"everlasting torture by fire imposed by divine justice" incurred by the Greek tyrant for his
crimes (9:9, cp. 9:32; 11:3; 12:12), and sometimes it refers to both temporal and
eschatological judgment (18:22).
Fourth Maccabees is highly significant for our interpretation of Paul's doctrine of
justification because it demonstrates that the AIK-group is firmly rooted in the same
98
DeSilva, Introducing the Apocrypha, 360.
99
"The tyrant Antiochus was punished on earth, and now that he has died, he continues to undergo
chastisement... For these deeds divine justice has pursued and will pursue the accursed tyrant" (4 Mace
18:5, 22 NETS).
linguistic world as the Old Testament, with a focus on both divine justice and human
righteousness. Furthermore, it shows that SiKaioouvri is a status of being SiKaioc achieved
by means of keeping the Law. This is the view that Paul will attack directly with the anti-
nomistic polemic of his Rechtfertigungslehre. As we will see, Sucaioauvn BEOU for Paul is
the status of righteousness that comes from God apart from the Law; it is the
righteousness of faith in opposition to the righteousness of the Law. It may well be that
the Jewish doctrine of the righteousness that comes from the Law that is the foil of the
Pauline teaching finds its most articulate and sustained expression in 4 Maccabees.
Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs
R. H. Charles appealed to the alleged Hebraisms in the Greek text to argue that
the T. 12 Patr. are a translation from a Hebrew original.101 However, he has not been
followed by the majority of scholars.102 The so-called Hebraisms can be explained in the
same way that they can be explained in the New Testament and other Jewish literature
composed in Greek, namely, as Septuagintisms.103 The substance of the ethical
exhortations in the T. 12 Patr., though clothed in Jewish garb, is clearly rooted in
Hellenistic moral philosophy, as evidenced by the frequent use of abstract nouns for
virtue or vice, e.g., dyaOoTioiia, dyaGoauvn,, dya96xr|c, dA.aôv£ia, 5iKai07tpayia,
The prophecy of a priestly messiah in T. Levi 18:1-14 suggests a time of composition during the
Hasmonean period (167 BC-63 BC) when these Jewish rulers served as both priests and kings. H. C. Kee,
"Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs," DNTB 1201; idem, OTP 1.777-78.
R. H. Charles, The Greek Versions of the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (Hildesheim: Georg
Olms, 1960; reprinted from Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1908), xxiii-xlii.
102
"Charles did not find many followers for his extremely improbable theory of a double translation from
the Hebrew." H. W. Hollander and M. de Jonge, 772e Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs: A Commentary
(SVTP 8; Leiden: Brill, 1985), 27.
101
"An author who decided to compose a scries of testaments of the sons of Jacob for an audience (whether
Jewish or Christian) which knew them through the Greek Bible, may well have chosen a type of Greek
which deliberately imitated that of the LXX." Hollander and de Jonge, Commentary, 28.
£uo£(3£ia, £ua7t?uxyxvia, KaK07ioua, auvEiSnaic, acocppoouvn,, cpilapyupia, and cpu\ri5ovia.
Most of these words are not used in those portions of the LXX that are translations from a
Hebrew Vorlage, and are much more frequent in the Apocryphal books of the LXX that
were composed in Greek.104
The word SiKaioouvri occurs 14 times in the T. 12 Patr., most commonly with an
ethical meaning, which is to be expected in view of the ethical nature of the work. Each
testament has a traditional title that summarizes the main point of that patriarch's moral
exhortation, typically based on that patriarch's own moral failure or for some virtue
associated with him as drawn from the accounts in Genesis. The Testament of Reuben
purports to be the last words of a wiser Reuben warning his sons against the sin of
7iopv£ia, with his own sin of defiling his father's bed (Gen 35:22) as the negative
example to be avoided. Thus the subtitle is "concerning thoughts," that is, lustful
thoughts of sexual immorality.105 The Testament of Simeon is subtitled JTEpi cpOovou106
("concerning envy"), since he was so envious of Joseph that he instigated the plot to kill
him.107 The Testament of Joseph is given one of the four cardinal virtues of Hellenistic
moral philosophy as its subtitle: 7ispi acocppoouvr|c ("concerning self-control"). The
Testament of Asher is subtitled 7t£pi Suo 7ipoaco7rcov KaKiac; Kai dpsxfjc; ("concerning the
Howard Clark Kee, "The Ethical Dimensions of the Testaments of the XII as a Clue to Provenance,"
NTS 24 (1977-78): 259-70.
101
Note the close connection between the two nouns (ewota and Jtopvsta) in this passage: "For ye hear
regarding Joseph how he guarded himself from a woman, and purged his thoughts from all fornication (Kai
xaq ewoiac EKaOaptcsv dno 7taar)<; 7topv£ta<;), and found favour in the sight of God and men ... For if
fornication overcomes not your mind (eav yap uf) Kanaxucm f| 7topvsia TT|V swotav), neither can Beliar
overcome you" (T Reu. 4:8, 11). ET: R. H. Charles, The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (Translations
of Early Documents, Series 1: Palestinian Jewish Texts [Pre-Rabbinic]; London: SPCK, 1925), 28.
106
While the LXX uses the word Cnloco (Gen 37:11) rather than cpOovog, both Philo (Ios 5, 17) and
Josephus (Ant 2.10) use cp06voc; in their retelling of the story.
107
The biblical account indicates that all the brothers of Joseph hated him (Gen 37:4, 5,8, 11, 18, 20, 26).
However, because Simeon was singled out by Joseph later on and bound before his brothers' eyes while
they set out for home (Gen 42:24), the inference was made that Simeon was the ringleader and therefore
more culpable. Cp. Philo, Ios. 175-77; for further references to this Jewish interpretive tradition, including
the Targums, see Hollander and de Jonge, Commentary, 110.
Chapter 5: Righteousness in Jewish LiteraUire - 342
two faces of vice and virtue"), and opens with an exposition of the doctrine of the two
spirits (cp. IQS III, 13-IV, 26), the spirit of truth and the spirit of deceit, and the way in
which the human will inclines toward the one or the other:
God has given two ways to the sons of men and two dispositions and two kinds of
action and two modes of living and two ends. Therefore, all things are by twos,
one over against the other. (There are) two ways, of good and evil, and with them
there are the two dispositions in our breasts distinguishing between them. Thus, if
the soul has pleasure in the good, every action of it is in righteousness (7idaa
7tpac;ic; auxfjc; EOXIV EV SiKaioauvn), and if he sins, he repents immediately. For
having his thoughts set on righteous things (SiKaia) and casting away wickedness,
he immediately overthrows the evil and uproots the sin. But if it (the soul) turns
the disposition to evil, every action of it is in wickedness, and driving away the
god, and ruled by Beliar he takes hold of the evil (T Ash. 1:3-8).
It is critical to observe that the terms Sucaioauvri and SiKaia are used with strongly ethical
denotations, that is, referring to upright actions that are in conformity with God's moral
law. This straightforward moralistic thrust is consistent with the usage of SiKaioauvn
throughout the T. 12 Patr., and one is hard pressed to find any specialized covenantal,
relational, salvific, or apocalyptic overtones here.
The primary usage of SiKaioauvn in the T. 12 Patr. is ethical. However, there are
three passages that may break the mold in that they speak of "the righteousness of God"
in some way (although one of these we will question on text-critical grounds).
The first of these is found in the Testament of Judah, where we find a meditation
on the messianic expectations associated with the Shiloh prophecy (Gen 49:10). Judah is
represented as reminding his sons before he died that the Lord swore an oath to him that
the kingship would never cease from his seed. However, there will be a period of time
when the kingship will be interrupted by Gentile rule, but it will be restored again at the
coming of the offspring of Judah, the messiah. Judah says, "But the Lord will bring upon
ET: Hollander and de Jonge, Commentary. 341-42.

them divisions one against the other, and there will be continuous wars in Israel, and
among men of other nations my kingship (f) (3aai^sia pou) will be brought to an end,
until the salvation of Israel comes (ECOC xou EXOEIV XO acoxfjpiov 'Iapaf|A,), until the
appearing of the God of righteousness (ECOC Ttapouaiac xou OEOU xfjc; SiKaioauvnc;), to
give Jacob rest in peace, and all the Gentiles" (T Jud. 22:1-2).i09 The meaning of the
phrase, "the appearing of the God of righteousness," is not immediately clear, but it could
be taken in a salvific sense, given the earlier reference to the coming of "the salvation of
Israel." If so, it would best be taken in an OT sense of a vindication that involves
judgment on the oppressors of Israel.
The second instance of "the righteousness of God" is in the Testament ofZebulon,
where the prophecy of Mai 3:20 (4:2) is quoted. The division into the northern and
southern kingdoms is predicted, followed by the exile and Israel's repentance in the land
of exile. "And after these things there will arise to you the Lord himself, the light of
righteousness, with healing and compassion in his wings (Kai p£xa xauxa dvax£AA.£i upfv
auxoc 6 Kupioc, cpcoc;110 SiKaioauvnc., Kai iaaic Kai £ua7iA.ayxvia STXI xaic 7rx£pu£,iv auxou).
He will redeem all the captivity of the sons of men from Beliar (auxoc Xuxpcbasxai jiaaav
aixpaX.coaiav uicov dv0pco7rcov EK XOU BsXidp), and every spirit of deceit will be trodden
down" (T. Zeb. 9:8).'" The meaning of "righteousness" in T. Zeb. 9:8 ultimately reduces
to the question of its meaning in the OT passage being quoted. There can be little doubt
that God is referred to under the epithet "the light of righteousness," not because of God's
faithfulness to his promises to Israel, but because of the vindication that he brings to his
109
ET: Hollander and de Jonge, Commentary, 221.
110
The LXX of Mai 3:20 (4:2) has "sun of righteousness" (fjlioc; ouaxiocnvric;), a literal translation of the
Hebrew (shemesh tsedaqah). Possibly this was changed in T. Zeb. 9:8 to "light of righteousness" in order to
avoid the pagan associations with solar deities in Egyptian, Mesopotamian, and Persian religions.
111
ET: Hollander and de Jonge, Commentary, 271.
people in their exile. Just as the sun rises in the east and brings joy to the world, so the
Lord himself will rise upon Israel, bringing deliverance and restoration after the exile.
From a New Testament, Christological point of view, the sun/light of righteousness is
none other than the Messiah himself, who comes to reverse the exile of condemnation
and alienation from God by providing the eschatological salvation of which Israel's post-
exilic restoration was but a type and shadow. This does not mean that righteousness
means salvation, but that the salvation ("he will liberate every captive of the sons of men
from Beliar") is brought about in a righteous manner through the judicial activity of God
resulting in vindication and justification.
This interpretation is confirmed by the NETS translation of the LXX text of Mai
4:2 (3:20) that is quoted here: "And for you who fear my name a sun of justice shall rise,
and healing is in its wings" (Kai dvaxEÊi upfv xolq cpo[3oup£voic xo ovopd pou fjXioc
StKaioauvqc; Kai iaaic; EV xaic; 7rx£puc;iv auxou). Additionally, it is possible that Malachi's
epithet for God, "the sun of justice," shows the influence of Persian religion where Ahura
Mazda, the primal god of justice, is pictured as a winged solar disc." 2
These two passages are rare instances in Jewish literature composed in Greek in
which the OT iustitia salutifera usage is echoed.
The third (alleged) "righteousness of God" passage in the T. 12 Patr. is one of the
Jewish texts heavily relied on by Oepke, Kasemann, and Stuhlmacher for their
apocalyptic interpretation of Gerechtigkeit Gottes as a technical term for God's saving
power. It is a passage in the Testament of Dan (subtitled 7t£pi Gupou Kai \|/EU5OUC;,
"concerning anger and lying"), and as quoted by these scholars it reads: "Depart,
therefore, from all unrighteousness, and cleave unto the righteousness of God (dTioaxnxE
112
Ralph L. Smith, Micah-Malachi (WBC 32; Waco: Word Books, 1984), 339.
Chapter 5. Righteousness in Jewish Literature 345
ouv d7io 7r.dar|c dSuciac Kai KO?iXfj0rjX£ xfj SiKaioauvn, xou OEOU), and your race will be
lis
saved for ever." But several manuscripts insert xou vopou, which results in a very
different meaning. The authoritative critical edition, edited by M. de Jonge, has: "Depart,
therefore, from all unrighteousness, and cleave to the righteousness of the law of the Lord
(Kai KoAA,n,6nx£ xfj SiKaioauvn xou vopou Kupiou), and my race will be saved for ever"
(T. Dan 6:10).114 Of course, to make this text relevant for his dissertation, Stuhlmacher
claimed that the addition of xou vopou was "obviously a late, reinterpreting
correction."115 But he was relying on the textual analysis of R. H. Charles, whose initial
reconstruction of the transmission history of the text has been completely revised by M.
de Jonge.116
In addition, the strong ethical focus of the immediate context would suggest that
the reading with xou vopou is correct. Dan is here pictured as exhorting his children to be
on guard against Satan (6:1), to keep themselves from every evil work (6:8), to cast aside
anger and lies (6:8). Furthermore, the Law of God (vopoc; ©sou) is mentioned in the
immediately preceding verse, where Dan exhorts his children to pass the things he is
saying on to the next generation, "that the Saviour [variant reading: 'father'] of the
Gentiles may receive you; for he is true and longsuffering, meek and lowly, and teaching
113
ET: R. H. Charles, The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, 76.
114
The Greek text is that edited by M. de Jonge, The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs: A Critical
Edition of the Greek Text (PVTG 1,2; Leiden: Brill, 1978), 110-11. ET: Hollander and de Jonge,
Commentary, 290.
1
Peter Stuhlmacher, Gerechtigkeit Gottes bei Paulus, 171 nl. Translation mine.
116
See de Jonge's introduction, xxxiii-xli, for a sketch of his view of the transmission history of the text
and how it differs from that of Charles, on whom Stuhlmacher relied. According to de Jonge's
reconstruction, the manuscripts fall into two families, I and II, with family I being regarded by him as
superior (xxxv). The manuscripts that omit xou vopou belong to family II. The stemma produced by
Charles led him to the opposite relative weighting of the manuscripts and therefore to the decision in his
critical edition to treat xou vopou as secondary.
the law of God through his works (EOXI ydp dAr|9f)c Kai paKpdOupoc, 7r.paoc Kai xa7i£iv6c;,
Kai EKSiSdoKcov Sid xcov gpycov vopov OEOU)" (T. Dan 6:9).117
Another consideration that supports the ethical interpretation is the use of the verb
KoAAdopai (always with the dative) elsewhere in the T. 12 Patr. It is used on four other
occasions, and in each instance it has an ethical meaning.

1 1X
I know, my children, that in the last times your sons will forsake simplicity
(KaxaX£i\|/ouoiv ... xfrv a7tX6xnxa) and will cleave to insatiable desire
(KoAAr|9fiaovxai xfj dTiXnaxia) and leaving guilelessness they will draw near to
wickedness and forsaking the commandments of the Lord (KaxaXmovxEc; xac;
EvxoXdc; Kupiou) they will cleave to Beliar (KoM,r|9fiaovxai xco BEîap) (T. Iss.
6:1).119
And I say these things to you from experience, my children, that you may flee
[variant: 'drive out'] hatred and cleave to the love of the Lord (KoAA.n,9fjx£ xfj
dyd7rn xou Kupiou). Righteousness casts out hatred (fi SiKaioouvri EKpdAAEi xo
piaoc;), humility destroys hatred. For he who is righteous (6 SiKaioc) and humble
is ashamed to do what is wrong (T. Gad 5:2-3).120
Therefore, you, my children, do not become people with two faces, one of
goodness and one of wickedness, like them.121 But cleave to goodness only (aXXh.
xx\ dyaOoxuxi povn KoA.A.f|9nx£), for God rests upon it and men desire it. Flee away
from wickedness destroying the devil [variant: 'the (evil) inclination'] with your
good actions (T. Ash. 3:l-2).122
ET: Hollander and de Jonge, Commentary, 290. Note, however, that Charles considers the quoted
portion above to be a later Christian interpolation. R. H. Charles, The Greek Versions of the Testaments of
the Twelve Patriarchs, xlix, 142.
118
The subtitle of T. Iss. is 7tepi otTrXoinxoc; ("concerning singleness"). A7tA.6xn,i; is a virtue that captures the
singleness of purpose of the godly, that is, their moral integrity and lack of double-mindedness in obeying
the commandments of the Lord. Hollander and de Jonge, Commentary, 233-34; Joseph Amstutz,
AnAOTlIZ: Eine begriffsgeschichtliche Studie zum jiidisch-christlichen Griechisch (Theophaneia 19;
Bonn: Hanstein, 1968). Howard Clark Kee points out that the meaning of ankxnnq, in the T. 12 Patr. must
be understood against the backdrop of the doctrine of the two spirits, the spirit of truth and the spirit of
deceit, with the will that inclines toward one or the other (T Ash. 1:3-9; T Jud. 20:1-2). The godly are
characterized by singleness, because their lives are characterized by whole-hearted, single-minded devotion
to the will of God. "The summum bonum of the faithful in Test XII is anX6xr\q, according to which the
divisive effects of the spirit of evil are overcome." Howard Clark Kec, "The Ethical Dimensions of the
Testaments of the XII as a Clue to Provenance," NTS 24 (1977-78): 264-66.
119
ET: Hollander and de Jonge, Commentary. 248.
120
ET: Hollander and de Jonge, Commentary, 325, 328.
121
"Like them," viz., like those who, while giving alms to the poor, steal and defraud; who, while
abstaining from certain foods, commit adultery; and who, while fasting, commit evil deeds (T. Ash. 2:5-10).
"Such men are like swine, hares, for they arc half clean, but in reality they are unclean" (v 9).
122
ET: Hollander and de Jonge, Commentary, 348-49.
In all four occurrences of the verb KoAXdopai (+ dative) in the T. 12 Patr., it has
an ethical connotation. In all four cases, there is a contrast between ethical righteousness
and ethical wickedness. In one particularly relevant example, cleaving to Beliar is the
same as forsaking the commandments of the Lord (T. Iss. 6:1), which supports the textual
reading "cleave to the righteousness of the law of the Lord" in T. Dan 6:10.123 In another
passage, cleaving to the love of God is connected with (ethical) "righteousness" as that
which drives out the sin of anger (T. Gad 5:2-3). Also worthy of note is the fact that in
two of the above parallel passages, the same imperative form (KoAAfjOnxE) is used as in T.
Dan 6:10.
Finally, T. Dan 6:10 itself provides a clue when the introductory imperative,
"forsake all [ethical] unrighteousness," is immediately restated in positive terms, "and
cling to the [ethical] righteousness of the Law of God." Whenever SiKaioouvri is set in
contrast to its standard antonym dSiKia, the ethical sense of Sucaioauvri is invariably in
view, which is corroborated by the highly ethical, even moralistic, thrust of the T. 12
Patr. as a whole. Indeed, this final, clinching argument suggests that even if xou vopou
were omitted, following the older text-critical judgment of Charles rather than de Jonge,
we would still be compelled to read the statement, "cleave to the righteousness of God,"
in an ethical sense, along the same lines as "cleave to the love of God," i.e., remain
committed to conduct characterized by love for God (objective genitive) and commitment
to his moral standards (T. Gad 5:2). The ethical parenesis of the context does not support
Stuhlmacher's claim that T. Dan 6:10 is an exhortation to "cleave" to the apocalyptic
demonstration of God's saving power.
123
A similar contrast between the law and Beliar is found in T. Levi 19:1: "And now, my children, you
have heard everything. Choose for yourselves light or darkness, the Law of the Lord or the works of
Beliar." ET: H. C. Kee, OTP 1.795.
In conclusion, Stuhlmacher's use of J. Dan 6:10 as evidence that "the
righteousness of God" was a technical term in apocalyptic Judaism referring to God's
saving power is shown to be invalidated by both textual criticism and the context of the
Testament of Dan and the T. 12 Patr. as a whole.
Before leaving the T. 12 Patr., there is one instance of "righteousness before
God" that is relevant to the Pauline usage. "For persons who are good, who are single-
minded - even though they are considered by the two-faced to be sinners - are righteous
before God (oi ydp dyaOoi avSpsc; Kai povo7ipoaco7toi, Kdv vopiaOcoai 7iapa xcov
SiTtpoacoTicov dpapxdvEiv, Sucaioi EIOI Jiapd xcp ©ECO)" (T. Asher 4:1).1- There is a
contrast in the two prepositional phrases introduced by 7rapd - "before the two-faced"
versus "before God." In the eyes of the two-faced, good men can appear to be sinners
because of their imperfections. But in the eyes of God, they are considered righteous,
because although they do commit sins on occasion, they are "good as a whole" (a phrase
used four times in various forms in T. Asher 4:2-5).
Testament of Job
In contrast to Job's ignorance of the real reasons for his suffering in the biblical
account, at the very outset of the Testament of Job an angel tells Job of all the calamities
that Satan is going to bring upon him. The angel exhorts him to be like a boxer in the
games126 who endures to win the victor's wreath:
m
E T : H . C. Kee, OTP 1.817.
123
The Testament of Job is difficult to date, but was probably written during the 1st century BC or AD. and
possibly as late as the 2nd century AD. R. P. Spittler, "Testament of Job," OTP 1.833; idem, "Job,
Testament of," ABD 3.870.
126
The phrase coc; aO^nxfiq 7roKxsi3cov is hard to translate. R. Thomhill has "like a boxer in the games" in the
main text, with the note, "Lit. Tike an athlete boxing.'" H. F. D. Sparks, ed., The Apocryphal Old
Testament (Oxford: Clarendon, 1984), 623.
It will be repaid to you doubly (dTroSoOfjoExai ooi 5uiA,daiov), so you may know
that the Lord is impartial (d;tpoaco7r.6A.r|7rxoc;) - rendering good things to each one
who obeys (d7io5i8ouc; EKdoxcp xcp UTUXKOUOVXI dya9d). And you shall be raised up
in the resurrection. For you will be like an athlete boxing (coc d9A,r|xf|c JCUKXEUCOV),
both enduring pains and winning the crown. Then will you know that the Lord is
just, true, and strong (SiKaioc; Kai dA,n9iv6c Kai ia%upoc 6 Kupioc), giving strength
to his elect ones (Test. Job 4.7-11).127
The distributive justice of God is strongly affirmed in the immediate context by the use of
the verb d7ioSi8copi ("it will be repaid to you doubly" and "rendering good things to each
one who obeys"), together with the affirmation of God's impartiality in rewarding the
obedient.128 This statement is then followed by the conclusion that, once the reward of the
righteous has been given, "Then you will know that the Lord is SiKaioc, true, and strong."
At the last day, God is proved to be "just, true, and strong" because he rewards those
who, like Job, are obedient to God in spite of great testing. Interestingly, the fact that God
is "true" (dlnOivoc or dXr\Qr)q) ~ is connected, both here and later (43:13-14), not with
the notion of God's covenant faithfulness in spite of human sin, but with the notion of
God's integrity and faithfulness in judging and distributing rewards, both temporal
(double restoration of goods) and eschatological (being raised in the resurrection).131
i:
ET: R. P. Spittler in OTP 1.841, only Spittlcr's "like a sparring athlete" has been replaced with
ThornhiH's "like an athlete boxing" (see previous note). Greek text from S. P. Brock, Testamentum lobi
(PVTG 2; Leiden: Brill. 1967).
'"s The use of the verb "to repay" with reference to the divine iustitia distributiva, together with the
affirmation that God is an impartial judge, immediately reminds one of Rom 2:6-11: og djtoStboei EK&OTCO
Kaxct xa epya auxou ... oil ydp eaxtv jrpoo(07roA,n,p\|/ia 7tapa xa> Oeco.
129
The SV text has d?tr|6r|c for dAnOtvoc, at 4.11. See The Testament of Job According to the SV Text (Texts
and Translations 5, Pseudepigrapha Series 4; ed. Robert A. Kraft with Harold Attridge, Russell Spittler, and
Janet Timbie; Missoula: Society of Biblical Literature and Scholars' Press, 1974), 26.
130
"Righteous is the Lord (diKatoc; eaxtv Kuptoq), true are his judgments (dAnOwd auxou xd Kpipaxa). With
him there is no favoritism (7tpoaco7io?ai\|/ta). He will judge us all together (KptveT h,u.ac; 6po0upa86v).
Behold the Lord has come! Behold his holy ones are prepared, while crowns lead the way with praises"
(Test Job 43:13-14). ET: R. P. Spittler in OTP 1.862.
1,1
Cp. Rev 15:3; 16:7; 19:2 ("True and righteous [Steam Kai a^nOivai] are your ways/judgments"), where
d^nOtvoq is paired with Steato; in a penal/judicial context.
J
Paraleipomena of Jeremiah (= 4 Baruch)
The decision to classify this text as one that was composed in Greek was a
difficult one, since scholars are split on this issue.1" There is one passage in this
pseudepigraphical work where SiKaioc; is used that is significant for my thesis. The
setting of the book is that Jeremiah has gone with the exiles into Babylon, while Baruch
remains in Jerusalem. After Baruch sends a letter to Jeremiah by an eagle, Jeremiah
responds with a letter that runs as follows:
My beloved son, do not be negligent in your prayers, beseeching God on our

behalf, that he might direct our way until we come out of the jurisdiction of this
lawless king. For you have been found righteous before God (SiKaioc; ydp £up£9nc;
This pseudepigraphical Jewish text was probably written in the 2n century AD. It refers to "the vineyard
of Agrippa" (3:14) and "the farm of Agrippa" (3:21; 5:22), which would place the work after AD 41. The
destruction of Herod's temple is referred to typologically under the figure of the destruction of the first
temple by the Babylonians. In addition, a key aspect of the text is the 66-ycar sleep of Abimelech, so
adding 66 years to AD 70 brings us to AD 136. The text expresses hope for the restoration of the temple,
but after the Bar Kokhba revolt (AD 132-35). Judaism turned against such nationalistic hopes, thus
indicating that the book was probably written before that shift in Jewish thought. Although of Jewish
provenance, later Christian interpolations can be discerned throughout the text. S. E. Robinson, "4 Baruch,"
OTP 2.414; idem, "Baruch, Book of 4," ABD 1.622.
C. F. A. Dillmann, R. H. Charles and Jens Herzer posit that the original language was Greek, and
Gerhard Delling, A.-M. Denis, Ann-Elizabeth Purintun, and S. E. Robinson argue for a Semitic original.
The arguments for a Semitic original, as usual, rest on the alleged Hebraisms in the Greek text, e.g., verbs
with cognate objects (e.g., nu£;axo £u%r|v, 9:3; /i0ot<; At0o|3o^f|acopev, 9:22). the use of partitive SK to mean
"some o f (e.g., e7tdpa<; £K xcov CUKCOV = "taking some of the figs," 5:35; cp. 7.29), and the Hebraic
redundant pronoun (e.g., op 7iaaa Kpiaic, [or KxiaicJ KSKpuTtxai ev auxco = "in whom all judgment [or
creation] was hidden in him," 9.6). But all of these so-called Hebraisms are found in Jewish texts composed
in Greek, including the NT, and are better regarded as Septuagintisms. The more weighty argument is the
odd passage where Jeremiah is relating to Baruch that he went out of the city and found some Jewish
people "hung up [i.e., being executed by bodily suspension] by King Nebuchadnezzar, weeping and crying,
'Have mercy on us, God Zar!' (6 Qebc, Zap)" (7.25). The argument is that the Greek translator, not knowing
what the Hebrew word Zar meant, and perhaps thinking it was a proper name, decided to transliterate it
instead. However, as Jens Herzer has shown, our author is probably following the lead of the LXX which
renders zar with aAXoxptoc; on several occasions (Deut 32:16; Ps 43:21; 80:10; Jer 2:25; 3:13; 37:8) in
reference to foreign gods or foreign rulers, and sometimes both (cf. 77J0r4.54). It is likely, then, that 6
0e6g Zap simply means "foreign god," as the author himself goes on to explain: after Jeremiah saw this
spectacle of his own countrymen being crucified, he wept "not only because they were hung up but because
they were calling on a foreign god (eTteKaXouvxo 0e6v dAAoxpiov)" (7.26). Cp. LXX Jer 16:13: "And I will
hurl you from this land into a land that you and your fathers have not known, and there you shall be slaves
to other gods (Soulsuaexe eKet BeoTg exspotq) who will show you no mercy" (NETS). On the other hand,
although the language of composition is probably Greek, 6 0e6g Zap provides strong support for the Jewish
rather than Christian provenance of the document (contra Dillmann, J. Rendel Harris, and others). Jens
Herzer, 4 Baruch (Paraleipomena Jeremiou) (SBLWGRW 22; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature,
2005), 128-29: idem, Die Paralipomena Jeremiae: Studien zu Tradition undRedaktion einer Haggada des
fiiihen Judentums (TSAJ 43; Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1994), 126-27.
Evdvxiov xou 9EOU), and he did not let you come here, lest you see the affliction
which has come upon the people at the hands of the Babylonians (7.24-25).134
The significance of this is that it demonstrates, again, the category of usage that we have
seen in the OT and continued in the Jewish literature, namely, "ethical righteousness
before God." It is ethical righteousness, to be sure, but it is ethical righteousness that has
been recognized as such by God and which elicits certain favorable divine actions. This
usage, I will argue in Chapter 6, is the usage that Paul most frequently has in mind when
5
he uses AIK-terms in the context of his Rechtfertigungslehre.
Letter ofAristeas1
The word SiKaioauvn is frequently used in reference to moral uprightness, e.g.,
"for the sake of justice and the promotion of good deeds (7ipoc Sucaioauvnv Kai KOAXDV
Epycov)" (Ep. Aris. § 18).137 When the high priest Eleazar was asked to explain the strange
(to Greeks) passages in the Torah about kosher laws, he replied, "Our lawgiver (6
vopo9£xr]c; fjpcov) ... laid down the principles of piety and justice (SiaoxEfMpEVOC ... xd
1,4
ET and Greek text from Paraleipomena Jeremiou (Texts and Translations 1, Pseudepigrapha Series 1;
cd. and trans. Robert A. Kraft and Ann-Elizabeth Purintun; Missoula: Society of Biblical Literature, 1972),
38-39. However, note that the SBL Greek text edited by Herzer reads the pronoun auxou instead of xou
Oeou. but in any case the pronoun clearly refers to God. Herzer, 4 Baruch (Paraleipomena Jeremiou), 28.
In addition, Herzer notes in his textual apparatus that one manuscript reads the plural (5teatoi yap
eupe0naav) and the Ethiopic version has "but you found justice before God."
n
' Cp. StKaiouTat 7tapd xcp 8eco (Gal 3:11); Steaiot 7iapa xco Oeco (Rom 2:13); and 8iKaico0f|aexai Jtaaa
adp^ evcb7tiov auxou (Rom 3:20).
136
If the Letter ofAristeas is taken at face value, it purports to have been written during the reign of
Ptolemy II Philadelphia (king of Egypt from 285 to 247 BC), but modern scholars discount the text's
eyewitness claim. Aristeas is usually dated somewhere in the 2nd century BC, with the main debate being
over whether to date it early in that century (200-170 BC) or later (150-100 BC), i.e., before or after the
Hellenization crisis. C. C. Caragounis, "Aristeas, Epistle of," DNTB 116-17. A few scholars would date it
in the 1st century BC, and hardly anyone would push it as late as the 1st century AD. Since it contains an
apology for the Septuagint, "the Christian era and the preceding century may be discounted, if only on the
ground that a work such as Aristeas would be superfluous at a time when the Greek Old Testament was in
wide circulation and had established itself as authoritative." Sidney Jellicoe, The Septuagint and Modern
Study (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1968), 48. In addition, Josephus appears to have relied on Aristeas
for his account of the translation of the Torah into Greek (Ant. 12.11-118).
137
Moses Hadas, ed. and trans., Aristeas to Philocrates (Letter ofAristeas) (New York: Harper & Brothers,
1951), 102-3.
xfjc EuoEpEiac Kai SiKaioauvnc;) and expounded them point by point, not alone by
prohibitions but by commandments" (§131), and added that the kosher laws were not
established out of concern for mice and weasels, but "for the sake of justice (SiKaioauvn, q
EVEKEV), to promote holy contemplation and the perfecting of character" (§144). By
learning to avoid unclean animals (which tend to be violent carnivores) and eat only
gentle, herbivorous creatures, people would learn to "practice righteousness (SiKaioouvri
auyxpij.o9ai) in spirit and oppress no one, trusting in their own strength, nor rob anyone
of anything, but must guide their lives in accordance with justice (EK SiKaiou) ... a
symbol that they must be just (sivai Sucaiouc;) and achieve nothing by violence" (§§147-
48). lj8 In sum, "all that is said of food ... and of unclean creeping things and of animals
is directed toward justice and just intercourse among men (npbq SiKaioauvnv Kai xf|v xcov
dv9pcu7icov auvavaaxpocpfrv Sucaiav)" (§§ 168-69).139
The word is also used in reference to the justice of kings in their dealings with
others as those with judicial authority. King Ptolemy of the Hellenistic kingdom of Egypt
had written to the high priest in Jerusalem requesting him to send learned elders to
translate the Hebrew Torah into Greek (§§35-50). In his response to King Ptolemy, the
high priest Eleazar wrote that Andreas and Aristeas, the men through whom the king had
sent his epistle, were true gentlemen, outstanding in culture, and "in every respect worthy
of your own conduct and righteousness" (xfjc; ofjc; dycoyfic; Kai SiKaioauvnc; aqioi Kara
7idvxa) (§43).140 Later, in the section of the letter describing the symposium scene when
speeches are being made at dinner, the king asks one of the visitors from Judea, "What is
m
Hadas, Aristeas, 152-53, 158-59.
139
Hadas. Aristeas, 166-67. Cp. the discussion of the rationale for hand-washing before prayer, another
example of how the Jews make all their distinctive practices "symbols of righteousness and truth" (§306;
Hadas, Aristeas, 220-21).
140
Hadas, Aristeas, 116-17.
the most essential quality of kingship?" The Jewish man replies to the Greek king, "To
keep oneself incorruptible ... to be sober the greater part of life, to honor justice
(SiKaioauvnv 7ipoxipav), and to make friends of men of this character; for God too is a
lover of righteousness (Kai yap 6 9EOC cpiXoSiKaioc EOXIV)" (§209).
Having looked at the judicial and ethical usages of SiKaioauvn, with reference to
human righteousness in the Letter ofAristeas, we must now turn to the concept of divine
righteousness. There are no explicit occurrences of "the righteousness of God" in the
Letter ofAristeas, but the idea is implicitly present in one or two passages. As the
speeches at the symposium continue, King Ptolemy asks how one can build physical
structures so that a king's public works will remain in the future. The Jewish visitor
replies that he must not coerce anyone to work as a builder without paying them. "For if
he reflected that God treats the human race considerately, supplying them with health and
perceptivity and other gifts, he would himself emulate this principle and render due
reward for laborious toil (xcov KaK07ia9£icov d7ro5i5oi)C xf|v dvxdp£U|/iv). And works
consummated in righteousness are also abiding (xd ydp EK 5ucaioauvr|c x£A,oup£va, xauxa
Kai SiapsvEi)" (§259).141 Monuments thus built EK SiKaioauvnc will endure and bring
lasting honor to the king who out of his treasury expended the funds necessary to have
them constructed. But the key point for our purpose is that such equitable remuneration
of laborers is a kingly act that emulates the righteousness of God, who bestows his gifts
on the human race. Clearly, the righteousness of God in this passage is iustitia
Hadas, Aristeas, 202-3.

distributiva pure and simple (d7ro5i5oi)c xfjv dvxdp£ii|/iv142), not his faithfulness in
keeping his promises to his covenant people.
The other passage that makes an implicit connection between the righteousness of
God and that of the king, though more tenuous than the one above, is found in the
response to King Ptolemy's question as to how he may live amicably with the multitude
of the citizens of his kingdom, given that they are of such different origins. The Jewish
respondent says, "By assuming the proper role for each (xo 7ip£jiov EKdoxcp
auvu7ioKpivop£voc;143), taking justice as a guide (Ka9r|y£pova )uxpf3dvcov SiKaioauvnv);
for so indeed you do, since God grants you right judgment (9EOU OOI SiSovxoc EU
X,oyiC£o9ai)" (§267). The point seems to be that when the king takes on various roles, as
if playing parts in a stage play, he must also "take justice as a guide" as a corrective to
rank hypocrisy.144 Within the limits of justice, then, the king must learn to play the
appropriate role in his dealings with the different groups in his kingdom. The implicit
reference to God's righteousness is found in the concluding statement that King Ptolemy
is already doing this, since God is granting him "right judgment" (EU Xoyiêo9ai). This
seems to imply that the justice of the human king is a bestowment of the divine King, the
14i
LSJ dvxdpeu|/ic = "exchanging, requital" (from avxapeipopat = "exchange one thing with another,
repay, requite, punish") is a rare word prior to the ecclesiastical writers. According to a TLG search, it
occurs only six times before Origen: Aesopus, Fabulae 45.11; Euripides, Troiades 915;Ps 118:112 LXX;
Ep. Aristeas 259 (our text); Vitae Aesopi 75.8; Severus Iatrosophista, De instrument infusoriis seu
clysteribus ad Timotheum 28.19.
143
LSJ auvujtoKpivoum = "accommodate oneself by pretending." Cp. u;toKpivopai, UTtoKpiatc = "playing a
part on the stage."
144
So Hadas in his commentary: "Taking justice as a guide: A proper corrective to what might appear a
counsel to hypocrisy" (Aristeas, 204).
145
Similar advice to "play the part" was given to King Ptolemy earlier in the discourse, but it is also
immediately followed by a qualification that seems to take it back: "Always look to your own fame and
eminence, so that what you say and think may be in keeping with them, knowing that all men over whom
you rule think and talk about you. You ought not to show yourself inferior to the actors (oi unoKptxai), for
they look to the role they must play (imoKpiveaOat) and suit their actions to it. You, however, are not
playing a part (ou oe ou/ urcoKpiaiv £%eiq), but are truly king, God having granted you the leadership which
your character merits" (§§218-19; Hadas, Aristeas, 184-87).
ultimate font of true justice. If this passage is to be taken as an implicit recognition of the
righteousness of God, then it reinforces our conclusion above that the righteousness of
God in the Letter ofAristeas is his distributive justice in giving to every man his due.
The Sibylline Oracles'40
The word SiKaioauvn occurs only three times in Book 3 of the Sibylline Oracles,
all in reference to ethical righteousness. In describing the origins of the Jewish people,
the text reads, "There is a city in the land of Ur of the Chaldeans, from which originates a
race of most righteous people (yEvoc ... Sucaioxdxcov dv9pco5xcov) ... always concerned
with good counsel and noble deeds." Unlike the Chaldeans who were led astray by
astrology and "misled as to good ways and righteous deeds (oSouc x' dya9dc; Kai Epya
SiKaia)," the Jews are a people who "care for righteousness and virtue (pEpipvcoaiv XE
SiKaioauvnv x' dpExfjv)" (Or. Sib. 3.218-34).147 The passage then goes on to narrate how
the twelve tribes left Egypt, traveled through the wilderness with God's accompaniment
in the form of a pillar of fire by night and a pillar of cloud by day, and how God
The Sibylline Oracles are comprised of twelve books composed in Greek hexameter, partly by Jews and
partly by Christians, over a long span from the 2nd century BC to the 7th century AD. John J. Collins,
"Sibylline Oracles," OTP 1.317-24. They were composed under the name of the famed Sibyl(s) of Greco-
Roman antiquity to claim the prestige of (purported) pagan authority for their moral, political, and
prophetic messages. Scholars are in near-universal agreement that one of the oldest sections is Book 3 and
that, aside from lines 1-96 and a brief Christian interpolation at line 776, Book 3 is largely of Hellenistic
Jewish provenance. Based on references to the seventh Greek (Ptolemaic) king of Egypt (lines 192-93, 314-
18, and 608-10), Book 3 is generally dated from the mid-2nd century BC or perhaps a bit later. Alexander
Polyhistor (c. 105-c. 40 BC) appears to have known an early recension of Book 3, thus providing a mid-l st
century BC terminus ad quern. John J. Collins, "The Development of the Sibylline Tradition," ANRW
11.20.1 (1986): 421-59; idem, "The Jewish Transformation of Sibylline Oracles," in Seers, Sibyls and Sages
in Hellenistic-Roman Judaism (JSJSup 54; Leiden: Brill, 1997), 181-97, esp. 186-87; Rieuwerd
Buitenwerf, Book III of the Sibylline Oracles and Its Social Setting with an Introduction, Translation, and
Commentary (SVTP 17; Leiden: Brill, 2003), esp. 61-64, 124-34, 167-70.
147
ET: Rieuwerd Buitenwerf, Book III of the Sibylline Oracles, 193. Greek text from A.-M. Denis,
Concordance grecque despseudepigraphes d'ancien Testament (Louvain-la-Neuve: Univcrsite Catholique
de Louvain, lnstitut Orientaliste, 1987), 893-96. Denis's text is derived from J. Geffcken, Die Oracula
sibyllina (GCS 8; Leipzig: Heinrichs, 1902).
appointed Moses as the leader of the people (3.248-54). At this point the text states that
when the people came to Mount Sinai, "God gave the law from heaven, having written all
righteous things on two tablets (ypdc;ac nXutqiv Suai 7idvxa SiKaia)" and commanded them
to practice (7toi£iv) it on pain of punishment, whether human or divine (3.256-60).148
Picking up on this theme that the law contains "all righteous things," it is later
said of the Jewish people that they "obtained the law of the Most High in righteousness
4
(EV SE SiKaioauvn vopou 'Yyiaxoio XaxdvxEc)" (3.580) and as a result were taught to
avoid the idolatry and sexual immorality that characterize the Gentiles (3.586-600). A
few lines later, the Gentiles are exhorted to convert from their wicked lifestyle and to
appease God by offering sacrifices, honoring righteousness (xr\v SE Sucaioauvnv xipa),
and oppressing no one (3.624-30).
There is one instance where the adjective SiKaioc is possibly applied to God, but
more careful scrutiny shows that it modifies the word "law." In an eschatological
context, when God comes to judge the world, the sons of God will live quietly around the
temple protected by God (3.702-3). Then the nations will see how much God loves and
helps them. They will say, "Come, let us all fall on the ground and pray to the immortal
King, the great and eternal God. Let us send (gifts) to the temple, for he is the sole Ruler!
Let us all consider the law of the highest God, for it is the most righteous of all (laws) on
,4S
ET: Buitenwerf. Book III of the Sibylline Oracles, 193-94.
149
ET: Buitenwerf, Book 111 of the Sibylline Oracles, 240. Various text-critical and syntactical possibilities
exist here. Some MSS read the genitive vopou while others have the accusative vopov. The verb Xayxdvco
can take either case. With the accusative, it means "to obtain by lot"; with the genitive, "to become
possessed of a thing." See LSJ ?vayxdvto I-II and discussion in Buitenwerf, 259-60. R. H. Charles has "in
righteousness possessing the law of the Most High" (APOT 2.389). Alternatively. J. J. Collins takes
Xay%avco + ev 5iKatoauvr| and the genitive vopou as modifying StKaioaovrp "Sharing in the righteousness
of the law of the Most High" (OTP 1.375). In any case, it is clear that the law and righteousness go hand in
hand.
earth (vopov u\|/ioxoio 9EOU (ppa^cbp£9a jxdvxsc OOXE SiKaioxaxoc; jt£A,£xai iidvxcov Kaxa
yaiav)"(3.716-20).150
The Sibylline Oracles, then, use the words from the AIK-group (SiKaioc; and
SiKaioouvri in particular) in a straightforwardly ethical manner. What stands out is the
tight connection between SiKaioauvn and vopoc;. The law of the Most High God given to
the Jewish people - "for only to them has the great God given reasonable counsel"
(3.584)151 - is itself "most righteous." contains "all righteous things," and therefore is
alone capable of creating a "most righteous people" who care for "righteousness and
virtue."
The Sentences of Pseudo-Phocylides
In a short gnomic collection of 230 Greek hexameter lines, Pseudo-Phocylides1
sets forth the ethics of the Mosaic Law in such a manner that it appears to be in perfect
harmony with Hellenistic moral philosophy. There is no debate that the original
language of the work is Greek.13 The work is a series of gnomai or aphorisms mostly
ET: Buitenwerf, Book III of the Sibylline Oracles, 243.

151
ET: Buitenwerf, Book III of the Sibylline Oracles, 240.
152
Phocylides of Miletus was a 7/6th century BC pagan Greek poet who wrote hexameter poetry and elegiac
gnomai or aphorisms. OCD 1173; Brill's New Pauly 11.145. Our text is pseudonymous in that it claims to
have been written by his more famous namesake. The modern consensus is that the real author of this work
was a highly Hellenized (possibly Alexandrian) Jew who flourished between 100 BC and AD 100. Walter
T. Wilson. The Sentences oj Pseudo-Phocylides (CEJL; Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2005), 6-7; P. W. van
der Horst, "Pseudo-Phocylides," OTP 2.567-68. Reliance on the language of LXX demonstrates that the
work postdates the translation of the Hebrew Bible into Greek. For a list of LXX parallels, including
re wordings (in hexameter) of specific stipulations in the legal portions of the Greek translation of the
Torah, see Wilson, Sentences, 17-19.
153
This Jewish author "placed these sentences in the mouth of a Greek thinker who lived centuries earlier
in order to show that already in ancient times the wisdom of the Greeks was influenced by the spirit of
Moses, with the result that Jewish Torah and Greek ethic were thoroughly in agreement. In this process, the
ceremonial parts of the law were ignored, and the interest of the author is directed exclusively to the issue
of how one should so lead one's life that it pleases God and receives God's blessing." Eduard Lohse,
Theological Ethics of the New Testament (trans. M. Eugene Boring; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1991), 22-23.
154
Van der Horst, "Pseudo-Phocylides," OTP 2.566.
Chapter 5: Righteousness in Jewish Literature • 358
taken from the Mosaic Law but reworded in Greek hexameter and packaged in terms of
the four cardinal virtues, it begins with a prologue and concludes with an epilogue, both
of which utilize words from the AIK-group.
Tauxa Sucna' 6ain,oi OEOU [3ou}t£upaxa cpatvEi1"5

<J>coKuA.i8r|c dvSpcov 6 aocpcbxaxoc 6X$ia Scopa.
AyvEin \|A)xfjc, ou ocopaxoc Eiai KaOappoi.

Tauxa 5ucaioauvr|c puaxfjpia, xoia (3IEUVXEC
^coijv EKXEXEOIX' dya9f|V p£%pi yf|paoc ouSou.
These counsels of God by His holy judgments

Phocylides wisest of men sets forth [lit. reveals], gifts of blessing.
poo
Purifications are for the puritv of the soul, not of the body.
V
ppQ
These are mysteries of righteousness; living thus
may you live out a good life, right up to the threshold of old age.
The moral aphorisms of the Mosaic Law, presented in the substance of the poem
in Greek hexameter, are called both "divine resolutions/counsels" ((3ou^£upaxa 9EOU) and
"holy judgments" (Sucai oatai) from God the great king over all the earth.158 Although
our author does not explicitly appeal to the authority of the Torah (for that would ruin the
conceit), his use of the word cpaivco ("to reveal") further indicates his belief that God is
the ultimate source of the moral precepts of the poem; the author has not fabricated them
1:0
The word order ofline 1 creates a complex sentence structure. The main phrase is xauxa fiouA-eupaxa
0eou ("these counsels of God"). The adverbial dative phrase 8tKr|cf octnai ("by holy judgments") modifies
the verb (patvei. Note that Skna' (=8iKnci[v]) is a poetic form of the dative plural of 5ucr) (usually spelled
5iKaic;).
1,6
Greek text from P. W. van der Horst, The Sentences of Pseudo-Phocylides with Introduction and
Commentary (SVTP 4; Leiden: Brill, 1978), 88-102, which reproduces the critical edition of Douglas
Young, ed., Theognis: Ps.-Pythagoras, Ps.-Phocylides, Chares, Anonymi Aulodia, Fragmentum
Teliambicum (Bibliotheca scriptorum Graecorum et Romanorum Teubneriana; Leipzig: Teubner, 19712).
157
ET: van der Horst, Sentences of Pseudo-Phocylides, following Ludwich's conjectural emendation of
dyvein for dyvetn (line 228). Arthur Ludwich, Uber das Spruchbuch des falschen Phokylides (Thesis;
Konigsberg: Hartung, 1904), 23.
158
See LSJ 5iKT] III.
out of his own mind, but since he is a poet inspired by the divine muse, they come from
the revealed will of God.159
As commentators have noted, the prologue and the epilogue frame the entire body
of aphorisms (lines 3-227), and so the two must be taken together. The verbal affinity
between xauxa Sucna' oainai OEOU PouA,£upaxa (line 1) and xauxa 5iKaioauvr|c puoxfjpia
(line 229) provides a mutually interpretive framework for interpreting the AIK-
terminology used in both (Sucai and SiKaioauvn).160 The concept of "holy judgments" is
found in Plato's Laws where he describes the annual selection of judges (Kpixai or
SiKaaxai) for the law courts (5iKaoxf]pia). The citizens are to choose judges deemed "the
most likely to decide the suits ... in the best and holiest way (dpiax' dv Kai oaicbxaxa xac;
SiKac ... SuiKpivEiv)," which is the opposite of "giving unjust judgments (dSuccoc Kpivai
xf|v Sucnv)" (Plato, Leges 767d-e).161 The term "holy" is relevant in this judicial context,
because the judges are sworn into their office by "adjuring the god" (xov OEOV opooavxEc)
in the temple, ensuring that their judicial role is undertaken in the consciousness that they
are being watched by God (probably Zeus) himself. Similarly, in Hesiod, justice stands in
contrast to the "crooked judgments" (oKoXiai Sucai) of judges influenced by bribes: "For
at once Oath starts to run along beside crooked judgments (OpKoc. dpa aKoA.if]ai
Sucnoiv), and there is a clamor when Justice (Aden) is dragged where men, gift-eaters,
5
Remember, the author is claiming to be the famous Greek poet Phocylides of ancient time. Cp. the
similar use m Sirach of the language of revelation, but this time explicitly in connection with the Law of
Moses: "All these things are the book of the covenant of the most high God ((Mpôc, 8ia0f|Kr|<; 0eou
uv[/iaxou), the law which Moses established as a heritage for the congregations of Jacob ... It reveals
instruction like the light (6 eKcpatvcov coc cpcog 7tai8etav)" (Sirach 24:23, 27). For this parallel and the
translation, 1 am indebted to Walter T. Wilson, The Mysteries of Righteousness: The Literary Composition
and Genre of the Sentences of Pseudo-Phocylides (TSAJ 40; Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1994), 168-70.
160
Wilson, Sentences, 68.
161
Plato: Laws, Books 1-VI(LCL; trans. R. G. Bury; Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2001),
444-45. The phrase also occurs in the singular (oair) Sucrf) in Theognis: "There is nothing among mankind
better than a father and a mother, Cyrnus, who care about holy justice (ou8ev ev dv0pcb7toiat naxpbq Kai
pnxpoq apeivov / EKXEQ', oaotc; 6atr)[cJ, Kupve, peunXe SucnfcJ)" (Theogn. 131-32). Greek Elegiac Poetry
(LCL; trans. Douglas E. Gerber; Cambridge. Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2003), 192-93.
carry her off and pronounce verdicts with crooked judgments (oKO/Vifjc; 5ucr|c; Kpivcoai
9£piaxac)" (Hesiod, Opera et dies 219-21).162
In the Sentences of Phocylides, these counsels of God's will, revealed through the
holy judgments of the Creator-King, are subsequently equated in the epilogue with "the
mysteries of righteousness" (SiKaioauvnc puoxfjpia) in accordance with which the
readers are urged to conduct their lives (xoia PIEUVXEC). The entire content of the
Sentences is hereby summarized under the heading of "righteousness."163 The term is
clearly being used here in a fundamentally ethical sense, since "righteousness" is
regarded as the sum of all virtue, as the real Phocylides is himself reputed to have said (as
we saw in chapter 3). But the ethical righteousness is rooted in the judicial righteousness
of God's own will as revealed through his holy judgments. The iustitia ethica promoted
by the Sentences is rooted in the more fundamental iustitia distributiva of God himself.
There is no notion here of a saving righteousness in fulfillment of God's faithfulness to
his promises.
Philo'
The most common usage of SiKaioauvn, in Philo is as one of the four virtues,
which is a commonplace of Hellenistic moral philosophy. A representative passage that
162
Hesiod: Theogony, Works and Days, Testimonia (LCL; trans. Glenn W. Most; Cambridge, Mass.:
Harvard University Press, 2006), 104-5.
163
Wilson, Sentences, 68; idem, Mysteries, 170-74; van der Horst, Sentences, 260.
164
The dates of Philo's birth and death are unknown but are usually listed as c. 20-15 BC- c. AD 50.
Gregory E. Sterling, "Philo." DNTB, 789; Peder Borgen, "Philo of Alexandria," ABD 5.333. The only event
in Philo's life that to which a date can be assigned is his trip from Alexandria to Rome in AD 39-40. He
went to Rome as the head of an embassy to the emperor Caligula (Gaius) on behalf of the persecuted
Jewish community of Alexandria. In the treatise describing this event, Philo begins by referring to himself
as a gray-headed, aged man (Legatio ad Gaium 1). Philo probably lived beyond AD 47, based on a possible
reference in Anim. 58 to a horse race that took place that year in honor of the emperor Claudius (cp. Pliny
the Elder, Historia Naturalis 8.160-61). Kenneth Schcnck, A Brief Guide to Philo (Louisville: Westminster
John Knox, 2005), 9-14, 23 n. 1.
illustrates both Philo's dependence on Hellenistic moral philosophy and his allegorical
method of interpreting the Scripture is in his commentary on Gen 2:10-14, the passage
about the river that flows out of Eden and then separates to become four rivers, the
Pishon, the Gihon, the Tigris, and the Euphrates. Philo thinks that the four rivers
represent the four virtues - prudence (cppovnaic;), temperance (ococppoauvn,), courage
(dvSpda), and justice (SiKaioouvri) - which flow from the generic virtue of God himself
(Leg 1.63-65; cp. Post 128). Not surprisingly, he also defines the virtue of SiKaioouvn,,
represented by the River Euphrates, in characteristically Platonic terms. Philo defines
SiKaioouvn as that state of the soul "when the three parts of the soul are all in harmony
with one another" (Leg 1.72), that is, when the two inferior parts of the soul - the
passionate and the appetitive parts - are in submission to the rational part of the soul, that
is, when the charioteer that steers the soul (again borrowing from Plato) is the rational
part rather than the passionate and appetitive parts which, when given the reins, only
drive the chariot over the precipice. "When the two inferior parts, the passionate and the
appetitive part, are disposed to yield to the superior [sc. rational] part, then justice
(SiKaioouvn,) exists" (Leg 1.72).165
However, one must not think that Philo took his cue only from Plato when
seeking to define justice. If anything, Philo was even more concerned to base his
philosophy on divine revelation as found in the Mosaic Law. Commenting on the
injunction of Moses not to add to or take anything away from the Law, he regards the
165
C. D. Yonge, trans., The Works of Philo: New Updated Edition (Peabody, Hendrickson, 1993), 33. Philo
uses the charioteer analogy in the next paragraph: "But when, on the contrary, passion and appetite get
riotous and disobey the reins, and by the violence of their impetuosity throw off and disregard the
charioteer, that is to say reason, and when each of these passions get hold of the reins themselves, then
there is injustice. For it is inevitable, that through any ignorance or vice of the charioteer, the chariot must
be borne down over precipices, and must fall into the abyss; just as it must be saved when the charioteer is
endowed with skill and virtue" (Leg 1.73). Plato first used this analogy in Phaedrus 246a-254e; cp.
discussion of Plato's definition of 8tKatoauvn in Chapter 3.
Law as a perfect summary of ethical duty and, as such, that which inculcates
righteousness, "for there is nothing which has been omitted by the wise lawgiver which
can enable a man to partake of entire and perfect justice (npbq 6^0KX.fipou Kai TtavxEôuc
pExouoiav 5iKaioauvn,c)" (Spec 4.143). Philo also utilizes the commonplace about
piety toward God and righteousness toward men. All the innumerable lessons and
teachings found in the Mosaic Law may be summed up under two heads: "the regulating
of one's conduct towards God by the rules of piety and holiness, and of one's conduct
towards men by the rules of humanity and justice (xo XE 7tp6c. OEOV SI' EuoEpEiac Kai
oaidxnxoc Kai xo 7tpoc; dv9pd)7touc; Sid cpiA,av9pco7iiac; Kai Sucaioauvnc;)" (Spec 2.63; cp.
Abr 208).167
Philo takes his description of justice in yet another direction. Rather than focusing
merely on the soul, or on the law as inculcating virtue, he looks at the external
relationships between humans and even couches his definition in terms of justice as an
impartial judge that renders to each his due (distributive justice):
Justice is conversant about the distribution of things according to merit

(d7r.ov£pnxiKfi xcov Kax' dcjiav Eoxiv r) SiKaioouvn,), and does not take the part
either of accuser or of defendant, but acts as a judge (Sucaaxfjc). As therefore a
judge does not desire beforehand to defeat any one, nor to oppose and make war
upon any one; but delivers his own opinion and judges, deciding for the right
(PpaPsuEi xo SiKaiov), so also justice, not being the adversary of any one,
distributes its due to every thing (ouxcoc n Sucaioauvri ouSevoc ouaa dvxiSucoc;
a7tov£p£i xo Kax' dc;iav EKdoxcp Ttpdypaxi) (Leg 1.87).
Elsewhere, Philo writes that "It is the part of justice to point out how we ought to honour
equality (iooxnxa xipnxEOv), and to assign to every man his due according to his deserts
6
Yongc, Works of Philo, 630.
7
Yonge, Works of Philo, 574.
8
Yonge, Works of Philo, 34-35.
(xo Kax' dc;iav a7rov£pnxEOV EKdoxoic)" (Mos 2.9).16' And, again, according to the Mosaic
constitution, judges need three virtues to exercise their office properly: wisdom so as not
to be deceived; courage so as not to be swayed by compassion and let the wicked go
unpunished; and justice (SiKaioouvri) "so as to dispense to each party what they deserve
(sic xf|v xcov Kax' dqiav £7iiPa?Ji6vxcov EKdoxoic d7iovopf|v)" (Spec 4.57).170
This understanding of justice in distributive terms is consistent with other
statements by Philo in which he takes an Aristotelian approach and speaks of "equality
(iooxric) as the first principle [or beginning/fountain/mother] of SiKaioouvn," (Spec 2.204;
4.230-31, 238; Plant 122; Legat 85). Philo sees this principle taught in the Mosaic Law
itself when it requires just weights and measures (Her 162, quoting Lev 19:35-36; Deut
25:13-15; cp. Spec 4.194).
In Book IV of his Special Laws, Philo has a fairly long section dealing with the
office of the judge (6 SiKaoxtjc;) as set forth in the Mosaic constitution (Spec 4.55-78).
Just as fire is warm in itself before it brings warmth to others, "so also ought the judge to
be full of pure unalloyed justice (dvdjfA.£coc; Eivai 8ucaioauvr|c; aKpaicpvouc;), if he is to
irrigate all who come before him with justice (xd Sucaia), in order that from him, as from
a sweet fountain (cbo7i£p dm) 7irp/fjc; yA,uK£iac;), a wholesome spring may be afforded to all
who thirst for a dispensation of good law (Euvopia)" (Spec 4.56). As the fountain of
justice, the judge must himself be filled with justice. However, there is a yet higher font
(7m,yfi) of justice than the human judge, for he is but the steward of God's justice and
dispenses it to others when he responsibly fulfills his stewardship. For the judge should
be blind, not showing any favoritism to those with whom he is acquainted, but is "to be

guided by such an opinion as this, that judgment is of God (f\ p£v Kpiaic xou 9EOU EOXIV)
[=Deut 1:17LXX]; and that the judge is the minister and steward of his judgment (6 SE
8iKaoxf|c £7iixpo7roc xfjc; Kpio£coc;); and a steward is not allowed to give away the things of
his master, as he has received as a deposit (7iapaKaxa9f)Kr|) the most excellent of all the
things which exist in human life, from the most excellent of all beings" (71). The
justice that the human judge dispenses is "the most excellent of all the things which exist
in human life" and as such it really comes from "the most excellent of all beings" (viz.,
God), and has been temporarily entrusted to him for safekeeping as a deposit
(7tapaKaxa9fiKr|) from God. Indeed, God himself, who is all-sufficient in himself and who
has no need of any created thing, is "the everlasting fountain of... justice" (Spec
1.277).172
One final reference to the righteousness of God is found in fragment II of Philo's
treatise on providence.173 Writing in the mode of theodicy, Philo defends God against the
arguments of the atheists who deny providence and think that all is governed by chance:
"God is not a tyrant who practises cruelty and violence and all the other acts of insolent
authority like an inexorable master, but he is rather a sovereign invested with a humane
and lawful authority, and as such he governs all the heaven and the whole world in
accordance with justice (p£xd 5ucaioouvn,c; xov aup7ravxa oupavov XE Kai Koapov
PpaPEUEi)" (Prov 2.2).174 In fact, far from being a tyrant, God is a like a father who
171
Yonge, Works of Philo, 622. Yonge rendered 7tapaKaxa0f|Kri as "pledge," but I have changed this to
"deposit," as a slightly more accurate gloss. LSJ defines it as "a deposit of money or property entrusted to
one's care," of course with metaphorical uses as here.
172
173
Fragment II of Philo's De Providentia is preserved in Eusebius, Praeparatio Evangelica 8.14.386-399.
174
exercises his power for the protection and correction of his children (§§3-6), but who also
brings terrible requitals upon the unrighteous deeds of unrighteous men (§§22-26).
It is clear from these passages that "the righteousness of God" in Philo's Greco-
Roman moralistic philosophy (which he claims is merely an exposition of the Mosaic
Law) is nothing less than God's distributive justice and has little to do with the ideas of
salvation, deliverance, or covenant faithfulness.
1IS
Josephus
Josephus uses AIK-terminology in the standard ethical and judicial senses. With
regard to ethical righteousness, we have a good example in Josephus's account of
Hyrcanus, the Hasmonean king, where he uses the adjective in a straightforward ethical
sense and one that is strongly tied to the keeping of the Mosaic Law. As a disciple of the
Pharisees, he invited them to a feast and told them that "he wished to be righteous
(PouAdpEVOv sivai SiKaiov) and in everything he did tried to please God and them" (Ant.
13.289).I76 Righteousness in this context means doing that which pleases God, as defined
by the Pharisaic interpretation of the Law. In the conclusion of his apologetic treatise in
defense of Judaism, Josephus claims that his religion has contributed many great ideas to
the world: "What greater beauty than inviolable piety? What higher justice than
obedience to the laws? (xi SE XOU 7i£i9apx£vv xoic vopoic SucaidxEpov;)" (Contra Apionem
2.293).177 Again, righteousness is equal to obedience to God's laws, although it can also
Flavius Josephus was born AD 37/38 and lived to see Trajan become emperor (AD 98-117). The year of
his death is unknown but is usually listed as c. AD 100. Louis H. Feldman, "Josephus," ABD 3.981-82;
Steve Mason, Josephus and the New Testament (2nd ed.; Peabody: Hendrickson, 2003), 34-53.
176
Josephus (LCL; trans. Ralph Marcus; Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1957), 7.372-3.
177
Josephus (LCL; trans. H. St. J. Thackeray; Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1956), 1.410-
11.
be used more loosely of upright character in general; for example, in his Life, Josephus
states that his father was of noble birth but "even more esteemed for his upright character
(Sid xfjv SiKaioauvnv)" (Vita 7).178 Abel, unlike his brother Cain, was concerned about
SiKaioouvri (Ant. 1.53). Noah was loved by God for his SiKaioouvn, (Ant. 1.75, 99).
In addition, Josephus employs the traditional Greek distinction between
righteousness toward man and piety toward God. For example, Josephus informs us that
John the Baptist "had exhorted the Jews to exercise virtue (dpExfiv £7iaoKouoiv), to
practice justice towards their fellows and piety towards God (xd 7ipoc aXXr\Xovq
SiKaioouvri Kai 7ip6c xov 9EOV EUOEPEICI xpwpEVOic)" (Ant. 18.117).I79 And he says that
Aminadab, whose house became a temporary resting place for the Ark of the Covenant,
was a man "reputed for his righteousness (SiKaioouvn) and piety (9pr|OK£ia)" (Ant.
6.18).'80 Josephus also employs the more usual pairing of SiKaioouvn, and EuasPEia (Ant.
8.121, 314; 9.16; 10.50; 12.56; 14.283; 15.375; 16.42).
Near the end of his Jewish War, Josephus recounts the noble end of Eleazar and
his men. Eleazar assembled his bravest fighters and said to them, "Long since, my brave
men, we determined neither to serve the Romans nor any other save God, for He alone is
man's true and righteous Lord (pdvoc ydp ouxoc; dX,n9f|c; EOXI Kai SiKaioc; dv9pcb7tcov
5£07r.6xr|c;)" (B.J. 7.323).181 It would be better to die fighting bravely than to fall into the
hands of the Romans and become their slaves.
Josephus (LCL; trans. H. St. J. Thackeray; Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1956), 1.4-5.
179
Josephus (LCL; trans. Louis H. Feldman; Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1965), 9.80-81.
I have slightly modified Feldman's translation, adopting Whiston's more literal "to exercise virtue" (The
Works of Josephus, 484) instead of Feldman's "to lead righteous lives" (dperfiv sjtaaKouaiv), a
modification necessary in order to distinguish dperfi from 8tKaioauvr|.
180
Josephus (LCL; trans. H. St. J. Thackeray and Ralph Marcus; Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University
Press, 1950), 5.172-3.
181
Josephus (LCL; trans. H. St. J. Thackeray; Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1957), 3.594-5.
In addition to the ethical usage, Josephus also employs AIK-words in a judicial
setting, with reference both to human and divine judgment, and in some passages the
human and the divine are connected by way of analogy. Many of these judicial passages
are in the Jewish Antiquities, which is Josephus's retelling of the story of the Hebrew
Bible. In the retelling of the story of Joseph, before Joseph revealed his identity to his
brothers, the brothers began to be full of remorse for all the evil they had done to Joseph,
"for which they now judged that they were justly punished by God (£(p' otc; SiKaiov
EKpivov xov 9E6V KoX,a£^6p£voi)" (Ant. 2.108). " This is clearly distributive justice.
When describing the administration of justice in Israel (cp. Deut 16:18), Josephus
uses the AIK-root, as would be expected: "As rulers let each city have seven men long
exercised in virtue and in the pursuit of justice (oi Kai xf|v dpExfiv Kai xf|v 7tspi xo SiKaiov
aTtouSfrv 7iponaKr|K6x£c;)" (Ant. 4.214). Additionally, he makes the comparison between
the human judges (oi Sucaaxai) and God as the divine judge. No one is permitted to be
abusive or insolent in the presence of the human judges, "for a respect for human
dignitaries will make men too reverential to be ever contemptuous of God" (§215). Just
as in the biblical narrative, so Josephus's summary of the constitution (f) 7ioXix£ia) of the
Jews warns the judges to be impartial and not to pervert justice by taking bribes,
for they must be influenced neither by lucre nor by rank in declaring judgement
(cpavEpdc; TtoiEtaOai xdc; Kpiosic;), but must set justice (xo SiKaiov) above all. Else
God would appear to be contemned and accounted weaker than those to whom,
from fear of their strength, the judge accords his vote. For God's strength is
justice (xou OEOU ydp ioxuc; EOXI XO SiKaiov); and one who gives this away out of
favour to persons of rank makes them more powerful than God (§§216-17).183
182
15.
183
81.
The statement that "God's strength is justice" should not be taken to mean that "might
makes right," but just the opposite, that God's strength does not consist in pure exercise
of power but in his exercise of just judgment. In this context, God's just judgments are
revealed (cpavEpdc JioisiaOai xdc KpiaEic;, §216) through the human judges of Israel that
God has ordained, "those to whom it shall fall to administer justice" (oi SucdCEiv
Xa%bvx£q, §215). The important point is that the justice of human judges is to reflect the
justice of the divine judge. There is an analogy between human and divine judgment. It
should also be noted that in another related context, in the previous book, Josephus states
that the people of Israel came to Moses for justice. So confident were the people in
Moses' fairness as an arbitrator (Siaixrixfjc) that "those that lost their causes thought it no
harm while they thought they lost them justly (raxd SiKaioauvnv) and not by cupidity (ou
Kaxd 3iA,£0V£c;iav)" (Ant. 3.67).184 Later, it is said that King Solomon's youthfulness did
not hinder him from the exercise of justice (SiKaioouvri) (Ant. 8.21).
We see something similar in a passage about King David. Josephus writes that
"He was of a just nature and, when he gave judgement, considered only the truth (fjv SE
Kai SiKaioc xf|v cpuaw Kai xac KpiaEic npbq TTJV dAf|9eiav dcpopcov ETtoiEixo)" (Ant.
7.110).185 The term "just" (SiKaioc) is interpreted here in a judicial sense, that is, he was
just in that he rendered verdicts (Kpioeic) by having consideration only for the truth. Later
in his account of David, Josephus narrates the story of the plague that God sent upon
Jerusalem after he conducted a census of the city. David put on sackcloth and entreated
God to stay the plague and have mercy: "The king said to God that it was he, the
184
ET: William Whiston, The Works of Josephus: New Updated Edition (Peabody: Hendrickson, 1995), 83
(modified). Josephus (LCL; trans. H. St. J. Thackeray; Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1957),
4.351.
185
Press, 1950), 5.418-19.
shepherd, who was rightly to be punished (auxoc £in, KoXaa9fjvai SiKaioc 6 7ioipf|v), but
the flock, which had committed no sin, should be saved" (Ant. 7.328).I86 The punishment
that God sent on the people was just, that is, it was in accord with God's distributive
justice, which justice was meted out on the head of the guilty shepherd-king so that the
innocent sheep might be spared.187 Compare the passage where Shishak sacks the city of
Jerusalem (2 Chron 12:5) and the people "acknowledge that God might justly (SiKaicoc)
turn away from them since they had acted impiously toward Him and had violated His
ordinances" (Ant. 8.256).188
We have another instance where Josephus describes God as SiKaioc. It occurs in a
passage in the Antiquities where Josephus tells us that on one occasion King Darius could
not sleep, so he began talking with his three bodyguards, promising that he would give a
prize to the one who gave the most intelligent speech. He asked the first whether wine
was the strongest thing; the second, whether kings were; and the third (Zerubbabel),
whether women or the truth were the strongest thing of all. Zerubbabel's encomium to
truth was delivered before the satraps and governors. He argued that although women and
kings are very strong, the truth is the strongest thing:
Although the earth is very great and the heavens high and the sun swift, yet all
these move in accordance with the will of God, and, since He is true and just
(d^r|9iv6c SE EOXIV Kai SiKaioc ouxoc), we must for the same reason believe truth
also to be the strongest thing, against which no injustice (xo dSiKov) can prevail
(Ant. 11.55).189
Press, 1950), 5.536-7.
187
Cp. the wonder of the atonement, where divine justice punished the innocent Shepherd-King so that the
guilty sheep might be spared (Zech 13:7 as quoted in Matt 26:31 || Mark 14:27).
188
Josephus (LCL; trans. H. St. J. Thackeray and Ralph Marcus; Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University-
Press, 1950), 5.710-11.
189
Zerubbabel's speech won the competition and he was given the prize. In addition,
Zerubbabel reminded him of what he had vowed to do if he became king, namely, to
rebuild the temple in Jerusalem. The point is that the justice of God is connected with his
truth, for truth is the strongest thing "against which no injustice can prevail."
With regard to the theme of divine justice, Josephus informs us that Herod's
defeat at the hands of King Aretus during a border dispute was attributed by the Jews to
God's punishment on Herod for his treatment of John the Baptist. "To some of the Jews
the destruction of Herod's army seemed to be divine vengeance, and certainly a just
vengeance (Kai pdXa SiKaicoc xivupEVOu), for his treatment of John, surnamed Baptist"
(Ant. 18.116).lt)0
The above are instances of righteousness being attributed to God in a judicial
setting, but there is one passage that explicitly speaks of the righteousness of God. It
occurs in the retelling of the story of Esther. Josephus comes to the end of the story,
where Haman's plot is uncovered and he is hanged on the same gallows on which he had
planned to have Mordecai hanged. Josephus then adds his own bit of moralizing in the
first person:
Wherefore I am moved to marvel at the Deity and to recognize His wisdom and
justice (69EV ETiEpvexai poi xo OEIOV OaupdtÊiv Kai xfiv aocpiav auxou Kai
SiKaioauvnv KaxapavOdvEiv), for not only did He punish Haman's wickedness but
also caused the penalty which had been contrived against another to fall upon
Haman himself (Ant. 11.268).191
There can be no disputing that the SiKaioauvn, of God in this passage is his distributive
justice; in fact, it is the perfect equity of that justice, since he punished Haman with the
same penalty that Haman had devised against Mordecai the Jew.
190
Josephus (LCL; trans. Louis H. Feldman; Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1965), 9.80-81.
191
All of this supports the notion that AIK-terminology applied to God in Josephus
has to do with distributive justice in a forensic Sitz im Leben rather than covenant
faithfulness or some sort of Hebraic-relational theory.
It is time to summarize our results so far. We see both continuity and
discontinuity between the two corpora of Jewish literature that we have now examined,
namely, the Apocrypha and OT Pseudepigrapha composed in Hebrew but now extant in
another language and the Jewish literature composed in Greek. There is continuity in that
the two categories of ethical and judicial righteousness continue with little change. There
is also continuity in that, under the category of ethical righteousness, we also have the
concept of righteousness before God: "persons who are good ... are righteous before
God" (T. Asher 4:1); "for you have been found righteous before God" (Par. Jer. 7:24-25).
And there is also continuity in that, under the category of God's righteousness, we found
two instances of iustitia salutifera, although without the exact phrase: "until the
appearing of the God of righteousness" (T. Jud. 22:1-2); "there will arise to you the Lord
himself, the light of righteousness" (T. Zeb. 9:8). These seem best understood as still
within the orbit of iustitia distributiva since they have to do with God's deliverance and
vindication of his people by the coming of the Messiah at the end of days. The vast
majority of the time, when SiKaioauvn, is predicated of God in the Hellenistic Jewish
literature composed in Greek, there is a strong emphasis on God's distributive and even
punitive justice. As we get farther from the OT period and closer to the time of Paul,
there is an almost relentless focus on God's justice, e.g., in the writings of Philo and
Josephus. The discontinuity between the two corpora of Jewish literature is that the small
category of correctness, which includes the covenantal usage going back to Zech 8:8 and
Hos 2:19-20, is not continued in the literature composed in Greek.
D. The New Testament
In this section, we survey the usage of AIK-terminology in the New Testament
passages other than the Pauline passages dealing with justification. In general, we see the
same basic pattern: most usages of SiKaioouvri are ethical, some are judicial, a few have
to do with righteousness before God, and there are three occurrences of "the
righteousness of God."
Setting aside the Pauline justification passages, the judicial usage of SiKaioouvri
and other AIK-terms in the NT is a major strand of usage. The noun SiKaioouvri is used
four times injudicial settings. There is Paul's reference in the Areopagus sermon that
God "has fixed a day on which he will judge the world in righteousness (EV f] \ieXkei
KpivEiv xi)v oiKoupEvnv EV SiKaioouvri) by a man whom he has appointed" (Acts 17:31
ESV). In Hebrews there are two references that both seem best understood in terms of the
judicial role of the OT kings: (1) "Your throne, O God, is forever and ever, the scepter of
uprightness is the scepter of your kingdom. You have loved righteousness and hated
iniquity" (Heb 1:8-9 quoting Ps 44:7-8LXX [45:6-7EB/7-8MT]); (2) the interpretation of
Melchizedek as "king of righteousness" (Heb 7:2). And finally, the Apocalypse of John
informs us that the exalted Lord Jesus, seated on a white horse, is "called Faithful and
True, and in righteousness he judges and makes war (EV SiKaioouvri Kpivsi Kai 7ioX£p£i)"
(Rev 19:11 ESV). In addition to the noun, the adjective SiKaioc192 and the adverb
12
Luke 12:57; John 5:20; 7:24; 2 Thess 1:5-6; 2 Tim 4:8; Rev 15:3; 16:5,7; 19:2.
SiKaicoc193 are also used in a judicial sense in the NT, in some cases focusing on God's
judicial activity of meting out his just judgment upon the wicked. Finally, it should also
be noted that Paul uses the NT hapax SucaioKpiaia when he speaks of "the day of wrath
when God's righteous judgment will be revealed (EV fipspa opyfjc Kai d7roKaA,u\|/£coc
SiKaiOKpiaiaq xou OEOU)" (Rom 2:5 ESV).
The ethical usage of SiKaioouvn in the NT is by far the most common and can be
summarized quickly. For example, "the way of righteousness" (fj 686c xfjc Sucaioouvric)
is used twice (Matt 21:32; 2 Pet 2:21), and "fruit of righteousness" (Kapnbq Sucaioouvnc)
is found three times (Phil 1:11; Heb 12:11; James 3:18). As in the OT, ethical
righteousness is also found with verbs of doing: JXOIECO + Sucaioauvnv (Matt 6:1; 1 John
2:29; 3:7, 10; Rev 22:11) and Epydôpai + SiKaioauvnv (Acts 10:35; Heb 11:33). Other
examples of ethical righteousness in the NT include: Paul's statement that Elymas the
magician was an "enemy of all righteousness" (Acts 13:10); the reference in Hebrews to
"the word of righteousness" (Heb 5:13); the language of suffering "for righteousness'
sake" (Matt 5:10; 1 Pet 3:14); Noah as "a preacher of righteousness" (2 Pet 2:5); and the
affirmation that we are waiting for new heavens and a new earth "in which righteousness
dwells" (2 Pet 3:13).
The seven instances of SiKaioouvri in Matthew194 have received particular
attention, with commentators divided over the interpretation of this important term. Some
take all seven occurrences in a purely ethical sense as the moral conduct required of
disciples in the kingdom of God.195 The ethical meaning is undeniable in the statement,
193
Luke 23:40-41; 1 Pet 2:23.
m
Matt 3:15; 5:6, 10, 20; 6:1, 33; 21:32.
193
Benno Przybylski, Righteousness in Matthew and His World of Thought (SNTMS 41; Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1980).
"For 1 tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you
will never enter the kingdom of heaven" (Matt 5:20 ESV).
Others argue that SiKaioouvn, is used, at least in some of the seven instances, in
the OT iustitia salutifera sense of God's salvific activity.196 In my view, there are only
two instances in Matthew where this interpretation is just barely plausible: Matt 3:15 and
5:6. Let us begin with Matt 3:15, where Jesus says to John the Baptist, "Let it be so now,
for thus it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness (nXx\p&oa\ 7iaaav SiKaioauvnv)"
(ESV). Because this statement occurs in the context of Jesus' baptism and anointing as
the Messiah who has come to save his people from their sins, it is plausible to see a
salvific meaning for SiKaioouvn here. The problem is that this is not how the iustitia
salutifera language works in the OT. In the passages in the Psalms and Isaiah that we
examined in Chapter 4, we saw that there is always a controversy in which the wicked are
oppressing the righteous and God comes in his judicial capacity to execute his righteous
judgment upon the oppressors, thereby vindicating the godly. The judicial controversy
context is absent in Matt 3:15. Furthermore, in the OT it is never said that someone must
do something in order to "fulfill" the righteousness of God, a locution that simply makes
no sense in terms of God's judicial activity which delivers and vindicates. It is more
likely, then, that Matt 3:15 is to be understood as saying that through baptism Jesus
Donald A. Hagner, "Righteousness in Matthew's Theology," in Worship, Theology and Ministry in the
Early Church: Essays in Honor of Ralph P. Martin (JSNTSup 87; ed. Michael J. Wilkins and Terence
Paige; Sheffield: JSOT. 1992), 101-20; idem, Matthew 1-13 (WBC 33A; Dallas: Word Books, 1993), 56.
Hagner recognizes the unavoidable ethical meaning of Sucatoauvr) in Matt 5:20 and 6:1, both of which are
in reference to the conduct expected of Jesus' disciples. He argues for an explicitly salvific interpretation in
the two occurrences of otKaioauvn, in connection with John the Baptist (Matt 3:15; 21:32) and the one
occurrence in the fourth beatitude (Matt 5:6), which he interprets as the desire for eschatological salvation.
In the remaining two occurrences (Matt 5:10 and 6:33), he recognizes that ethical righteousness is in view
at the lexical level, but he wants to qualify this by noting the discourse concept of Matthew's theological
presupposition that "the demand is conditioned by the gift upon which it depends." "Righteousness in
Matthew's Theology," 115.1 agree with this latter point, as long as lexical and discourse concepts are kept
distinct. That means, in the end, our disagreement is only about the interpretation of StKatoauvn, in Matt
3:15; 5:6; 21:32.
identifies with his people in order to take up the role of Israel by identifying with its
disobedience and securing its obedience. This interpretation is corroborated by the second
reference to John's baptismal ministry in Matthew, where Jesus berates those who
rejected him: "John came to you in the way of righteousness (EV OSCO SiKaioauvn,^), and
you did not believe him, but the tax collectors and the prostitutes believed him" (Matt
21:32 ESV). John's message was a baptism of repentance in view of the coming of the
day of judgment, a strongly ethical call to return to the righteousness that God requires so
as to flee from the wrath to come. This is why John initially questioned the
appropriateness of Jesus submitting to baptism. But it was "fitting" for Jesus to be
baptized, for through his anointing he was committing himself to a life of obedience
culminating in his atoning death under the eschatological wrath of God (proleptically
anticipated in his baptism), thereby fulfilling all ethical righteousness. On this
interpretation, the salvific implication that initially led us to consider the plausibility of
the iustitia salutifera interpretation of Matt 3:15 is upheld. Yet that salvific implication
arises less from the lexical concept of SiKaioouvn itself than from the discourse concept
that Jesus, as the representative of his people, is identifying with them in their situation of
unrighteousness in order "to fulfill all (ethical) righteousness (on their behalf)." This
interpretation also makes the best sense of the phrase "«// righteousness" (jidoav
SiKaioauvnv).
The second instance of SiKaioauvn, that has plausibly been interpreted in reference
to saving righteousness is in the fourth beatitude of the Sermon the Mount: "Blessed are
those who hunger and thirst for righteousness (oi 7IEIVCOVXEC Kai SiycovxEC xfjv
SiKaioauvnv), for they shall be satisfied" (Matt 5:6 ESV). If interpreted in terms of the
OT iustitia salutifera concept, the meaning is "blessed are those who hunger and thirst
for the coming eschatological salvation." It makes some sense to speak of the persecuted
disciples hungering and thirsting for God's justice, vindication, and deliverance in the
coming eschatological age. However, the OT language of saving/delivering righteousness
always has God's righteousness in view (typically by adding a divine pronoun: "my, his,
your"); here, we have the word "righteousness" absolutely with no indication that it is
God's vindication that is desired. Further, there are no examples of the language of
hungering or thirsting after God's saving righteousness in the OT, nor is the feeding
imagery, "for they shall be satisfied/filled (xopxaa9f|aovxai)," ever associated with God's
vindicating iustitia salutifera in the Psalms and Isaiah. "Hungering and thirsting after
righteousness" seems to be the same thing as "seeking first the kingdom of God and his
righteousness" (Matt 6:33). Given the emphatic theme of the ethical righteousness
expected of Jesus' disciples, it makes better sense to take all five occurrences of
SiKaioouvri in the Sermon in a consistently ethical manner. We must acknowledge that
for Matthew the demand is always grounded in the gift of the saving grace brought by the
coming of the kingdom in the person of Jesus.197 But this broader discourse concept does
not enter into the lexical concept of SiKaioouvri per se.
This brings us, then, to the three occurrences of SiKaioouvri 9EOU outside of the
Pauline corpus (Matt 6:33; James 1:20; 2 Pet 1:1).
"But seek first the kingdom of God and his righteousness, and all these things will
be added to you (CJTXEIXE SE Ttpcoxov XTJV paoilEiav Kai xr\v SiKaioauvnv auxou, Kai xauxa
197
This is Donald Hagner's main concern in his essay "Righteousness in Matthew's Theology," a concern
that I share, against those who would attempt to paint a picture of a thoroughly rabbinic Matthew with an
allegedly nomistic soteriology in shaip contrast with Paul's soteriology of grace. For a helpful critique of
the attempt to read Matthew's theology as a species of Judaism, sec Hagner, "Matthew: Apostate,
Reformer, Revolutionary?" NTS 49 (2003): 193-209.
7tdvxa 7ipoox£9Y]a£xai upiv)" (Matt 6:33 ESV). If taken out of context, it may be tempting
to read this statement in the Reformational/Pauline sense of the righteousness of God as a
gift. This interpretation is supported by the verb 3ipoox£0f|O£xai, which could be taken as
implying that "all these (temporal) things" are bestowed in addition to the spiritual gift of
righteousness or salvation. However, the problem with this view is that it ignores the
four strongly ethical instances of SiKaioouvri in the passage leading up to this point in the
Sermon on the Mount (Matt 5:6, 10, 20; 6:1). Jesus has urged his disciples to hunger and
thirst after ethical righteousness (5:6), to be willing to suffer for the sake of the ethical
righteousness set forth by Jesus (5:10), to excel in ethical righteousness beyond the
external righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees (5:20), and to take care that they do
not practice their deeds of righteousness before other people to be seen by them (6:1).
With this context in view, we come to the exhortation of Matt 6:33 to seek first God's
kingdom and righteousness. The whole thrust of the Sermon on the Mount is that it is
Jesus' teaching concerning the righteousness of the kingdom, that is, the kind of
righteous life demanded of those who are identified with Jesus as those who have a share
in his saving reign. This verse "is so bound up in the general thought of the Sermon on
the Mount that it is out of the question to interpret dikalosyne in the Pauline sense of
God"s righteousness through which man is justified."198 Even Hagner admits that in this
instance "it is difficult to exclude altogether the possibility of a reference to ethical
righteousness" and that the phrase "his righteousness" focuses on "the unique
righteousness defined by Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount and differentiated from that
of the scribes and Pharisees (5.20)."199
198
Przybylski, Righteousness in Matthew. 90.
199
Hagner, "Righteousness in Matthew's Theology," 115.
The second occurrence of "the righteousness of God" in the non-Pauline portion
of the NT is James 1:19-20, which reads: "Let every person be quick to hear, slow to
speak, slow to anger; for the anger of man does not produce200 the righteousness of God
(opyn ydp dvSpdc Sucaioauvnv 9EOU OUK Epyd^sxai)" (ESV). Although Stuhlmacher tries
901
to interpret SiKaioouvn, 9EOU as God's iustitia salutifera. in the context "the
righteousness of God" is probably not used in this OT sense, since there is no contextual
frame of reference to suggest that James is thinking of God's saving or vindicating
activity.202 It is best to take SiKaioouvri 9EOU here in an ethical sense, i.e., as denoting the
righteous behavior that God expects of his people, echoing Jesus' own usage in the
Sermon on the Mount (Matt 5:6, 10, 20; 6:33), with OEOU taken as an objective
genitive.203 The meaning of the verse is brought out well by the NIV's interpretive
translation: "for man's anger does not bring about the righteous life that God desires," or,
as one commentator puts it, "the righteousness which God approves."204 It is possible that
the exhortation to be slow to anger, together with the warning that man's anger does not
bring about the righteousness desired by God, was intended as a corrective to the Jewish
200
The verb epydÊrai is used here transitively as a synonym of Karepydc,£Tai (which, as it happens, is a
variant reading found in C* P 0246 and the Majority text). BDAG spydôpat 2c, "bring about, give rise to
as proceeds from work." Cp. "Godly grief produces (epyaêrat) a repentance that leads to salvation without
regret" (2 Cor 7:10 ESV).
201
Stuhlmacher, Gerechtigkeit Gottes, 191-94.
202
Douglas Moo, The Letter oj James (PNTC: Grand Rapids: Eerdmans/Leicester, England: Apollos,
2000), 83-84.
203
To the argument that the genitive Oeou must be subjective in keeping with the subjective genitive avSpoc;
("the anger of man"), Martin Dibelius replies that it is possible for a rhetorical parallelism in case to carry
with it a simultaneous difference in syntactical function. Martin Dibelius, James (Hermencia; rev. Hcinrich
Greeven; trans. Michael A. Williams; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1976), 110-11 n. 12. He cites the datives in
Rom 12:10-13 as an example. I would also point to the parallelism of old + ace. in Rom 4:25, first with a
causal meaning ("he was delivered up on account of our transgressions"), then in the parallel with a telic
meaning ("raised for our justification").
204
James Hardy Ropes, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle of St. James (ICC;
Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1948), 169. So Moo, The Letter of James, 84; Ziesler, The Meaning of
Righteousness, 135; Gottlob Schrenk, "5ucr|, KTA." TDNT2.200.
view that righteous anger or zeal on behalf of God's holiness can be an engine for the
promotion of righteousness." D
If the first two instances are readily understandable in straightforward ethical
terms, the third instance of SiKaioouvri 9EOU in the NT outside of Paul is a little different
and probably focuses on the attribute of God. It occurs in the opening salutation of the
Second Epistle of Peter: "Simon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, to those who
through the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ have received a faith as
precious as ours (xoic iooxipov f|piv Xaypvoxv Tiiaxiv EV Sucaioauvn, xou 9EOU fjpcov Kai
acoxfjpoc 'Inaou Xpiaxou)" (2 Pet 1:1 NIV). Most commentators agree that this instance
of SiKaioauvn OEOU is not to be interpreted in a Pauline sense as the gift of righteousness
by faith (since this verse has the relationship the other way around, namely, that faith has
been obtained by God's righteousness), nor in the OT sense ofiustitia salutifera™ but in
reference to God's attribute of justice or fairness. This is indicated by the reference to
iooxipoc Jrioxic ("a faith of equal standing with ours" ESV). As we saw in Chapter 3,
"Righteousness in Extra-Biblical Greek," Aristotle defined justice as "the proportionate,"
and as we saw earlier in this chapter, Philo said that equality (iaoxTjc) is the first principle
of justice. God is viewed here as a divine patron who grants faith with perfect fairness
" Ropes, The Epistle of St. James, 170; James B. Adamson, The Epistle of James (NICNT; Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1976), 78-79. According to Martin Dibelius, the anti-Jewish polemic interpretation of James
1:20 was advocated by Willibald Beyschlag in Kritisch-exegetisches Handbuch tiber den Brief des Jacobus
(KEK 15; Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 18976). Dibelius, however, argues that it is a generic
Wisdom saying rather than anti-Jewish polemic. Dibelius, James, 110 n. 12.
206
Several French interpreters have taken SiKaioauvn, Oeou in 2 Pet 1:1 as God's saving righteousness: A.-
L. Descamps, Les Justes et la Justice dans les Evangiles et le Christianisme primitif (Louvain: Publications
Univcrsitaires de Louvain/Gembloux: J. Duculot, 1950), 58, 92; H. Cazelles, "Apropos de quclques textes
difficiles relatifs a la justice de Dieu dans l'Ancien Testament," RB 58 (1951): 169-88; Ceslas Spicq, Les
Epitres de Saint Pierre (SB; Paris: Gabalda, 1966), 208.
and equality, without showing any favoritism." Why might it be a concern whether God
grants equal faith in accord with his justice or fairness? To answer this question, it is
tempting to think that the author of 2 Peter is attempting to reassure Gentile Christians
that their faith is of equal value with that of Jewish believers in Jesus. But given the
absence of any allusions in the letter to the Jew-Gentile question, it is more likely that the
contrast is between the apostles and Christians of subsequent generations who may have
worried that their faith was of lesser value than the faith of those who were eyewitnesses
of the glory of Christ (cp. 2 Pet 1:16-18).208
The usage of Sucaioauvri in the non-Pauline portions of the New Testament is
consistent with the foregoing. Recall that I have brought these passages to bear here in
this context as instances of Jewish writings composed in Greek in order to test the
hypothesis that the word SiKaioauvn, in Jewish Greek has taken on a Hebraic saving or
relational meaning due to the influence of the OT. However, this theory has not been
bome out by the NT evidence. The vast majority of NT occurrences outside of Paul are in
reference to either ethical or judicial righteousness. We have seen, furthermore, that the
three instances of SiKaioouvn, OEOU (Matt 6:33; James 1:20; 2 Pet 1:1) are not used in an
OT iustitia salutifera sense, much less in any way that might support a relational
interpretation of righteousness. The closest that SiKaioauvn comes to denoting saving
righteousness in the non-Pauline portion of the NT is in the statement of Matt 3:15, "Let
it be so now, for thus it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness" (ESV), but it arises to
that salvific meaning through the meaning "righteousness before God" (a righteousness
207
Peter H. Davids, The Letters of 2 Peter andJude (PNTC; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans/Leicester, England:
Apollos, 2006), 162-63; Earl J. Richard. Reading 1 Peter, Jude, and 2 Peter: A Literary and Theological
Commentary (Macon, Georgia: Smyth & Helwys, 2000), 321.
208
J. N. D. Kelly, A Commentary on the Epistles of Peter and of Jude (HNTC; New York: Harper & Row,
1969), 296-97.
achieved by Jesus as the messianic representative of his people) rather than by directly
alluding to the OT language of God's delivering and vindicating activity on behalf of the
oppressed.
E. Conclusions
Our survey of Jewish literature has been wide-ranging and exhaustive. We have
paid special attention to the transitions, the continuities and discontinuities, as we moved
from the Dead Sea Scrolls, to the Jewish literature composed in Hebrew but extant in
Greek, Latin, or Ethiopic, to the Jewish writings composed in Greek, including the New
Testament. This has been a most illuminating exercise, for it has yielded a number of
significant conclusions that are decisive for our thesis.
First, the Qumran sectarian writings are the primary Jewish writings outside of the
OT that are preserved in Hebrew and which demonstrate the highest degree of continuity
with OT usage. The three usages of ethical righteousness, judicial righteousness, and
righteousness in terms of correctness continue in the Dead Sea Scrolls. We also see the
high concentration of God's righteousness ("his, your righteousness" where the pronouns
refer to God)209 in the DSS with a meaning that continues the salvific/delivering usage of
the Psalms and Isaiah in which God vindicates his oppressed people by punishing their
enemies. However, the salvific usage has been extended and spiritualized, since the
enemies in the DSS are spiritual entities such as Satan, the evil inclination, and sin. Those
in Israel who have repented of their sins and joined the covenant community receive
forgiveness, cleansing, and a new heart, so that their (ethically transformative)
"judgment" is "by the righteousness of God." This spiritualized usage of "God's

209
"My righteousness" (in reference to God's righteousness) does not occur in the DSS.
righteousness" occurs in one or two passages in the OT (e.g., "Deliver me from
bloodguiltiness, O God, O God of my salvation, and my tongue will sing aloud of your
righteousness," Ps 51:14EB/16MT ESV), but the Qumran sect has extended and developed
this train of thought and applied it to the renewal of the Mosaic covenant that they
believed had occurred within their sectarian Yahad by God's electing grace.
Second, this spiritualized DSS usage of the language of God's saving
righteousness is not carried over either into the Jewish literature composed in Hebrew but
extant in Greek, Latin, or Ethiopic, or into the Jewish literature composed in Greek, or
into the non-Pauline portion of the New Testament considered as Jewish literature. There
are a handful of salvific usages in these corpora, but they are not as developed as the DSS
usage. Rather, these passages seem to be either allusions to Isaiah (Baruch 5:2, 9) or
Messianic (T Jud. 22:1-2; T Zeb. 9:8), and thus have a strongly vindicatory sense in
which Israel will be delivered from exilic oppression and restored to her former glory.
The one (non-Pauline) NT instance of "righteousness" that has a clearly salvific meaning,
Matt 3:15, is salvific only in terms of the discourse concept of the Messianic baptismal
context and in syntagmatic collocation as the object of the word "to fulfill," while the
lexical concept of SiKaioouvn, itself'in this verse is best classified as "ethical
righteousness before God." Also, it must be noted that Matt 3:15 does not use the
language of the righteousness of God, so this sets it apart even further from the
Sprachgebrauch of OT iustitia salutifera discourse.
Third, the category of "righteousness before God" is a significant development in
both the literature composed in Hebrew but extant in Greek, Latin, or Ethiopic and the
literature composed in Greek. This concept of "righteousness before God" is present in

the OT, but in these two corpora the notion is extended and developed in terms of strict
obedience to the Mosaic Law.
Fourth, the usage of "righteousness" in the sense of doing something correctly, or
with integrity, or keeping one's word, that we saw in the OT continues in a very limited
fashion in the Jewish literature composed in Hebrew. It does not continue in the Jewish
literature composed in Greek, including the non-Pauline portion of the NT. This is a
decisive blow to the viewpoint, first articulated by Cremer and taken up by New
Perspective scholars, that the Greek word SiKaioouvri has a Hebraic, relational, and
covenantal meaning in Paul. The covenantal usage was already quite limited in the OT to
begin with, and it was in any case distinct from the sphere of God's iustitia salutifera in
terms of his judicial activity that results in the deliverance and vindication of his
oppressed servants. Although the "correctness" language does occur in the DSS and the
other Jewish literature composed in Hebrew, it does not carry over into the Jewish
literature composed in Greek. The cord is broken at this point. This then leads us to the
determination that SiKaioouvn did not become a Greek word that could be used with this
particular Hebrew meaning in the mental furniture of Greek-speaking and Greek-writing
Judaism. Therefore, we must set aside as incorrect one of the linguistic pillars on which
New Perspective scholars have attempted to build their view that SiKaioouvn OEOU in Paul
is a cipher for "God's covenant faithfulness."
Fifth, the iustitia salutifera language that is so dominant in the Psalms and Isaiah,
and in the DSS in a spiritualized form, is possible in Jewish literature composed in Greek.
However, it is quite limited (two times in the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs) and
seems to occur only in messianic contexts looking ahead to the expectation of the
restoration of Israel. On the basis of our criterion, then, we cannot say that the iustitia
salutifera usage of SiKaioouvn, 9EOU is impossible in Paul. However, we would need to
see some contextual indicators that he is using it in this precise sense - not in Cremer's
relational/covenantal sense, but in the precise sense of God's saving activity understood
as a subcategory of his iustitia distributiva, since it is his judicial activity of punishing the
oppressors and vindicating the righteous, which is very different from the NPP
interpretation of SiKaioouvn 9EOU as "God's covenant faithfulness."

Chapter 6
Exegesis of AiKaioavvij ©sot) in Paul
In the preceding chapters we have observed that in all three corpora - extra-
biblical Greek, the Old Testament, and Jewish literature - the term "righteousness" (sans
the genitive) can be used in two primary ways: ethically and judicially (though there are
fine subdivisions within these two broad categories, and also a usage in reference to
"correctness" on occasion in the OT). When used judicially in the OT and in Jewish
writings, "righteousness" primarily denotes distributive justice. When used ethically in
the OT and Jewish writings, "righteousness" primarily denotes that behavior or conduct
which is in accordance with God's law and which is approved by God in his sight. The
judicial element comes into play insofar as God, as the divine Judge, recognizes the
righteousness of humans and deems it to be pleasing in his sight. This shows that
ultimately the two broad categories of usage are integrated theologically, at least for the
OT and Jewish thought.
The righteousness of God in Jewish Greek can be used with two main meanings:
(1) God's distributive justice; and (2) his punitive judicial activity which results in the
deliverance of his people from their oppressors (iustitia salutifera in the proper sense).
This semantic range is available to Paul; the existence of this semantic range does not
385
Chapter 6: Exegesis of AiKaioowrj 0eoO m Paul 386
automatically decide the question of exactly which usage Paul is selecting in any given
instance of SiKaioouvri 9EOU in his writings.
In this chapter, we turn from Paul's linguistic context - extra-biblical Greek
usage, the Old Testament (Hebrew and Greek), and the Jewish literature - to Paul
himself. As we do so, we must keep the results from the preceding chapters in view, since
the semantic range provides the scope of possible options within which we may position
and understand Paul's usage. On the one hand, Paul's usage is tethered to the semantic
range and cannot step very far out of its boundaries, as happens with the view that
SiKaioouvri 9EOU means "God's covenant faithfulness." On the other hand, Paul is a
creative theological thinker who took his OT-Jewish inheritance and transformed it in
light of his sudden conversion through the Damascus-road Christophany.' Therefore, we
cannot a priori limit Paul's usage to all of the meanings that went before him, but must
allow for the possibility that he transformed the linguistic usage with his own theological
insights. As Cranfield says:
While it is of course true that the righteousness language of the OT and of late
Judaism is the background against which Paul's expression SiKaioouvn 9EOU must
be understood, there is no reason to assume that he must have used the language
he took over just precisely as it had been used. We must allow for the possibility
of his having used what he took over with freedom and originality/
A. AiKaioctivn 0£ot> as "God's Covenant Faithfulness"
In the first section of this chapter, I critique the view that Sucaioauvri OEOU in Paul
should be taken as a cipher for "God's covenant faithfulness." The main exponents of this
1
Seyoon Kim, The Origin of Paul's Gospel (WUNT II/4; Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1981).
2
C. E. B. Cranfield, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans (ICC; Edinburgh:
T. & T.Clark, 1975), 1.97.
Chapter 6: Exegesis of AiKoiocruvri ©eon in Paul - 387
view are Hermann Cremer, Ernst Kasemann, James D. G. Dunn, N. T. Wright, and
Richard B. Hays. These scholars do not rest their case solely on OT and Jewish usage, for
as important as these background texts may be, the decisive question is whether Paul
himself uses SiKaioouvn, 9EOU in this covenantal sense. These scholars agree in their
claim that exegesis of the Pauline texts does in fact support this covenantal interpretation.
Accordingly, we will examine the main Pauline passages to which these scholars appeal,
namely, Rom 3:1-8 and 3:25-26. In addition to these two passages in the third chapter of
Romans, another important passage is 2 Cor 5:21, which is particularly associated with
N. T. Wright's exegesis, and so we will also examine his interpretation of that passage.
Romans 3:1-8
The importance of this passage cannot be overestimated. Kasemann appealed to it
because it speaks of "God's faithfulness" (f) nioxiq xov 9EOU) and "God's righteousness"
(9EOU SiKaioouvn) in the same context, a fact which he took as support for seeing them as
interchangeable terms. This passage is filled with exegetical difficulties, many of which
we will not be able to address here. In order to get our bearings, it will perhaps be useful
to set forth the whole paragraph as follows:
Then what advantage has the Jew? Or what is the value of circumcision? Much
in every way. To begin with, the Jews were entrusted with the oracles of God.
3
What if some were unfaithful? Does their faithlessness nullify the faithfulness of
God (pf) f| a t a x i a auxcov xf|v 7iioxiv xou 9EOU Kaxapyijasi;)? By no means! Let
God be true though every one were a liar, as it is written, "That you may be
justified in your words, and prevail when you are judged." But if our
unrighteousness serves to show the righteousness of God (E! SE f| dSiKia f)pcov
9EOU Sucaioauvnv auvioxnaiv), what shall we say? That God is unrighteous to
inflict wrath on us? (I speak in a human way.) 6By no means! For then how could
God judge the world? 7But if through my lie God's truth abounds to his glory,
why am I still being condemned as a sinner? 8And why not do evil that good may
Chapter 6: Exegesis of Aucaioown. ©eon in Paul 388
come?—as some people slanderously charge us with saying. Their condemnation

is just. (Rom 3:1-8 ESV)
There are two main options for interpreting 9EOU SiKaioouvri in v 5. The first
option is to take the phrase in a purely positive sense, as basically equivalent to ij Tiioxic;
xou 9EOU in v 3 and f\ dA,f|0eia xou 9EOU in v 7. Ernst Kasemann is the chief representative
of this interpretation, and he is followed by other commentators.4 The second option is to
take it as a neutral term that encompasses the rightness of God in judging human sin.^
Advocates of the first option make several arguments. One of their main
arguments is to show the parallels between v 3 and v 5. Verse 3 implies, by way of
rhetorical question, that human faithlessness does not nullify the faithfulness of God.
Verse 5, which seems to resume the thought of v 3 and restate it in an affirmative form,
says that human unrighteousness merely serves to demonstrate the righteousness of God.
Thus the two verses are making parallel statements, only with v 5 using terms from the
AIK-root rather than the niET-root. Richard B. Hays sets forth the parallels using the
following tabular structure.6
3
Kasemann writes: "Paul identifies JIIOTK; and 5tKatoaovt] TOO Oeon by making them parallel, as is possible
from the OT understanding of God's righteousness as his prevailing covenant faithfulness (durchsetzender
Bundestreue)" Kasemann, Commentary on Romans (trans. Geoffrey W. Bromiley; Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1980), 79 (=An die Romer [HNT 8a; 4th ed.; Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1980], 74).
4
E.g., James D. G. Dunn, Romans 1-8 (WBC 38A; Dallas: Word Books, 1988), 134; Robert Jewett,
Romans (Hermeneia; Minneapolis: Fortress, 2007), 247; Peter Stuhlmacher, Paul's Letter to the Romans: A
Commentary (trans. Scott J. Hafcmann; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1994), 53.
5
E.g., Douglas J. Moo, The Epistle to the Romans (NICNT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996), 190; David
Hill, Greek Words and Hebrew Meanings: Studies in the Semantics of Soteriological Terms (SNTSMS 5;
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1967), 158; Thomas R. Schreiner, Romans (BECNT; Grand
Rapids: Baker, 1998), 156-57.
6
Hays argues that Qeov Sucatocruvn does not occur independently in this passage but "stands as one of a
series of apparently synonymous expressions, all affirming God's integrity as contrasted to humanity's lack
of integrity .... Clearly, these expressions function interchangeably in this passage and therefore interpret
one another." Richard B. Hays, "Psalm 143 and the Logic of Romans 3," JBL 99 (1980): 110.
Chapter 6: Exegesis of AiKaiocruvri ©eon in Paul 389
Table 15. Parallel Terms in Romans 3:1-8

avdpomoq 0EO<;
Verse 3 f\ d7iioxia auxcov xf|V TttOXlV xou 9EOU

Verse 4 naq dv9pco7ioc; i|/£uaxr|c; 6 9EOC; dXn9fjc;
Verse 5 f| dSiKia f)pcov 9EOU SiKaioouvri
Verse 7 EV xcp epco \|/£uopaxt r) aA,f|0Eia xou 9EOU
This schematic of parallelisms is taken as proof that just as dTtioxia, d8ucia, and vj/Euapa
are synonymous terms describing human covenant unfaithfulness, so God's 7iioxic;,
SiKaioouvn, and dA.fj9£ia are "functionally equivalent terms"7 denoting his covenant
faithfulness to Israel, that is, his unwavering commitment to fulfill the Abrahamic
promises in spite of Israel's unfaithfulness.
There is no doubt that the first half of the paragraph (Rom 3:1-3) deals with the
question of God's covenant faithfulness. This follows from a consideration of the
preceding context (Rom 2:17-29), where Paul, in a diatribe with an imaginary Jewish
interlocutor,8 shows that the mere possession of the Mosaic Law and the mere outward
rite of circumcision will not avail to provide the Jews with the status of "righteous before
God" (Sucaioi 7rapd xcp 9ECO) at the day of judgment (Rom 2:13). If they would be
righteous before God by means of the Law, they must actually keep the Law. But they do
not, resulting in God's name being blasphemed among the Gentiles, as Paul makes clear
in Rom 2:17-24. Being outwardly circumcised is not what makes one a true Jew, but
circumcision of the heart (Rom 2:28-29). This then raises the interlocutor's objection,
voiced in Rom 3:1: "Then what advantage has the Jew? Or what is the value of
7
Hays, HOn. 14.
8
Stanley K. Stowers, The Diatribe and Paul's Letter to the Romans (SBLDS 57; Chico: Scholars Press,
1981); Thomas H. Tobin, Paul's Rhetoric in Its Contexts: The Argument of Romans (Peabody:
Hendrickson, 2004), 88-98.
Chapter 6: Exegesis of Aucaioouvn, ©sou in Paul - 390
circumcision?" (ESV). In response, Paul acknowledges that the Jews have been entrusted
with the very oracles of God, that is, they have been given the divine revelation
summarized in the Torah, including both the promises made to Abraham and the giving
of the divine Law setting forth Israel's response of grateful obedience. The fact that some
Jews have been unbelieving or faithless does not nullify God's faithfulness (Rom 3:3). It
is a theological non-negotiable for Paul that God's election of his people is irrevocable
(Rom 11). That God is a covenant-keeping God is foundational to his gospel, since God's
sending the Messiah is the fulfillment of his promises ("to show God's truthfulness, in
order to confirm the promises given to the patriarchs," Rom 15:8 ESV).
But several considerations strongly suggest that the specific lexeme 9EOU
SiKaioouvn in Rom 3:5 should not be taken as equivalent to f) marie xou 9EOU (God's
covenant faithfulness) in v 3.
First, Kasemann's reading ignores the quotation of Psalm 50:6LXX (=51:4MT/EB)
intervening between v 3 and v 5. That quotation uses the verb SiKaioco, another term from
the AIK-root, thus making the transition from v 3 to v 5 less smooth. Psalm 50:6LXX says,
"Against you alone did I sin, and what is evil before you I did, so that you may be
justified in your words and be victorious when you go to law (67icoc dv 5ucaico9fic EV XOIC
Coyote aou Kai vucn,aEic EV xcp Kpiv£o9ai OE)" (NETS). In other words, the language of
God being "justified" or "proved right" has to do with a legal context in which there is
some sort of judicial activity taking place. Of course, Kpiv£o9ai in the phrase EV xcp
Kpiv£o9ai OE could be interpreted as a true passive, yielding the translation "when you are
Chapter 6: Exegesis of AiKonoauvn, ©eon in Paul • 391
judged" (ESV, NASB, BDAG)9 or as a deponent middle with an active sense, which
yields, "when you judge" (NIV) or "when you contend in a law suit."10 But in either case
there is a legal or judicial controversy in view in which humans and God are in a court-
room setting, in which case God must be the Judge. Thus, even in the case of the passive,
"when you are judged," God is still the Judge but he is being criticized by the unhappy
object of his judgments. So when in v 5 God's righteousness (9EOU SiKaioouvn) is
referred to, this must be understood as linking back to the quotation of Ps 50:6LXX in the
preceding verse. God's righteousness, then, on either interpretation of Kpiv£o9ai, is his
status as a SiKaioc Judge. To link v 5 back to v 3 as if 9EOU SiKaioouvn, were merely a
rephrasing of f\ 7uoxic xou 9EOU is to ignore the intervening verse (v 4), which introduces
a shift in perspective and language by means of the quotation of Psalm 50:6LXX with its
usage of the verb SiKaioco in the passive with reference to God.
Second, for Kasemann's positive reading of 9EOU SiKaioauvn, in Rom 3:5 to work,
Paufs quotation of Ps 50:6 in the preceding verse (Rom 3:4) would have to be taken
in a sense diametrically opposed to its meaning in the original context. In the psalm,
David is confessing his own sin and acknowledging that God is in the right to judge him:
"so that you may be justified (OTUQC dv SucaicoOfjc) in your words" (NETS). David
confesses his sin and acknowledges that it was against God alone that he sinned, so that
God might be proved right in his words of judgment against him. The righteousness of
God (in Ps 50:6LXX) is therefore not his saving faithfulness to keep his promises in spite
of David's sin, but his righteousness in judging David for his sin. As Thomas Schreiner
9
Dunn, 1.133-34 ("when you are on trial"); Kasemann, 81; William Sanday and Arthur C. Headlam, A
Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans (ICC; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1902),
72.
10
Cranfield, 182 n. 4; Jewett, 246; Moo, 188 and n. 53.
Chapter 6: Exegesis of AiKaiocruvn. ©eoii in Paul 392
argues, "In the OT context the purpose clause describes God's judging righteousness, not
his saving righteousness."'1 But while Paul sometimes applies OT passages in new ways,
he never quotes them against the thrust of their original context. "
Third, building on the previous point, Kasemann's interpretation requires one to
ignore or soften the purpose clause. O7tcoc + dv + the subjunctive. The purpose clause
from the Psalm quote is linked to the unquoted first half of the verse, "Against you alone
did I sin, and what is evil before you 1 did, so that you may be justified (67icoc dv
1^
Sucaico9fic) in your words" (NETS). David confesses that he has sinned against God
alone "in order that" (|S?f?7 / OTTCOC) God might be proved to be righteous in pronouncing
judicial sentence against him.14 David accuses himself in order to justify God, to
demonstrate that God is righteous. Paul has substituted for David's self-accusation his
own, "Let God be true though every one were a liar," to which he then appends the Ps
50:6LXX quote introduced by "as it is written." But the meaning is essentially the same.
David's confession of sin is the opposite of self-justification, which would make God a
liar. The purpose clause is therefore quite significant for understanding the flow of Paul's
argument and highlights the fact that the issue is no longer God's covenant faithfulness
11
Schreiner, Romans, 152.
12
Schreiner adds: "Paul would probably not contradict the OT meaning of the verse in citing it in Romans.
He does not always abide by the intended meaning of the OT text; he extends its meaning and applies it to
new situations. But he never turns the meaning of the text upside down - which would be demanded if
Kasemann were correct." Schreiner. Romans, 152; cp. John Piper, The Justification of God: An Exegetical
and Theological Study of Romans 9:1-23 (2nd ed.; Grand Rapids: Baker, 1993), 127 n. 14.
13
"The 'so that' (o7tcoi;) of the Psalm quote shows that God's (= 'you') vindication is the result of the
preceding statement in the psalm ... It is fair to conclude that Paul is using this Psalm quote in 3:4b to show
that man's sin vindicates God's judgment upon it." Piper, The Justification of God, 127.
14
"We must not weaken this |1?D? by understanding it of the consequence instead of the intention ... When
sin is revealed as such to a man, he himself must say Amen to the Divine penal sentence, just as David did
to that pronounced upon him by Nathan; to decide thus against one's self, in order that God may be in the
right and carry the point, is the very essence of penitence ... The sinner's accusation of himself justifies the
Divine righteousness." Franz Delitzsch, Biblical Commentary on the Psalms (London: Hodder &
Stoughton, 1888), 2.156-57.
Chapter 6: Exegesis of AiKaioouvu ©sou in Paul 393
but God's iustitia distributiva. As John Piper points out, Kasemann's interpretation
"would seem to offer no explanation for the 6na>qf 3 or at the very least would require
the 6na>q to be softened to the point of being almost a meaningless particle.
Fourth, while Kasemann and his followers want to orient the meaning of 9EOU
SiKaioouvri in v 5 by orienting it primarily in connection with the first half of the
paragraph (Rom 3:1-3), which has to do with God's faithfulness, I would argue that the
meaning of 9EOU SiKaioouvn, in v 5 is better understood by orienting it with the second
half of the paragraph (Rom 3:4-8). As 1 have acknowledged, the first half does indeed
deal with God's covenant faithfulness, but Paul seems to drop that topic for the time
being (to pick it up again in Rom 9-11), while in the second half of the paragraph, v 4-8,
he returns to the theme of God's righteous judgment (see xo Kpipa xou Oeov [2X] and
d7iOKaX,ui|/£coc SucaioKpiaiac xou 9EOU in Rom 2:2, 3, 5) that is the overall thrust of his
argument up to this point (Rom 1:18-2:29). It is not that the theme of God's covenant
faithfulness has been completely dropped, but that Paul is walking a tightrope as he tries
to balance two theological considerations: on the one hand, God's election of Israel, his
covenant revelation to Israel (xd Xojm xou 9EOU, Rom 3:2); and on the other hand, the
reality that God is a righteous judge and that he will not show favoritism to the Jews
simply because they are the recipients of these covenant blessings. The language of 9EOU
SiKaioouvri belongs to the second half of the balancing act, not the first. This is evident
when one reads Rom 3:5-6 as a unit:

5
But if our unrighteousness serves to show the righteousness of God, what shall
we say? That God is unrighteous to inflict wrath on us? (pf| dSucoc 6 9EOC 6
£7iicp£pcov xfiv opynv;) (I speak in a human way.) 6By no means! For then how
could God judge the world (enei n&q Kpivsi 6 Qebq xov Koopov;)? (ESV)
15
Piper, The Justification of God, 127 n. 14.
Chapter 6: Exegesis of Auccaocnjvn, ©eon m Paul - 394
The references to God's justice in inflicting wrath and judging the world make clear that
Paul is now speaking of God's impartial iustitia distributiva, not his faithfulness to
Israel's election and covenant. The question as to whether God is unjust (pf) dSucoc 6
9E6C.) to inflict wrath on sinners, coming right on the heels of the rhetorical question
about our unrighteousness serving to show God's righteousness, is particularly telling.
The logic of the diatribal back-and-forth here demonstrates that 9EOU SiKaioouvn, is the
positive counterpart of the negative (and immediately rejected with pf) ysvoixo)
statement, dSiKoc 6 9E6<;. Therefore, 9EOU SiKaioouvn, is tantamount to the affirmation,
SiKaioc 6 GEOC. The point of affirming God's righteousness, then, is not to repeat the
notion that God is faithful to his covenantal election of Israel, but to affirm that God is a
righteous Judge who justly inflicts his wrath on sinners.
Fifth, the language of "God's truth" and "human falsehood" in this paragraph has
been mistakenly interpreted as a set of code words for covenant faithfulness and covenant
breaking. But James Barr pointed out long ago the linguistic fallacy of the assumption
that dXn9£ia has taken on covenantal connotations because of the Hebrew words it
renders in the LXX.16 It is true that "the truth of God" can be used to refer to God's
faithfulness in keeping his promises (cp. "to show God's truthfulness [i)7i£p dA.n9£iac
GEOU], in order to confirm the promises given to the patriarchs," Rom 15:8 ESV), since
covenant-keeping is, logically, a species of truthfulness. But it is a fallacy to argue that
every reference to God's dXnGsia must always denote the specific form of truthfulness
that we call "covenant faithfulness." In the first chapter of Romans, r\ dXijGEia xou 9EOU
("they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather
16
James Barr, The Semantics of Biblical Language (Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1961), 161-205.
Chapter 6. Exegesis of Au«xiocr6vr| ©eou in Paul 395
than the Creator," Rom 1:25 NASB) simply denotes "the reality consisting of God
Himself and His self-revelation" in contrast with the futility of idolatry.17 Further
demonstrating that it is not a technical term, in chapter two, Paul refers to God's dA,n,9£ia
in the context of his judgment: "But we are sure that the judgment of God is according to
truth (xo Kpipa xou GEOU EOXIV Kaxd dX,fj9£iav) against them which commit such things"
(Rom 2:2 KJV). Furthermore, "the truth of God" in Rom 3:7 is also contrasted with "my
lie" (ESV, NASB), or "my falsehood" (NIV), which sheds light on the meaning of the
former phrase. It would appear from the context that "my lie/falsehood" is either (a) a
general term for the human condition of sinfulness, harking back to chapter one, where
human rebellion against God is characterized as "suppressing the truth in
unrighteousness" (1:18), "exchanging the truth of God for a lie" (1:25),18 or (b) a more
specific reference to the attempted self-justification of humans before God's just
judgment, claiming that they are not deserving of divine wrath, a reading that harks back
to v 4 in the immediate context, "Let God be true, and every human being a liar (naq SE
av9pco7toc. \|/£uaxr|c). As it is written: 'So that you may be proved right when you speak
and prevail when you judge'" (ESV). This latter interpretation would also fit nicely with
the statement later in the chapter: "Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to
those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be silenced and the whole world
held accountable to God (iva nav axopa cppayfj Kai u7r65ucoc yEvnxai naq 6 Koapoc xcp
9£cp)" (Rom 3:19 ESV). In any case, the meaning is not, "Let God be faithful to his
covenant, though every human being be a covenant-breaker," for that would apply only
to Israel's unfaithfulness to her special covenant status and election. Thus, "the truth of
17
Cranfield, Romans, 1.123.
18
Morris, Romans, 160 ("the falseness and sin of people").
Chapter 6: Exegesis of AiKaioouvn. ©sou in Paul •• 396
God" in v 7 is probably best interpreted as his veracity, integrity, and reliability in
judging human sin.19
Sixth, the transition from God's covenant faithfulness to his distributive justice is
not as harsh as it may appear at first, since, for Paul, the faithfulness of God is expressed
not only when he is maintaining Israel's election on the basis of his faithfulness to his
covenant promises, but also when he is judging Israel by bringing the negative sanctions
of the covenant to bear on covenant-breakers. God is faithful to the terms of his covenant
even when he punishes sinners, for the Mosaic Covenant promises not only life to those
who obey but also death and judgment for those who break the covenant. This fits with
an important OT text, Deut 32:4: "The Rock, his work is perfect, for all his ways are
justice (C25PP / dA.n9ivd). A God of faithfulness (HlfiQX 7<S! / 9EOC moxoc) and without
iniquity, just (p'HS / SiKaioc) and upright O ^ / daioc) is he" (ESV).20 The faithfulness
of God is thus expressed not only when he upholds his people on the basis of his election
but also when he judges the unfaithful within Israel for their breaking of the covenant.
Thus Rom 3:1-8 does not support the thesis that SiKaioouvri GEOU is a cipher for
"God's covenant faithfulness." As used in this context, it simply means God's justice in
judging human sin.
19
Schreiner, Romans, 157. See also my discussion of "faithfulness" in the Hebrew Bible in Chapter 4
above, where I showed that it can refer to God's integrity and reliability as a righteous Judge, e.g., "He wall
judge the world in righteousness, and the peoples in his faithfulness (injilOfcG / ev rfj aAnOsig aurou)" (Ps
96:13MT/95:13LXXESV).
20
"The assertion of God's absolute justice, even in the face of his judgment of his people, is familiar in the
OT. Particularly noteworthy, because of the many linguistic parallels with [Rom] 3:1-8 and because it is
followed by a recitation of the disasters brought on Israel by their unfaithfulness, is Deut 32:4." Moo,
Romans, 191 n. 75.
Chapter 6: Exegesis of AiKaioouvii ©sou in Paul 397
Romans 3:21-26
In this passage, Paul makes the turning point from the foregoing passage on the
wrath of God against both Jew and Gentile (1:18-3:20), to the new reality in Christ,
characterized by the revelation of the righteousness of God, using terminology that takes
up his thesis statement at the outset (1:16-17). The redemptive-historical transition from
wrath to grace is indicated by the terms "but now" (vuvi Ss) and "in the present time" (EV
xcp vov Kaipco) in Rom 3:21 and v 26 respectively. In spite of the voluminous scholarly
work and exegetical options, the thrust of the passage is clear: sinners are justified by
faith, apart from the works of the law, on the basis of the atoning death of Christ,
described here in cultic terms as "a means of propitiation ... in his blood" (iA,aoxfjpiov ...
91
EV xcp auxou ai'paxi, v 25).
Although a wide variety of interpretations of this passage exist, following Seyoon
Kim's analysis of the scholarly lay of the land, we may say that, broadly speaking, there
are two main types of interpretation of Rom 3:21-26.22
The first type of interpretation is regarded as the traditional one, and is advocated
by C. E. B. Cranfield. On this view, God's righteousness (ij SiKaioauvn auxou - 2x) in vv
25-26 is typically taken as the attribute of God's justice, which is upheld or demonstrated
by the atoning death of Christ. The emphasis in this interpretation of the passage falls on
21
Following Bultmann, I take the intervening words 5td niaxEwq as a phrase inserted by Paul into the pre-
existing primitive Jewish-Christian confessional formula to clarify that the justifying benefit of the atoning
death of Christ is appropriated by faith. Rudolf Bultmann, Theologie des Neuen Testaments (Tubingen:
Mohr Siebeck, 1948), 1.47. Most commentators, even those who do not necessarily adopt Bultmann's
thesis about Paul's quotation of an early formula, agree that sv x& aikou atpart likely goes with tâotfiptov
rather than niaxewc, (so Cranfield, 1.210; Dunn, 1.172; Jewett, 287-88: Moo, 237; Schreiner, 194). The
construction mcmc; + ev + object of faith (dative) does occur in the Pauline corpus, but the object is always
Christ himself (Gal 3:26; Eph 1:15; Col 1:4; 1 Tim 3:13; 2 Tim 1:13; 3:15), never his blood. Fitzmyer takes
EV x&> auTou aipari with the verb 7ipo£0£To (Fitzmyer, 341, 348).
22
Seyoon Kim, The Origin of Paul's Gospel, 278-80. Kim quotes Cranfield and Kasemann as the primary
representatives of these two main types of interpretation.
Chapter 6: Exegesis of AiKotiocruvn, ©sou in Paul 398
the necessity of the atonement, "to demonstrate God's justice." Although God is a God of
love and mercy, he could only forgive and justify sinners in a manner consistent with his
holiness and righteousness by means of the propitiatory death of Christ for our sins which
satisfied the demands of God's justice. There is thus, on this view, a kind of Anselmic
theory of the necessity of the atonement. Here is Cranfield's interpretive translation of vv
25-26:
25
whom God purposed to be by the shedding of his blood a propitiatory sacrifice,
the benefit to be appropriated by faith, in order to prove his righteousness (this
was necessary on account of the overlooking of past sins 2 in God's forbearance),
in order, I say, to prove his righteousness in the present time, so that he might be
righteous even in justifying the man who believes in Jesus.23
On this view, the phrase Sid xf)v 7tdp£oiv xcov 7ipoy£yovoxcov dpapxrjpdxQV EV xfj dvoxfj
xou 9EOU is a parenthesis explaining why Christ's atoning death was necessary. It was
necessary because the divine forbearance in passing over past sins and letting them go
unpunished had called God's justice into question. This interpretation depends on taking
7tdp£oic (a word that occurs only here in the entire Greek Bible) as "passing over," and
Sid + the accusative in the prepositional phrase (Sid xf|v ;r.dp£oiv ...) as "on account of
the overlooking of past sins." In addition, the noun EVSEIÎC, which occurs in the two
nearly identical purpose clauses, sic (changed to 7tpoc xfyv in v 26) EVSEIÎV xfjc
SiKaioouvr|c auxou, is taken with the meaning "proof, demonstration," so that the two
clauses would be translated, "in order to prove or demonstrate his justice."
Cranfield. 1.201. Italics his.

Chapter 6: Exegesis of AiK0tiocn3vr| ©eon in Paul 399
The second type of interpretation is that put forward nearly simultaneously and
(apparently) independently24 by Kasemann and Kiimmel in 1951-1952, setting forth a
new view that has now become the dominant one in NT scholarship.
If the first view focuses on the Anselmic notion of the atonement as a satisfaction
of divine justice, the second view shifts the meaning of the passage in a very different
direction, namely, the notion of the atonement as the expression of God's covenant
faithfulness resulting in the renewal of the covenant. In his commentary, published two
decades after the article, Kasemann provides his interpretive translation as follows:
Him God has publicly set forth as an expiation, (which is appropriated) through
faith in virtue of his blood. (This took place) to show (zum Erweis) his
righteousness in such a way that in divine forbearance sins were remitted; to
show (zum Erweis) his righteousness in the present hour of destiny, that he might
be righteous and might justify him who lives by faith in Jesus.26
Kiimmel's paraphrase of the key clause in v 25b is similar: "thereby he wanted to show
(erzeigen) his righteousness in remitting the sins committed during the time of his
patience."27 Whereas the first view interprets 7tdp£oic to mean "passing over" and the
clause as a whole is taken as a parenthesis, for Kasemann and Kiimmel the word TrdpEoic
is taken as "remission" in the fully soteric sense and therefore as synonymous with
dcpEoic. In keeping with the reinterpretation of Trdpsotc, the other key word in the
passage, EVSEIÎC (2X), is taken with the nuance of "display, showing," rather than the
traditional interpretation, "proof, demonstration." This shift in meaning may seem to be a
Judging by the fact that neither one cites the other in his original article on this passage.
25
Ernst Kasemann, "Zum Verstandnis von Romer 3,24-26," ZNW43 (1950/51): 150-54 (reprint: idem,
Exegetische Versuche und Besinnungen, Erster Band [Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1960], 96-
100); Werner Georg Kiimmel, "ntipEaic; und evSstîq: Ein Beitrag zum Verstandnis der paulinischen
Rechtfertigungslehre," ZTK 49 (1952): 154-67 (ET: "ndpeotc and evSet^tc; A Contribution to the
Understanding of the Pauline Doctrine of Justification," Distinctive Protestant and Catholic Themes
Reconsidered (Journal for Theology and the Church, Vol. 3), ed. Robert W. Funk [Tubingen: Mohr
Sicbcck/Ncw York: Harper & Row, 1967], 1-13).
26
Kasemann, Romans, 91 (= An die Romer [4th ed], 85).
"Kiimmel, 165 (= ET, 11).
Chapter 6: Exegesis of AIKCXIOOTJVTI ©gou in Paul 400
rather fine distinction, but it does in fact make a significant difference, for now the clause
is taken to mean that God's righteousness is displayed by means of the forgiveness of
sins through the atoning death of Christ. It must also be noted that in order for this view
to work, the Sid + ace. construction must be taken instrumentally (Kiimmel: "through the
remission of sins committed previously"), a usage that is possible but rare.28
This second interpretation rests primarily on the lexicography of the word
7tdp£oic, a word that occurs only here in the entire Greek Bible, thus forcing us to
examine its usage in extra-biblical Greek to determine its semantic range. It occurs most
frequently in the extra-biblical Greek literature, including Philo and Josephus, as a
medical term meaning "paralysis." It may be tempting to set the widespread medical
usage aside as irrelevant to our text, but it is illuminating when one considers that the
meaning "paralysis" is derived from the Jiapinpi root since paralysis is regarded as "a
slackening of strength." Thus the idea seems to be more along the lines of "letting go,"
rather than the positive, juridical idea of "acquittal, remission."
Moving to the non-medical usages, there are five extra-biblical passages that
commentators have wrangled over as more directly relevant to the interpretation of
7rdp£oic in our text. In the first extra-biblical passage, it has to do with "allowing one to
escape" unpunished (Plutarch, Comparatio Dionysii Bruti 2.3).31 Even Kiimmel
28
Kiimmel, 164 (= ET, 10-11), cites five passages: John 6:57; Rom 8:10, 20; Rev 12:11; 13:14.
29
Douglas A. Campbell, The Rhetoric of Righteousness in Romans 3.21-26 (JSNTSup 65; Sheffield: JSOT
Press, 1992), 46 n. 2. Philo, De/. 168; Proem. 143, 145; Josephus, Ant. 9.240; 11.236.
See LSJ Tidpeatc, II ("slackening of strength, paralysis") and 7iaptr|pi III ("relax, weaken") and IV ("yield,
give up").
31
"Therefore the Roman people felt at once a yearning for Caesar, and in consequence became harsh and
implacable towards his murderers; whereas Dion, for letting Dionysius escape from Syracuse, and for not
demolishing the tomb of the former tyrant, was held most culpable by his countrymen" (8to Kaiaapa psv
EuOix; ETtoOncrev 6 'Pcopaicov orjpoc;, cbare xakEnbq ysvEoOai Kai cmapatTnTOt; xolq dneKTovooi, Aicova 8' r)
Atovuoiovj napsafc; EK ZupaKouotov Kai TO pf) KaraoKdv|/ai xorj 7tpoiEpou xupdwou rov rdepov £7ramov
Chapter 6: Exegesis of AiKouocrovri ©sou m Paul 401
acknowledged that this supports the traditional "leaving sins unpunished" interpretation.
In the second case, 7r.dp£oic means "remission" of monetary debts (Phalaris, Epistulae
81.1),32 which would come the closest to the meaning desired by Kummel/Kasemann,
since they could argue that the remission of sins is a metaphorical extension of the
concept of the remission of debts (cp. dcpir|pi, dcpEoic). In the third, it is used to indicate
that God grants "relief to a chosen few from the adamantine chain of fate (Dio
Chrysostom, Orationes 30.19)/ 3 In the fourth passage, it means "neglect, negligence" of
a treaty between the Latins and the Romans (Appian, Basilica frag. 13; quoted by
Suidas).34 In my view, the third and fourth instances do not support Kummel/Kasemann
but seem to fit better with the traditional view. Finally, in the fifth passage, which is the
strongest one in support of the traditional view, 7idp£aic means the "dismissal of charges"
against someone who had been accused and was about to be put on trial (Dionysius of
Halicarnassus, Antiquitates Romanae 1.31.2)?' Following J. M. Creed's helpful analysis,
pdJaoxa npbq xonq 7io>dxa<; £7ioir|G£v). Translation by Bernadotte Perrin in Plutarch: Lives (LCL;
Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2001), 6.251.
" "Not repenting of the remission of the debts, O men of Ennaeus, have I written this epistle to you" (On
pETapeA-opEvoc; £7ti xfj napeoEi xcov xpr|pdxcov, oo avSpEC EwaTot, xf|v E7iicxoA,f]v upiv xauxrp' enEcxakKo.)
(translation mine).
33
"However, a very few enjoy some relief by the kindness of God; and while they are indeed bound, yet
the bond is very light on account of their goodness" (xwaq usvxot Kai liav oîyouc Jidpeoiv xtva SÊW EK
xofj OEOU, Kai SsSEaOat p£v, ekaypwq SE 7tdvu 8t' £7ii£tK£iav). Translation by J. W. Cohoon in Dio
Chrysostom: Discourses 12-30 (LCL; Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2001), 415. Dio's
Thirtieth Discourse, "Charidemus," reports the last words of a young man to his father as he lay dying.
Charidemus, with typical philosophic resignation in the face of death, discourses on the possible reasons for
suffering. The reference to "relief (TtdpEatc;) in this context means "relief from the bodily sufferings of this
life."
34
'"The Latins, though allies of the Romans, were waging war against them.' Suidas, see £va7tov8o<;. 'But
the Latins brought charges against the Romans, namely, their negligence toward them, being allies and
kinsmen.' Suidas, see 7t&p£cuc;" (Aaxtvot EvorcovSot 'Pcopaiotc; OVXEC; EoxpdxEuov ETI' auxouc;. Suid. v.
£VCT7tov8ocj. oi Ss Aaxtvot syKXf|paxa sic 'Pcopaiouq EJIOIOUVXO xf|v XE napzaiv auxcov xfjv sm ocpac, ovxac
EVG7t6v8ovji; Kai auyYEVEtq. Suid. v. Jtdpsatc) (translation mine).
35
"But from the tribunes, in spite of many entreaties, they were unable to obtain an absolute dismissal of
the charges against Marcius, though they did get a postponement of his trial for as long a time as they
asked" (rapd SE xcov 8n,pdpxoov nokka XurapfioavxEg xf)v uf|v oA-ocrxspfj napcaiv ov% £i5povxo, xfjv 8' exq
Xpovov ooov f|îouv dvapoXf)v s7.apov). Translation by Earnest Cary on the basis of the version of Edward
Chapter 6: Exegesis of AiKouoowri ©sou in Paul • 402
I would argue that the word clearly is not equivalent to dcpEoic and, more often than not,
seems to mean something along the lines of "letting someone or something go" with the
result that the demands of strict justice are left unsatisfied.3 Kiimmel claims that the
meaning "remission" is certain in all cases except the Plutarch passage, 7 but 1 would
argue just the opposite - the meaning "passing over, leaving unpunished" is supported by
all but the Phalaris passage. In any case, Kiimmel does acknowledge that the traditional
translation cannot be ruled out on the basis of extra-biblical usage, and so ultimately the
context of Rom 3:25-26 is determinative.
Also helpful in determining the meaning of 7idp£oic is the cognate verb jrapiripi,
which has a variety of meanings, one of which is "pass by, pass over, pass unnoticed"
(LSJ 7iapir|pi II), "to take no note of, disregard" (Muraoka 7iapir|pi 2). I have found three
cases where this verb takes "sin(s)" as the direct object, providing a close parallel to Rom
3:25 (fj jrdpEoic xcov ... dpapxripdicov). Xenophon, in his treatise on the cavalry
commander (Hipparchicus), uses it in a sense very close to the traditional interpretation
of TtdpEoic in Rom 3:25. The context has to do with cavalry functioning as raiders always
prepared to strike a larger infantry force when they make mistakes, for example, when the
infantry scatter in search of provisions or when a group marches too far ahead and allows
the others to lag behind. Xenophon says that the cavalry commander, being in command
of a smaller, lighter force, ought to capitalize on these mistakes by striking a quick blow
Spelman in The Roman Antiquities of Dionysius of Halicarnassus (LCL; Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard
University Press, 1986), 4.251.
36
J. M. Creed, "HAPEE1Z in Dionysius of Halicarnassus and in St. Paul," .ITS 41 (1940): 28-30.
Commenting on the passage in Dionysius, Creed writes: "It is obvious that 7tdp£atc; cannot here be used in
the judicial sense of release or acquittal, for the point at issue is not whether Coriolanus shall be acquitted
or condemned, but whether or not the trial itself shall be allowed to take place" (29). He goes on to point
out that Dionysius uses cupeaiq in nearby passages in a manner that is clearly distinct from Jiapsatc;, namely,
in the stronger, judicial sense of "acquittal" or "remission of punishment" (7.34.2; 7.46.2).
37
Kiimmel, 156-58 (= ET, 3-4).
Chapter 6: Exegesis of AiKaioouvn. ©eon in Paul 403
to inflict damage on the infantry but then retreating soon thereafter in the manner of
guerrilla warfare:
So he must not let such blunders (dpapxfjpaxa) go unpunished, or the whole

country will be occupied; only he must take good care to retire the moment he has
struck, without giving time for the main supports to arrive on the scene.38
Another instance where 7iapir|pi takes the direct object dpapxia is found in the
Jewish Antiquities of Josephus. In this passage, Josephus is discussing the relationship
between King Herod and Alexandra, the mother of his wife Mariamne and also of
Aristobulus III. Early in his reign, Herod had married Mariamne (who was descended on
both her maternal and paternal sides from former Hasmonean rulers) in order to give his
reign legitimacy. However, this created a problem when he deposed the current high
priest and installed Ananelus, an obscure priest from Babylon, in his place. Alexandra
wanted her son, Aristobulus III, to be made high priest instead. In addition, Aristobulus
was highly favored by the Jewish populace not only because of his Hasmonean ancestry
but also because of his physical beauty. Out of fear that his wife might use this popularity
to have Aristobulus installed as high priest instead of Ananelus, Herod had both him and
his mother confined to the royal palace and subjected to constant surveillance. These
restrictions so irked Alexandra that she hatched a scheme of smuggling herself and her
son in coffins out of the country to Cleopatra in Egypt in order to take refuge under
Antony's protection. Unfortunately the scheme was discovered and Herod was informed.
The king permitted things to proceed as far as the carrying out of the plan, and
then caught her in the very act of fleeing. But he overlooked her offence
(TiapfjKEV SE xf]v dpapxiav) because he did not dare take any harsh measures
against her, even though he would have liked to, for Cleopatra, out of hatred
38
Hipparchicus 7.10. ET: Xenophon (LCL; trans. E. C. Marchant; Cambridge: Harvard University Press,
2000), 7.276-77'. The Greek reads: xd ouv xotauxa dpapxf)paxa on xpri napiEvai aKolaoxa (E! SE ur), bXr\ r)
yjbpa xpaxojisSov Eoxat) EKEIVO Kak&q npovoouvxa, Kai 7toif)oavxd xi (pOdoat djioxooprjaavxa 7tptv xo noXv
ponOonv E7ttyEvsa0at.
Chapter 6: Exegesis of AiKOtiocruvri ©eoii in Paul - 404
toward him, would not have allowed her to be accused; and so he made a show of
magnanimity as if forgiving them out of kindness rather than for another reason.39
Herod would have liked to have punished Alexandra and Cleopatra, but he "made a show
of magnanimity as if forgiving them out of kindness." This passage is particularly clear in
making the distinction between true forgiveness and the mere overlooking of an offence,
i.e., not pursuing justice. Herod "permitted" the plan to occur, then he caught Alexandra
in the very act of fleeing, but he overlooked the offence and "did not dare take any harsh
measures against her, even though he would have liked to." However, in the end, Herod
got his wish: after appointing the attractive young man (Aristobulus III) to the high
priesthood, soon thereafter he had him drowned while he was bathing in some fish ponds.
The third instance is Sirach 23:2, which is in the context of a plea to God to set
"the discipline of wisdom" over Ben Sirach in order that he may not be overcome by
fleshly appetites and sins. The text, in the context of vv 1-6, reads:
O Lord, Father and Master of my life, do not abandon me to their designs, and do
not let me fall because of them! Who will set whips over my thoughts, and the
discipline of wisdom over my mind, so as not to spare me in my errors, and not
overlook my40 sins (xd dpapxfjpaxa)? 3Otherwise my mistakes may be
multiplied, and my sins may abound, and I may fall before my adversaries, and
my enemy may rejoice over me. 4 0 Lord, Father and God of my life, do not give
me haughty eyes, 5and remove evil desire from me. Let neither gluttony nor lust
overcome me, and do not give me over to shameless passion (NRSV).41
j9
Josephus, Ant. 15.48. ET: Josephus (LCL; trans. Ralph Marcus and Allen Wikgren; Cambridge: Harvard
University Press, 2004), 10.278-81. Greek: 6 SE xf|v psv ECOC; xfjc, £yxEtpf| ascot; eaaaq 7ipo£A,9£tv E7t'
auxocpcopcp xou Spaapou auvsXapEv,rcapfjKEvSs xr)v dpapxiav, xaXznbv psv ouSsv, EI Kai ocpoSpa
jJoulopsvcp rjv auxcp, SiaGfiivat xo\\ir)oaq, on yap av dvaax£O"0ai KA£07tdxpav aixtav £7ii xcp jrpoc; auxov
piaEt Xapouaav, spcpaivcov SE p£yaô\|/uxiav paÂov st, £Jit£iK£iac auxotc auvEyvcoKEvat.
40
NETS has "their," which literally follows the Greek; NRSV has emended the Greek text, in light of other
versional witnesses, to yield an improved sense.
41
Sirach 23:2-3: xk; £7ttaxnaEi £7ii xou Stavofipaxoi; poo adoxxyaq Kai £7ti xfjc, KapSiaq pou rcatSsiav aoepiag,
iva £7ti xoic ayvorjuaoiv pou pf) (psiacovxat Kai on pf) napfl xd dpapxfipaxa auxcov, OTICOC, pf| 7iA,n6uv9cocnv
ai dyvotai pou Kai ai dpapxiai pou JtA,£ovdccocnv Kai Jtsooupat gvavxt xcov ujtsvavxicov Kai EmxapEtxai poi
6 £X0p6c pou;
Chapter 6: Exegesis of AiKcuoor>vr| ©eoO in Paul 405
Ben Sirach's prayer is not "Lord, do not forgive my sins," but "Lord, do not overlook my
sins by letting me go my own way, by failing to discipline me." His fear is that if God
does not discipline him by setting "whips over his thoughts," then he could well be
overcome by his sinful desires. Such moral failure would be a disaster because his
adversaries would rejoice over him.
In these three instances, the cognate verb 7rapiu.pi takes as its direct object "sin"
(dpapxia) (once, in the Josephus text) and "sins" (dpapxfjpaxa) (twice, in Xenophon and
Sirach), and in all three cases, it is clear that the meaning is not to remit sins but to
overlook them or leave them unpunished. Interestingly, in the Xenophon passage, the
word "unpunished" (dicoAaaxa) is explicitly added so that the phrase as a whole is
translated, "to let blunders (lit. sins) go unpunished" (dpapxfjpaxa ... JtapiEvai
dKoA,aaxa).
Having examined the question of the translation of TrdpEoic, let us now turn to the
meaning of the other key word in Rom 3:25-26, EVSEICÎC, which occurs twice. In this case,
the lexical evidence supports either reading - either "demonstration, proof (BDAG 2;
LSJ III) or "showing, display" (BDAG 1; LSJ II). Thus the issue must be resolved by
appealing to the context and Paul's own thought. It is argued that the new interpretation
of EVSEICIC comports with Paul's concept of divine revelation, his Offenbarungsbegriff
Kiimmel points out that "when Paul speaks of revelation, he does not speak of a
communication of facts or of an explanation, but always of an event,"42 a point reinforced
by Paul's usage of such verbs as d7ioKaA,u7tx£xai (1:17), TiEcpavEpcoxai (3:21), and
7ipo£8£xo (3:25) in the immediate context. The eschatological event of the atoning death
Kiimmel, 165 (= ET, 11).

Chapter 6. Exegesis of AiKouoouvri ©sou in Paul 406
of Christ "shows, displays" or perhaps even "effects" God's saving righteousness. It does
not provide evidence of an already existing justice of God that has been called into
question and that now requires rational proof. Indeed, any thought that God would be
required to prove his justice in the face of human criticism does not seem consistent with
Paul's out-of-hand dismissal of such human judgment upon God later in the letter: "Is
there injustice on God's part? By no means ... But who are you, O man, to answer back
to God?" (Rom 9:14, 20 ESV).43
For Kasemann (but not for Kiimmel), the phrase "transgressions previously
committed" (xd 7ipoy£yov6xa dpapxn,pdxa) refers to the covenant-breaking of the Old
Covenant people of God. Paul characterizes the redemptive-historical epoch prior to the
eschatological present (vuvi, EV xcp vov Kaipcp) of the gospel epoch as a time in which
previous generations of God's people broke the covenant, setting the stage for a new
work of God that provides atonement for those covenant transgressions, renews the
covenant, and provides for a new covenant relationship (ein neues Bundesverhdltnis) that
has been expanded and universalized to include Gentiles also by faith in Christ.44 To put
the matter succinctly, for Kasemann, the forgiveness of Israel's covenant-breaking (f\
7idp£oic xcov TtpoyEyovoxcov dpapxripdxcov), provided through Christ's atonement,
"displays the righteousness of God, namely, his commitment to the covenant (ndmlich
sein Festhalten am Bunde).,,4S Clearly then, for Kasemann, the decision to take TtdpEOic
43
Kiimmel, 162-63 (= ET, 9).
44
Kasemann, "Zum Verstandnis," 99.
45
Kasemann, "Zum Verstandnis," 99. "The fact that righteousness, forgiveness, and patience are connected
with one another is very OT-Jewish. So can the LXX render "IDP! and D , firn with StKatocnJvn, and in 4
Ezra 8:36 it is said, 'For in this, O Lord, your righteousness and your goodness is revealed, that you are
merciful to those who have no store of good works.' Righteousness is here the attribute of covenant
faithfulness (Bundestreue) and is nearly synonymous with goodness and mercy. God stands by his
covenant, even if man falls and transgresses it. and proves himself to be righteous, kind and patient. Our
Chapter 6. Exegesis of AiKcuoauvn. ©sou in Paul 407
as "remission, forgiveness," EVSEIÎC as "effective display" rather than "rational proof,"
and Sid + ace. in an instrumental sense provides crucial support for his covenantal
reading of the passage as a whole. It is only by choosing these lexical and syntactical
options that he is able to argue that the passage is set against the backdrop of Israel's
covenant failure and that Paul presents Christ's atonement as a covenant renewal
demonstrating God's covenant faithfulness. It should also be pointed out that Kasemann's
interpretation rests on Bultmann's position that Paul is quoting a traditional Jewish-
Christian liturgical formula, which he then reinterprets within the universal framework of
his own theological thought. The original Jewish-Christian formula quoted here used the
terminology of God's righteousness in a covenantally-narrow sense, as referring to God's
faithfulness to his covenant people with little concern for God's commitment to the
creation as a whole. Paul, however, takes the terminology and universalizes it by adding
"a correcting addition" (eines korrigierenden Zusatzes) at the end of v 26 ("so that he
might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus").46 As Kasemann
explains in his commentary:
God's righteousness reaches beyond the covenant people (Die gott/iche

Gerechtigkeit ubergreift das Bundesvolk) and is valid for everyone who believes
in Jesus the Crucified. Indirectly this says that God's covenant faithfulness (der
Bundestreue Gottes) becomes his faithfulness to his whole creation (seine Treue
gegeniiber seiner gesamten Schopfung) and his right which is established in this
relationship. The catchword 'righteousness of God' (das Stlchwort der
Gerechtigkeit Gottes) was most welcome to Paul as indication of the change in
aeons; nevertheless, he interpreted it in terms of his own theology.47
text differs from this Jewish view only in its orientation to a unique eschatological act of God. In the death
of Jesus alone has truly occurred what pious Jews hoped and prayed for" (98-99).
46
Kasemann, "Zum Verstandnis," 100. "Because he is thinking universally, and so no longer of the
condition of the covenant people, he is speaking at the end of v 26 at the same time out of the category of
the individual."
47
Kasemann, Romans, 101 (=An die Romer [4th ed.], 95).
Chapter 6: Exegesis of AiKcuoauvri ©eou in Paul 408
Much more could be said by way of engaging the details of these two broadly
competing interpretations, but what needs to be said at this point is that the resolution of
this debate is not determinative for the meaning of God's SiKaioouvn in vv 25-26. For
while the new lexical/syntactical approach to vv 25-26 (viz., taking 7tdp£Oic as
"remission," EVSEI^K; as "display," and Sid + ace. instrumentally) is necessary for
Kasemann's covenantal interpretation ("to display his Sucaioauvri or covenant
faithfulness") to get off the ground, this construction of the syntax and lexicography, in
and of itself, does not require a covenantal interpretation. The proof of this is that
although Kasemann and Kiimmel were mutual architects of this new view (sharing the
same interpretation of 7idp£Oic as equivalent to dcpEoic), only Kasemann incorporates into
this view Cremer's relational theory that Sucaioauvri 0EOU here means "God's faithfulness
to his covenant" (Gottes Treue zu seinem Bund). c But Kiimmel, in spite of his complete
agreement with Kasemann on the narrow lexical and syntactical questions, interprets f]
SiKaioouvn auxou in vv 25-26 as God's justifying activity "in the sense of the
righteousness which God has and gives" (im Sinne der Gerechtigkeit, die Gott hat und
gibt).49 Indeed, one could adopt three of the main options for SiKaioouvri auxou (with the
exception of "God's justice") - whether the status of righteousness from God (genitivus
auctoris), God's saving activity, or God's covenant faithfulness - and successfully
integrate it into the Kummel/Kasemann interpretation of Sid xijv 7idp£oiv ("through the
remission/forgiveness of sins"). So it is not vital for my thesis to disprove the
Kummel/Kasemann interpretation and vindicate the traditional view represented by
Cranfield.
48
Kasemann, "Zum Verstandnis," 99.
49
Kiimmel, 161 (= ET, 8).
Chapter 6: Exegesis of AiKcnocruvn. ©eon in Paul 409
On the other hand, while Kiimmel's view of 7cdp£oic does not require Kasemann's
covenantal reading, Kasemann's covenantal reading depends on Kiimmel's view of
TidpEoic. In other words, Kiimmel's view of Jidpsoic is a necessary but not a sufficient
condition of Kasemann's covenantal reading. That Kasemann's covenantal reading
depends on Kiimmel's view of 7tdp£oic is evident if one attempts to consider the
alternative. If the traditional interpretation of 7idp£oic as "passing over, leaving
unpunished" is accepted, it would make no sense for Paul to affirm that God set forth
Christ as a propitiatory sacrifice in his blood "in order to effectively display his covenant
faithfulness," and this was necessary because in his forbearance God had passed over
former sins. Since taking 7idp£aic as equivalent to dcpEoic is necessary to Kasemann's
covenant-faithfulness interpretation of Rom 3:25-26, consider the following arguments
(in addition to the lexical arguments adduced above) against this reading.
First, we must not only examine the meaning of 7tdp£oic isolated from its
syntactical context. The word occurs as part of a prepositional phrase, Sid xf|V 7rdp£oiv. In
order to make their overall view work, these exegetes must adopt the extremely rare
instrumental use of Sid + ace, as opposed to the more common causal sense ("because of,
on account of). It appears to be a self-serving move, not too different from the sort of
thing that happens when inexperienced Greek students mechanically scan the possibilities
listed in the Greek grammars and choose the option that suits their preferred
interpretation. Douglas Moo puts it this way: "An instrumental translation of Sid
followed by an accusative, while possible in Hellenistic Greek, is so rare that compelling

Chapter 6. Exegesis of Aucaiocrovn. ®soi5 m Paul 410
contextual reasons must be present if it is to be adopted."" Those compelling reasons are
lacking. There would be a compelling reason if TtdpEOic could only mean "remission," but
even Kiimmel acknowledges that the meaning "passing over" is possible on the basis of
its semantic range in extra-biblical Greek. Ordinarily, the syntax and the semantics work
together such that, for example, a rare syntactical usage is required by a common lexical
meaning, or vice versa. It is possible to make sense of any prepositional phrase by
adopting a rare meaning of its noun, which, due to the constraints of the interplay
between syntax and semantics, requires the adoption of an even rarer usage of the
prepositional construction in which that word resides. But this is not ordinary exegetical
procedure. When one has gotten oneself out on a limb, it is not normally considered an
improvement to move out still farther on the same limb.
Second, why would Paul restrict his field of view only to the remission of sins
committed prior to Christ? Even if we adopt the instrumental meaning of Sid xf]v
;idp£aiv, we would expect Paul to affirm that the atoning death of Christ shows God's
righteousness "by means of the forgiveness of sins" in general, rather than merely the
covenant transgressions of Israel before Christ. Of course, Kasemann would reply that
Paul is merely quoting a Jewish-Christian liturgical formula which enshrined a
covenantally-narrowed perspective on the scope of Christ's atonement, but that Paul
himself does not share this narrowing and in fact seeks to universalize it by his
"correcting addition" at the end of v 26 ("that he might be just and the justifier of the one
who has faith in Jesus"). But the so-called "correcting addition" does not explicitly
50
Moo, 239 n. 96. The construction sometimes has a final or telic sense ("with a view to"), e.g., Rom 4:25
(8id xfrv Sucaicoaiv fipcov). but this usage would not make sense here on either the new interpretation ("to
show his covenant faithfulness with a view to remitting sins") or the traditional interpretation ("to show his
justice with a view to passing over sins").
Chapter 6: Exegesis of AiKcuocrovri ©eon in Paul -411
expand the extent of the atonement to the Gentiles. Perhaps it does so by implication,
insofar as the individualizing language, "the one who has faith in Jesus" (6 EK TcioxEuoc
Tqaou), logically implies that the atonement provides justification for all who have faith
in Jesus, whether Jew or Gentile. But why would Paul take such a roundabout route to
make the point? Having just quoted (ex hypothesi) a Jewish-Christian formula that limits
the atonement to providing forgiveness for the Jewish people only (and, at that, for
Jewish sins committed in the epoch prior to Christ), it is surprising that Paul is not more
explicit in rejecting that restriction and clarifying his own position on the universal
validity of the atonement, a concern that is expressed elsewhere in Romans with
terminology such as "to the Jew first and also to the Greek" (1:16; 2:9-10), "both Jews
and Greeks" (3:9), "all the world" (3:19), "for all who believe" (3:22; 10:4), "for there is
no distinction [between Jew and Greek]" (3:22; 10:12), "to all the descendants" (4:16),
"not from among the Jews only but also from among the Gentiles" (9:24), and so on.
Third, the passing over of sins committed beforehand is tied to the phrase, "in the
forbearance of God" (EV xfj dvoxfj xou OEOU), and this seems to indicate the Old Covenant
period before the cross. "Paul's meaning is ... that God 'postponed' the full penalty due
sins in the Old Covenant, allowing sinners to stand before him without their having
provided an adequate 'satisfaction' of the demands of his holy justice.' 01 Paul appears to
have a redemptive-historical perspective (similar to that of the author of Hebrews) on the
efficacy of the Old Covenant sacrificial system relative to the ilaaxijpiov (propitiatory
sacrifice) accomplished in Christ. The Old Covenant system, though sufficient for its
51
Moo, Romans, 240; cp. Schreiner, Romans, 195.
Chapter 6: Exegesis of Aucaiocriivn. ©sou in Paul - 412
purpose and for its time, did not satisfy the demands of God's justice; and to the degree
that it offered forgiveness, it did so only in anticipation of the greater atonement to come.
Romans 3:25-26, then, does not provide Pauline support for the notion that
SiKaioouvn OEOU means "God's covenant faithfulness."
Second Corinthians 5:21
Having examined the two passages in Romans that have been appealed to in
support of the view that SiKaioouvri OEOVJ in Pauline usage can mean "God's covenant
faithfulness," we now turn to 2 Cor 5:21 which speaks of "becoming the righteousness of
God." In order to engage in the exegesis of this phrase, we need to step back and take in
the preceding context, which reads as follows:
Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old has passed away;
behold, the new has come. All this is from God, who through Christ reconciled
us to himself and gave us the ministry of reconciliation; that is, in Christ God
was reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them,
and entrusting to us the message of reconciliation. Therefore, we are
ambassadors for Christ, God making his appeal through us. We implore you on
behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God. For our sake he made him to be sin who
knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God (xov pij
yvovxa dpapxiav UTrip ijpcov dpapxiav £7roina£v, iva TJpEic. ysvcopEOa SiKaioouvn
OEOU EV auxco) (ESV).
The traditional interpretation of 2 Cor 5:21 takes it in agreement with Paul's other
statements about the righteousness of God in Romans and Philippians. As F. F. Bruce
writes: "Paul has chosen this exceptional wording in order to emphasize the 'sweet
exchange' whereby sinners are given a righteous status before God through the righteous
one who absorbed their sin (and its judgment) in himself."
Two inter-related exegetical questions must be addressed.
F. F. Bruce, 1 and 2 Corinthians (New Century Bible; London: Oliphants, 1971), 211.
Chapter 6 Exegesis of AiKoaocrovri ©eofi m Paul 413
First, who is the "we" (fipsic) of v 21? Many commentators insist that Paul is
consistently using the first person plural throughout the passage to refer to Paul himself
and his apostolic coworkers. Yet he uses the first person plural in vv 14-15 to refer to all
believers, so it is not correct to say that Paul's usage of the pronoun is totally consistent
throughout. Moreover, it is not insignificant that vv 14-15 have the same scope as v 21 -
namely, the substitutionary atoning death of Christ - and both use the preposition vnep to
communicate this idea: in vv 14-15, we find U3i£prtdvxcov(2x) and wtEp auxcov (lx),
while in v 21 we have i)7i£p ijpcov (lx), and all four occurrences are in connection with
the "for us" formula of the primitive church's confession of the atoning death of Christ
(cp. Rom 5:8; 14:15; 1 Cor 15:3; Gal 1:4; 2:20; Eph 5:2, 25; lTim2:6). 5 3
Second, and related to the first question, what is the meaning of the verb
"become" (y£vcbp£0a)? If the "we" is the apostolic company, as distinct from all
Christians, then v 21 is not primarily a statement about the atonement but about Paul's
ministry, and so the verse would have to be paraphrased in various ways to bring this out.
For example, N. T. Wright paraphrases it, "that we might embody the covenant
faithfulness of God." Others adopt similar views.34 Stegman interprets the verb y£vcbp£0a
as denoting a change of nature or an entry into a new condition. He also appeals to 2 Cor
1:19, which uses another form of the same verb: "in him the Yes has come to be
"The first person plural in v. 21 differs from that in v. 20. Together with vv. 14-15, v. 21 constitutes an
inclusion of the passage." Jan Lambrecht, Second Corinthians (SP 8; Collegeville, Minn.: The Liturgical
Press, 1999), 100.
54
"As Christ, bearing humanity's judgment, became sin's representative on the cross, so ministers of the
new covenant represent God's righteousness to those they exhort. Although Paul would no doubt apply the
principle to any believers who shared the gospel with others, they are 'God's righteousness' not as 'the
justified' but as agents of the message of God being reconciled with the world." Craig S. Keener, 1-2
Corinthians (NCBC; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005). 187.
Chapter 6: Exegesis of AiKaiocriivri ©eon in Paul 414
(ysyovEv). Stegman connects the "Yes" and "Amen" language of 2 Cor 1:19-20 with
SiKaioouvri OEOU in 2 Cor 5:21. Thus, he interprets 2 Cor 5:21 as saying that God's
covenant faithfulness has been brought about by Jesus' faithfulness (jrioxic Xpioxou) and
continues to be revealed through those who embody Christ's faithfulness.56 However,
Wright's and Stegman's emphasis on the continuation of Christ's ministry in the present
through the ongoing ministry of Paul and others like him seems to fly in the face of the
two aorists used in the verse: just as God "made" (EJioinosv - aorist indicative) Jesus to
be sin on the cross, so we "become" (y£vcbp£0a - aorist subjunctive) the righteousness of
God in him. There is little room for the notion of process in these two verbs; the accent
seems to be on two completed judicial actions, one a verdict against Christ on the cross
and the other a verdict in favor of believers, which verdict becomes ours in union with
Christ's resurrection justification (cp. Rom 4:25). The two aorists therefore support the
consistently forensic reading of the verse.
It is noteworthy that for both Wright and Stegman, the full Pauline significance of
EV auxcp is diminished and does not, at least in this text, carry the theological freight of
soteric union with Christ.38 Wright does not give much focused attention to the EV auxcp,
but in taking it with y£vcbp£0a, he makes Paul the "embodiment" or "incarnation" of
God's covenant faithfulness by means of his imitation of Christ in humble service to the
' Thomas Stegman, The Character of Jesus: The Linchpin to Paul's Argument in 2 Corinthians (AnBib
158; Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 2005), 281.
56
Stegman, The Character of Jesus, 281.
57
Paul Barnett, The Second Epistle to the Corinthians (NICNT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997), 314 n. 66.
58
Murray J. Harris rightly complains that Wright's interpretation "robs the characteristically Pauline phrase
EV Xpioxcp of its potency." Harris, The Second Epistle to the Corinthians: A Commentary on the Greek Text
(NIGTC; brand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2005). 456 n. 207.
Chapter 6. Exegesis of AiKaioauvn, ©eoij in Paul 415
point of death. He appeals to the concept of the ambassador (although Paul does not use
the noun 7ipeoPeuxfjc, he does use the verb TipeoPeuopev, v 20) as one "who represents
the one for whom he speaks in such a full and thorough way that he actually becomes the
living embodiment of his sovereign - or perhaps ... we should equally say the dying
embodiment."60 So for Wright, "in Christ" must indicate that Paul's ministry represents,
embodies, or incarnates Christ's. Stegman, moving even further from the Pauline "in
Christ" concept, takes ev as signifying cause or reason, diminishing the significance of ev
Xpioxcp to that of a mere model.61 This is all the more problematic when one remembers
that the concept of union with Christ is used in the full soteric sense only a few verses
earlier: "Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation (COOXE si xic EV Xpioxcp,
Kaivij Kxiaic). The old has passed away; behold, the new has come" (v 17 ESV).
A third question is the meaning of dpapxia, which occurs twice in this verse:
"Him who knew no sin, for our sake he made to be sin" (xov pij yvdvxa dpapxiav fJTcep
ijpcbv dpapxiav ETtoinoEv) (trans, mine). Some scholars take the two instances of dpapxia
in different senses: (1) the usual meaning of transgression of God's will; (2) as a
technical term for the sin offering, following LXX usage.'2 However, the full phrase
typically used in the LXX is 7i£pi xfjc; dpapxiac (LXX Lev 5:6-13). Paul uses Tispi
"It is the covenant faithfulness of the one true God, now active through the paradoxical Christ-shaped
ministry of Paul, reaching out with the offer of reconciliation to all who hear his bold preaching." Wright,
"On Becoming the Righteousness of God," in Pauline Theology, Vol. 2: 1 &2 Corinthians (ed. David M.
Hay; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993), 206.
(>0
Wright, "On Becoming the Righteousness of God," 206 (emphasis his).
61
"It is because of Christ that the apostle and others can embody the former's niaxiq. That is, Jesus
modeled forth obedience to God and living for the advantage of others." Stegman, The Character of Jesus,
281 (emphasis his).
62
Murray J. Harris, 452-53; Ralph P. Martin, 2 Corinthians (WBC 40; Waco: Word Books, 1986), 140,
157; Thomas D. Stegman, SJ, Second Corinthians (CCSS; Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2009), 143-44.
This was the position adopted by Augustine, Ambrosiaster, Aquinas, and Calvin. The history of
interpretation of this verse is documented in Stanislas Lyonnet and Leopold Sabourin, Sin, Redemption, and
Sacrifice: A Biblical and Patristic Study (AnBib 48; Rome: Biblical Institute, 1971), 185-296.
Chapter 6: Exegesis of AiKatotruvri ©eon in Paul - 416
dpapxiac in Rom 8:3 to make clear his intention of alluding to the sin offering, though
this is also disputed. But the prepositional phrase is lacking in 2 Cor 5:21. If he used the
propositional phrase in Rom 8:3, why did he abandon it in 2 Cor 5:21? It stretches
credulity to think that with the single word dpapxia Paul was able to signal an allusion to
something as specific as the sin offering of Leviticus 5. This interpretation of 2 Cor 5:21
becomes even more difficult when one considers that sacrificial language of any kind is
lacking in the immediate context, such as is found, for example, in Rom 3:25
(Diaoxfjpiov) or 1 Cor 5:7 (xo nao%a fjpcov exuOn, Xpioxoc).
Further reinforcing the interpretation of dpapxia as "sin" is the fact that it would
seem to be necessary to maintain the same meaning in both instances, or else the paradox
is obscured. Paul is pointing out the paradox that the one who knew no sin was made sin
for us, thus strongly making the point that he died as a substitute who bore the
punishment for sin that we deserved.
Finally, the antithetical parallelism of the text's structure places dpapxia (both
times) as the antithesis of SiKaioauvn, Oeou, as the following chiasm shows:
xov pij yvovxa dpapxiav

vnep f|pcov
dpapxiav
£7ioina£v,
iva fipEic
yevcbpsOa
SiKaioouvn OEOU
EV auxcp
The verse is divided into two slightly unequal parts, and with the exception of the
introductory "him who knew no sin," each half has a corresponding parallel member in
63
My chiastic analysis is derived from C. K. Barrett's, but with slight differences and set forth in a different
format. Barrett acknowledged that "though the parallelism is close, the chiasmus is imperfect." Barrett, A
Commentary on the Second Epistle to the Corinthians (HNTC; New York: Harper & Row, 1973), 179.
Chapter 6: Exegesis of AiKaiocuvn. 0eoO m Paul 417
the second half. Thus U7iep fipcov in v 21a has its answering EV auxcp in v 21b, both
focusing on the "sweet exchange" grounded in the substitutionary/representative work of
Christ - he punished for us and we justified in him. Similarly, the verb e7roin,aev finds its
response in yevcopeOa, for just as God "made" Jesus to be sin, so we "become" the
righteousness of God in him. These rather realistic verbs must be taken in a judicial and
representative sense. Jesus was not literally turned into sin, but rather he suffered the
penal judgment that sin deserves; in other words, he was treated by God as a sinner.64 So
"in him," we are not literally God's own righteousness, but rather those united to Christ
are regarded and treated in the eyes of divine justice as perfectly righteous.65
And, finally, we come to the question of the meaning of SiKaioouvn OEOU in this
verse. N. T. Wright, as we would expect, is consistent with his premise and translates it
"the covenant faithfulness of God," but he is not alone in taking the phrase in this way.66
Then there are those commentators, such as Frank Matera, who follow the
standard Protestant line when it comes to the first half of the verse, about Christ
becoming sin for us, and who do not agree with Wright's translation of "covenant
faithfulness," but who want to bring in the idea of moral transformation, thus blurring the
Compare the similar language in Gal 3:13: "Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a
curse for us (yEvopEvog U7t£p f|pcov Kaxdpa)" (ESV). Christ did not literally become a curse; he endured the
curse of the law in our stead.
65
"With dpapxiav £7toina£v the abstract is used for the concrete (= dpapxeoôv), just as with StKatocuvn, (=
Straioi), so as to make clear the principal meaning of the clause ... The meaning is, just as believers are
'just' because God regards ('reckons') and treats them as such, though they are sinners, so Christ is
regarded and treated by God as a sinner ... though he is sinless." Rudolf Bultmann, The Second Letter to
the Corinthians (trans. Roy A. Harrisville; Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1985). 165. Similarly Frank Matera, 11
Corinthians (NTL; Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2003), 144 (at least with regard to v 21a).
66
"Our Spirit-empowered transformation becomes the visible manifestation of the ongoing fulfillment of
God's promises (3:1-6; see Jer 31:31-33; Ezek 11:19; 36:26-27). Thus God's covenant faithfulness - his
righteousness - continues to be revealed through us in the here and now." Stegman, 144-45 (emphasis his).
However, Stegman differs from Wright in that he argues that, while admitting that f]p£tq refers primarily to
Paul and those commissioned to be ambassadors for Christ, nevertheless "all Christians are to become the
righteousness of God in some manner." Stegman, The Character of Jesus, 275 n. 742 (emphasis his).
Chapter 6: Exegesis of AiKouoauvri ©eon in Paul 418
lines between justification and sanctification. They usually appeal to the "new creation"
imagery a few verses earlier (v 17) and argue that being "in Christ" is not merely a
forensic reality but a transformative one as well.67 This may indeed be true, but it is
incorrect to equate SiKaioauvn, OEOU with Kaivf] Kxioic. For although both are
apprehended and realized ev Xpioxcp, the former is the judicial basis of the latter, that is,
the status of righteousness is the ground of the renewed moral life. In and of itself, the
lexeme SiKaioouvn, Oeou does not denote the renewed life any more than the dpapxia that
Christ became denotes his actually becoming a sinner in an intrinsic moral sense. To be
sure, both spiritual realities -justification and sanctification - are involved in the totality
of salvation, which Paul in this context speaks of under the metaphor of "reconciliation to
God." Yet while inseparable, justification and sanctification must be distinguished both
conceptually and lexically. Additionally, the purely forensic reading of "that we might
become the righteousness of God in him" is supported not only by the antithetical parallel
of Jesus who was "made sin" in a purely forensic sense, but also by the earlier reference
to God "not counting their trespasses against them" (pij >ioyi^6p£voc; auxoic; xd
7tapa7txcbpaxa auxcov, v 19). Earlier in the epistle, Sucaioauvri ("righteousness") and
KaxaKpioic ("condemnation") are paired as opposites (2 Cor 3:9). Thus "not counting
their trespasses against them" and "becoming the righteousness of God in him" denote
the twin forensic soteric realities of the forgiveness of sins and the reckoning of
righteousness in union with Christ.69
b/
Matera, 145.
68
"The new creation of verse 17 and the righteousness of verse 21 are not synonymous; the latter is the
ground of the former." Barrett, 181.
69
Paul Barnett. 315.
Chapter 6: Exegesis of AiKcuocr6vr| &eov in Paul - 419
As we saw in our study of Rom 3:5 and 25-26 above, so too in 2 Cor 5:21 the
covenantal interpretation of righteousness in Paul does not rest on a solid foundation.
These are the three Pauline passages that have been repeatedly used to support the view
that SiKaioouvri OEOU in Paul can mean "God's covenant faithfulness." We have already
seen that, apart from a very limited collection of texts that are best understood in terms of
correctness or integrity in one's speech, the Hebraic/relational or covenantal
interpretation of "righteousness" has little justification in the OT or in the Jewish
literature. But 1 have taken the time to engage in the exegesis of these Pauline texts that
have been used to argue for a covenantal interpretation just in case, by some semantic
miracle, a relational or covenantal overtone from the Hebrew still managed to enter into
Paul's Greek usage. After all, Paul was trained at the feet of Gamaliel in Jerusalem, was
able to speak fluent Hebrew or Aramaic (Acts 22:2); so we may reasonably assume that
he could read the OT in Hebrew. Yet as we have seen, the minute chance that Paul
intended to convey the notion of God's faithfulness to his covenant has not been borne
out in these three Pauline texts.
Other Greek Words for "Faithfulness"
Before moving on to the next section, I would like to round out this section with
another observation that puts the matter to rest. It is indeed correct that Paul affirms the
theological truth that God is utterly faithful to keep his promises. At issue here is not the
reality of God's covenant faithfulness, but what Greek terms Paul uses to refer to it. It is a
fact that when Paul speaks of God's covenant faithfulness, he does not appropriate words
from the AIK-group but instead uses terms such as moxic, dXij0£ia, and pEPaioco. There is
Chapter 6: Exegesis of AiKmoouvrj ©sou in Paul - 420
also a perfectly good word for "faithfulness" in Greek (moxoxric) that Paul could have
used. Paul does not use this exact word, but he comes close. He speaks of "the
faithfulness of God" (rj 7tioxic xou OEOU) (Rom 3:3). Three times he says that "God is
faithful" (7riaxoc 6 Oeoc) (1 Cor 1:9; 10:13; 2 Cor 1:18), and on other occasions he uses
the adjective moxoc in reference to God or Christ (1 Thess 5:24; 2 Thess 3:3; 2 Tim
2:13).
In addition, Paul uses a variety of phrases and idioms to affirm that God keeps his
promises, but none of them involves the use of "righteousness" terminology: "... so that
the promise (f| ETcayyEMa) will be guaranteed (PePaioc) to all the seed" (Rom 4:16);
"With respect to the promise (fj tbrayyEAia) of God he did not waver in unbelief... being
fully assured that what God had promised (£7tijyy£Xxai), he was able also to perform"
(Rom 4:20-21); "It is not as though the word of God has failed" (Rom 9:6); "The gifts
and the calling of God are irrevocable" (Rom 11:29); "For I say that Christ has become a
servant to the circumcision on behalf of God's truthfulness (dArjOEia OEOU) to confirm (sic
xo PePaicoaai = 'in order to fulfill' [BDAG]) the promises (ai E7rayy£?aai) given to the
fathers" (Rom 15:8); "For as many as are the promises (£7iayy£AIai) of God, in him they
are yes ... Now he who establishes (6 pEPaicov) us with you in Christ and has anointed us
is God" (2 Cor 1:20-21); "the Law, which came 430 years later, does not invalidate a
covenant previously ratified by God, so as to nullify the promise (r\ enayysXiay (Gal
3:17).
Paul frequently uses the noun or verb for "promise" in the contexts where he
wants to affirm the faithfulness of God. Yet the words for "promise" are strikingly absent
Chapter 6: Exegesis of AiKaiocrovr] ©eon in Paul - 421
from the contexts where Paul speaks of "the righteousness of God." This suggests that the
translation "the covenant faithfulness of God" is incorrect.
Also, if SiKaioouvri OEOU means "God's covenant faithfulness," why does Paul not
use the lexeme in Romans 11. the one place where Paul explicitly addresses the question
of God's covenant faithfulness in maintaining his promises to Israel based on his divine
election?
B. AiKaioavvn 0£oi) as "God's Saving Activity or Power"
If SiKaioouvri OEOU does not mean "God's covenant faithfulness" in Paul, is it
possible that it means "God's saving activity or power" without the added notion that this
saving activity is in fulfillment of his covenant promises? Going all the way back to
Cremer, most scholars who adopt the subjective genitive interpretation of the phrase tend
to combine the two meanings "God's covenant faithfulness" and "God's saving activity
or power" (e.g., Kasemann, Dunn). They would see the two elements as connected
because God exercises his saving power in fulfillment of his covenant promises. Yet I
have chosen to examine these ideas separately because, as I argued in Chapter 4 and
Chapter 5, there are many examples (40 in the OT; 35 in the DSS) where "God's
righteousness" (typically with the pronoun "his, your, my") is used in the sense of God's
judicial activity that results in the punishment of Israel's enemies, thereby delivering and
vindicating his people. This delivering usage is distinct from the very small handful of
cases where "righteousness" is used in a way that indicates correctness or integrity in
speech and which can be used in covenantal contexts (Neh 9:8; Hos 2:19-20; Zech 9:9).
Chapter 6. Exegesis of AiKaioonJvrj ©sou in Paul 422
These two views, while combined in the minds of many scholars, are in fact best
analyzed separately. This approach is supported by the fact that there are at least two
scholars who distinguish the concepts quite clearly and see only one of the aspects of
meaning as activated in Paul's lexeme. On one hand, N. T. Wright hones in on "covenant
faithfulness" as the primary focus of SiKaioouvn, OEOU in Paul.70 On the other hand,
Douglas A. Campbell flips the emphasis by adopting the "saving activity/power"
interpretation and arguing that the "covenant faithfulness" resonances are not explicitly
activated.71
Let us then critically examine the arguments for taking SiKaioouvn OEOU as God's
saving activity/power.
Auvauic QEQU and'Opyfi QEOU as Subjective Genitives
Perhaps the most common argument is that OEOU in SiKaioouvn OEOU should be
taken as a subjective genitive denoting God's saving activity/power because that is how
OEOU functions in the two genitival phrases in the verses immediately preceding and
following Rom 1:17: Suvapic OEOU (V 16) and opyij OEOU (V 18). Some scholars also
point to two phrases that occur a few chapters later (f| 7tioxic xou OEOU [Rom 3:3] and ij
N. T. Wright: "This is a well-known problem in relation to 'righteousness' and 'salvation,' as frequently

in Isaiah 40-55. The two sit side by side so often that people have often been tempted to say that
'righteousness' there means 'salvation.' But that is misleading. Words cannot simply be telescoped into one
another like that... God's righteousness is that quality or attribute because of which he saves his people.
His 'acts of righteousness' are thus the acts that he performs as outworkings or demonstrations of his
covenant faithfulness." Justification: God's Plan & Paul's Vision (Downers Grove: IVP, 2009), 71.
71
Douglas A. Campbell: "Covenantal associations are consequently possible but not necessary semantic
resonances of the phrase Sncatoouvri ©sou, and we would need contextual information to activate them in
Paul... In the immediate location of [Rom] 1:16-17, and its particular allusions to Psalm 98,1 see nothing
that activates such specific resonances explicitly ... In sum, it seems that - on internal grounds -
SiKatootivn ©sou in Paul denotes a singular, saving, liberating, life-giving, eschatological act of God in
Christ." The Deliverance of God: An Apocalyptic Rereading of Justification in Paul (Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 2009), 700-2.
Chapter 6: Exegesis of Aucaioowri ©eon in Paul - 423
dA,fj0£ia xou OEOU [Rom 3:7]). In all four cases, the genitive qualifier Oeou makes the
noun a divine attribute or activity: it is God's own "power," "wrath," "faithfulness," and
"truth." In none of these cases is the genitive Oeou to be interpreted as indicating that
"power," "wrath," "faithfulness," or "truth" comes from God. Adolf Schlatter puts it this
way: "After the preceding 'power of God' and parallel to the following phrase 'wrath of
God,' there is no doubt about the meaning of the genitive. The righteousness is as much
God's own as the power and the wrath are his own."
But there is no grammatical rule that an author must be absolutely consistent in
his usage of the genitive. It is well-known that the genitive is perhaps one of the most
flexible cases in Greek, indicating a seemingly infinite variety of relationships with the
head noun.73 Paul is not bound to use Oeou in the same syntactical sense in every
instance. Indeed, he uses it in a variety of ways in the near context. In Romans, Oeou is
used in a variety of ways.
Possessive genitive - attribute or quality of God
• xo xpJloxov xou Oeou ("the kindness of God," Rom 2:4)

• OEOU SiKaioouvri ("God righteousness/justice," Rom 3:5)
• Jiveupa Oeou ("the Spirit of God," Rom 8:9)
• d7toxopia Oeou ("the severity of God," Rom 11:22)
• dXijOeia OEOU ("God's truthfulness/faithfulness," Rom 15:8)
Subjective genitive
• xo Kpipa xou OEOU ("the judgment of God," Rom 2:2-3)

• SucaioKpiaia xou OEOU ("the righteous judgment of God," Rom 2:5)
• f\ enayyeXia xou Oeou ("the promise of God," Rom 4:20)
• fj dydTiri xov OEOV ("the love of God," Rom 8:39)
• ij 7rp60£aic xou OEOU ("the purpose of God," Rom 9:11)
Adolf Schlatter, Romans: The Righteousness of God (trans. Siegfried S. Schatzmann; Peabody:
Hendrickson, 1995), 20.
7
'' C. F. D. Moule calls the genitive an "immensely versatile and hard-worked case." An Idiom Book of New
Testament Greek (2nd ed.; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1959), 37.
Chapter 6: Exegesis of AiKcuooirvri ©sou in Paul 424
Objective genitive
• xo yvcooxov xou Oeou ("what can be known about God," Rom 1:19)
• t,f\Xoq OEOU ("zeal for God," Rom 10:2)
Genitive of origin or source
• £uayy£>aov OEOU ("the gospel of God," Rom 1: l) 74

• ij x&pic tou OEOU ("the grace of God," Rom 5:15)
• xo xdpiopa xou OEOU ("the gift of God," Rom 6:23)
In each case, the significance of the genitive is quite clear from the context; or,
more precisely, the lexical semantics of the nomen regens (the head noun) in relation to
the meaning of the nomen rectum (the noun modifying, qualifying or restricting the head
noun in the genitive case) is ultimately the decisive factor determining the precise
syntactical force of the genitive.
Even the same genitive phrase can be used in more than one sense. For example,
"the glory of God" (fj Soâ xou OEOU) is used six times in Romans with a variety of
nuances: as a divine attribute or quality possessed by God alone ("the glory of the
immortal God," Rom 1:23; "my falsehood increases his glory," Rom 3:7); as a divine
standard to which humans can attain ("all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,"
Rom 3:23); and as an eschatological hope connected to the physical glory of the
resurrection body ("we rejoice in the hope of the glory of God," Rom 5:2; "raised from
the dead through the glory of the Father," Rom 6:4).75 The word OEOU in this third usage
could be interpreted as a genitivus auctoris, since bodily 56c;a or glorification comes from
74
"The genitive OEOV indicates origin ... God is the author of the message not only in that it is He who is
now setting it forth, speaking through those who proclaim it, but also in that He has purposed it from all
eternity, promised it in the OT scriptures (cf. v. 2), and brought it into being by the gospel events."
Cranfield, 1.55 n. 1; Dunn, 1.10.
75
Cp. "the glory that will be revealed in us" (Rom 8:18), and Paul's usage of 86§a in 1 Corinthians 15 (e.g.,
the body "is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory," v 43).
Chapter 6: Exegesis of AiKotioown. ©eon m Paul 425
God and is given to those who are the objects of God's powerful resurrection activity,
i.e., "those whom he justified, he also glorified (sSocâaev)" (Rom 8:30), "being
transformed from glory to glory (anb Socjnc eic, 56c;av)" (2 Cor 3:18).
Furthermore, taking Suvapic OEOU and opyij OEOU as direct parallels of SiKaioouvn,
OEOU is misleading, since such a reading glosses over the structural relationships among
the three theological concepts. In order to see those relationships, it is worth quoting Rom
1:15-18 as a whole. This passage is remarkable for being structured around a series of
four clauses each introduced by a post-positive ydp, with the first three being used with
the usual causal meaning providing the reason or explanation for the previous clause, and
the fourth (v 18) being used in a looser sense.76

15
So, as far as lies with me, I am eager to preach the gospel to you also who are in
Rome.
16
For (ydp) I am not ashamed of the gospel,
for (ydp) it is the power ofGod'unto salvation for everyone who believes, for
the Jew first and also for the Greek.
A y
For (ydp) in it [viz. the gospel] the righteousness of God is revealed by

faith unto faith, as it is written, "He who is righteous by faith shall live."
1 ft
For (ydp) the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and
unrighteousness of humans who suppress the truth in unrighteousness
(translation mine).
The power of God and the righteousness of God are not on the same level in this passage,
as if the two terms were parallel to one another on the same semantic plane. Rather, the
first statement explains why Paul is not ashamed of the gospel, with ydp functioning as a
marker of the reason for the preceding clause. He is not ashamed of the gospel, "for it is
the power of God unto salvation for everyone who believes" (Suvapic yap OEOU EOXIV sic
acoxripiav Tiavxi xcp moxEuovxi). In other words, the gospel message about God's act in
Christ is the powerful means that God uses to save all who believe, whether Jew or
76
"Marker of clarification, for, you see" (BDAG ydp 2).
Chapter 6: Exegesis of AiKaiocuvn. ©eon in Paul 426
Greek. A helpful parallel is 1 Cor 1:18, where Paul says that "the word of the cross is
folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is power of God (xoic Se
ocpôpevoic; fjpiv Suvapic Oeou EOXIV)" (ESV), a statement that is then explained in other
words a few verses later:
For since, in the wisdom of God, the world did not know God through wisdom,
it pleased God through the folly of what we preach to save those who believe (Sid
xfjc pcopiac xou Kipuypaxoc ocoaai xouc 7uax£uovxac). For Jews demand signs
and Greeks seek wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to
Jews and folly to Gentiles, but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks,
Christ the power of God (OEOU Suvapiv) and the wisdom of God (1 Cor 1:21-24
ESV).
The point is that the gospel message is "the power of God unto salvation" in the sense
that it is the powerful means that God uses to save those who believe, that is, to save
them from perishing in God's wrath. The wrath of God is the judicial backdrop of the
salvation that comes through the gospel. Although in Rom 1:18-32 the wrath of God is a
present reality revealed in the progressive handing over of sinners to greater and greater
depravity, in Romans 2 it is a future, eschatological reality, "the day of wrath when God's
righteous judgment will be revealed" (Rom 2:5), "the day when God judges the secrets of
humans" (Rom 2:16). The present revelation of God's wrath in the sad tale of human sin
is a foretaste and sign of "the wrath to come (fj opyij fj EpôpEvt])" (1 Thess 1:10; cp. Col
3:6; Eph 5:6). The wrath of God is a presently revealed reality that points to a future,
eschatological outpouring of wrath on the day of judgment.
This brings us to v 17. The antithesis of eschatological wrath is eschatological
salvation, and righteousness (or justification) is the middle term that provides the now-in-
Chapter 6: Exegesis of AiKaiocrovu ©eoO in Paul 427
the-gospel-revealed means for the transition from wrath to salvation. Paul will make the
connection of these three terms (wrath -> righteousness by faith -^ salvation) explicit
later on: "Since, therefore, we have now been justified by his blood, much more shall we
be saved'by him from the wrath of God" (Rom 5:9 ESV). But we see the same
connection in the first chapter of Romans. Why is the gospel God's powerful means for
saving people from perishing under God's eschatological wrath? Because in it the
righteousness of God is revealed, a righteousness that is received by faith and offered to
faith. For Paul, righteousness is the precondition of life (6 SiKaioc; eK Tiioxecoc îjaexai,
Hab 2:4/Rom 1:17; cp. SiKaicooic; ^cofjc ["justification that brings life," NIV], Rom 5:18).
But "there is none righteousness, not even one" (OUK eoxiv SiKaioc; OUSE EIC., Rom 3:10);
therefore, in the gospel message about the death and resurrection of Jesus the Messiah is
revealed the righteousness that comes from God as a gift (Rom 5:17) offered to all who
believe, whether Jew or Gentile, and received by faith. Just as God's eschatological wrath
is coming because of human "unrighteousness" (dSuda - 2x in Rom 1:18), so eternal life
will be given to those who are "righteous before God" (Sucaioi 7iapd xcp Oecp, Rom 2:13),
not by doing the righteousness required by the law, but by believing in Christ and trusting
in him "for righteousness" (eic. SiKaioauvnv, Rom 10:4, 10).
So it is incorrect to place these three genitival phrases on the same level as non-
hierarchical parallels. Rather, one must pay close attention to the conceptual relationships
in Paul's thought. The wrath of God is the backdrop of salvation. The gospel is the power
of God unto salvation. And the righteousness of God, by faith for faith (eK maxecoc eic
7/
Peter Stuhlmacher is correct to point out that v 18 and v 17 are closely connected, but rather than locating
the antithesis between "salvation" and "wrath," he locates the antithesis between "God's righteousness"
and "God's wrath," thus missing the crucial and distinctive role of "righteousness by faith" as the means of
salvation from wrath. Stuhlmacher, Romans, 35.
Chapter 6: Exegesis of AiKmocruvri ©eon in Paul - 428
7tioxiv), that is, the offer of "the righteousness of faith," is the central content of the
gospel message (Rom 10:6-11) by which it becomes God's power for delivering all who
believe from God's wrath and granting them eschatological life.
The Appeal to Intertextuality
Another argument for taking SiKaioouvn, Oeou as a subjective genitive that refers
to God's "saving activity or power" is based on the claim that Rom 1:16-17 contains an
intertextual allusion to one or more Old Testament texts. The argument is that the
collocation of the three terms "salvation," "righteousness," and "revealed" in Rom 1:16-
17 suggests he presence of an intertextual allusion to Ps 98:2 and Isaiah 56:1 (and other
similar passages in Deutero-Isaiah).
In the first place, we have to question the legitimacy of the very idea of
intertextuality, at least as formulated by its most well-known advocate, Richard B. Hays.
It is simply too subjective a methodology to provide a sound basis for exegetical and
theological conclusions. Hays lists seven criteria (or "rules of thumb")79 for determining
the presence of intertextual echoes in Paul, but they are ultimately negated by Hays's
Richard B. Hays, Echoes of Scripture in the Letters of Paul (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989),
36-38.
79
Hay, Echoes, 29-32. The seven "rules of thumb" listed by Hays are (1) availability (Was the proposed
source of the echo available to the author and/or original readers?), (2) volume (How distinctive or
prominent is the precursor text within Scripture?), (3) recurrence (How often does Paul elsewhere cite or
allude to the same scriptural passage?), (4) thematic coherence (How well does the alleged echo fit into the
line of argument that Paul is developing?), (5) historical plausibility (Could Paul have intended and his
readers have understood the alleged meaning effect?), (6) history of interpretation (Have other readers
heard the same echoes?), and (7) satisfaction (Docs the proposed reading make sense and illuminate the
surrounding discourse?). Note that the decisive criteria are "thematic coherence" and "satisfaction," which
are really one and the same. But this presupposes that one's interpretation of "the line of the argument" and
"the surrounding discourse" is correct to begin with. But in the debate over Sucaiocruvri 9sou, this is
precisely what is in question. So the whole intertextual approach becomes rather circular and consequently
unhelpful. Wc can pursue this investigation on a more sure methodological footing if we begin with the
scriptural texts that Paul explicitly cites (Gen 15:6; Hab 2:4) and then move out from there to search for
echoes of other OT passages that are consistent with that starting point.
Chapter 6: Exegesis of AiKaiocruvii Qeofj in Paul - 429
own insistence that the determination of authorial intent is neither possible nor
80
necessary.
Now Paul states that "the righteousness of God" is "testified to by the law and the
prophets" (papxupoupevn vnb xou vopou Kai xcov Ttpocpnxcov, Rom 3:21), and this might
seem to provide prima facie support for the search for intertextual allusions. But what
passages in "the law and the prophets" does Paul have in view? There are only two texts
cited by Paul in support of his doctrine of "righteousness by faith" - one from the law
(Gen 15:6, cited in Rom 4:3 and Gal 3:6) and one from the prophets (Hab 2:4, cited in
Rom 1:17 and Gal 3:11).81 And in both Gen 15:6 and Hab 2:4, the righteousness in view
is not God's own righteousness, whether conceived of as a divine attribute or a divine
activity, but is a righteousness that believers possess before God ("Abraham believed
God and it was reckoned to him as righteousness" and "he who is righteous by faith shall
live"). These two passages use the noun and the adjective from the AIK-group -
SiKaioouvn in Gen 15:6 and SiKaioc in Hab 2:4 - in a manner that clearly has to do with
the status of humans as "righteous" before God. Furthermore, both passages state that this
status of righteousness before God is something that comes by faith - Abraham
"believed" (e7rioxeuoev) God and it was reckoned to him as righteousness; he who is

"To limit our interpretation of Paul's scriptural echoes to what he intended by them is to impose a severe
and arbitrary hermeneutical restriction ... Later readers will rightly grasp meanings of the figures that may
have been veiled from Paul himself." Hay, Echoes, 33, cp. 156.
81
It might also be supposed that Ps 143:2 (used in Rom 3:20 and Gal 2:16) is a third Old Testament text
included in "the law and the prophets" in Paul's mind. But there are two reasons for not including it as a
positive witness to the righteousness of God. First, it is negative only, indicating that no one can be
justified in God's sight by one's own works, and thus does not qualify for the OT revelation of the
righteousness of God. And. second, while Paul twice employs the language of Ps 143:2, he does not
introduce it with a citation formula or some sort of indicator that he is quoting Scripture, e.g., KaOcbc;
yEypa7ixat (Rom 1:17); xiydp f| ypacpf] Xsyst; (Rom 4:3); etc. On the other hand, Ps 143:2 is relevant to the
interpretation of StKatoauvn, OEOU since it explicitly specifies that the question has to do with the status of
righteousness before God: "no one living shall be justified before you (ou 5iKaico6f|o-£Tai svcb7u6v oon Jtac
L^COV)" (LXX) -> "no flesh shall be justified before him (ou 8iKaico9f|rj£Tai 7taaa aap§ svco7tiov aikou)"
(Rom 3:20).
Chapter 6: Exegesis of AiKcuoauvn, 0eoO in Paul 430
righteous "by faith" (EK JiioxECOc) shall live. And since Paul has said that "now, apart from
the law, the righteousness of God is manifested, being testified to by the law and the
prophets," with these two texts being the only ones explicitly cited by Paul, this provides
further support for taking SiKaioouvn OEOU as a status of righteousness from God
(genitivus auctoris) rather than as a divine activity (subjective genitive). It is
methodologically unsound to ignore the scriptural witnesses actually cited by Paul and to
appeal rather to a subjective theory of intertextuality that leads the interpreter to other
texts in the OT never cited by Paul. The intertextual approach might be valid if it
reinforced the meaning of the OT texts that Paul does cite, but as handled by Hays it
leads to an interpretation of "the righteousness of God" that stands in tension with the
meaning that arises when that phrase is read in light of the scriptural witness of Gen 15:6
and Hab 2:4. The citation of these two texts is perhaps the strongest clue enabling us to
discern Paul's authorial intent behind the phrase SiKaioouvn OEOU. Or to put it another
way, the phrase itself may be ambiguous due to the various meanings of both the noun
SiKaioouvn, and the genitive OEOU, but the meaning of the noun as "a status of
righteousness" and the meaning of the genitive as identifying author or source are the
meanings activated by the explicit scriptural citations in the immediate context. Other
semantic and syntactic possibilities are thereby deactivated, or at least pushed into the
background.
Not only do Paul's explicit OT citations stand in tension with the alleged
intertextual allusions, but we must also ask how strongly the OT iustitia salutifera usage
(understood properly) is present in the background of Paul's thought. There is nothing in
the context of Paul's usage of this lexeme to suggest that he is thinking in terms of this
Chapter 6: Exegesis of Ancatoouvri ©EOU in Paul 431
delivering/vindicatory judicial context. In the ten "righteousness of God" passages there
are no enemies or oppressors in view, nor are the oppressed righteous in need of God's
delivering and vindicating activity. Rather, in three cases he uses the lexeme in a
straightforward manner to refer to God's distributive justice and in the other seven cases
to refer to the status of righteousness that comes from God and is received/appropriated
by faith.
No doubt, if Paul were asked to interpret the iustitia salutifera passages in the
Psalms and Isaiah, he would take them as further support of his Rechtfertigungslehre,
taking the route of the DSS and spiritualizing the enemies. God's vindicating of his
oppressed people by executing judgment on their enemies in the OT would then be
interpreted by him typologically as God's justification of the ungodly by executing his
wrath upon his Son in the propitiatory sacrifice. On this basis, one can see ultimate
theological harmony between the OT iustitita salutifera usage and the Pauline
SiKaioouvn Oeou. But this would be a theological argument after we have already
determined on exegetical grounds that SiKaioouvri Oeou is first and foremost the gift of
righteousness from God. Only after we have done that can we go back and see the
vindication theme in the Psalms and Isaiah as a type adumbrating the gospel's message of
"righteousness by faith." It is methodologically unsound to go at it the other way around,
that is, to limit Paul's usage within the typological horizon of the iustitia salutifera theme
in the Psalms and Isaiah.

Chapter 6: Exegesis of AiKaioouvn. ©eon in Paul • 432
C. AiKaioouvt] 0EOU as "Gift of Righteousness from God"
Having critiqued the "God's covenant faithfulness" and "God's saving activity"
interpretations, 1 now turn to make the positive case for the traditional Reformation
interpretation that it means "the gift of righteousness from God."
AiKaioouvn as Righteousness before God
The debate over the meaning of SiKaioouvri Oeou in Paul involves two
interconnected issues: the precise lexical force of the head noun SiKaioouvri, and the
syntactical significance of the genitive Oeov. In this section I am focused on the meaning
of the head noun SiKaioouvn,. In the next section we will examine the genitive OEOU.
As our lexical survey of "righteousness" in Chapters 3-5 has shown, the noun
SiKaioouvri can be used with a variety of usages, but with the two main ones being
judicial righteousness and ethical righteousness. However, it is important to recognize
that the two meanings are connected in the subcategory under ethical righteousness that I
have labeled "righteousness before God." When SiKaioouvn is used in reference to
"righteousness before God," it can be either the intrinsic righteousness of humans who
have kept God's law and are therefore deemed righteous in God's sight, or the imputed
righteousness of a human who has been deemed righteous in God's sight by faith (e.g.,
Gen 15:6). But in either case, there is a judicial dimension to this ethical righteousness
since God has deemed someone to be righteous in his sight. It is divinely-approved
righteousness.
The notion that there is an implicit God-ward dimension to "righteousness" is
supported by three Pauline references that explicitly speak of righteousness "before

Chapter 6: Exegesis of AiKaioowri ©sou in Paul 433
God," although instead of the noun they use the adjective SiKaioc or the verb SiKaioco:
"For it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God (SiKaioi napa xcp Oecp),
but the doers of the law who will be justified" (Rom 2:13 ESV); "For by works of the law
no human being will be justified in his sight (ou SiKaicoOfjoExai Tiaoa odpi; evcoTtiov
auxou), since through the law comes knowledge of sin" (Rom 3:20 ESV); and "Now it is
evident that no one is justified before God (ouSeic Sucaiouxai Jiapd xcp Oecp) by the law,
for 'The righteous shall live by faith'" (Gal 3:11 ESV). Since SiKaioouvn is the state of
being SiKaioc, and SiKaioco means to deem someone to be SiKaioc, it is to be expected that
all three terms would have a fundamental congruence, at least in the context of Paul's
teaching on justification. And if Paul's teaching on justification has this strong God-ward
concern, it is evident that SiKaioouvri itself is in many cases to be understood as "the
status of being SiKaioc in God's sight." Besides, we saw evidence of this usage in the OT
and in the Jewish literature.
Based on our lexical study in Chapters 3-5, we can say with some degree of
confidence that there are three main possibilities for the meaning of the head noun
SiKaioouvn in the lexeme SiKaioouvri Oeou: (1) God's attribute of righteousness or
distributive justice; (2) God's saving/delivering righteousness; or (3) the status of
divinely approved righteousness that comes from God as a gift. I am arguing that option
(1) is found only in Rom 3:5, 25-26 in Paul, and that the remaining seven passages fall
under option (3). To be clear, I am not arguing that the genitive Oeou is an objective
genitive as if the "divinely-approved" qualifier comes from Oeou.82 Rather, I am arguing
" Luther and Calvin sometimes interpreted the genitive OEOU as an objective genitive and sometimes as a
genitive of source. It is even possible that they thought it had two meanings, so that the lexeme as a whole
meant both "the righteousness that God approves or that is valid before God" (objective genitive) and "the
Chapter 6: Exegesis of AiKouoo-ovn. ©sou in Paul - 434
that the "divinely-approved" aspect is connected with the word SiKaioouvri itself, based
on a trajectory of usage from the OT to the Jewish Literature to Paul's own usage.
We have already traced OT/Jewish trajectory. Let us now examine Paul's usage.
In contexts having to do with his Rechtfertigungslehre, there are about two dozen
occurrences of the noun SiKaioouvn, sans the genitive modifier Oeou where the noun
means "the status of righteousness before God" or "divinely-approved righteousness."
Table 16. AiKaioouvn (sans Oeou) in Paul

Ref Greek English (ESV)
Rom 4:3 'EjiiaxcuoEV Ss Appaau. xa> GECO, Kai sA-oyiaGn. "Abraham believed God and it was counted to him
auxcp eic, SiKaioauvijv. as righteousness."
Rom 4:5 xcp 5E ui] Epyaôusvco, jnoxsuovxi 6E cm xov "And to the one who does not work but trusts him
SiKaiouvxa xov daepfj, XoyiCsxai fj jiiaxic, who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as
auxovj eic, SiKaioauvnv. righteousness."
Rom 4:6 KaGCwtep Kai Aaui8 Aiysi xov ucxKapiapov xou "... just as David also speaks of the blessing of the
dvOptimou ib 6 GEOC, A.oyicj£xai SiKaioauvnv one to whom God counts righteousness apart from
xcopic epycov works ..."
Rom 4:9 Aeyouev ydp, 'E/.oyioGr| xw APpadp f| Triaxic, "We say that faith was counted to Abraham as
eic SiKaioauvnv. righteousness."
Rom Kai cmpeiov sXa(3sv Jispixopfjc,, crcppayTSa xfjc, "He received the sign of circumcision as a seal of
4:11a 8iKaio«rtivT|i; xfjc Triaxscoc xfjc EV xfj the righteousness that he had by faith while he was
ctKpoPuaxia still uncircumcised."
Rom eic, xo sivai auxov 7taxepa 7tavxcov xcov "The purpose was to make him the father of all who
4:11b 7tiaxeu6vxcov 8i" dKpoPuaxiac,, eic, xo believe without being circumcised, so that
XoyiaGfjvai auxoic [xf|v] SiKaioauvnv righteousness would be counted to them as well."
Rom On ydp §id vopou r\ s7tayy£Aia xcp Appadp fj "For the promise to Abraham and his offspring that
4:13 xcp o7tEppaxi auxou, xo KA.n,pov6pov auxov he would be heir of the world did not come through
eivai Koapou, CCAACX 5ia SiKaioauvn.!; Triaxscoc the law but through the righteousness of faith."
Rom 5io Kai eXoyiaGn, auxcp eic, SiKaioauvnv. "That is why his faith was 'counted to him as
4:22 righteousness.'"
Rom noXka \xaXkov oi xfjv 7ispiaasiav xfj<; %apixoc "... much more will those who receive the
5:17 Kai xfjc, Scopeac, xfjc SiKaioauvijc XapPdvovxec abundance of grace and the free gift of
EV ^cofj Paai^suaouaiv 5id xou evoc, 'Inaou righteousness reign in life through the one man
Xpiaxou. Jesus Christ."
Rom iva cbansp epaaiXsuaEV f) dpapxia ev xcp "... so that, as sin reigned in death, grace also might
5:21 Gavaxcp, ouxcoc Kai fj x«pi? PaoiXeuop 5ia reign through righteousness leading to eternal life
SiKaioauvii? sis; c^tofiv aicbviov 5id Tn,aou through Jesus Christ our Lord."
Xpiaxou xou Kupiou fjpcov.
Rom si 8E Xptaxoc, EV upiv, xo psv acopa vsKpov 5id "But if Christ is in you, although the body is dead
8:10 dpapxiav, xo 8s 7rveupa ^cof] 8ia SiKaioauvnv. because of sin, the Spirit is life because of
righteousness."
Rom Ti ouv Epoupev; oxi EGVT} xd pfj SicbKovxa "What shall we say, then? That Gentiles who did
9:30 SiKaioauvnv KaxeXapev SiKaioauvnv, not pursue righteousness have attained
SiKaioauvnv Ss xfjv EK jttarscoc/ righteousness, that is, a righteousness that is by
faith" (ESV modified).
Rom 'Iopaf|A. 8e SICOKCOV vopov 8iKaioauvi]c eic "... but that Israel who pursued a law that would
9:31 vopov OUK £cpGaaev. lead to righteousness did not succeed in reaching
that law."
righteousness that comes from God as its source or author" (genitivus auctoris). My view is that the
genitive OEOU has a single univocal meaning.
Chapter 6: Exegesis of AiKaioouvr) ©sou in Paul - 435
Rom xs7.oc ydp vopou Xpiaxoc eic SiKaioauvnv "For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness
10:4 Jtavxi xa> 7iiaxsuovxi. to everyone who believes."
Rom Mouafjc yap ypdipsi xijv SiKaioauvnv xijv EK "For Moses writes about the righteousness that is
10:5 xofj vopou oxi 6 ônjaat; (ivGpoOToc, cf|aExai ev based on the law, that the person who does the
auxfj. commandments shall live bv them."
Rom fj SE EK Ttiaxscoc. SiKaioouvri oiixcoc A,eyei, Mfj "But the righteousness based on faith says, 'Do not
10:6 ewtr|c ev xfj lcapSia aou, Tic ctvapfjaexai etc, say in your heart, "Who will ascend into heaven?'"
xov oupavov; xoux' EOXIV Xpiaxov Kaxayayeiv (that is, to bring Christ down)"
Rom KapSia ydp maxsuexai eic SiKaioauvnv, "For with the heart one believes and is justified,
10:10 axopaxi 5E opoXoyeixai sic acoxripiav. and with the mouth one confesses and is saved."
1 Cor ei; auxou 8E upsic eaxe sv Xpiaxro 'inaou, 6c "He is the source of your life in Christ Jesus, whom
1:30 syEvfjGri aocpia ijplv and Gsou, SiKaioauvn. xe God made our wisdom and our righteousness and
Kai dyiaapoc Kai CraoAuxproaic sanctification and redemption."
2 Cor 3:9 si yap ij SiaKovia xfjc KaxaKpiascoc, 86â, "For if there was glory in the ministry of
TiokXcp pfiXA,ov TiEpiaaEuei fj SiaKovia xfjc; condemnation, the ministry of righteousness must
SiKaioauvi]? Soyp far exceed it in glory."
Gal 2:21 OUK dGsxco xfjv xapiv xou Geou- ei yap Sia "J do not nullify the grace of God, for if
vopou SiKaioauvn., apa Xpiaxoc, Scopedv justification were through the law, then Christ died
djteGavev. for no purpose."
Gal 3:6 KaGroc APpadp EJtiaxeuaev xfi GECO, Kai "... just as Abraham 'believed God and it was
eXoyiaGp auxcp Eic SiKaioauvnv. counted to him as righteousness.'"
Gal 3:21 'O ouv vopoc Kaxd xrov e7iayyeî(5v [xou Gsoti]; "Is the law then contrary to the promises of God?
pi) yevoixo' Ei yap ESOGT] vopoc 6 Suvdpsvoc Certainly not! For if a law had been given that
CcooTioifjaai, ovxcog EK vopou av f|v fj could give life, then righteousness would indeed be
SiKaioauvi). by the law."
Gal 5:5 puEic. yap 7rveupaxi EK niax&aq eXjiiSa "For through the Spirit, by faith, we ourselves
SiKaioauviiq djiEKSexdpeGa. eagerly wait for the hope of righteousness."
Phil 3:9 Kai eupsOro sv auxw, pf| excov spijv "... and may be found in him, not having a
SiKaioauvnv xijv BK vopou akXa xf|v8j Sid righteousness of my own that comes from the law,
7tiaxecoc Xpiaxou, xfjv eK Geou SiKaioauvpv84 but that [righteousness] which comes through faith
E7ii xfj Tiiaxei in Christ, the righteousness from God that depends
on faith"
In most cases, the term is equivalent to "the righteousness of faith" (a concept that
occurs five times in Paul in various forms: Rom 4:1 la, 13; 9:30; 10:6; Phil 3:9). In fact,
SiKaioouvri is rendered "justification" in the ESV twice (Rom 10:10; Gal 2:21). But there
are four instances in Table 16 above where SiKaioouvn means ordinary ethical, intrinsic
righteousness. In Rom 9:30 (the first occurrence, not the other two); 9:31; 10:5; Gal 3:21,
it could be argued that SiKaioouvn is almost equivalent to "the righteousness of the law"
and should not be translated as "justification." I have included them in Table 16 because
8j
I have highlighted the article xr)v because it implies another StKotiocrovriv, even though the word itself is
omitted for stylistic reasons. This is a case of the article being used anaphorically as the equivalent of a
relative pronoun. Daniel B. Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics (Grand Rapids: Zondervan,
1996), 213-15. The phrase aXka xr)v 5td 7tioxsto<; Xpiaxou in Phil 3:9, then, qualifies as one of the five
occurrences of "the righteousness of faith" in Paul.
84
1 have not highlighted xny eK QEOV SiKaioauvnv in Phil 3:9 because Table 16 is a list of instances of
absolute SiKaioouvn sans Oeou used in the sense of "divinely-approved righteousness."
Chapter 6: Exegesis of AiKaioauvn. ©sou in Paul 436
they are used in contrast to "the righteousness of faith," and since the two kinds of
righteousness are being compared and contrasted, both kinds of righteousness evidently
have to do with a righteous status that someone thinks they have or desires to have or
actually enjoys in the sight of God.
My argument here closely follows that of Stephen Westerholm, who analyzes
Paul's "righteousness" language using the distinction between "ordinary righteousness"
(the righteousness of the law or of works) and "extraordinary righteousness" (the
righteousness of faith).85 Westerholm argues:
In the ordinary use of the terms, "righteousness" is what one ought to do and the
"righteous" are those who do it... Fittingly, then, Paul repeatedly speaks of the
righteousness of faith as an emergency measure introduced by God to offset
human z^nrighteousness ... The (ordinary) righteousness that is spelled out in the
law is, for Paul, the more basic righteousness, from which the "righteousness" of
Of.
faith paradoxically borrows its name.
Normally, SiKaioouvn when predicated of humans means "ordinary ethical
righteousness," a usage that is common in both the LXX and in Jewish literature, as we
saw in Chapters 4 and 5. Paul is playing off of this ordinary usage, since SiKaioouvn, is
what sinful humans lack and need, and so "the demands of ordinary righteousness (as
spelled out in the law), though not met in the ordinary way, are nonetheless presupposed
by the Pauline gospel."87 When the reference is to "extraordinary righteousness," the
context makes this clear (as well as added phrases like "of faith") and, in any case, even
"extraordinary righteousness" presupposes the ordinary meaning as its foil.
Stephen Westerholm, Perspectives Old and New on Paul: The ' Lutheran " Paul and His Critics (Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, 2004), 261-96; idem, "The Righteousness of the Law and the Righteousness of Faith in
Romans," Interpretation 58 (2004): 253-64.
86
Westerholm, "The Righteousness of the Law," 262-63.
87
Westerholm, "The Righteousness of the Law," 263.
Chapter 6: Exegesis of AiKaioouvn, ©eou in Paul - 437
Qeou as Genitive of Source or Genitivus Auctoris
So we have examined the head noun SiKaioouvn, and have concluded that when
used by Paul in the context of his Rechtfertigungslehre it denotes the status of
righteousness before God or divinely-approved righteousness. We now turn to an analysis
of the genitive Oeou. If 1 am right that SiKaioouvn is to be taken as the status of
righteousness before God, then the genitive Oeou could be either an objective genitive
("righteousness that God approves") or a genitive of source or genitivus auctoris ("the
righteousness that comes from God"). Since we have already argued that the "before
God" element is implicit in the noun SiKaioouvn,, the first option is less likely. In
addition, there are good contextual reasons for taking Oeou as a genitivus auctoris. There
are a number of Pauline passages that explicitly speak of "justification" or some related
term as a gift using the nouns Scoped, 5cbpr|pa, and xdpiopa (which I take to be
essentially synonymous), and Scopedv (the accusative of Scoped used adverbially).88
Rom 3:24: "being justified as a gift (Scopedv) by His grace" (NASB).
Rom 5:15a: "but the free gift (TO xdpiopa) is not like the trespass" (ESV).
Rom 5:15b: "much more have the grace of God (fj xapiq xov Oeou) and the free
gift (fj Scoped) by the grace of the one man Jesus Christ abounded for many" (ESV).
Rom 5:16a: "the free gift (TO Scopripa) is not like the result of that one man's
trespass" (ESV).
Rom 5:16b: "the free gift (TO xdpiopa) following many trespasses brought
justification" (ESV).
BDAG Scopedv.
Chapter 6: Exegesis of AiKatoouvri ©sou in Paul 438
Rom 5:17: "much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and the
free gift of righteousness (oi xfiv jrepioaeiav xfjc; yapixoq Kai xfjc; Scopedc; xr)q Sucaiocuvric;
taxppdvovTecj) reign in life through the one man Jesus Christ" (ESV).
Rom 6:23: "the free gift of God (TO xdpiopa xov Oeou) is eternal life in Christ
Jesus our Lord" (ESV).
Of the above passages, the most important is Rom 5:17, since it specifically
speaks of "the free gift of righteousness" (fj Scoped xfjc; SiKaioauvnc;). When combined
with Rom 6:23, "the free gift of God" (TO xdpiopa TOTJ Oeou), Rom 5:17 makes clear that
SiKaioouvn is a gift of God. In addition, when combined with the eK Oeou of Phil 3:9, it
becomes clear that SiKaioouvn, Oeou is the status of divinely-approved righteousness that
comes from God as a gift.
All of this is consistent with a broader theological presupposition in Paul's
thought. Paul often sets these two ideas in contrast, "of God" versus "of humans." It is a
contrast that seems deeply imbedded in his theological outlook. For example, 2 Cor 4:7:
"But we have this treasure in earthen vessels, so that the surpassing greatness of the
power will be of God and not from ourselves (exopev Se TOV Onoaupov TOUTOV ev
oaTpaKivoicj oKeueaiv, iva fj U7repPoA,ij Tfjc Suvdpecocj fi xov Oeou Kai pfj e£ fjpcov)"
(NASB). This cross-reference suggests that the genitive Oeou is used by Paul to make a
contrast between that which is from God and that which comes from merely human
resources. Note that in the parallel phrase (pf| ecj fjpcov) he uses the preposition eK, rather
than the simple genitive (cp. fj eK Oeou SiKaioouvn,, Phil 3:9). This shows that the genitive
of source can be expressed by Paul with or without the precising preposition.

Chapter 6: Exegesis of AiKaioouvri ©eou in Paul 439
The righteousness of God, then, is the righteousness that is from above, as
opposed to the righteousness that comes from below, by human striving. It is a
supernatural and divine righteousness. This is a major theme in Paul's writings. He is
constantly emphasizing the fact that there is a supernatural, divine activity at work in the
lives of believers.
Adolf Schlatter helpfully points out that one of the primary ways that Paul's
conversion impacted his theology was that he experienced firsthand the contrast between
human inability and the sovereignty of divine grace. Although Schlatter takes SiKiaoouvri
Oeou as God's own righteousness (subjective genitive), his stress on the Pauline doctrine
of grace is correct:
The special nature of [Paul's] conversion provided the negative verdict which the
individual pronounces against himself at repentance with particular vigor. From it
issues the sharp contrasts reflected in his train of thought: not the Law but Christ,
not works but faith, not the flesh but the Spirit, not man but God .... When he was
persuaded of Jesus' messianic glory at his appearance, he saw himself compelled
to a complete denial of self. His confidence in his own work and knowledge was
shattered. He experienced a dying that smote him in his highest aspirations and
works. What saved him was solely the grace of Christ, who presented himself to
him as the giver of divine grace ... Thus, Paul, through his conversion, becomes a
believer. He received through it nothing but faith, because it is solely in Christ
that he has everything, that is, God with his righteousness interceding for him and
his life granted to him.89
For Paul, "the righteousness of faith" is "the righteousness of God," not "of
humans." It originates in God, not in humans. It is utterly divine and heavenly, and comes
to humans from the outside as a gift of sovereign grace. Note the monergistic accent in
the immediately preceding context. In 2 Cor 4:1 -6, Paul has just said that, though the god
of this world has blinded the minds of unbelievers, the God who commanded light to
Adolf Schlatter, The Theology of the Apostles: The Development of New Testament Theology (trans.
Andreas J. Kostenberger; Grand Rapids: Baker. 1998), 298 (emphasis mine).
Chapter 6: Exegesis of AiKaioouvr| ©eou in Paul 440
shine out of darkness has shined in our hearts to give us the light of the knowledge of
God in the face of Jesus Christ. Thus, when Paul speaks of "the surpassing greatness of
the power" in v 7, he is referring to the power of God as manifested in the salvation and
conversion of the elect. This supports my reading of the soteriological contrast between
xov Oeou and ecj fjpcbv. And recall that Paul said in Rom 1:16 that "the power of God unto
salvation" is revealed in the gospel precisely by means of "the righteousness of God."
Francis Watson points to 2 Cor 3:5 to make a similar point: "Not that we are
sufficient of ourselves (dtp' eauxcbv), to reckon anything as from ourselves (ec; eauTcov).
Rather, our sufficiency is from God (eK xov Oeou)" (Watson's translation). Watson quotes
Josephus's description of the Sadducean doctrine that "all things lie within our own
power (ixnavxa ecp' rjpiv auroic KeiaOai)" (Ant. 13.173),90 and interprets Paul as refuting
that claim, since 2 Cor 3:5 makes "a contrast between reliance on divine or on human
agency.
Other passages make the same contrast. In his Epistle to the Philippians, he writes
"... in no way alarmed by your opponents - which is a sign of destruction for them, but
of salvation for you. and that too, from God (dô Oeou)" (Phil 1:28 NASB). And although
the Pauline authorship of the Epistle to the Ephesians is disputed, the author (whether
Paul or a disciple) makes a very Pauline statement when he writes: "For by grace you
"The Sadducees do away with Fate, holding that there is no such thing and that human actions are not
achieved in accordance with her decree, but that all things lie within our own power, so that we ourselves
are responsible for our well-being, while we suffer misfortune through our own thoughtlessness."
Josephus: Jewish Antiquities Books XII-XIII (LCL; trans. Ralph Marcus; Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard
University Press, 1998), 313.
91
Francis Watson, Paul, Judaism, and the Gentiles: Beyond the New Perspective (rev. cd.; Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 2007), 18. See also the essays in Divine and Human Agency in Paul and His Cultural
Environment (ed. John M. G. Barclay and Simon J. Gathercole; London: T&T Clark, 2008).
Chapter 6: Exegesis of AiKaioouvn, ©sou in Paul - 441
have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves (OUK ec; upcov), it is the gift of
God (Oeou TO Scopov)" (Eph 2:8 NASB).
"By Faith" and Other Ndherbestlmmuneen
We have separately analyzed the two parts of the lexeme SiKaioauvn Oeou, the
head noun and the modifying genitive. Now we must observe how the lexeme functions
as a unity. What we will see is that, as Seyoon Kim points out, "Paul usually speaks about
SiKaioouvn Oeou conferred upon or appropriated by faith, so that he stresses its character
as a gift."92
Although Ulrich Wilckens ultimately rejects this argument, he admits the
possibility of understanding "SiKaioouvri as the righteousness of the homo iustificatus^''
because of what he calls the Ndherbestimmungen added as precising phrases that qualify
the lexeme SiKaioouvn Oeou.93 The term Ndherbestimmungen is difficult to translate, but
it comes from the adjective ndher ("near" in the sense of being in proximity, even
juxtaposed) and the noun Bestimmungen ("definers, delimiters, constraints, or precising
terms"). Since words are polysemous (that is, having multiple meanings), and even
within a basic meaning can have a variety of nuances and connotations, with the result
that words typically have a semantic range, only one meaning of which is selected in any
given instance, the decisive consideration for deciding which meaning is in view in any
given text is the context. Scholars, of course, have long recognized the importance of
context in deciding the precise semantic force of any given lexeme. But Wilckens's
92
Seyoon Kim, The Origin of Paul's Gospel, 284.
9
"' Ulrich Wilckens, Excursus on "Gerechtigkeit Gottes," in Der Brief an die Romer, vol. 1 (EKK VI/I;
Kdln: Benziger; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1978), 204-5.
Chapter 6: Exegesis of AiKaioauvn. ©sou in Paul • 442
concept of Ndherbestimmungen is even more precise and helpful in this regard. It is not
uncommon for scholars to regard context much too broadly when attempting to determine
the meaning of a word in any given context. They will sometimes appeal to the broader
context, the immediate paragraph or even an idea found in a nearby paragraph or chapter,
not to mention the tendency - as we have seen in Cremer. Kasemann, Stuhlmacher,
Dunn, Wright, et al. - to appeal to the much wider context of usage in the Old Testament
or Second Temple Jewish Literature. Such appeals to "context" are of course appropriate
but they cannot come close to having the same decisiveness as the Ndherbestimmungen
that are immediately juxtaposed, even abutted, to the lexeme in question.
Perhaps an illustration will help. The word "glasses" is polysemous in English. It
may denote spectacles worn to provide correction for those who are nearsighted or
shortsighted. Or it may denote two or more items of glassware used typically for drinking
liquids. The two sentences, "The prescription for my reading glasses is old," and "Don't
forget to set out the wine glasses for dinner," contain a number of Ndherbestimmungen,
such as the adjectives "reading" and "wine," the reference to an "old prescription" (not
applicable to wine glasses), the verb "set out" (one does not "set out" reading glasses),
and the prepositional phrase "for dinner." The juxtaposition of these syntagmatic items
with the word "glasses" immediately disambiguates the polysemy and make abundantly
clear which meaning is in view in each sentence. An exhaustive study of the word
"glasses" in the corpus of English literature would not help us in these cases. Such a
study can only provide us with these possible meanings of the word, and perhaps a
number of additional specialized uses and connotations. The context of English literature
will only enable us to establish the semantic range available to a speaker or writer, but it
Chapter 6: Exegesis of AiKaioofjvri ©sou in Paul 443
will not enable us to determine which segment of that semantic range is being activated
in any given instance. Narrowing the context to the paragraph in which the term is used
may be more useful insofar as it sets up certain expectations. For example, if the
paragraph is about a dinner, then we might expect the term "glasses" to be used with
reference to drinking glasses. However, even this surrounding context is not decisive. It is
conceivable that an author could use the term with the other meaning, spectacles, even in
this context, e.g., "Please hand me my reading glasses so 1 can read the manufacturer's
label on the bottom of these drinking glasses." Ultimately, then, it is the
Ndherbestimmungen that are decisive. They are so decisive, in fact, that once juxtaposed
to the lexeme "glasses" the other meaning is immediately deselected. From the point of
view of linguistics, it might even be more accurate to say that the other meaning is not
even entertained by the brain of the competent native English speaker as a possibility.
Foreigners attempting to learn English might need to consult a dictionary and weigh the
context to determine which meaning is in view, but native speakers will automatically
know which meaning is intended because they know which "glasses" can be "set out,"
and which "glasses" have "prescriptions."94
This is directly relevant to our study of the ten occurrence of SiKaioauvn Oeou in
Paul, for in seven of the instances, the Ndherbestimmungen provide us with clarity, even
certainty, as to which meaning is in view. When Paul speaks of SiKaioouvri Oeou as
something that is either offered to or received by faith, it is clear that the "gift from God"
meaning is selected, whereas other possibilities, such as God's distributive justice or his
94
In the field of linguistics, the topic I am addressing here falls broadly under the area of syntagmatic sense
relations. See Moises Silva, Biblical Words and Their Meaning: An Introduction to Lexical Semantics
(Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1983), 141-43.
Chapter 6: Exegesis of AiKatoouvn. ©eou in Paul - 444
saving activity are thereby deselected or at least pushed into the background. Consider
the following table showing that in all seven of the cases where "the righteousness of
God" denotes a gift from God, the phrase is always accompanied with various
Ndherbestimmungen that signify its reception or appropriation by humans and that,
conversely, in the three instances where SiKaioouvri Oeou is used to refer to God's
distributive justice, such appropriating Ndherbestimmungen are lacking.
Table 17. The Ten "Righteousness of God" Texts in Paul

Ref Text Interpretation "By faith"
l Rom 1:17 SiKaioauvn, yap OEOU ev auxcp d7iOKa>vUJtxsxai EK Gift from God Yes
7iiaxeax eic 7riaxiv, KOBOK ytiocmxai, '0 Se SiKaioc EK
7riaxscoc Chasxai
2 Rom 3:5 si SE f) dSiKia fipwv GEOU SiKaioauvnv auviaxnaiv, xi Distributive justice No
spoupev;
3 Rom 3:21 Nuvi 5s ycopic vouou SiKaioauvn, GEOU 7ts(pavepa)xai, Gift from God Yes - cf. v 22
papxupoupEvn. und xou vopou [Gen 15:6] Kai xcov
rcpo(pr|xc5v [Hab 2:4]
4 Rom 3:22 SiKaioauvn SE GEOU 8id iriaxecoc 'Inaou Xpiaxou, eic Gift from God Yes - cf. w 24-
ndvxac xouc 7iiaxEi>ovxac ... 24 SiKaiouuevoi Scopedv 25
xfj auxou ydpixi... 25 ... Sid jiiaxecoc
5 Rom 3:25 eic evSeiîv xfj? SiKaioauvT|<; auxou Distributive justice No
6 Rom 3:26 npoc xfiv evSeiîv xfj<; SiKaioauvii<; auxou sv xcp vfrv Distributive justice No
Kaipffl, sic xo eivai auxov SiKaiov Kai SiKaiouvxa xov
EK 7iiaxecoc. 'Inaou
7 Rom 10:3a dyvoouvxsc ydo xnv xoi5 GEOU SiKaioauvnv, Kai xi)v Gift from God Yes - cf. 9:30-
iSiav c^rixouvxEC axfjaai 10:17, esp. 10:4
8 Rom 10:3b-4 xti SiKaioouvri xou GEOU ouy U7texa7naav. xsXoc yap Gift from God Yes-cf. 9:30-
vopou Xpiaxoc sic SiKaioauvnvrcavxixco 7tiaxeuovxi. 10:17, esp. 10:4
9 2 Cor 5:21 xov pf) yvovxa dpapxiav U7isp iipmv dpapxiav Gift from God Implicitly - cf.
E7toir|aev. 'iva f|peic yevcupeGa SiKaioauvn GEOU EV 5:17 6:2
auxcb
10 Phil 3:9 Kai supsGco ev auxco, pf] EYCOV spf]v 5iKaioauvn,v xf|v Gift from God Yes
EK vopou O)JM xpv Sid niaxzac Xpiaxou. xfiv EK GEOU
SiKaioauviiv em xfj niaxei
Let us now look at each of these ten occurrences in order. We have already
engaged some of the above passages in depth exegetically (Rom 3:5 and 25-26; 2 Cor
5:21), so my comments on these three can be brief. My concern at this point is to draw
Chapter 6. Exegesis of AiKaioouvn, ©eou m Paul 445
attention to the appropriating Ndherbestimmungen present in the seven cases where
SiKaioouvn, Oeou means the gift of righteousness or is used in reference to the
righteousness of the homo iustificatus, and the absence of such appropriating
Ndherbestimmungen in the three cases where SiKaioouvn, Oeou means God's own
attribute of righteousness or his distributive justice.
(1) Romans 1:17
The verse is readily divided into two verse-halves, and we will take each in turn.
In the first verse-half, we have the phrase eK 7riaxecoc eic maxiv (v 17a), which belongs
syntactically with SiKaioouvn, Oeou as an appropriating Ndherbestimmung. There is
disagreement among commentators over how to interpret the phrase, but the best
explanation is that it means "by faith to faith." Rom 3:22 is a helpful parallel: "the
righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ, to all who believe (SiKaioouvri Se
Oeou Sid 7iiaxecoc 'Inoou Xpiaxou, eicftavxac,xouc Ttiaxeuovxac)." The explanation for the
apparent redundancy is that Paul wants to make two points about the role of faith in
appropriating this righteousness: it is received by faith, and it comes to all who believe,
whether Jew or Gentile.95
The second verse-half is a Scripture quotation introduced by KaOcbc yeypaTtxai in
order to indicate the scriptural warrant for the statement made in the first verse-half Once
the connection between the two verse-halves is given due recognition, it is difficult to see
how the covenantal interpretation can be made to fit the sense of the verse as a whole.
95
Using Rom 3:22 as the closest parallel to explain SK niaxeaq eiq 7iiaxiv in 1:17, Murray writes: '"From
faith' points to the truth that only 'by faith' are we the beneficiaries of this righteousness ... 'To faith'
underlines the truth that every believer is the beneficiary whatever his race or culture or the degree of his
faith. Faith always carries with it the justifying righteousness of God." Murray, Romans, 1.31-32.
Chapter 6: Exegesis of AiKaioauvn. ©sou in Paul 446
Whatever it means for "the SiKaioouvn of God" to be revealed "by faith to faith," it must
relate in some way to the quotation of Hab 2:4 concerning "the one who is SiKaioc. by
faith." Clearly, Paul is relating the term SiKaioc, (righteous) by faith in 17b back to the
revelation of God's SiKaioouvri (righteousness) by faith to faith in 17a. The gospel
reveals the righteousness of God because it reveals a way for sinners to be SiKaioc; before
God by faith, and, as he will explain later, to affirm that it is "by faith" is to affirm that it
is "not by works." The Hab 2:4 citation therefore indicates that by SiKaioouvn Oeou Paul
refers to the righteousness of faith.
Francis Watson makes this point as well. Appealing to the lexical correspondence
between the two halves of v 17 indicating the concept of righteousness by faith
(SiKaioouvn Oeou ... eK Jiiaxecoc ... D Se SiKaioc, eK nioxeayq), Watson argues that the Hab
2:4 citation "actually generates its antecedent" (v 17a).9 He goes on to complain of the
"methodological deficiency" of commentators who fail to account for the citation of Hab
2:4 in their interpretation of SiKaioauvn Oeou,97 as if the phrase could be lifted from its
context, subjected to lexical analysis in the OT and Jewish literature, and its meaning
determined without paying attention to the appropriating Ndherbestimmung eK 7r(axecoc,
which occurs twice, first in v 17a and then again in its scriptural warrant in v 17b.
96
Francis Watson, Paul and the llermeneutics of Faith (London: T&T Clark, 2004), 43-53.
97
Watson does not name names, but I would argue that Cremer, Kasemann, Stuhlmacher, Dunn, and
Wright are all guilty of this methodological deficiency. In all of the learned discussions of the meaning of
SiKatocTUvri Osou in Paul, they frequently quote the first verse-half and hardly ever quote the second verse-
half (the Hab 2:4 citation). These scholars typically avoid discussion of the two eK Ttioxecoc prepositional
phrases which bind the two verse-halves of Rom 1:17 together, and so they do not address how the divine
revelation of "the righteousness of God ... by faith" (SiKaioouvn, OEOU ... EK 7UGXECGC) is related to the
concept of being "righteous by faith" (6 buccuoc, SK TtiaxEcoc,).
Chapter 6: Exegesis of AiKatoauvn. ©sou in Paul 447
(2) Romans 3:5
As we saw in our treatment of this verse in the context of Rom 3:1-8 (pp. 386-
395), the phrase Oeou SiKaioouvn, here most likely means the attribute of God's
righteousness or justice. The absence of appropriating Ndherbestimmungen make clear
that it is not being used in a soteriological sense to refer to the righteousness that is
received by faith. This conclusion is supported by the contrast between "our
unrighteousness" and "God's righteousness," a contrast that further removes "God's
righteousness" from the realm of righteousness applied, received, or appropriated by
humans.
(3-4) Romans 3:21-22
As practically all commentators agree, Rom 3:2 Iff is a recapitulation of the thesis
statement of Rom 1:17, and so the language of SiKaioouvn Oeou in 3:21-22 should be
interpreted in a manner that is consistent with and epexegetical of its meaning in 1:17. In
the explanatory passage in Rom 3:21-22, SiKaioouvn, Oeou is contextually defined
(ndherbestimmt) as "through faith of Jesus Christ to all who believe" (v 22). To
paraphrase, this means that the status of being righteous comes from God and is received
through faith in Christ.
After the parenthesis of vv 22b-23, "For there is no distinction: for all have sinned
and fall short of the glory of God (ou ydp eoxiv 8iaaxoA,fj-rcavxec,ydp fjpapxov Kai
uaxepouvxai xfj; 56£y\q xou Oeou)" (ESV), Paul resumes his train of thought with a
participial phrase that connects back to SiKaioouvn, Oeou: "being justified as a gift by his
grace (Sucaioupevoi Scopedv xfj auxou %dpixi)" (Rom 3:24). The use of the participle
Chapter 6: Exegesis of Aucaioauvn. ©sou in Paul - 448
SiKaioupevoi in juxtaposition with SiKaioouvn Oeou indicates that "the righteousness of
God" is not a divine quality or activity but a status that applies to humans. Humans who
receive the righteousness of God by faith are therefore justified or declared righteous.
It is also significant that Paul says that the righteousness of God has been
manifested "apart from the law" (xcopiq vopou), or as he will flesh this out later, "not by
the works of the law." The righteousness of God is manifested apart from doing what the
law requires and it is manifested through faith in Christ. At work here is an implied
contrast between "the righteousness of the law" and "the righteousness of faith," a
contrast that Paul will spell out more clearly in Rom 9:30-10:6. The righteousness of
God is manifested apart from the law in the sense that it cannot be attained by keeping
the law.98 It therefore stands in contrast to the righteousness of the law, the Jewish
attempt to be righteous before God through obedience to the moral demands of the law.
This suggests that the righteousness of God and the righteousness of faith are one and the
same. Therefore, SiKaioouvri Oeou is neither God's saving activity/power, nor God's
covenant faithfulness, but the righteousness of the homo iustificatus.
Note as well that the law and the prophets bear witness to the righteousness of
God. In view of Paul's reliance on Gen 15:6 ("Abraham believed God and it was
reckoned to him for SiKaioouvn") and Hab 2:4 ("he who is SiKaioc by faith shall live") as
the key scriptural support for his doctrine of justification, it is likely that "the law and the
prophets" refer, not exclusively, but primarily to these two key proof texts, which stand
98
The statement that the righteousness of God is manifested "apart from the law" (xwpic vopou) is
equivalent to saying that it is manifested "apart from the works of the law," as Paul himself spells this out
later: "We hold that one is justified by faith apart from the works of the law (xcopic, spycov vopou)" (Rom
3:28 ESV); "just as David also speaks of the blessing of the one to whom God counts righteousness apart
from works (xcopic; epycov)" (Rom 4:6 ESV). "The word vopou [in the phrase xcopic; vopou in Rom 3:21] is
probably shorthand for spya xou vopou (erga tou nomou, works of law) from verse 20. Thus Paul argues
that the saving righteousness of God cannot be obtained by keeping the law." Schreiner, Romans, 180.
Chapter 6: Exegesis of AiKaioauvn. ©sou in Paul - 449
as representatives for the teaching of the law and the prophets as a whole. Genesis
belongs to "the law," and Habakkuk to "the prophets." But these two verses bear witness
to a SiKaioouvn (or a status of being SiKaioc) that is obtained by faith, not to the
righteousness of God himself (however understood). The one speaks of Abraham
believing God and thus being credited with the status of SiKaioouvn, before God. The
other contrasts the haughtiness of the Assyrian oppressor with the humble faith of the
godly who is SiKaioc; before God by his faith (or of the SiKaioc who lives by faith). These
two proof texts are not about God being SiKaioc or acting in a SiKaioc. manner, but about
humans being SiKaioc; before God. Since Paul claims these two proof texts as bearing
witness to "the righteousness of God" by faith, "the righteousness of God" in Paul's mind
must be something that can be anthropologically appropriated or enjoyed, whether a gift
that humans receive from God or a status that humans have before God, or both.
(5-6) Romans 3:25-26
We examined these two occurrences of SiKaioouvn auxou earlier, and we
concluded that the meaning was basically God's justice. In all likelihood, Paul is
continuing the earlier reference to God's righteousness or justice in Rom 3:5. One should
also note the prepositional phrase in which the word "righteousness" occurs: "for the
demonstration of his righteousness" (siq/npbq [rijv] evSeiîv xfjc; SiKaioouvrjc auxou). This
prepositional phrase can be worded verbally: "in order to demonstrate that God is
righteous." Paul is affirming that the atoning death of Christ (the ilaaxfjpiov of v 25) was
necessary in order to demonstrate his justice. The atonement satisfies God's justice so
that he might justly justify sinners. "Paul's point is that God can maintain his righteous
Chapter 6. Exegesis of AiKaioauvn, ©sou in Paul 450
character ('God's righteousness' in vv. 25 and 26) even while he acts to justify sinful
people ('God's righteousness' in vv. 21 and 22) because Christ, in his propitiatory
sacrifice, provides full satisfaction of the demands of God's impartial, invariable
justice."99 Thus there is no doubt here that the righteousness of God is not an
anthropologically-experienced status of righteousness before God, as it is in Rom 1:17;
3:21-22; etc. The absence of appropriating Ndherbestimmungen here is not surprising.
(7-8) Romans 10:3
In this verse, the language of appropriating the righteousness of God is from a
different linguistic stock than the Ndherbestimmungen we have encountered thus far. Paul
says that the Jews, "being ignorant of God's righteousness, and seeking to establish their
own, did not submit to God's righteousness" (ESV). Paul's opening statement that his
prayer to God and his heart's desire is that the Jews might be saved (10:1) makes clear
that he is thinking in soteriological terms. This soteriological concern is reinforced by the
references later in the chapter to calling upon the Lord in order to be saved (Rom 10:10,
13). Now as we saw in Chapter 1, Kasemann argued that the language of "submitting to
God's righteousness" does not fit with the traditional view that the righteousness of God
is solely a gift, and he appealed to this verse to support his thesis concerning God's
righteousness as God's apocalyptic saving power.100 And while he did not deny the gift-
character of the righteousness of God, he wanted to speak rather of "the power-character
of the gift." But Kasemann overlooked the entire surrounding context (9:30-10:13) which
99
Moo, Romans, 242.
100
Kasemann, "Gottesgerechtigkeit bei Paulus," in Exegetische Versuche undBesinnungen (2nd ed.;
Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1965), 2.186 (= ET: '"The Righteousness of God' in Paul," in New
Testament Questions of Today [Philadelphia: Fortress, 1979], 173).
Chapter 6: Exegesis of AiKaioauvn, ©sou in Paul - 451
is focused on righteousness as a status before God received by faith, as opposed to a
status achieved by doing the works of the law. Although Rom 10:3 itself does not say that
SiKaioouvn comes by 7riaxic, this is the unmistakable message of the entire context: "the
righteousness that is by faith (SiKaioauvnv xijv eK 7iiaxecoc.)" (9:30); "because they did not
pursue it [righteousness] by faith (oxi OUK eK 7tiaxeco<;), but as if it were by works" (9:32);
"Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes (eiq SiKaioauvnv
7iavxi xcp maxeuovxi)" (10:4); "the ffom-faith righteousness (rj eK 7rioxecoc; SiKaioauvn,)"
(10:6); and "with the heart one believes resulting in righteousness (KapSig Tttoxeuexai eiq
SiKaioauvnv)" (10:10). Repeatedly, Paul says that righteousness comes by faith, not by
works.
Thus, when we read in Rom 10:3 that the Jews failed to submit to the
righteousness of God, we can only take this to mean that they insisted on doing the works
of the law as the means of righteousness, rather than receiving righteousness as a gift
from God by faith. This is proved by the antithesis between "seeking to establish their
own [righteousness]" and "submitting to God's righteousness." Instead of using the word
7rioxic; or 7iiaxeuco, Paul is describing faith here as a form of submission or obedience (cp.
"the obedience of faith" in Rom 1:5). The metaphor of faith as submission was probably
derived from his quotation from Isaiah a few verses earlier: "Behold, I am laying in Zion
a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offense; and whoever believes in him will not be put
to shame" (Rom 9:33 ESV). In this Scripture quotation, Paul weaves the language of "a
stone of stumbling and a rock of offense" (Isa 8:14) into the main quotation from Isa
Chapter 6: Exegesis of AiKaioauvn. ©sou in Paul • 452
28:16 which, as Paul interprets it, is a prophecy of Israel's failure to believe in Christ.101
By doing so, he implies that believing in Christ is the opposite of stumbling over Christ.
Why might the Jews be offended by or stumble over the stone that God has laid in Zion?
Because they are clinging to their own law-keeping as their righteousness before God.
The Jews are offended at the suggestion that they cannot be righteous before God by
keeping the law and must instead trust in a crucified Messiah for righteousness. They
cannot accept the notion that "Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone
who believes" (Rom 10:4), that is, that Christ has brought the law to an end (taking xeA,oc
as terminus or end),102 so that anyone and everyone who believes in Christ may attain the
status of righteousness before God. Believing in Christ for righteousness requires giving
up one's attempt to achieve righteousness by the works of the law. Faith in Christ means
submitting to the righteousness of God, that is, ceasing the futile attempt to erect one's
own righteousness and yielding to the righteousness that God has provided in Christ
freely as a gift, apart from the works of the law.
(9) 2 Corinthians 5:21
As with Rom 10:3, the appropriating Ndherbestimmungen in 2 Cor 5:21 are
clothed in a novel form that departs from Paul's more usual locutions involving 7iiaxic, or
moxeuco. Paul says that "For our sake he [God] made him to be sin who knew no sin, so
that in him we might become the righteousness of God" (ESV). There are two
Ndherbestimmungen and they must be taken together: "that we might become ... in him"
101
J. Ross Wagner, Heralds of the Good News: Isaiah and Paul "In Concert" in the Letter to the Romans
(NovTSup 101; Leiden: Brilf 2002), 126-31.
102
Of the five possible meanings of this word, BDAG places Rom 10:4 under meaning 1: "a point of time
marking the end of a duration, end, termination, cessation."
Chapter 6: Exegesis of AiKaioauvn, ©sou in Paul 453
(yevcbpeOa ... ev auxcp). The verb yivopai could be taken either in a transformative or in a
forensic sense, but it is not necessary to decide that question here, since it is clear that the
subject of the verb is "we" (fjpeic) not God. Additionally, this "becoming" takes place in
union with Christ, a reality signaled by the use of the Pauline ev auxcp, which links back
to the ev Xpioxcp of v 17. These grammatical features make clear that the righteousness of
God is not a divine quality or activity, but a righteousness that believers
become/realize/enjoy in union with Christ.
Although appropriating language is not present in the explicit "by faith" form that
we are familiar with in Romans and Galatians, the verses immediately preceding and
following 2 Cor 5:21 demonstrate the implicit presence of the notion that the
righteousness of God is appropriated by humans as recipients of God's grace. In v 20,
Paul summarized the content of the word of reconciliation, the gospel message: "We
implore you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God" (ESV). The implication is that we
must respond positively to God's gracious offer in Christ ("God was in Christ,
reconciling the world to himself) in order to be reconciled to God. Then in the verse
immediately after 2 Cor 5:21, the idea of faith responding to the gospel is brought out
with the use of the locution of "receiving God's grace" (Sexopai + x a P lv ): "We appeal to
you not to receive the grace of God in vain (pf) eic Kevov XTJV x&ptv xou Oeou SecâoOai
upacy (2 Cor 6:1 ESV).
(10)Philippians3:9
In the tenth and final occurrence of "the righteousness of God" in Paul, we return
to the familiar "by faith" appropriating Ndherbestimmungen. The entire sentence reads:
Chapter 6: Exegesis of AiKaioauvn, ©sou in Paul - 454
"Indeed, 1 count everything as loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ
Jesus my Lord. For his sake I have suffered the loss of all things and count them as
rubbish, in order that I may gain Christ and be found in him, not having a righteousness
of my own that comes from the law, but that which comes through faith in Christ, the
righteousness from God that depends on faith" (Phil 3:8-9 ESV).
The language of union with Christ, "that I may gain Christ and be found in him
(ev auxcp)," indicates that the righteousness of God is not God's own attribute or activity
but a gift appropriated and enjoyed by believers. Note that the participial phrase, "not
having (pf) excov) a righteousness of my own ... but [rather having] ... the righteousness
from God," is tied to the "in Christ" prepositional phrase (... ev auxcp, pf) excov ...). This
is consistent with 2 Cor 5:21 which says that the righteousness of God is something that
we enjoy in union with Christ. Indeed, the very language of "having" righteousness
(whether one's own or that which comes from God) makes clear that the whole orbit of
thought here has to do with a righteousness that is received and enjoyed by believers. In
keeping with this, the usual "by faith" appropriating language occurs twice: "not having
a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which comes through faith
in Christ, the righteousness from God that depends on faith (pij excov epfjv Sucaioauvnv
xfjv eK vopou d/Jv-d xfjv Sid Tiiaxecoc Xpiaxou, xnv eK Oeou Sucaioauvnv em xfj maxei)."
Finally, the addition of the precising preposition eK makes clear that the genitive
Oeou should be taken as a genitivus auctoris. The righteousness of God in this text is
explicitly said to be "a righteousness that comes from God" (fj eK Oeou Sucaioauvri).
Chapter 6: Exegesis of Aucaioauvn. ©sou in Paul 455
In conclusion, three occurrences of "God's righteousness" in Paul (Rom 3:5, 25-
26) lack any appropriating terminology and are best viewed as references to God's
righteousness as an attribute or his distributive justice. In the seven other passages,
SiKaioouvn Oeou is employed with reference to justification (Rom 1:17; 3:21, 22; 10:3
[2x]; 2 Cor 5:21; Phil 3:9) and has to do with the righteousness of the homo iustificatus.
In these seven cases, the use of terminology having to do with human response or
appropriation provides strong evidence that SiKaioouvri Oeou is the status of
righteousness that comes from God as a gift. In four of the seven, the appropriating
Ndherbestimmungen or precising terminology juxtaposed with Sucaioauvri Oeou come in
the form of Paul's familiar "by faith" language: "in it the righteousness of God is
revealed from faith to faith" (Rom 1:17); "the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus
Christ" (Rom 3:21-22); and "[having] that [righteousness] which comes through faith in
Christ, the righteousness from God that depends on faith" (Phil 3:9). In two cases of
SiKaioouvri Oeou, both of which occur in Rom 10:3, the concept of faith appropriating
God's righteousness is presented using the metaphor of "submitting to the righteousness
of God." This reading is supported by the fact that in the immediate context, "faith" is
connected with "righteousness" five times (e.g., "righteousness by/from faith,"
"righteousness to everyone who believes," etc., in Rom 9:30, 32; 10:4, 6, 10). And
finally, although appropriating terms like nioxxq are not used in 2 Cor 5:21, the idea that
the righteousness of God is the righteousness of the homo iustificatus is clearly present.
Paul makes the idea clear when he speaks of the "sweet exchange" wherein Christ
became sin for us on the cross, so that "in him" we might "become" the righteousness of
God. He took our sin that we might possess his righteousness. And God's righteousness
Chapter 6: Exegesis of AiKaioauvn. ©eou in Paul 456
is a gift received by faith. The appropriating syntagmatic limiters (Ndherbestimmungen)
further prove that the genitive Oeou is a genitive of source or origin rather than a
subjective genitive, thus indicating that the phrase is best interpreted, not as God's
eschatological saving activity in keeping with his covenant faithfulness, but rather as the
gift of righteousness from God. To say that "the righteousness of God" is received or
appropriated by faith is to say that it is a gift of God.
The niaxic Xpiaxou Debate
Because I place so much stress on the fact that the righteousness of God is
repeatedly said by Paul to be something received or appropriated "by faith," 1 must deal
with another interpretation of these "by faith" Ndherbestimmungen that would seriously
undercut my argument. I am referring to the interpretation of 7iioxi<; Xpiaxou as "the
faithfulness of Christ," taking the genitive as a subjective genitive, an interpretation that
appears to be gaining ground in Pauline scholarship. Relevant to the interpretive battle
over SiKaioouvn, Oeou is the fact that there is one verse where the phrase Sid 7iiaxecoc;
Tn,aou Xpiaxou is immediately juxtaposed with SiKaioouvn Oeou - Rom 3:22: "the
righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ (SiKaioouvn, Se Oeou Std 7iiaxecoc
'In,aou Xpiaxou)." Interestingly, "the faithfulness of Jesus Christ" interpretation is not
adopted by all who interpret SiKaioouvn Oeou as "God's covenant faithfulness" - James
103
Although the view itself was first propounded by Johannes HauBleitcr in 1891 and was taken up by
Gerhard Kittel and a handful of other scholars in the 20th century, the contemporary heated debate was
kicked off by Richard B. Hays in his dissertation, The Faith of Jesus Christ: The Narrative Substructure of
Galatians 3:1-4:11 (SBLDS 56: Chico: Scholars Press, 1983; 2 nd expanded ed. published by Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans/Dearborn: Dove, 2002). The literature on this topic is large, but the best place to go for
an entree in the debate is the multi-author work The Faith of Jesus Christ: Exegetical, Biblical, and
Theological Studies (eds. Michael F. Bird and Preston M. Sprinkle; Milton Keynes: Paternoster/Pcabody:
Hendrickson, 2009), which contains essays arguing both sides. See also the extensive bibliography on pp.
309-30.
Chapter 6: Exegesis of AiKaioauvn, ©eou in Paul 457
D. G. Dunn holds the traditional objective genitive view, "faith in Jesus Christ."
Nevertheless, the subjective-genitive interpretation would seem to comport best with the
covenant-faithfulness interpretation of SiKaioouvn, Oeou, since it provides a way of
avoiding the strong implication that Sucaioauvri Oeou in Rom 1:17; 3:21-22 is something
offered to and received by faith. For once it is held that "the faithfulness of Jesus Christ"
is in view, then Rom 3:21-22 can be translated: "But now, apart from the law, God's
covenant faithfulness is manifested ... even God's covenant faithfulness by means of the
faithfulness of Jesus Christ" (SiKaioouvri Se Oeou Sid 7tiaxecog 'Inaou Xpiaxou).104 The
arguments for this interpretation are weighty, and cannot be dismissed as utterly without
merit, but the view itself does begin to look less and less convincing when scholars allow
the interpretation to spread to other passages that employ the noun 7tiaxic without Jesus or
Christ as a genitival qualifier. This is not practiced by all who hold to the "faithfulness of
Jesus Christ" interpretation, but Richard B. Hays and Douglas Campbell apply it even to
the eK Tuoxecoc, of Rom 1:17 (both times), which requires that 6 SiKaioc in the Hab 2:4
quotation be interpreted Christologically in the sense that "the righteous one" is Jesus.105
The arguments against the subjective genitive interpretation of moxic Xpiaxou are
as follows, and in summarizing them here I am not claiming originality.
Richard B. Hays says there is a "positive correlation" between the subjective-genitive interpretation of
mcmc; Xpiaxou and the covenant-faithfulness interpretation of SiKaioauvn OEOU. Hays, The Faith of Jesus
Christ [2nd ed.], 283, 294.
105
Hays, The Faith of Jesus Christ, Vx ed. (1983): 150-57; 2nd ed. (2002): 132-41, 280-81; Douglas A.
Campbell, "The Faithfulness of Jesus Christ in Romans 3:22," in The Faith of Jesus Christ (cd. Bird and
Sprinkle), 57-71; idem, The Deliverance of God: An Apocalyptic Rereading of Justification in Paul (Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, 2009), 613-16.
First, if the genitive is to be taken as the subjective genitive, then following the
principles of transformational grammar,106 we would expect to find examples elsewhere
in Paul's writings where the verb jnoxeuco has Jesus as its subject or where the adjective
niaxbq is attributed to Christ with reference to his faithful obedience to God. Instead, we
find that when the verb 7uaxeuco is used in connection with Jesus or Christ, Jesus is the
object (typically with a preposition such as eni or ev) rather than the subject of the
verb.107 And although the adjective TUOXOC is applied in two instances to Christ, it is not
used in the sense of his faithfulness to God, his life of obedience, or his faithfulness in
submitting to death. In 2 Thess 3:3 (7110x6c Se eoxiv 6 Kupioc), the adjective moxoc
denotes the Lord's faithfulness to guard his own against evil (or the evil one), and has
nothing to do with his faithful obedience to the Father to the point of death. In the other
case, the context is the eschatological judgment: "If we have died with him, we will also
live with him; if we endure, we will also reign with him; if we deny him, he also will
deny us; if we are faithless, he remains faithful (ei d7iioxoupev, eKeivoc 7riaxoc pevei) -
for he cannot deny himself (2 Tim 2:13 ESV). Thus adjective 7iiox6c could be
interpreted as having to do with his faithfulness to uphold his own honor, so that it ends
up being not very different from his faithfulness as a judge.
Second, Paul himself defines Tiiaxic. Xpiaxou for us in a key text where the phrase
occurs twice - Gal 2:15-16. The two italicized phrases are the debated ataxic. Xpiaxou
106
The ambiguous genitive construction Tticmi; Xptoxou can be "transformed" to represent two kernel
sentences: (1) subjective genitive: "Christ is faithful" (or even "Christ believes") and (2) objective genitive:
"someone believes in Christ." "While the second construction is found several times in Paul... the first
one, in either form, is absent." Moises Silva, God, Language, and Scripture: Reading the Bible in the Light
of General Linguistics (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1990), 107.
107
Tobin, Paul's Rhetoric in Its Contexts, 132; Moises Silva, "Faith Versus Works of Law in Galatians," in
Justification and Variegated Nomism, Vol. 2: The Paradoxes of Paul (WUNT 11/181; eds. D. A. Carson,
Peter T. O'Brien, and Mark A. Seifrid; Tubingen: Mohr Sicbeck/Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2004),
231; idem, Philippians (BECNT; 2nd ed.; Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2005), 161.
Chapter 6: Exegesis of AiKaioauvn. ©eou in Paul - 459
occurrences, while the underlined phrase reproduces the concept using the construction
moxEuco + eic + Christ as the object:
We ourselves are Jews by birth and not Gentile sinners; 16yet we know that a
person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, so we
also have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and
not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be justified
(ESV).
The explicit statement "so we also have believed in Christ" (Kai fjpeic eiq Xpioxov
'In,aouv eTrioxeuoapev) spells out the objective-genitive meaning of 7rioxic Xpiaxou which
is used immediately before and after. In other words, as Moises Silva points out, if the
genitival construction was ambiguous, Paul immediately removes all ambiguity by using
the explicit formulation with the verb e7tiaxeuoapev.10S Further developing this argument
from the redundancy of Gal 2:16, Barry Matlock has provided the following structural
analysis of the verse:109
eiSoxec; [Se] oxi

A B
la ou Sucaiouxai dv0pco7toc. ec epycov vouou eav pf) Sid Tiiaxecoc 'Inaou Xpiaxou,
B
lb Kai fnueiQ skXpicrrdv 'Inaovv enimevoapsv,
B A
ila iva SucaicoOcopev eK maxecoc Xpiaxou Kai OUK ec epycov vopou,
A
lib oxi ec epycov vopov ov diKaicoOrjaexai izaoa aapS,.
Matlock points out that la and Ila are antitheses built around the same verb SiKaioco.
Whereas la has the negative ("we know that a person is not justified by works of the law
108
Silva, "Faith Versus Works," 232-33; cp. Tobin, 132-33.
109
R. Barry Matlock, "Saving Faith: The Rhetoric and Semantics of 7tioTtc; in Paul," in The Faith of Jesus
Christ (eds. Bird and Sprinkle), 84.
Chapter 6: Exegesis of AiKaioauvn, ©eou m Paul 460
but through faith in Jesus Christ"), Ila puts the same thought in a positive form ("in order
to be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law"), but with the antithetical
pair "by faith in Jesus Christ" and "by works by the law" in the opposite order. Also,
whereas la puts the "not" with the verb, Ila puts it with "by works of the law." Then the
final element of each statement is amplified in lb and lib, respectively. The "by faith in
Jesus Christ" at the end of la is amplified in lb: "so we also have believed in Christ
Jesus." And the "not by works of the law" at the end of Ila is amplified in lib: "because
by works of the law no one will be justified." From this, Matlock draws the conclusion
that this complex structure establishes the equivalence of Sid 7iioxeco<; 'Inoou Xpioxou and
fjpeig eic Xpioxov 'Ir|aouv ernaxeuaapev, thereby selecting the objective-genitive
interpretation of moxic Xpioxou. Ironically, proponents of the subjective genitive argue
against the objective genitive because of its redundancy, but Matlock's analysis turns this
argument on its head. Paul's use of antithesis, parallelism, and repetition in Gal 2:16
actually demonstrates that jrioxic, Xpiaxou means "faith in Christ."1 n
Third, as several studies have shown, the church fathers uniformly interpreted the
phrase as an objective genitive.112 Origen and Chrysostom in their comments on Rom
3:22 assumed the objective genitive and did not even entertain the subjective genitive as a
1,0
Matlock, "Saving Faith," 84.
111
"Fear of redundancy and tautology is utterly misplaced" (Matlock, "Saving Faith." 85). Similarly, Silva
writes: "Scholars who object to the traditional interpretation of Gal. 2:16 (also 3:22 and Rom. 3:22) on the
grounds that it would be redundant operate with an unjustifiably negative understanding of the role played
by redundancy in communication" (Silva, Philippians, 161 n. 13). Elsewhere, Silva refers to "the law of
maximal redundancy" as an exegetical rule of thumb. When we are faced with an ambiguous word or
phrase, the meaning that is most likely to be correct is the one which contributes the least new information
or makes the least disturbance to the context. Silva, Biblical Words and Their Meaning, 153-56.
112
Roy A. Harrisville, III, 'THETIS XPIETOY: Witness of the Fathers," NovT 36 (1994): 233-41; Mark W.
Elliott, "nicync, XptoTOu in the Church Fathers and Beyond," in The Faith of Jesus Christ (ed. Bird and
Sprinkle), 277-89. The opposite case is made by Ian Wallis, The Faith of Jesus Christ in Early Christian
Traditions (SNTSMS 84; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995), but his arguments are effectively
countered by Mark Elliott in the article just cited.
possibility to be set aside.113 As Matlock says, "No awareness is shown of this option ...
and so the objective genitive is read without polemic or apology. Silence can be very
eloquent, and here it fairly sings."" 4 On the other hand, awareness of this option is shown
by Augustine, who sets it aside, just as he also sets aside the subjective genitive
interpretation of iustitia Dei.''5
Finally, one begins to wonder whether the proponents of this view actually
believe that faith is the instrument by which we rest upon and receive Christ in order to
be justified. Some are more circumspect and do acknowledge that Paul clearly teaches
that faith is the necessary response to the gospel by which the benefits of Christ are
appropriated.116 Others, however, seem to want to take things a step further. Fearing that
any emphasis on faith as human response detracts from the objectivity of God's
redemptive grace in Christ, they redefine faith in corporate terms as participation in the
faithfulness of Christ.
1
'' Origen: "This righteousness is disclosed through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe ... And he says
that now the righteousness of God, which is supported by testimonies in the law and the prophets, has also
been given equally to all through faith in Jesus Christ." Origen: Commentaiy on the Epistle to the Romans,
Books 1-5 (The Fathers of the Church 103; trans. Thomas P. Scheck; Washington, D.C.: The Catholic
University of America Press, 2001), 214-15. Chrysostom: "Then that no one should say, How are we to be
sa\ed without contributing anything at all to the object in view? he shows that we also offer no small matter
toward this, I mean our faith. Therefore after saying, 'the righteousness of God,' he adds straightway, 'by
faith unto all and upon all that believe.'" Chrysostom's homilies on Romans, NPNF1 11.377.
IM
Matlock, "Saving Faith," 87.
" ' Augustine, commenting on Rom 3:22: "Accordingly [Paul] advances a step further, and adds, 'But
righteousness of God by faith of Jesus Christ,' that is, by the faith wherewith one believes in Christ; for just
as there is not meant the faith with which Christ Himself believes, so there is not meant the righteousness
whereby God is Himself righteous." Augustine, De spiritu et littera 9.15. NPNF1 5.89.
1,6
Paul Foster claims that the debate is only over the interpretation of the phrase 7iicmc, Xptcrrou, and not
over the importance for Paul of faith in Christ. Paul Foster, "nicm; Xptarou Terminology in Philippians
and Ephesians," in The Faith of Jesus Christ (ed. Bird and Sprinkle), 99. That is reassuring, but doubts
remain about whether the subjective-genitive interpretation leaves room for faith in Christ as the means of
justification, i.e., as the means of obtaining a status of righteousness and acceptance before God.
11
' Richard B. Hays writes: "Because justification hinges upon this action of Jesus Christ, upon an event
extra nos, it is a terrible and ironic blunder to read Paul as though his gospel made redemption contingent
upon our act of deciding to dispose ourselves toward God in a particular way ... 'Faith' is not the
precondition for receiving God's blessing; instead, it is the appropriate mode of response to a blessing
Chapter 6: Exegesis of AiKaioauvn, ©eou in Paul - 462
We have taken the time to engage the 7110x11; Xpioxou debate because of its
increasing importance as a serious option in Pauline interpretation and because of its role
as a potential defeater to the case for taking SiKaioouvn Oeou as the gift of righteousness
from God. Although James D. G. Dunn is one notable proponent of the New Perspective
who has not been convinced of the subjective-genitive interpretation of Ttioxic Xpioxou as
"the faithfulness of Jesus Christ," others, such as N. T. Wright and Richard B. Hays, have
been. They are therefore able to preserve the covenant-faithfulness interpretation of
SiKaioouvri Oeou by employing the subjective-genitive interpretation of moxic Xpioxou as
a way of reinterpreting the Ndherbestimmungen (especially "by faith") and thus depriving
them of their anthropic, appropriating force.
The Parallels Between Phil 3:9 and Rom 10:3
This brings us to a powerful argument based upon the parallels between Phil 3:9
110
and Rom 10:3 (in the context of 9:30-10:6). The argument is a response to those who
reject the use of fj eK Oeou SiKaioouvn, in Phil 3:9, with its use of the preposition eic, as a
parallel for interpreting the genitive Oeou in SiKaioouvn Oeou as a genitivus auctoris. For
example, Stuhlmacher is bluntly dismissive of the appeal to Phil 3:9, asserting that "there
is nothing more unjustifiable than to take that phrase [eK Oeou] ... and make it the
already given in Christ. As such, it is also the mode of participation in the pattern definitively enacted in
Jesus Christ." Hays, The Faith of Jesus Christ [2nd ed.], 211.
118
"My point is that the parallel contexts indicate that righteousness in Rom. 10 cannot have a different
definition from what we see in Phil. 3. In the latter text, righteousness clearly is a gift given to sinners - a
declaration that those who have failed to keep the law but who have trusted in Jesus Christ stand in the
right before God. The same gift character of righteousness, therefore, is in view in Rom. 10 ... If such is
the meaning in Rom. 10, it is highly unlikely that Paul means anything different in Rom. 1:17; 3:21 -22."
Thomas R. Schreiner, New Testament Theology: Magnifying God in Christ (Grand Rapids: Baker
Academic, 2008), 357-58. The reference to this as "a powerful argument" is Schreiner's own
characterization.
Chapter 6: Exegesis of AiKaioauvn, ©eou in Paul 463
interpretive norm for SiKaioouvri Oeou."119 But as Schreiner has pointed out, the
numerous parallels between these two texts make it difficult to distinguish the meaning of
SiKaioouvn [she] Oeou in each so sharply. The following table builds upon Schreiner's
analysis:
Table 18. Parallels Between Rom 10:3 and Phil 3:9

Concept Rom 10:3 and context Phil 3:9
+ The righteousness of God r\ xov Oeou Sucaioauvri (10:3a) p EK Oeou Sucaioauvu
r) SiKaioouvn, rofj 0sox5 (10:3b)
- My or their own f| i§ia SiKaioouvn, (10:3a) eux) SiKaioouvri f| EK vopou
righteousness
+ The righteousness of faith Sucaioauvn f) EK 7tiaTecoc (9:30) f| [SiKaioouvn] Sid 7tiaT£cog
f| EK TEioiecoc SiKaioauvn, (10:6) Xpioiou ... sTri Tfj niaxex
- The righteousness of the vopoc StKaioouvrjc (9:31) epf] SiKaioown r) EK vopou
law r) dtKatoauvr) r) EK vopou (10:5)
The plusses and minuses in the left-most column are intended to indicate that the
first member of each parallel is a positive concept (righteousness of God/faith) and the
second member of the parallel is a negative concept (righteousness of one's own/of the
law) for Paul. Not only do Rom 10:3 and Phil 3:9 share the same language in these four
areas, they also share the same antithesis between the righteousness of God/faith and the
righteousness of one's own/of the Law. But what is more, there are two antithetical pairs:
the righteousness of/from God is set in contrast to one's own (whether the Jews' or
Paul's) righteousness, and the righteousness of faith is set in contrast to the righteousness
of the Law. The recognition of the double interwoven antithetical parallelisms
strengthens the conceptual relationship between the two texts to the point where they are
bound together by a fourfold intertwined bond that simply cannot be disentangled.
Peter Stuhlmacher, Gerechtigkeit Gottes bei Paulus, 39.

In Rom 10:3. "their own righteousness" is explained as "the righteousness of the
law," and "the righteousness of God" is explained as "the righteousness of faith" (cp.
Rom 10:3 with 10:5-6; 9:30). In Phil 3:9, "my righteousness" is explained as "that which
is of the law," and "the righteousness from God" is explained as "that which is by faith."
Therefore, "the righteousness of God" (Oeou) in Rom 10:3 is equivalent to "the
righteousness from God" (eK Oeou) in Phil 3:9.
Schreiner's argument, then, proceeds in three steps. Step one: Most
commentators agree that Phil 3:9 is referring to the gift aspect, "righteousness from
God," a fact that is unavoidable given the addition of the preposition eK as well as the
contrast with epfj. Step two: The parallels between Phil 3:9 and Rom 10:3 are too strong
to allow for the possibility that Rom 10:3 is using SiKaioouvri Oeou with a different
meaning than SiKaioouvn, eK Oeou in Phil 3:9. Step three: If SiKaioauvr) Oeou in Rom
10:3 denotes the status of righteousness received from God, then it stretches credulity to
think that Paul had a different meaning in view when the same lexeme was used in
reference to justification earlier in the letter (Rom 1:17: 3:21-22). Indeed, just as Phil 3:9
and Rom 10:3 are connected by a fourfold tie, so Rom 10:3 is connected back to Rom
3:21. For just as Rom 10:3 is in the context of Paul's contrast between "the righteousness
of the law" and "the righteousness of faith," so in Rom 3:21-22 Paul says, "But now,
apart from the law (xcopic; vopou), the righteousness of God is manifested ... through
faith in Jesus Christ." In other words, the righteousness of God is the righteousness of
faith, for it is a righteousness that is received by faith, apart from doing what the law
requires. And all commentators recognize the linkage between Rom 3:21 and 1:17, so
Chapter 6: Exegesis of Aucaioauvri ©sou in Paul - 465
that we have an unbroken chain from Rom 1:17 to 3:21 to 10:3 indicating that
SiKaioouvn, Oeou in all three passages is to be taken in the same gift-from-God sense.
D. Conclusion
We have already seen in Chapter 4 that there is no basis for taking SiKaioouvn,
Oeou as a cipher for God's covenant faithfulness. And we saw in Chapter 5 that while it
might be possible to see it as referring to his judicial activity that results in salvation
(iustitia salutifera), this usage is frequent in a spiritualized sense in the DSS but it occurs
only twice in the Jewish literature composed in Greek. And even in the Jewish Greek
literature, it occurs in a slightly altered sense, so that it is not a clear allusion to the
iustitia salutifera usage in the Psalms and Isaiah. We concluded that it was barely
possible but unlikely that SiKaioouvri Oeou in Paul means "God's delivering/saving
judicial activity." The purpose of this chapter was to examine the evidence of Paul's own
writings to see if by any chance there might be some internal evidence to support taking
SiKaioouvn, Oeou in a Hebraic sense as referring either to God's covenant faithfulness or
to his saving activity. So we examined the three Pauline texts that have been used to
support this reading - Rom 3:5 and 25-26; and 2 Cor 5:21. We concluded that in the first
two passages (Rom 3:5 and 25-26), SiKaioouvri Oeou is best understood as God's attribute
of righteousness or his distributive justice, and that in the third (2 Cor 5:21), SiKaioouvri
Oeou is the status of righteousness that believers possess by virtue of union with Christ.
Thus we did not find any internal evidence from Paul's own epistles to support taking
SiKaioouvri Oeou to mean God's covenant faithfulness or his saving power or some
combination of the two. We then turned to an examination of SiKaioouvn Oeou in Paul

Chapter 6: Exegesis of AiKaioauvn, ©eou in Paul - 466
and we argued that the word SiKaioouvn is best taken as "divinely-approved
righteousness" and that the genitive Oeou is a genitivus auctoris. Then, by examining the
presence or absence of various Ndherbestimmungen, we concluded that seven of the
occurrences of SiKaioouvn Oeou in Paul use the lexeme in a soteriological sense to refer
to the righteousness of God as a gift.

Chapter 7
Synopsis and Implications
In my closing chapter I would like to accomplish two things: first, to provide a
synopsis of the argument of the dissertation as a whole, particularly the results of the
lexical investigation of "righteousness" language; and second, to engage in theological
reflection on Paul's doctrine of justification in light of those lexical results, giving
particular attention to the implications of this study for the New Perspective on Paul.
A. Synopsis of the Argument
In Chapter 1, "History of Interpretation of Aucaioauvri ©eou in Paul," I laid the
foundation by establishing the traditional views of "the righteousness of God" in Paul.
Absolute uniformity, of course, does not exist, but there is nevertheless a general
consensus from the Greek and Latin fathers to the medieval commentators to the
Protestant Reformation. The general consensus was that SiKaioauvn, was a Normbegriff,
that Oeou was to be taken as a genitive of source or an objective genitive, but certainly not
as a subjective genitive; and that taken as a whole, the phrase referred to the righteous
status that believers possess by virtue of faith on the basis of Christ's atonement. This
was the consensus view across the entire church until the second half of the 19l century
when a new view began to arise. Traditional views continued even after the rise of the
new view, most notably in Bultmann's 1964 article in response to Kasemann.
467
Chapter 7: Implications for Paul's Doctrine of Justification 468
Beginning in 1860, a new view began to form, initiated by Ritschl and his circle.
They rejected the idea that "righteousness" was a Normbegriff 'and began searching for
other, more positive interpretations. Ritschl held that it was a Zweckbegriff an aim
concept, that is, God's righteousness is his determination to maintain his unswerving aim
of love. Hermann Cremer rejected the Ritschlian interpretation but maintained the
positive emphasis, leading to his famed Verhdltnisbegriff'interpretation that would
exercise a profound influence on the 20l century discussion, primarily through
Kasemann's influential 1961 lecture, "Gottesgerechtigkeit bei Paulus." This sets the
historical context for the rise of the New Perspective, especially Dunn and Wright, and
their interpretation of "the righteousness of God" as God's covenant faithfulness.
After Chapter 2 in which 1 described my methodological assumptions and
approach, in Chapters 3-5,1 surveyed the use of "righteousness" in extra-biblical Greek
as early as the 6th century BC, in the Old Testament, and in Jewish literature after the Old
Testament up to around the time of the Bar Kokhba revolt in AD 135.1 analyzed the
semantic range of the term and determined that it is generally used judicially or ethically,
with a small category having to do with doing something correctly or integrity in speech
in the OT. I noted that there are some differences between the usage of SiKaioouvn, in
extra-biblical Greek and the usage of p i ? and i~rp"12S in the OT, such as the use of the
plural "righteous acts" in the OT and the frequent occurrence of God's delivering
reighteousness (iustitia salutifera), but that the differences are not between an alleged
"Greek" norm-concept and a "Hebrew" relational concept of righteousness. The Greek
usage can also be used in reference to righteousness in the area of speech and keeping
promises and covenants, just as the Hebrew usage (although we found only three
instances of this in the OT - Neh 9:8; Hos 2:19-21; Zech 8:8). Conversely, the Hebrew
usage is just as judicial as, if not more than, that of extra-biblical Greek. We also saw that
the Hebrew usage of "God's righteousness" is not thoroughly positive as Diestel, Ritschl
and Cremer claimed. This undercuts Cremer's theory that "righteousness" is a relational
concept in Hebrew thought. Even when used in a positive, saving sense, God's iustitia
salutifera is still understood as a highly judicially-stamped concept so that iustitita
salutifera is best understood not in contrast to but in connection with his iustitia
distributiva. An implicit point of Chapter 3 was that the relational interpretation of
righteousness operates with a false contrast between Greek and Hebrew thought.
Chapter 4, "Righteousness in the Old Testament," was critical because its
conclusions undermine the NPP view that "the righteousness of God" in Paul refers to
"God's covenant faithfulness." By an exhaustive examination of every occurrence of
p""!?5 and i"Ip"12£ in the Hebrew Bible and their translational equivalents in the LXX, I
critically examined Cremer's arguments for the relational interpretation of righteousness
in the OT. I showed that the references to God's righteousness in the OT can be neutral,
negative, or positive. The concept of "righteousness" in the OT is not as far removed
from extra-biblical Greek as one would think - it is a Normbegriff and has to do with
iustitia distributiva.
In Chapter 5, "Righteousness in Jewish Literature," we saw that the Jewish
literature continues the same trajectories of usage found in the OT and in extrabiblical
Greek. "Righteousness" is not a relational concept, nor does it means "covenant
faithfulness." It remains a Normbegriff throughout Jewish literature of the Second

Chapter 7: Implications for Paul's Doctrine of Justification - 470
Temple period. Indeed, there seems to be a strong emphasis on "righteousness" in the
ethical sense, including the notion of "righteousness before God."
In Chapter 6, "Exegesis of Aucaioauvri ©eou in Paul," I answered the contextual
(Pauline) arguments for taking "the righteousness of God" in Paul as a divine activity,
whether "salvation" or "covenant faithfulness" or a combination of both. I answered the
appeal to Romans 3:3, 5 (which speaks of "God's faithfulness" and "God's
righteousness" in the same context). I critiqued Kummel's and Kasemann's interpretation
of Rom 3:25-26 as "for the demonstration of his covenant faithfulness" (rather, it means
that, because of the atoning death of Christ, God is just even when he justifies the
wicked). I also interacted with the argument from intertextuality, in which the collocation
of the three terms "righteousness," "salvation," and "revealed" suggests an intertextual
appeal to Ps 98:2 and Deutero-Isaiah. In addition to dealing with these arguments, 1
pointed out a major flaw with this view - when Paul speaks of God's covenant
faithfulness, he does not appropriate words from the AIK-group but instead uses terms
like mane., dAfjQeta, and (3e(3ai6co. Also, if SiKaioauvn, Oeou means "God's covenant
faithfulness," it is difficult to understand why Paul failed to use the lexeme in Romans
11, the one passage where Paul is most concerned to uphold the faithfulness of God in
keeping his covenant promises in spite of Israel's unbelief.
Having critiqued the "covenant faithfulness" interpretation, I made the positive
case for the traditional Reformation interpretation. All of the contextual indicators
(citation of Gen 15:6 and Hab 2:4; "my righteousness" vs. "God's righteousness"; the
Ndherbestimmungen; etc.) fit only with "ordinary righteousness" rather than iustitia
salutifera/covenant faithfulness.
Paul's "righteousness" language is largely understandable in terms of standard
Greek usage, albeit with some biblical theological content drawn from the LXX
(especially Gen 15:6 and Hab 2:4), but without any need for recourse to knowledge of
Hebrew usage. In Rom 2:13 Paul essentially defines SiKaioco as "to declare one to be
SiKaioc; before God."
With Stephen Westerholm, I concluded that when one surveys Paul's use of
"righteousness" alone (not in the phrase "the righteousness of God"), one sees that he
uses the term to mean "ordinary righteousness" most of the time; if he is talking about
"extraordinary righteousness," the context makes this clear (as well as added phrases like
"of faith") and, in any case, even "extraordinary righteousness" presupposes the ordinary
meaning as its foil, and has nothing to do with an alleged Hebraic/relational meaning.
Building on Westerholm, I engaged in exegesis of the SiKaioouvn, Oeou passages in Paul,
arguing that it refers to "an extraordinary righteousness from God as a gift received by
faith" and is thus equivalent to "the righteousness of faith."
B. Implications for Paul's Doctrine of Justification
Having provided a synopsis of the argument of this dissertation, I would now like
to draw out some of the implications of this study.
First, one of the significant conclusions of this study is that Cremer's relational
theory of the OT concept of righteousness has been decisively disproven. The
Verhdltnisbegriff approach to "righteousness" was a false turn in the history of
scholarship. It cannot be sustained because it is simply not true that "righteousness" is a
"thoroughly positive" term in the OT. Furthermore, if righteousness is not conformity to

an external norm, and the relationship itself is the norm, then this is simply the end of the
concept of God's justice, which is exactly what Ritschl was aiming at in his total
reconstruction of Christian theology on the basis of the presupposition that God is pure
love. Righteousness is a Normbegriff, and the norm is God's own moral law, which is
grounded in his unchanging nature as a God of perfect holiness, justice, and truth. As we
saw in our exegesis of Rom 3:25-26, the distributive justice of God is established by
justification on the basis of Christ's propitiatory sacrifice.
Second, this study has clarified the notion of God's saving righteousness. We may
speak of a legitimate iustitia salutifera concept, though what we mean by this phrase is
not the same as what Cremer meant by it. For Cremer, God's righteousness is always a
positive concept, namely, saving righteousness, and the reason for this is that
"righteousness" is a Verhdltnisbegriff. This means that there is no norm higher than the
relationship, for the relationship between two parties is the norm itself, and
"righteousness" is constituted by acting consistently with the relationship. As applied to
God's righteousness, then, iustitia salutifera for Cremer is his acting to deliver his people
in accordance with his covenant commitments to his people. However, if we set that
Verhdltnisbegriff'theory to one side, we can speak of a legitimate iustitia salutifera
concept in the OT and in the DSS, legitimate in the sense that it is God's judicial activity,
punishing the oppressor and vindicating the oppressed, thus a judicial activity with saving
results. In this legitimate understanding, God's iustitia salutifera is not to be set in
contrast to God's iustitia distributiva (as Diestel, Ritschl, and Cremer did) but is rather to
be seen as a subset of God's iustitia distributiva. In this way, "righteousness" retains its
fundamental meaning as a Normbegriff, with the norm being God's own moral law,
rooted in his unchanging nature as a God of perfect holiness, justice, and truth.
Third, the righteousness of faith stands in contrast to the righteousness of the
Law. It is Paul's polemic against the nomistic theology of Judaism. This nomistic trend, I
would argue, is a response to the Hellenization crisis of the 2n century BC, which
spurred the Jewish people to recommit themselves with ever greater fervor to the
ancestral Law as the means of attaining righteousness before God. This is not to deny E.
P. Sanders's important critique of the older Protestant interpretation of Second Temple
Judaism as a legalistic religion. Sanders was entirely correct in his protest. He
demonstrated that Judaism's pattern of religion was one of "covenantal nomism,"
wherein the covenant was established beforehand by God's electing grace, so that all
obedience to the law ("nomism") is a response to the covenant and the means of staying
within the covenant in order to attain eschatological life at the end. He further
demonstrated that Judaism acknowledged the centrality of repentance and renewed
commitment to ethical righteousness as the primary means of atonement. But none of this
changes the fact that the Judaism of this period was nomistic, and not merely in the sense
of teaching that Law-keeping is a response to God's grace, but even more so in the sense
of maintaining with particular rigor that one's righteousness before God comes by means
of this Law-keeping. The literature of Second Temple Judaism repeatedly demonstrates
the truth of Paul's accusation that the Jews were ignorant of God's righteousness and
were seeking to establish their own (dyvoouvxec, xijv xov Oeou Sucaioauvnv, Kai njv iSiav
^nxouvxec axfjaai) (Rom 10:3). It is precisely this nomistic feature of Judaism which
provides the Sitz im Leben of Paul's anti-nomistic polemic regarding

Chapter 7: Implications for Paul's Doctrine of Justification - 474
righteousness/justification by faith in Christ apart from the works of the law. The Pauline
antithesis between "the righteousness of the law" and "the righteousness of faith" stems
from this controversy with Judaism.
Finally, Paul's doctrine of justification is not primarily a matter of justifying the
history of God's dealings with Israel. It is not about being in a right relationship with
God, or being identified as a member of the covenant people of God. Rather, justification
is a matter of how sinful humans can be righteous before the divine tribunal. Paul's
righteousness terminology is set within an eschatological framework of being righteous
before God in order to obtain eternal life. The New Perspective paradigm shift from
soteriology to ecclesiology cannot be sustained.

APPENDIX
All Occurrences of "Righteousness" in the Old Testament
Section 1. p~I2£ (masc.) in the OT
n %
I. Legal righteousness 49 41
With verbs ol judging or ruling 15
Justice 19
Righteousness of God ("my. his. your") 7
Vindication 5
Clothed with righteousness 3
Rights -
II. Ethical righteousness 41 34
General 12
With verbs of doing 3
Righteous laws/word 10
Gates, paths, cities, etc of righteousness 7
Righteousness before God 9
Honesty -
III. Correctness 21 18
Speaking righteousness, telling the truth 6
lust balances, weights L_ 1 0
Doing something correctly 5

IV. Difficult cases 8 7
Total 119 100
I. LEGAL RIGHTEOUSNESS (49)
I \ With verbs of mdging or ruling (15")
1 A 1 Human judges or kings (including Messiah) as subject (10)
l)Le\ 19 15
"You shall not be partial to the poor or defer to the great, but m righteousness shall you judge (DD^n
p~I2»D / ev Sucaioauvn KpiveicJ your neighbor" (ESV)
2) Deut 1 16
"And I [Moses] charged your judges at that time, "Hear the cases between your brothers, and judge
righteously (p~I2» DntDSE? / Kpivart. 5iKaico<;) between a man and his brother or the alien who is with him
You shall not be partial in judgment"' (ESV).
475
Appendix - 476
3) Deut 16 18
"And you shall appoint judges and officers in all your towns and they shall judge the people with
righteous judgment (pni$~CDSE?Q DS?rmK ItDBKH / Kat Kpwouoiv xov A,aov Kpioiv 8iKatav)" (ESV)
4)Ps58 1[58 2MT/57 2LXX]

"Do you indeed decree what is right (|1"l3"in p~I25 / SiKaioauvnv XaXzlxc), you gods7 Do you judge the
childien of man uprightly (1BSE7n •,"1&,,,!2 / euOeta KpivETe)17' (ESV)
5) Ps 72 2 [71 2LXX]
1
"Give the king your justice (TpEDSEJO / TO Kpipa aou), O God, and >our righteousness ejnp"J2J1 / rn,v
6iKaioouvr|v oou) to the royal son' May he judge your people with righteousness (p1W2 ^Di? ]""T /
Kpivsiv TOV A,aov oou sv oiKatoouvp), and your poor with justice (5DS27D3 / ev Kpioei)'" (ESV)
6-7) Prov 8 15-16

a<
"By me [wisdom]
[wisdon kings teign, and rulers decree what is just (p"lS "^pp^' I YP P°r>o"iv 5tKaioauvr|v),
by me pnnces mle, and nobles, all who govern justly (p"IX ",EDSffi'~72)' (ESV)
8) Prov 31 9
1 9
"The words of King Lemuel An oracle that his mother taught him Open your mouth, judge
righteously (p^SS-tDStt? / Kpivs SiKaicoc), defend the rights of the poor and the needy" (ESV)
9)Isa 11 4
1 3
"There shall come forth a shoot from the stump of Jesse He shall not judge by what his eyes see, or
decide disputes by what his ears hear, but with righteousness he shall judge the poor (D , 7H p~T253 E2271
/ akXa Kpivti TaTtbivco Kpiotv2), and decide with equity ("WftD ITD'HI / Kai bXtyêi) for the meek of the
earth and he shall stnke the earth with the rod of his mouth, and with the breath of his lips he shall kill the
wicked Righteousness (p~I2» / SiKaioouvn,) shall be the belt of his waist, and faithfulness (HjlENn /
a^nOsial the belt of his loins" (ESV) 3
10) Isa 32 1
"Behold, a king will reign in righteousness ( " p D - " ] ^ " 1 p~!U7 / (3aotA£uq Sucaioc; |3aciXeuasi4), and
princes will rule injustice (T")ET !2SÔl7 D'HErT) / Kat apxovxec; psra Kptcecoc; aptjouaiv)" (ESV)
I A 2 God as subject (5)
l-2)Ps9 4, 8 [9 5, 9MTLXX]
"When my enemies turn back, they stumble and perish before your presence For you have maintained
my just cause ( T i l "'JDSÔ IVK71?' £KO\r\oaq xr\v Kptaiv pou Kai rnv Sucnv pou), you have sat on the
throne, giving righteous judgment (p12S £221$ / o Kpivcov 8iKaioouvn,v) You have rebuked the nations,
you have made the wicked perish, you have blotted out their name forever and ever The enemy came to
an end in everlasting rums, their cities you rooted out, the very memory of them has perished But the
1
Several Hebrew MSS have |HK in place of p~!2 so that the text reads "all who govern the earth " So LXX (ivpawoi
Si' spofj KpccToOcn yfjc,)
22 ,Symmachus aXka Kpivs! sv Sikaiocrovn. Tisvnrac,
3
Note that p~IS2 ("with righteousness ') and " W D 3 ("with equity" [ESV] or "with fairness" [NASB]) aie parallel
" W D normally means "level ground, plain, plateau," but it has a metaphorical meaning here and in Ps 45 6, 67 4, Mai
26
4
Aquila i8ou eiq 5iKaiov (3aaiA£uasi [JaaiAsuc, Symmachus and Theodotion iSou sic; SiKaiocruvpv fSaaiêuasi
PacnXbuc,
Appendix - 477
LORD sits enthroned forever, he has established his throne for justice (CD25907 / EV Kpiasi), and he judges
the world with righteousness (p1"2!21 ev SiKaioauvn), he judges the peoples with uprightness ( D ^ B T M /
ev eu0UTnxi)" (ESV)
3-4)Ps96 13 [95 13LXX]

"He will judge the world m righteousness (p*13D / ev SiKaioouvri) and the peoples in his faithfulness
(inDIQ&O / ev xfj aA-nOeia aurou)" (ESV) (= Ps 98 9 [97 9LXX] except that "in his faithfulness" is replaced
by "with cquitv" [D'"lt£n223 / ev EUBUTTJTI])
5) Jci 11 20
"But I was like a gentle lamb led to the slaughter I did not know it was against me they devised
schemes saying, 'Let us destroy the tree with its fruit, let us cut him off from the land of the living that his
20
name be remembered no more ' But, O LORD of hosts, who judges righteously (p~I25 JDD© / Kpivcov
SiKaia), who tests the heart and the mind let me see jour vengeance C?jnDp3 / xnv napa oou EK8tKr|aiv)
upon them, for to vou have I committed my cause ("O^TIS / TO StKatcopa pou)" (ESV)
I B Justice (19)
I B 1 Human (including Messianic) justice (9)
1-2) Deut 16 20
"You shall not pervert justice (tD2E?!2 / Kptoiq) You shall not show partiality, and you shall not accept a
bribe, for a biibe blinds the eyes of the wise and subverts the cause of the righteous (Dp"1"!^ "'"DT Kojovq
20 S
SiKaicov) Justice and only justice, you shall follow ( ^ T i n p~I2i p~IU / Sucaiax; TO SIKOIOV SICOCJI), that
you may live and inherit the land that the LORD your God is giving you" (ESV)
3)Ps45 4[45 5MT/44 5LXX]
"In your majesty ride forth victoriously m behalf of truth, humility, and righteousness (p"!U~npi?l
n?2N C T 7 5 ? / eveKEv aJujOeiai; Kai 7ipauTnro<; Kai bucaioauvnc), let your nght hand displaj awesome
deeds" (NIV)
4)Ps94 15 [93 15LXX]

"Judgment will again be founded on righteousness (31KT D252D p~I2nS? / ecoc; ou SiKaioauvn, e7tiaxpei(/r|
nq Kpiaiv), and all the upright in heart will follow it" (NIV)
5) Prov 25 5
"Take away the wicked (PEH / aaePeTcJ from the presence of the king, and his throne will be established m
righteousness (p"1^3 / rv SiKaioauvn,)" (ESV)
6) Eccl 3 16
"Moreover, I saw under the sun that m the place of justice (tD2^DH DlpO / T07tov rfjc KpioecocJ, even
thete was wickedness (J?2/~in / o aaePriq), and in the place oi righteousness (pllSn Q*pl2 / TOJIOV TOU
SiKaiou), even there was wickedness (BZHH / o aaePpc;) I said m my heart, God will judge the nghteous
and the wicked (DTl/KH COSK?"" SJEHrmiO p'HSrrnK / ouv TOV SiKaiov Kat auv TOV aoepfj KptveT 6
Geog), for there is a time fot every matter and for every work" (ESV)
Some MSS have SiKaioq or bucaia

Appendix - 478
7)Eccl5 8 [5 7MTLXX]
"If you see m a province the oppression of the poor and the violation of justice and righteousness (p1S"\
CD2590 7T2 / apjiaynv Kpipaxoi; Kai Sucaioauvric;), do not be amazed at the matter, for the high official is
watched by a higher, and theie are yet higher ones o\ er them" (ESV)
8) Isa 16 5
"When the oppressor is no more, and destruction has ceased and he who tramples underfoot has
vanished from the land, then a throne will be established in steadfast love ("10!"D per' eA-eoocj, and on it
will sit in faithfulness (J"IOiQ / psra a/a]0£iac;) in the tent of David one who judges and seeks justice and is
swift to do righteousness
(p"TS "irtQI DBK7Q EHT) E259 / Kpivcov KOI EKLJITCOV Kpiua Kai OTIEUSCOV Sucaioouvnv6)" (ESV)
9) Ter22 13
"Woe to him who builds his house by unrighteousness (p"!U~X73 ou pETa bucaioauvn,c;), and his upper
rooms by injustice (£02t^Q K73 / OUK ev Kptpari), who makes his neighboi serve him for nothing and does
not give him his wages" (ESV)
IB2Divmejustice(10)
1)Job 8 3
The words of Bildad the Shuhite to Job "Does God pervert justice (CD2E7D m y / a8ucr|0£i Kpivcov)? Does
the Almighty pervert what is right (pIS I xo bucaiov)?" (NIV)
2) Job 36 3 p~12J~jnX ,T,S?Sl71 / Epyoic; Se pou SiKaia epco

NASB, ESV "I will ascribe righteousness (or 'justice' [NIV]) to my Maker"
3)Ps48 10 [48 HMT/47 11LXX]

"As your name, O God, so your piaise reaches to the ends of the earth Your nght hand is filled with
righteousness (pIS I SiKaioauvn)' (ESV)
4) Ps 65 5 [65 6Mr/64 6LXX]

"By awesome deeds you answer us with righteousness (pISD), O God of our salvation, the hope of all the
ends of the earth and of the farthest seas" (ESV) (LXX has e7taKouoov npcbv, o 0eog o acornp rjpcov =
"Hearken to us O God our savior" [NETS])
5-6) Ps 89 14 [89 15M1/88 15LXX]

"Righteousness and justice (CD25901 p~!2 / SiKaioauvn Kai Kpipa) are the foundation of your throne"
(ESV) (= Ps 97 2 [96 2LXX] with change of pionoun,' his throne")
7) Isa 45 8
"Shower, O heavens, from above, and let the clouds ram down righteousness (p1% ' SiKaioauvnv), let the
earth open, that salvation and righteousness (np"1251 J???"1 / skeoq Kat Sucaioauvnv) may bear fruit, let the
earth cause them both to sprout, I the LORD have created it" (ESV)
6
Some MSS insert the preposition sic or em. before SiKaiocruvnv
7
Hebrew |1DD m both verses But LXX translates inconsistently eToipacria ("preparation, provision") in Ps 88 15L
and KcxTopGcocnc, ("setting straight, setting up") m Ps 96 2LXX
Appendix - 479
8) Isa 58 2
"Cry aloud, do not hold back, lift up youi voice like a trumpet, declare to my people their transgression,
to the house of Jacob their sins Yet they seek me daily and delight to know mv ways, as if they were a
nation that did righteousness (i"J27S? np"]U / SiKaioauvnv 7i£7tomKtoi;) and did not forsake the judgment
(CD2C70 / Kptoiq) of their God, fhev ask of me righteous judgments (p"HS-nJ2Sty?3 / Kpiaiv Sucaiav), they
delight to draw near to God" (ESV)
9-10) Ter 23 6 | 33 168

"In his days Tudah will be saved, and Israel will dwell securely And this is the name by which he will be
called 'The LORD is our righteousness' Q3p1U HIIT / Kupioc IcoctSeK9)" (ESV)
I C The righteousness of God ("my, his your righteousness") (7)
l ) P s 7 17 [7 18MT]
"I will give to the LORD the thanks due to his righteousness (lp"T2S3 / Kara xnv SiKaioauvnv auxou) and I
will sing praise to the name of the LORD, Most High" (ESV) (NIV "I will give thanks to the LORD
because of his righteousness") 10
2-3) Ps 35 24, 28 [34 24, 28 IXX ]

"Awake, and rise to my defense' CtDSHyB? / xfj Kpioei pou)
Contend for me, my God and Lord
Vindicate me in your righteousness (y\p1"£3 "2£D2^ /
Kprvov pe Kaxa xnv Sucaioauvrrv oou11), O LORD my God,
do not let them gloat over me
25
Do not let them think, 'Aha, just what we wanted''
or say, 'We have swallowed him up '
May all who gloat over my distress
be put to shame and confusion,
may all who exalt themselves over me
be clothed with shame and disgrace
May those who delight m my vindication Cp"I2» I xnv 8iKaioauvr|v pou)
shout for joy and gladness,
may they always say, 'The LORD be exalted,
who delights in the well-being of his servant'
My tongue will speak of your righteousness (~p11 / XTW SiKaioauvrrv oou)
and of your praises all day long" (NIV)
4) Ps 50 6 [49 6LXX]
"Our God comes, he does not keep silence, before him is a devouring fire, around him a mighty tempest
He calls to the heavens above and to the earth, that he may judge (]"*1f I SiaKpivai) his people 'Gather to
me my faithful ones, who made a covenant with me by sacrifice'' The heavens declare his righteousness
OpIS EP13K? TT'JH / Kat avayyeXouarv oi oupavoi xr\v SiKaioauvrp' auxou), for God himself is judge'
(Kin B27D D , ri7K" , 3 ' OTI o 8EO<; Kprxnq eoxiv) Selah 7 'Hear, O my people, and I will speak, O Israel, I
will testify against you I am God, your God'" (ESV)
Jer 33 [=40 ] stops at v 13 in the LXX, there is no Greek text corresponding to the Hebrew text found at Jer 33 16
in the MT
9
PuncUiation given by Rahlfs However, Joseph Ziegler (Gottingen Septuagmta) takes sv TOU; jtpocpnxcuc, horn next line
withlcoaeSsK So NETS ("Iosedck among the prophets") Aquila KUpis 8iKaiocrovr| nprov Symmachus and the Syrian
Kupis SIKCUCOOOV r\uaq
10
In the immediate context, God's righteousness expressed m (a) the salvation of the righteous (w 8-10) and (b) the
punishment of the wicked (vv 11-16) This poses a significant problem for Ritschl and Cremer
11
Some MSS read xnv SiKaioauvnv pou Others have xnv eAeripocruvny aou
p
See under "Vindication '
Appendix - 480
5) Ps 97 6 [96 6LAA]
"The heavens proclaim his righteousness 0p"12J / xnv 8iKaioauvr|v auxou), and all the peoples see his
glory" (ESV)
6) Isa 42 21
"The LORD was pleased, for his righteousness' sake. (^pIS ]Sfts), to magnify his law and make it
glorious" (ESV) (LXX Kupioq o OEOC; epouêxo iva SucaicoOf) Kat peya/awn awecw) '
7) Isa 51 5
"Give attention to mc, my people,
and give ear to mc, my nation,
lor a law will go out from me,
and I will set my pistice COEZJtt ' n, Kpiaic, pou) tor a light to the peoples
My righteousness CpIS I n SiKaioouvn, pou) diaws near,
my salvation ("PET / xo atoxipiov pou) has gone out,
and my arms wall nidge the peoples (ItSEST D^QS? ,X?"1T1 /no LXX),
the coastlands hope for me,
and foi my arm they wait (j'PrT'' ^"IT" 7*0 ' Kai exq xov Ppaxtova pou EAJIIOUOW)
Lift up youi eyes to the heav ens,
and look at the earth beneath,
for the heavens vanish like smoke,
the earth will wear out like a garment,
and they who dwell m it will die m like manner,
but my salvation (TIPW 1 / xo acoxipiov pou) will be forever,
and my nghteousness (TIp-lS / n, Sucaioauvri pou) will nev er be dismayed
Listen to me, you who know nghteousness (p1% I Kptaicj,14
the people m whose heart is my law,
fear not the reproach of man,
nor be dismayed at their revilmgs
For the moth will eat them up like a garment,
and the worm will eat them like wool,
but my nghteousness (TIpIS / n, SiKatoauvr) pou) will be forever,
and my salvation CnyiKT / xo acoxipiov pou) to all generations" (ESV) ,:>
I D Vindication (5)
1) Job 6 29
"My vindication Cp'IS) is at stake" (ESV) (LXX jtaA.iv xco 8ucaico auvfp%Fa0E = "gather again with him
who is just" [NETS])
2) Ps 4 1 [4 2MT1-XX]
"Answer me when I call, O God of my righteousness QpIS Tt vK / 6 OEOC; xfjc, SiKaioauvrjc; pou)" (ESV)
1
The context has to do with |udgment on Israel for disobeying God's law "So he poured on him the heat of his
anger" (v 25)
14
Listed under "Ethical righteousness "
15
Here, the nghteousness ot God is clearly saving, but it is saving because it is his powerful action ('his arm") of
condemning those who reproach and revile his people God's righteousness is his powerful vindicating judgment, and it
even goes out like a light to the nations, causing them to hope in him as well
Appendix - 4 8 1
3) Ps 35 27 [34 27LXX]
"May those who delight in mv vindication (?p1S I xnv SiKaioauvnv pou) shout for joy and gladness"
(NIV) ,fi
4) Ps 37 6 [36 6LXX]
"Commit your way to the LORD, trust m him, and he will act He will bung forth your righteousness
C^pIS ' xr\v Sucaioauvnv oou) as the light, and your justice (*[tDE2?0 / xo Kpipa oou) as the noonday"
(ESV)
5) Ps 40 9 [40 10MT/39 10LXX]

9 l~
"1 hav e proclaimed glad tidings of righteousness (p"T2J THEO / eun,yytîoapr|V Sucaioauvnv ) m the
10
gieat congregation, behold, I will not restrain my lips, O LORD, you know I have not hidden your
righteousness (?]np~I2S / xnv Sucaioauvnv oou) withm my heart I have spoken of your faithfulness
(^jrijlQX xnv aA.n0etav oou) and your salvation (?jriSftK?ri / xo ocoxrjpiov aou), I have not concealed your
lovingkindness (*|"10n / xo eXeoq aou) and your truth (^jriDK / xnv aln,0£tav oou) from the great
congregation" (NASB) 18
I E Clothed with righteousness (3)
1) Job 29 14
"I put on righteousness (p"T2$ I SiKaioouvn,), and it clothed me, my justice CCDEE7D / Kpipa) was like a robe
and a turban" (ESV)
2)Ps 132 9 [131 9LXX]

"Let your priests be clothed with righteousness (p'^X~^5P^l7', / svbuaovxai Sucaioauvrrv), and let your
saints shout for joy" (ESV)
3)Isa 11 5
"Righteousness (p"72J / SiKaioouvri) shall be the belt of his waist, and faithfulness (HSIfiKn / a^nOsia) the
belt of his loins" (ESV)
II. ETHICAL RIGHTEOUSNESS (41)
IIA General (12)
l ) P s 7 8[7 9MI/LXX]
"The LORD judges the peoples, judge me, O LORD, according to my righteousness (fplS'Z I Kara xnv
SiKaioauvnv pou19) and according to the integnty that is in me" (ESV) 20
2) Ps 45 7 [45 8MT/44 8LXX]

"Your throne, O God, is forever and ever The scepter of your kingdom is a scepter of uprightness ("WO
CDD2I7 / papSoc EuOuxnxocJ, you have loved righteousness (p1% I SiKaioouvn) and hated wickedness
(»BH / avopia)" (ESV)
See above tor context, which twice refers to God s righteousness (w 24 28)
17
Some versions based on the LXX (the Bohainc and some Latin MSS) have ' vour righteousness '
18
See v 5 ('I will proclaim and tell of them," I e "your wondrous deeds') and vv 13, 17 (references to God's
deliverance) Therefore, "1 will proclaim glad tidings of righteousness' means "1 will proclaim the glad tidings of
God's judicial activity that resulted in his delivering me from my oppressors "
19
Some MSS have oou
20
See context which uses ' righteousness" terms in vv 9, 11, 17
Appendix - 482
3) Prov 1 3
1 2
'The proverbs of Solomon, son of David, king of Israel To know wisdom and instruction, to undeistand
words of insight, to receive instruction in wise dealing, m righteousness, justice, and equity (D'lETftl
E5EBJQ1 pIS i SiKatoauvnv uXnQf) Kat Kpipa)" (ESV) 21
4) Prov 2 9
"Then you will understand righteousness and justice and equity (O^KTQI D2£?fD1 pIS I SiKaioauvnv Kai
Kpipa), every good path" (ESV) z
5)Eccl7 15
"In my vain life I have seen everything There is a righteous man (p'HS / 8ucaioc;) who perishes in his
righteousness (1p~I25D ev SiKaico auxou), and there is a wicked man (1?EH ' aoePn,c;) who prolongs his life
m his evildomg (ini?*1D / ev KaKia auxou)" (ESV)
6)Isal 21
"How the faithful city has become a whore, she who was full of justice (£DSE?ft / Kpiaic)' Righteousness
(pIS i SiKaioouvri) lodged m her, but now murderers" (ESV)
7-8) Isa 26 9-10

"When your judgments (~"IDB£?D ' xa 7tpoaxaypaxa oou) are m the earth, the inhabitants of the world
10
learn righteousness (pIS ' SiKaioouvri) If favor is shown to the wicked (££?"] / o aofiPn,^), he does not
learn righteousness (pIS I SiKaioouvn), in the land of uprightness he deals conuptly and does not see the
majesty of the LORD" (ESV)
9) Isa 51 1
"Listen to me, you who pursue righteousness (pIS "lE"i"l / oi SitoKOVxeq xo SiKaiov), you who seek the
LORD look to the rock from which >ou were hewn, and to the quarry from which you weie dug" (ESV)
10) Isa 51 7
,
' Listen to me >ou who know righteousness (pIS S?'T / oi eiSoxeq Kpioiv21),
the people in vv hose heart is my law,
tcai not the reproach of man,
nor be dismayed at their reviling" (ESV)
11)Fzek 3 20
"Son ot man, I ha\ c made you a watchman for the house of Israel Whenever you hear a word from my
18
mouth, you shall give them warning from me If I say to the wicked (S?EH / 6 avopoq), 'You shall surely
die," and you give him no warning, nor speak to warn the wicked from his wicked way. in order to save his
life that wicked person shall die for his iniquity, but his blood I will require at your hand But if you
w arn the wicked, and he does not turn from his wickedness, or from his wicked way, he shall die for his
20
iniquity, but you will have delivered your soul Again, if a righteous person (p""!? ' SiKaiog) turns from
his righteousness ("\p1S12 > ano xcov Sucaioauvcov24 auxou) and commits injustice (711? ITDSl I Kat 7iovnor|
7tapa7txcopa), and 1 lav a stumbling block before him, he shall die Because you have not warned him, he
The same three terms occur together in Prov 2 9 Both contexts are ambiguous does pIS refer to justice or ethical
righteousness7
21
LXX misunderstands 'equity' as a veib and takes with the concluding phrase Kai Kaxopacoaeic, Tiavxac, atovac
ayaSouq = "and you will make all good courses straight" (NETS)
23
Chrysostom, Hcs>chias and others have SiK(xiocrovr|v
24
Some MSS have the singular xfjc; 5iKaiooovr|c,
Appendix - 483
shall die for his sm, and his righteous deeds that he has done (!"JK?S? "1E>N plHp"!^ / ai SiKaioouvai auxou,
ac, ejtoinoev) shall not be remembered, but his blood I will icquiie at youi hand But if you warn the
righteous person (p"HS / 6 SiKaioc,) not to sin, and he does not sm, he shall suiely live, because he took
warning, and you will have delivered your soul" (ESV)
12) Zeph 2 3
"Seek the LORD, all you humble of the earth who have carried out his ordinances, seek righteousness
(p1S~*itDp'2 ' Sucaioauvnv Cn,xr|oax£), seek humility Perhaps you will be hidden in the day of the LORD's
anger" (NASB) 2l
II B With verbs of doing (3)
l ) P s l 5 2[14 2LXX]
"LORD, who may dwell in your sanctuary'' Who may live on your holy hill 7 He whose walk is
blameless and who docs what is righteous (pIS 72JE / EpyaCopevoc 8iKaiocuvnv). who speaks the tmth
from his heart" (NIV)
2)Ps 119 121 [118 121LXX]

"I have done what is just and right (pIS) CDE59D TPK7S? / ejtoinaa Kpipa Kai SiKaioouvnv); do not leave
me to my oppressors" (ESV).
3) Isa 64 5 [64 4MT]

"Since ancient times no one has heard, no eai has pei ceived, no eye has seen any God besides you, who
acts on behalf of those who wait for him You come to the help of those who gladly do right (pIS IrTOSJ
2?E?~nX / xoic; 7toiouciv xo SiKaiov), who remember your ways" (NIV)
II C. Righteous laws, word (10)
l)Ps 119 7 [118 7LXX]

"I w ill praise you with an upright heart,
when I learn youi righteous rules" (ESV).
C?Jpn!3 ,EDBK70 / xa Kpipaxa xr)q SiKaioauvpc, aou)
2)Ps 119 62 [118 62TXX]

"At midnight I rise to praise you,
because of your righteous rules ( ^ p - ^ "'CDBCtfQ / ) " (ESV)
(TJpHS "'tDEtPD / xd Kpipaxa xfjc, SiKaioauvnc, aou)
3)Ps 119 75 [118:75LXX]

"I know, O LORD, that your rules aie righteous,
(^pOBEJD p i U - , D / oxi Sucaioauvn xct Kpipaxa aou)
and that m faithfulness you have afflicted me" (ESV).
4 ) P s l l 9 106 [119 1061XX]

"I have sworn an oath and confirmed it,
25
Note the chiasm, suggesting that "righteousness" here has to do with carrying out God's ordinances
A - "Seek the LORD, all you humble of the earth"
B - "who have carried out his ordinances"
B' - "seek righteousness"
A' "seek humility"
Appendix - 484
to keep your righteous rules" (ESV)

( ' I p I S , £3BE? 13 / xrx Kpipaxa xfjg Sucaioauvric, oou)
5)Ps 119 123 [118 123LXX]

"My eyes long for youi salvation ("^DIME?1 / / eic, xo ocoxr|piov aou)
and for the fulfillment ofyour righteous promise" (ESV)
(*!p~!H m D i s ? / eiq xo >.oytov xfjc; 8ikaioauvn.c oou)
6 ) P s l l 9 138 [118 138LXX]

"You have appointed your testimonies in righteousness (pIS I Sucaioouvnv)
and in all faithfulness (HJIQK / alnOeiav)" (ESV)
7)Ps 119 144 [118 144LXX]

"Your testimonies are righteous (pIS I SiKaioouvri) forever,
give me understanding that 1 may live" (ESV)
8 ) P s l l 9 160 [118 160LXX]

"The sum of your word is truth,
and every one of youi righteous rules endures forever" (ESV)
(TJpnS tOB^Q" I'D / 7tavxa xa Kpipaxa xfjc; 5tKaioouvu,c, aou)
9)Ps 119 164 [118 164LXX]

"Se\ en times a day I praise you
for your righteous rules" (ESV)
(TJpnX ,E0BI2?O / xa Kpipara xfjc; Sucaioouvric, aou)
10) Ps 119 172 [188 172LXX]

"My tongue will smg of your word,
for all your commandments are right (ESV)
(pIS *pm2SQ~7D 7taoai ai svxoâi aou SiKaioouvn,)
II D Gates, paths, cities, etc of righteousness (7)
l ) P s 2 3 3 [22 3LXX]
"He restoies my soul He leads me in paths of righteousness (pnS'vSSJfiS / ETII rpiPooc 8iKaioouvr|c,) for
his name's sake" (ESV)
2)Ps 118 19 [117 19LXX]

Open to me the gates oj righteousness (p1S~^1W I nvXaq Sucaioouvric;), that I may enter through
20
them and give thanks to the LORD This is the gate of the LORD, the righteous (D,p,~I2J / 8iKaioi) shall
enter through it" (ESV)
3)Isa 1 26
"Afterward you shall be called the city of righteousness (IpIS ~P17 / noXxq SiKaioouvn, q), the faithful city"
(ESV)
4) Isa 41 10
God speaking to Israel, my servant "Fear not, for I am with you, be not dismayed, for I am your God, I
will strengthen you, I will help you, I will uphold you with my righteous right hand CpIS |''H' , 3 / xfj
SECÎS xfj SiKaia pou)" (ESV)
Appendix - 485
5) Isa 61:3
""...
... that they
tit may be called oaks of righteousness (pISI "T^K / y£ve.ai SiKaioauvnc,), the planting of the
LORD, that he may be glorified" (ESV)
6) Jer 31:23 [38:23LXX]

"Once more they shall use these words in the land of Judah and in its cities, when I restore their fortunes:
'The LORD bless you, O habitation of righteousness (pIS'TTty, O holy hill!'" (ESV) (LXX has sm
SiKaiov opoc, TO dyiov auxou).
7) Jer 50:7 [27:7LXX]

"My people have been lost sheep. Their shepherds have led them astray, turning them away on the
mountains. From mountain to hill they have gone. They have forgotten their fold. All who found them
have devoured them, and their enemies have said, 'We are not guilty, for they have sinned against the
LORD, their habitation of righteousness (p~IS~ni3 / vopf) Sucaioouvric;26), the LORD, the hope of their
fathers'" (ESV).
II.E. Righteousness before God (9)
1) Job 8:6: ^p"!? I"l!3 Q?P1 / d7tOKaxaaTf|a£i Se ooi Siavrav 8iKaiocuvr|c

NASB: "If you are pure and upright, surely now he would rouse himself for you and restore your righteous
estate"
ESV: "... and restore your rightful habitation"
NIV: "... and restore you to your rightful place"
2) Job 35:2: 7X!2 *p1S rn!2K / Euxac Aucaioc, eipifivavxtKupiou

NASB: "Do you say, 'My righteousness is more than God's'?"
ESV: "Do you say, 'It is my right before God' ... ?"
NIV: "You say, T will be cleared by God'"
3)Ps 17:15 [16:15LXX]

"As for me, I shall behold your face in righteousness (p"|S3 / ev Sucaioauvri27); when I awake, I shall be
satisfied with your likeness" (ESV)."
4-5) Ps 18:20, 24 [18:21, 25MT/17:21, 25LXX]

"The LORD dealt with me according to my righteousness CpISS / Kaxd xpv SiKaioouvnv pou);
21 i • •
according to the cleanness of my hands he rewarded mc. For I have kept the ways of the LORD, and
have not wickedly departed from my God. For all his rules were before me, and his statutes I did not put
away from me. I was blameless before him, and I kept myself from my guilt. So the LORD has
rewarded me according to my righteousness Cp1S3 I Kaxd xf)v SiKaioouvnv pou), according to the
cleanness of my hands in his sight" (ESV).
6) Isa 58:8
"Is not this the fast that I choose: to loose the bonds of wickedness, to undo the straps of the yoke, to let
the oppressed go free, and to break every yoke? Is it not to share your bread wdth the hungry and bring the
homeless poor into your house; when you see the naked, to cover him, and not to hide yourself from your
26
So Ziegler (Gottingen Septuaginta). who begins a new sentence here (... civff ebv f|papxov xco Kupico- vopi)
5iKaiocrovr|c TO) awuyayovn xoiic, jiaxcpac, auxcov). Rahlfs has vopfj in apposition to Kupico (... <xv0' wv i^papxov TO)
Kupico vopfj Sucaioauvric,...).
27
Some versions dependent on the LXX (the Sahidic and some Latin witnesses) add aou.
28
Cp. Ps 11:7: "For the LORD is righteous (p^lS); he loves righteous deeds (Hip*!?); the upright shall behold his
face."
Appendix - 486
own flesh7 Then shall your light break forth like the dawn and your healing shall spring up speedily, your
righteousness (f\p1S r\ SiKaioouvri aou 29 ) shall go before you, the glory of the LORD shall be your rear
guaid" (ESV)
7-8) Isa 62 1-2

"For Zion's sake I will not keep silent, and for Jerusalem's sake I will not be quiet, until her
righteousness (IpIS I r\ SiKaioouvn, pou 30 ) goes forth as brightness and her salvation (Hriyit^'' / xo
ocoxijptov pou) as a burning torch The nations shall see your righteousness (~\p1S I xrrv SiKaioouvr|v
oou 11 ), and all the kings your glory" (ESV) v
9) Hos 10 12
"Sow for yourselves nghteousness (Hp"]!* / SiKaioouvn,), reap steadfast love, break up your fallow ground,
for it is the time to seek the LORD, that he may come and ram righteousness (pIS 18iKaioauvn,cJ upon
you" (ESV, LXX ECOC; XOU EÔEIV ysvppaxa 8iKaioauvr|c; upiv)
III. C O R R E C T N E S S (21)
III A Speaking righteousness, telling the truth (6)
l ) P s 5 2 3 [ 5 2 5 MT /51 5 IXX ]
"Why do you boast of evil O mighty man' 7 The steadfast love of God endures all the day Your tongue
plots destruction, like a sharp razor, you worker of deceit You love evil more than good, and lying more
than speaking what is right (pIS "im?2 "lpK? / aSiKiav UTtsp xo Xa^fjaai SiKaioauvnv)" (ESV)
2) Prov 8 8
"All the utterances of my mouth are m righteousness (p~i3J3I I pexa Sucaioouvric,), there is nothing crooked
or p e n erted m them" (NASB)
3) Piov 12 17
"Whoever speaks the truth gives honest evidence (pIS T 3 ' 1 H J I Q K ITE^ / em8eiKvupevn,v Jtiaxiv
a7tayyb/iA.£i SiKaioc,), but a false witness utters deceit" (ESV)
4) Prov 16 13
"Righteous lips (p~tU~"'riB!2? / xeuVn. 8ucaia) are the delight of a king, and he loves him who speaks what is
1
right (WIV" - D I / A.oyouc, opOouc,)" (ESV)
5) Isa 45 19
"I did not speak in secret, m a land of darkness, I did not say to the offspring of Jacob, 'Seek me in vain ' I
the LORD speak the truth (pIS "13"! / XaX&v SiKaioauvnv), I declare what is nght (D'HSTQ T 3 D /
avayyeAlorv aXnOeiav)" (ESV)
6) Isa 59 4
"No one enters suit justly (p1S2 N l p - ] ^ / OUSEIC, âleT SiKaia), no one goes to law honestly (71310X33
CDE5W I^KI / OUSE eaxtv Kpioic, aXnOivq), they rely on empty pleas, they speak lies, they conceive mischief
and give birth to iniquity" (ESV) (NIV "No one calls for justice, no one pleads his case with integrity")
(NASB "No one sues righteously and no one pleads honestly")
The Epistle of Barnabas, Cyprian, and Irenaeus (in Latin) omit aou in their quotation of this verse
30
Origen, Lucian, Eusebius and Jerome corrected pou to auxfj^ ("her") in conformity with the MT
31
Some MSS have pou both here and in the next clause ("m> glory")
31
See immediately preceding context, Isa 61 10-11, which speaks of "the robe of nghteousness '
Appendix - 487
III.B. Just balances, weights (10)
1-4) Lev 19:36

"You shall do no wrong in judgment, in measures of length or weight or quantity. You shall have just
balances, just weights, a just cphah, and a just hin." (ESV).
(pIS "[TH pIS riB"^ pn35-,333N pIS *3TKQ ' Cuyd SiKaia Kai oxdOpia SiKaia Kai xouc; SiKaioc;)
5-6) Deut 25:15

"A full and fair weight you shall have, a full and fair measure you shall have, that your days may be long
in the land that the LORD your God is giving you" (ESV).
(piS) nD^C / dXriGivov Kai SiKaiov - 2x)
7) Job 31:6
"Let me be weighed m a just balance (pn3S-13TXI233 / EV Cuycp SiKaico). and let God know my integrity!"
(ESV).
8-10) Ezek 45:10

"You shall have just balances, a just ephah, and a just bath" (ESV).
(p"12$~rQ1 p I S T l B ' W pn3J-,,3TKQ / tpybq SiKaioc; Kai psxpov SiKaiov Kai X°TVK; SiKaia)
III.C. Doing something correctly (5)
1) Isa 42:6
"I am the LORD; I have called you in righteousness (p1S2 I ev Sucaioauvri); I will take you by the hand
and keep you; I will give you as a covenant for the people, a light for the nations" (ESV).
2) Isa 45:13
"T have stirred him [Cyrus] up in righteousness (plS'2 I psxd Sucaioouvric;), and I will make all his ways
level; he shall build my city and set my exiles free, not for price or reward,' says the LORD of hosts"
(ESV).
3-5) Deut 33:19; Ps 4:5 [4:6 MTLXX ], 51:19 [5 l:21MT/50:21LXX]: "sacrifices of righteousness" (lit.) or "right
sacrifices" (ESV) (p"13J-,rl3T / Ouoia [sg.] Sucaioauvric;).
IV. DIFFICULT CASES (8)
1) Ps 17:1 [16:1LXX]: pIS HIIT IVfflD I eicdKouoov, Kupie, xfjc; Sucaioauvric; pou
NASB, ESV: "Hear a just cause. O LORD"
NIV: "Hear, O LORD, my nghteous plea"
See suggested emendations in BHS apparatus
2-4) Ps 85:10, 11, 13 [85:11, 12, 14MT/84:11, 12, 14LXX]: pIS 1SiKaioauvn - 3x
ESV: "Steadfast love and faithfulness meet;
righteousness and peace kiss each other.
Faithfulness springs up from the ground,
and righteousness looks down from the sky.
Yes, the LORD will give what is good,
and our land will yield its increase.
Righteousness will go before him
and make his footsteps a way."
Appendix - 488
5)Ps 119 142 [118 142LXX]

"Your righteousness is righteous forever (DT1S77 pIS f\T\p1S I r\ 8ucaioauvn aou Sucaioauvri EIC; xov
aicova), and your law is true" (ESV)
6) Isa 41 2 173-p imOp 1 ' pIS I 5iKaioouvn,v, EKaXeoev auxr|v Kara 7to8ac, auxou
ESV "Who stirred up one from the east whom victory meets at every step7" (Gesenius)
Oswalt " whom righteousness calls to its foot," l e , to its service (2 81-82)
NASB " whom he calls m nghteousness to his feet'?"
NIV ' calling him m nghteousness to his service9"
NETS "Who has roused righteousness from the east, called it to its feet and it will go 0 "
7) Dan 9 24
"Seventy w ecks are decreed about your people and your holy city, to finish the transgression, to put an end
to sm, and to atone for iniquity, to bring in everlasting righteousness (DÔ^S? pIS I SiKaioouvnv
aioviov3 ), to seal both vision and prophet, and to anoint a most holy place" (ESV)
8) Hos 2 19 [2 21MTLXX]
"And I will betroth you to me forever I will betroth you to me in righteousness and injustice, in steadfast
love and in mercy (D,T3n"]331 "ICrOI DBS^QBI p~!2»33 / ev Sucatoauvri Kai EV Kpipaxi Kai EV eXesx Kai EV
oucxippoic,)" (ESV)
33
LXX and Theodotion agree here
Appendix - 489
Section 2. np""12S (fern.) in the OT
n %
I. Legal righteousness34 74 47
With 1\DV to execute justice 12
Justice 19
Righteousness of God ("my, his, your") 34
Vindication 4
Clothed with nghteousness 2
Rights 3
II. Ethical righteousness 73 46
General 43
With verbs of doing 15
Righteous laws word -
Gates, paths, cities, etc of righteousness -
Righteousness before God 14
Honesty 1
III. Correctness 5 3
Speaking righteousness, telling the truth 4
Just balances, weights -
Doing something correctly 1
I \ . Difficult cases 5 3
Total 157 100
(77 = number of occurrences)
I. LEGAL RIGHTEOUSNESS
A With Hg?l? "to execute justice" (12)
I A 1 Human judges or kings (including Messiah) as subject (9)
1-2) 2 Sam 8 15 G 1 Chron 18 14)

"So David reigned over all Israel And David administered justice and equity (IplSI DBE7D HSî? T H
T H kai nv AautS noicov Kpipa Kai SiKaioouvnv) to all his people" (ESV)
3-4) 1 Kings 10 9 ( 2 Chron 9 8)

The queen of Sheba said to Solomon "Blessed be the LORD your God, who has delighted in you and set
vou on the throne of Israel' Because the LORD loved Israel forever, he has made you king, that you may
execute justice and righteousness (1p1S~l CDBS9J2 TWDVs I xou 7toietv Kpipa ev SiKaioouvn, Kai EV Kpipaaiv
auxcov [3 Kgdms 10 9] || xou rcoincai Kpipa Kai SiKaioauvnv [2 Chron 9 8])" (ESV)
5) Jer 22 3
Addressed to the king of ludah "Do justice and righteousness (f\p1S*\ DE27D Wp I TIoieTxe Kpiotv Kai
SiKaioauvnv), and deliver from the hand of the oppressor him who has been robbed And do no wrong or
violence to the resident alien, the fatherless, and the widow, nor shed innocent blood in this place" (ESV)
The sub-categories under "Legal righteousness" actually add up to 74, but I reduced the total back down to 72,
because Deut 33 20 and 1 Sam 12 7 are counted twice, l e , undei both "With HE'S? 'to execute lustice" and "The
Righteousness of God '
Appendix - 490
6) Jer 22 15
Do you think you are a king
because you compete in cedai7
Did not youi father eat and drink
and do justice and righteousness"7
(np"12n DE270 71275? / 7IOIETV Kpipa Kai SiKaioauvnv KaA.nv)
Then it was well with him
He judged the cause of the poor and need},
then it was well
Is not this to know me 7
declares the LORD
But you have eyes and heart
only for your dishonest gam,
for shedding innocent blood
and for practicing oppression and violence" (ESV)
7-8) Jer 23 5 | 33 15
"Behold, the days are coming, declares the LORD, when 1 will raise up for David a righteous Branch
(23 5-6 p"HS 1!2S / avaxo?mv Sucauxv || 33 15 np"13S35 7TD35 / - ) , and he shall reign as king and deal
wisely, and shall execute justice and righteousness (7Ip"12J1 CDE27FD 7T2>5? ; Jtoin,o£i Kpipa Kai
SiKaioauvnv)3 in the land In his days Judah will be saved, and Israel will dwell securely And this is the
name by which he will be called 'The LORD is our righteousness'" (ESV)
9) Ezek 45 9 (note use of pIS 3x m v 10)

"Thus says the Lord GOD Enough. O princes of Israel' Put away violence and oppression, and execute
justice and righteousness (1275? np"J2£l CDE2?D / Kpipa Kai Sucaioauvnv noinoaxe) Cease your evictions of
my people, declares the Lord GOD" (ESV)
I A 2 God as subject (3)
l)Ps99 4[98 4LXX]

"The King37 in his might loves justice (BE27D / Kpiaiv)
You have established equity (D'HBT'O / euOuxnxac,),
you have executed justice and righteousness in Jacob"
(rnZ?y ^ p l ^ l EB270 / Kpiaiv Kai 8tKaioauvr|v eTtomoac,) (ESV)
2)Ps 103 6[102 6LXX]

"The LORD works righteousness and justice for all who are oppressed" (ESV) ( 7117P mp"lS 71275?
•,pl275?~7D7 D,£DB©f31 / TTOICOV Eêripocuvac, o Kupioc. Kai Kpipa nam xoiq a8iKoupevoic,)
3)Jer9 24[9 23 MTIXX ]

"Let not the wise man boast in his wisdom, let not the mighty man boast in his might, let not the neh man
boast in his riches, but let him who boasts boast m this, that he understands and knows me, that I am the
LORD who practices steadfast love, justice and righteousness (7Ip"]3»l CSBK?& "1071 71275? / JTOICOV eXsoq Kai
Kpipa Kat SiKaioauvnv) m the earth For in these things I delight, declares the LORD" (ESV)
31
See ' Human (including Messianic) justice "
36
Jer 33 [=40'xx] stops at v 13 m the LXX, there is no Greek text corresponding to the Hebrew text found at Jer 33 15-
16 in the MT For this reason, Tlpn^l EE270 71271? is present at both Jer 23 6 and 33 15 in the MT, but Ttomaei Kpipa
Kai 8ucaioauvr|v is found only at Jer 23 6 in the LXX
37
In this context, "the King" = "the LORD "
Appendix-491
B Justice (19)
I B 1 Human (including Messianic) justice (9)
l ) P s 7 2 3 [71 3LXX]
"Give the king your justice (?pEDE2?B / xo Kpipa aou), O God,
and your nghteousness (?]np~lXl / xi'iv SiKaioauvnv aou) to the royal son'
May he judge your people with righteousness (p~I3JB / ev SiKaioouvn,),
and your poor with justice (B277233CD / ev Kpioet)'
Let the mountains bear prosperity (DI1?© ' eipr|vr|v) for the people,
and the hills, in righteousness (1p1S"2 ' ev SiKaioouvn,)'
and crush the oppressor'" (ESV)
2) Prov 16 12
"It is an abomination to kings to do evil,
for the throne is established by righteousness (7Ip1S31 / pexa SiKaioouvpc,)"
(ESV)
3) Isa 5 7
"Foi the vineyard of the LORD of hosts
is the house of Israel,
and the men of Judah
are his pleasant planting,
and he looked for justice (S2BK7D / Kpiaic),
but behold, bloodshed,
for righteousness (IpIS I SiKaioauvn),
but behold, an outcry'" (ESV)
4) Isa 9 7 [9 6 w m ]
"Of the increase of his government and of peace there will be no end, on the throne of David and over his
kingdom, to establish it and to uphold it with justice and with righteousness (7Ip"13»Dl CSB27Q33 / ev
SiKaioouvn, Kai ev Kpipaxi) from this time forth and forevermore" (ESV)
5) Isa 60 17
"Instead of bronze I will bnng gold,
and instead of iron I will bnng silver,
instead of wood, bronze,
instead of stones, iron
I will make your overseers peace
and your taskmasters righteousness (jlpIS I EV SiKaioouvn)
1ft
Violence shall no more be heard m your land.

devastation or destruction withm your bordeis,
you shall call your walls Salvation,
and your gates Praise" (ESV)
See below, "The righteousness of God "

Appendix - 492
6) Jer 33 15jy
"Behold, the days are coming, declares the LORD, when I will raise up for David a righteous Branch ( 71035
7Ip"135 / --), and he shall reign as king and deal wisely, and shall execute justice and righteousness ( 712757
np"J351 CSB27Q / - ) m the land" (ESV)
7) Amos 5 7
6
"Seek the LORD and live,
lest he break out like fire in the house of Joseph,
and it devour, with none to quench it for Bethel,
O you who tuin (ustice (BBK7D Kpipa) to woimwood
and cast down righteousness (IpIS I SiKaioouvn) to the earth'" (ESV) 40
LXX Kupioc o Ttoicov etc ui|/oc Kpipa Kai SiKaioauvr|v etc yfjv eOnKev
8) Amos 5 24
"But let justice (DE27E / Kpipa) roll down like waters,
and righteousness (IpIS / SiKaioouvn,) like an everflowmg stream" (ESV)
9) Amos 6 12
"Do horses run on rocks7
Does one plow thei e with oxen9
But you have turned justice (CDE27I2 / Kpipa) into poison
and the fruit of righteousness (IpIS **1B / Kaprcov Sucaioouvnc,)
into wormwood" (ESV)
IB2Divmejustice(10)
1) Job 37 23
71357* N*? T i p - I S - a m BB2?!21 7D_K*32? 17!3K3*rr*6 *"127
- 1 " T T
Kat oux euptoKopev aAAov opoiov xfj toxui auxou, o xa Strata Kpivcov OUK oiei £7taK0U£iv auxov,
NASB "The Almighty—we cannot find Him, He is exalted in power and He will not do violence to justice
and abundant righteousness'
ESV "The Almighty—we cannot find him, he is great in power, )ustice and abundant righteousness he
will not violate "
NIV "The Almighty is beyond our reach and exalted in power, m his justice and gieat righteousness, he
does not oppress "
2)Ps33 5 [32 5IXX]

4
"For the word of the LORD is upright (127* / eu0n,c,),
and all his work is done in faithfulness (7I31I2N33 / ev 7tiaxEi)
5
He loves righteousness and justice
(CDE27D1 7tp~"3* 337IK / ayarca etaripoauvryv Kai Kpiaiv),
the earth is full of the steadfast love (1*371 / sXsoq) of the LORD" (ESV)
3) Isa 1 27
27
"Zion shall be redeemed by justice (*DE270r3 / pexa Kptpaxoc),
39
Jer 33 [=40:xx] stops at v 13m the LXX, there is no Greek text corresponding to the Hebrew text found at Jer 33 15
m the MT
40
It is unclear who "you" is It could be God (LXX, NIV) or Israel (ESV, NASB) The latter interpretation is supported
by the parallel in Amos 6 12
Appendix - 493
and those in her who repent, by righteousness (7lp"13*33 / pexd elen,poouvr|c)41

28
But rebels and sinners shall be bioken together,
and those who forsake the LORD shall be consumed" (ESV)
4) Isa 5 16
AC
"Man is humbled, and each one is brought low,

and the eyes of the haughty are bi ought low
16
But the LORD of hosts is exalted injustice (tDE2?033 / ev Kpipaxi),
and the Holy God shows himself holy m righteousness
(7!p"13>33 2Hp3 2>l~Ipn 7X7!' o Oeoc; o dyioc SoâoOnaexai ev Sucaioauvn)"
(ESV)
5) Isa 10 22
"For though your people Israel be as the sand of the sea, only a lemnant of them will return Destruction is
decreed, overflowing with righteousness" (ESV)
(7!p"13* P]"D127 ]*l*in ]1*7"3 / A,oyov auvxe>„d>v Kai auvxepvcov EV SiKaioouvn,)
6) Isa 28 17
"And I will make justice (tDB27Q / Kpiaic) the line,
and righteousness (7Ip"135 / n, Etampoauvri pou) the plumb line,
and hail will sweep away the refuge of lies,
and waters will overwhelm the shelter" (ESV)
7) Isa 33 5
"O LORD, be gracious to us. we wait for you
Be our arm every morning,
our salvation (13n5?127* I r\ acoxr]pia f]pcov) m the time of trouble
5
The LORD IS exalted, for he dwells on high,
he will fill Zion with justice and righteousness
(7Ip"1351 CDB27D / Kpiaecoc Kai Sucaioauvric),
and he will be the stability of your times,
abundance of salvation, wisdom, and knowledge,
the fear of the LORD is Zion's tieasure" (ESV)
8) Isa 45 8
"Shower, O heavens, from above,
and let the clouds ram down nghteousness (pIS I SiKaioauvnv),
let the earth open, that salvation and righteousness
(7Tp"1351 S?27* / eA,eoc Kai SiKaioauvnv) may bear fruit;
let the earth cause them both to sprout,
I the LORD have created it" (ESV)
9) Isa 54 14
"In righteousness (7Ip"13J"3 / EV Sucaioauvri) you shall be established,
you shall be far from oppression (p275?Q / ajio dSucou), for you shall not fear,
and from terror, for it shall not come near you" (ESV)
41
Context speaks of redemption through God's purifying judgment "I will turn my hand against you and smelt away
your dross as with lye and remove all your alloy" (v 25), and as a result "you shall be called the city of righteousness"
(v26)
Appendix - 494
10) Dan 9 7
"To you. O Lord, belongs righteousness (7!p"ll*7! *3~!!$ **p / LXX & Th ooi, KUptE, f\ SiKaioouvn), but to
us open shame, as at this day, to the men of Judah, to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and to all Israel, those
who are near and those who are far away, m all the lands to which you have driven them, because of the
treachery that they have committed against you" (ESV)
C. The righteousness of God ("my. his, youi nghteousness") (34)
1) Deut 33:21
20
"Blessed be he who enlarges Gad! Gad crouches like a lion, he tears off arm and scalp. i] He chose the
best of the land for himself, for there a commander's portion was reserved, and he came with the heads of
the people, with Israel he executed the justice of the LORD (712757 71171* np"13" / SiKaioauvrrv Kupioc,
£n:oir]aev), and his judgments (1"DE27Q / Kpiaiv auxou) for Israel" (ESV).
2) Judges 5 11
"To the sound of musicians at the watering places, there they repeat the righteous triumphs of the LORD
(7117!" nip-13*), the righteous triumphs of his villagers (4213T*1B npiS) in Israel" (ESV). See LXX-A and
LXX-B.
3) 1 Sam 12 7
"And Samuel said to the people, 'The LORD is witness, who appointed Moses and Aaron and brought your
fathers up out of the land of Egypt. 7 Now therefore stand still that I may plead with you before the LORD
concerning all the righteous deeds of the LORD that he performed (7!2>5?~"127K 7117!" nip"135-*?"? / xpv
jtaoav Sucaioauvnv Kupiou, a e7toinoev) for you and for your fathers. 8 When Jacob went into Egypt, and
the Egyptians oppressed them, then your fathers cried out to the LORD and the LORD sent Moses and Aaron,
who brought your fathers out of Egypt and made them dwell m this place'" (ESV) 41
4)Ps5-8[5:9 M T ' r x x ]
"Lead me, O LORD, in your righteousness (~T\p1SZ *37!3 ,' 68nyr|a6v pe ev xfj Sucaioauvri oou) because
of my enemies, make your way straight before me (*^D~1"1 '•JB**' "12717! / KaxeuOuvov Evtimiov pou xijv 6S6v
oou)" (ESV)
5) Ps 22-31 [22:32MT/21 32IXX]

30
"Posterity shall serve him; it shall be told of the Lord to the coming generation;31 they shall come and
proclaim his righteousness (lDplU / xijv Sucaioouvrrv auxou) to a people yet unborn, that he has done it
(71275? *D / oxi ETtoincEV 6 Kupioc)" (ESV).
6)Ps 311 [31.2MI/30:2LKX]

"In you, O LORD, do 1 take refuge; let me never be put to shame; in your righteousness deliver me!
(*3£D7B *"[np"13*"3 / ev xfj SiKaioouvri oou puaai pe Kai echelon pe)" (ESV).
7-8) Ps 36:6, 10 [36.7, 1 lMT/35.7, 11LXX]

"Youi steadfast love (""pOTJ / xo eleoq oou), O LORD, extends to the heavens,
your faithfulness (""jrijlOK / ij d/.f|0etd oou) to the clouds
4
" See "Difficult cases "
43
What arc "the righteous deeds of the LORD that he performed"? His mighty work of delivering his people from
slavery in Egypt (v 8) And it didn't happen just once After God brought them into the land, they forgot the LORD,
and he sold them into the hand of the Moabites But when they cried out to the LORD and confessed then sin, he sent
them judges to deliver them once morefiomtheir oppressors (vv 9-11) In both the exodus and the military victories
provided through the judges, God's act of dehvenng his people occurred through acts of judgment on their oppressors
Hence these divine deliverances are termed "the righteous deeds of the LORD "
Appendix - 495
6
Your righteousness C*\T\p1S I r\ 8iKaioauvr| aou) is like the mountains of God,
your judgments (*"|CDBK7D / xa Kpipaxa oou) are like the great deep,
man and beast you save O LORD
10
Oh, continue your steadfast love ( ""["IDT! / xo tXzoq aou) to those who know you,
and your righteousness (*"|np*13* / xnv Sucaioauvnv aou) to the upright of heart'"
(ESV)
9)Ps40 10 [40 ll MT /39 11LXX]

"I have proclaimed glad tidings of righteousness (pIS "n"127*3 ' eunyye?aaapr|v SiKaioouvnv) m the great
congregation, behold, 1 will not restrain my lips, O LORD, you know "' I have not hidden your
righteousness (I^DpIS I xr\v Siraiocuvriv oou) within my heart, I have spoken of your faithfulness
(""TIJIEX ' xr|v aA,nOeiav oou) and your salvation ("?|715?127n / xo ocoxnpiov oou) I have not concealed youi
lovingkindness ("]*107! / xo ?Xzoq oou) and your truth C"]nON xnv aA,n0siav oou) from the great
congregation" (NASB)
10)Ps51 14 [51 16MT/50 16LXX]

"Deliver me from bloodgmltmess, O God, O God of my salvation (*n5?127n "7I7N / o Oeoc xfjc ocoxipiac
pou), and my tongue will sing aloud of your righteousness (y\r\P1S I xnv SiKaioouvr|V aou)" (ESV)
l l ) P s 6 9 27[69 28M1/68 28LXX]

"Add to them punishment upon punishment, may they have no acquittal from you" (ESV), lit " and
may they not come mto your righteousness ("*np"!3i33 1K33* /Kl / Kai pn, siaeXOexcoaav ev SiKaioouvn,
oou)" (NASB)
12) Ps 71 2[70 2LXX]

"In you, O LORD, do I take refuge, let me never be put to shame' In your righteousness deliver me and
rescue me (*3*D7'Bm *37,35ri "^Tlpl'Sn / ev xfj SiKaioouvn, oou puaai pe Kai etelou pe), incline your ear to
me, and save me'" (ESV)
13-14) Ps 71 15, 16 [70 15, 16LXX]

12
"O God, be not far from me,
0 m> God, make haste to help me'
May my accusers be put to shame and consumed,
with scorn and disgrace may they be covered
who seek my hurt
But I will hope continually
and will praise you yet more and more
My mouth will tell of your righteous acts (f^TipIS I xnv 5iKaioouvr|v aou),
of your deeds of salvation C"]ri5?127n / xnv acoxn,piav oou) all the day,
for their number is past my knowledge
16
With the mighty deeds of the Lord GOD I will come,
1 will remind them of your righteousness ("^7lp"13J / xfjc Sucaioauvric aou),
yours alone" (ESV)
15-16) Ps 71 19, 24 [70 19, 24LXX]

K
"Your righteousness CjTIpl** I --). O God,
reaches the high heavens
You who have done great things,
O God, who is like you7
Cp Psl43 1, 11, Dan 9 16

23
My hps will shout for joy,
when I sing praises to you,
my soul also, which you have redeemed.
And my tongue will talk of your righteous help ("]7lp"13* / xf)v SiKaioouvnv aou)
all the day long,
for they have been put to shame and disappointed
who sought to do me hurt" (ESV).
17)Ps72 1 [71:1LXX]
"Give the king youi justice ("]***>E2?*3 / xo Kpipa oou), O God,
and your righteousness C*]rip"13"l / xf|V Sucaioauvnv aou) to the royal son'
2
May he judge your people with nghteousness (p"l3**3 / ev Sucaioauvri),
and your poor with justice ("DB2T30 / ev Kpioei)!
Let the mountains bear prosperity (DI*"3!"?' eipf|vpv) for the people,
and the hills, in righteousness (7lp"135D / EV SiKatoouvp)'
and crush the oppressor'" (ESV)
18)Ps88 12[88.13MT/87 13LXX]
"Is your steadfast love declared in the giave,
or vour faithfulness in Abaddon7
J
12
Are your wonders known in the darkness,
or your righteousness (*?|np13* / fj SiKaioouvri aou)
in the land of forgetfulncss0" (ESV)
19) Ps 89.16 [89 !7MT/88 17LXX]
"Righteousness and pistice ("DB2?*31 pIS I SiKaioouvn, Kai Kpipa)
are the foundation of your throne,
steadfast love and faithfulness (71*2X1 "107! / sXeoq Kai aXt)Qsia) go before you.
Blessed are the people who know the festal shout,
who walk, O LORD, m the light of your face,
who exult in youi name all the day
and myour righteousness are exalted
(1*311* *"j7lp~!3""31 ' Kai EV xfj SiKaioouvn oou u\|/co0f)oovxai)" (ESV).
20)Ps98 2 [97 2LXX]

"Oh sing to the Loid a new song,
for he has done marvelous things!
His right hand and his holy arm
have worked salvation for him PP~"*i5?*2717[ 71275? / sacooev auxco).
2
The LORD has made known his salvation (1715712"* / xo ocoxfjpiov auxou);
he has revealed his righteousness
(17lp~!35 7!73 / ajTEKdXu\|/ev xfjv SiKaioouvrrv auxou) in the sight of the nations.
He has remembered his steadfast love and faithfulness
(17I310&O 1107!' TOO eAiouc auxou ... Kai xfjc dA,n.0eiac auxou)
to the house of Israel
All the ends of the earth have seen the salvation of our God
(13*7!*?X 7157127" TIN / xo ocoxf|piov xou Oeou ljpcov)" (ESV).
Appendix - 497
21) Ps 103:17 [102:17LXX]

17
"But the steadfast love ("107! / xo eêog) of the LORD is
from everlasting to everlasting on those who fear him,
and his righteousness (17lP"!3J / f) SiKaioouvn auxou) to children's children,
18
to those who keep his covenant
and remember to do his commandments" (ESV).
22) Ps 111:3 [110:3LXX]
"Great are the works of the LORD,
studied by all who delight in them.
Full of splendor and majesty is his work,
and his righteousness endures forever" (ESV)
("15771 7n*35? 17ip"13** / Kai f) SiKaioouvri auxou pEvsi eic xov aicova xou aicovoc)
23) Ps 119:40 [118:401XX]

"Behold, I long for your precepts; in your righteousness give mc life! (,3!!7! "?J7!p*135"il / ev xfj Sucaioauvri
oou qr)oov ps)" (ESV).
24) Ps 119:142 [118:142LXX]

"Your righteousness is righteous forever ( D715?7 pIS *"inp""!3" / f) SiKaioouvn oou SiKaioauvn, sic xov
aicova). and your law is true" (ESV).
25-26) Ps 143:1, 11 [142:1, 11LXX]

"Hear my prayer, O Lord;
In your faithfulness answer me, in your righteousness*.
C""7lp*"i3""3 "335? "^3*3X33 / EV xfj d?ir|0eia oou, ercdKOUcov pou ev xfj SiKaioouvn oou)
for no one living is righteous before you.
For your name's sake, O LORD, preserve my life!

In your righteousness ("*jrip"135*3 / ev xfj Sucaioouvn, aou) bring my soul out of
trouble!
And in your steadfast love you will cut off my enemies,
and you will destroy all the adversaries of my soul,
for I am your servant" (ESV).45
27) Ps 145:7 [144:7LXX]

"They shall speak of the might of your awesome deeds,
and I will declare your greatness.
They shall pour forth the fame of your abundant goodness
and shall sing aloud of your righteousness ("^rip*"!!* / xfj Sucaioauvri oou)" (ESV).
28) Isa 46:13

12
"Listen to me, you stubborn of heart,
you who are far from righteousness:
(7!p"13J*346 D*pl7!*17! / oi paKpdv mro xfjc SiKaioauvqc)
I bring near my righteousness ("7lp"135 / xfjv Sucaioouvrrv pou); it is not far off,
and my salvation will not delay;
I will put salvation in Zion,
45
Cp. Ps 51:14; Dan 9:16.
46
See "Ethical righteousness."
Appendix - 4 9 8
for Israel my glor>" (ESV)
29-30) Isa 51 6,8

4
"Give attention to me, my people
and give ear to me, my nation,
for a law will go out from me,
and 1 will set my justice (*"DE27*3 / n Kpiaic pou) for a light to the peoples
5
My righteousness ("p~!U / n SiKaioauvn, pou) diaws near,
my salvation (*5?27* / xo ocoxijpiov pou) has gone out,
and mv aims will mdge the peoples (IBB*"?" D"*35? *5"~1T1 / no LXX),
the coastlands hope for me,
and for my arm they w ait (|1/7I** *5?~1T~7X1 / Kai tic xov (3paxiova pou EJIJIIOUOIV)
6
Lift up your eyes to the heavens,
and look at the earth beneath,
for the heavens vanish like smoke,
the earth will wear out like a garment,
and they who dwell in it will die m like manner,
but my salvation (*n*?127* / xo acoxtptov pou) will be forever,
and my righteousness (TlpIS i r\ SiKaioouvri pou) will nevei be dismayed
7
Listen to me, you who know righteousness (pIS I Kpiaic)
the people in whose heart is my law,
fear not the reproach of man,
nor be dismayed at their revilmgs
8
Foi the moth will eat them up like a garment,
and the worm will eat them like wool,
but my righteousness QT\p1S I n SiKaioauvn. pou) will be forever,
and my salvation (*715?127* / xo acoxipiov pou) to all generations" (ESV)
31) Isa 56 1
"Thus says the LORD,
Preseive justice and do righteousness
(7!p"11547 127571 DE27Q 11*327 / OuAaooeoOe Kpiaiv, TiovnaaxE SiKaioouvn,v),
For My salvation ("7157127* / xo ocoxn,piov pou) is about to come
And My righteousness (**"lp""3* / xo SAEOC pou) to be revealed'" (NASB)
32) Isa 59 16
"He saw that there was no man,
and wondered that there was no one to intercede,
then his own arm brought him salv ation,
and his righteousness (inp"13* / eAimuoouvri) upheld him" (ESV)
33) Dan 9 16
"O Lord, according to all your righteous acts (""|np""I3"~TOO / Th evrcaon,EAen,poouvp oou || LXX Kara
xr|v SiKaioouvnv aou) let your anger and your wrath turn away from your city Jerusalem, your holy hill,
because for our sms, and for the iniquities of our fathers, Jerusalem and your people have become a byword
among all who are around us" (ESV) 48
34) Micah 6 5
4
"1 brought you up out of Egypt
4
See "Ethical righteousness '
4S
Cp Ps51 14, 143 1, 11
Appendix -
and redeemed you from the land of slavery.

I sent Moses to lead you
also Aaron and Miriam.
5
My people, remember
what Balak king of Moab counseled
and what Balaam son of Beor answered.
Remember your journey from Shittim to Gilgal,
that you may know the righteous acts of the LORD" (NIV).
(7!17P nip""}l* / f| SiKaioouvri xou Kupiou)
LP. Vindication (4)
1) Isa 54:17
"No weapon that is fashioned against you shall succeed,
and you shall confute every tongue that rises against you in judgment.
This is the heritage of the servants of the LORD
and their vindication from me ("FIX*? D71p135 / upstc eaeoOe poi Sucaioi),
declares the LORD" (ESV).49
2)Jer51:10[28:10 LXX ]
"Suddenly Babylon has fallen and been broken;
wail for her!
Take balm for her pain;
perhaps she may be healed.
We would have healed Babylon,
but she was not healed.
Forsake her, and let us go each to his own country,
for her judgment has reached up to heaven
and has been lifted up even to the skies.
The LORD has brought about our vindication,i0
(13*71p"!35"711S! 7!*7I" K"3"17! / EîjvEyKEv Kupioc xo Kpipa auxou)
come, let us declare in Zion
the work of the LORD our God" (ESV).
3) Joel 2:23
"Be glad, O children of Zion,
and rejoice in the LORD your God,
for he has given the early rain for your vindication (7!p11"7 / eic 8iKaioouvr|v);
he has poured down for you abundant rain,
the early and the latter rain, as before" (ESV).
4) Micah 7:9
"I will bear the indignation of the LORD
because I have sinned against him,
until he pleads my cause
(*"3*1 3**1* "127K 15? / ECOC xou Siraicboai auxov xfjv Sucnv pou)
and executes judgment for me.
('PB27D 1275?! / Kai 7totijasi xo Kpipa pou)
4
This versed could go under "Righteousness before God." But note the promise, "you shall confute every tongue that
rises against you in judgment," which suggests vindication. So although this passage is very close to "righteousness
before God," the vindicatory aspect is strong enough to warrant putting it under this sub-category.
50
Literally, "the LORD has brought about our vindications" (plural).
Appendix - 500
He will bring me out to the light,

I shall look upon his vindication" (ESV) M
(17!p13"D 1X1K / o\|/opai xnv SiKaioauvnv auxou)
I E Clothed with righteousness (2)
1) Isa 59 17
"He put on righteousness (7!p13* / SiKaioauvn.) as a breastplate,
and a helmet of salvation on his head
he put on garments of vengeance for clothing,
and wtapped himself in zeal as a cloak" (ESV)
2) Isa 61 10
1
"I will giearly rejoice m the LORD,
my soul shall exult m my God,
for he has clothed me with the garments of salvation,
("?27*"*13"3 ipaxiov acoxripiou)
he has covered me with the robe of righteousness
(7!|"pi3" /"5?*3 / %ixcova sucppoauvric),
as a bridegroom decks himself like a priest with a beautiful headdress,
and as a bride adorns herself with her jewels
For as the earth brings forth its sprouts,
and as a gaiden causes what is sown in it to sprout up
so the Lord GOD will cause righteousness ( 52 np13* / SiKaioouvn,) and praise
to sprout up befoie all the nations" (ESV)
I F Right(s)(3)
1)2 Sam 19 28 [19 29 MI ]

Mcphiboshcth speaking to David "For all my father's house were but men doomed to death before my lord
the king, but you set your servant among those who eat at youi table What further right have I, then
(1p13J 115? *7~2?*~n*3 / xt ecxiv poi en Sucaicopa), to cry to the king"'" (ESV)
2) Neh 2 20
Nehemiah addressing Sanballat, et al "The God of heaven will make us prosper, and we his servants will
arise and build but you have no portion or right or claim (|11*3T1 7!p13*l p77!~|*K D337 / upiv OUK eoxiv
pepic Kai SiKaioauvn, Kai pvr)poauvov) m Jerusalem" (ESV)
3) Isa 5 23
"Woe to those who are heroes in dnnkmg wine
And valiant men in mixing stiong drink,
23 * = > * - >
Who justify the wicked for a bribe,
And take away the rights of the ones who are m the right'" (NASB)
(130*3 11*0* D*p*13* np13" / xo SIKOIOV XOU SiKaiou aipovxec)"
' Technically this should go under "the righteousness of God" (note the suffix 'his vindication")
See "Difficult cases "
Appendix- 501
II. ETHICAL RIGHTEOUSNESS
ILA. General (43)
1-3) Deut 9:4-6

"Do not say in your heart, after the LORD your God has thrust them out before you, 'It is because of my
righteousness (*""ip13**3 / Sid xdc SiKaioouvac pou) that the LORD has brought mc in to possess this land,'
whereas it is because of the wickedness (n"?27133 / Sid xfjv doEpsiav) of these nations that the LORD is
driving them out before you. 3 Not because of your righteousness C*]np13**3 / xfjv Sucaioauvnv aou) or the
uprightness of your heart C"]"3*37 127*33 / Sid xijv ocioxnxa xfjc KapSiaq oou) are you going in to possess
their land, but because of the wickedness (n5?271"3 / Std xfjv doe[5eiav) of these nations the LORD your God
is driving them out from before you, and that he may confirm the word that the LORD swore to your fathers,
to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob. 6 Know, therefore, that the LORD your God is not giving you this good
land to possess because of your righteousness (""[ripll'D / Std xdc SiKaioouvac oou), for you are a
stubborn (""|15?~7!27p / OK>tppoxpdxn,X.oc) people" (ESV).
4)1 Sam26:23 53
"Then Saul said, T have sinned. Return, my son David, for I will no more do you harm, because my life
was precious in your eyes this day. Behold, I have acted foolishly, and have made a great mistake." " And
David answered and said, 'Here is the spear, O king! Let one of the young men come over and take it. 23
The LORD rewards every man for his righteousness (171p13" / xdc SiKaioouvac auxou) and his faithfulness
(1T1*PS / xijv niaxiv auxou), for the LORD gave you into my hand today, and I would not put out my hand
against the LORD'S anointed'" (ESV).
5-6) 2 Sam 22:21, 25

"The LORD dealt with me according to my righteousness (*7!p13*3* / Kaxd xfjv SiKaioauvnv pou);
according to the cleanness of my hands ("H" 13333 / Kaxd xf|v KaOapioxnxa xcov xeipcbv pou) he rewarded
me. 22 For I have kept the ways of the LORD and have not wickedly departed from my God. 2 j For all his
rules were before me, and from his statutes I did not turn aside. I was blameless (D**37) / apcopoc) before
him, and I kept myself from guilt (*?15?*3 / &7t6 xfjc dvopiac pou). 25 And the LORD has rewarded me
according to my righteousness (**"lp""!3*3? / Kaxd xt)v 8iKaioauvr|v pou), according to my cleanness (*13333 /
Kaxd xf|v KaOapioxnxa xcov xetpcov pou) in his sight" (ESV).
7) 1 Kings 3:6
"And Solomon said, 'You have shown great and steadfast love to your servant David my father, because he
walked before you in faithfulness, in righteousness, and in uprightness of heart ( 71127*331 7!p135331 HQXD
D337 / sv agnosia Kai sv SiKaioauvn, Kai ev euOuxnxi KapSiac) toward you. And you have kept for him this
great and steadfast love and have given him a son to sit on his throne this day'" (ESV).
8) Job 27:6
Job speaking: "Far be it from me to say that you are right; till 1 die I will not put away my integrity (*7lD""i /
xf|v dKaiciav) from me. 6 1 hold fast my righteousness (*71p12""". / SiKaioouvn) and will not let it go; my
heart does not reproach me for any of my days" (ESV).
9) Job 35:8
Elihu: "If you have sinned, what do you accomplish against him? And if your transgressions are multiplied,
what do you do to him? 7 If you are righteous (71p1"i54-DK / e7iei Se ouv Sucatoc et), what do you give to
The parallel in Psalm 18:20-24 uses the masculine (pi?).

54
Verb (Qal).
Appendix - 502
him7 Or what does he receive from >our hand? s Your wickedness (""]5?271 / n, aospsia oou) concerns a man
like youiself, and your righteousness (""jTlpIS / n, SiKaioouvn, aou) a son of man" (ESV)
10) Ps 11 7[10 7LXX]

4
"The LORD is m his holy temple
the LORD'S throne is in heaven,
his eyes see, his eyelids test, the children of man
5
The LORD tests the righteous,
but his soul hates the wicked and the one who loves violence
6
Let him lam coals on the wicked,
fire and sulfur and a scorching wind shall be the portion of then cup
7
For the LORD is righteous (Till* p"1"i_","3 / oxi SiKaioc Kupioc),
he loves righteous deeds (331K mp~J*J / SiKaioouvac r|ya7tr|a£v),
the upright (12?* / EuOuxnra) shall behold his face" (ESV) ^
11-12) Prov 8 18 20 Wisdom speaking

"Riches and honor are with me,
endunng wealth and righteousness (IpIS i SiKaioouvn,)
My fruit is better than gold, even fine gold,
and my yield than choice sih er
20
I walk m the way of righteousness (7fp""!2*~niJO / sv oSotc Sucaioouvijc),

m the paths of justice ("DB27*3 7)133*713 / xpi(3cov Sucaicopaxoc),
21
granting an inheritance to those who love me,
and filling then treasuries" (ESV)
13) Prov 10 2
"Treasures gained by wickedness do not profit,
but righteousness (IpIS I SiKaioouvn,) delivers from death
The LORD does not let the righteous go hungry,
but he thwarts the craving of the wicked" (ESV)
14-16) Prov 11 4-6
"Riches do not profit in the day of wrath,
but righteousness (7!p13* / SiKaioouvri) delivers from death
The righteousness of the blameless (D*D71 7lp13* / SiKaioouvri apcopouc)
keeps his way straight,
but the wicked falls by his own wickedness
The righteousness of the upright (D*127* npi3" / Sucaioouvr) avSpcbv opOcov)
delivers them,
but the treacherous are taken captive by their lust" (ESV)
17-18) Prov 11 18, 19

"The wicked man earns deceptive wages,
but he who sows righteousness (71p13" 571T / oTteppa SiKaicov) reaps a sure reward
The truly righteous man (7!p1"3""p / uioc SiKaioc) attains life,
but he who pursues evil goes to his death" (NIV)
19) Prov 12 28
"In the path of righteousness is life (D**7! 7Ip135"7!1i*"3 / EV oSoic Sucaioauvric t/on),
15
Cp Ps 17 15 "As for me, I shall behold your face in righteousness (pIS) "
and in its pathway there is no death" (ESV)
20) Prov 13 6
"Righteousness (7Ij"H3* / SiKaioown) guards him whose way is blameless,
but sm overthrows the wicked" (ESV)
21) Prov 14 34
"Righteousness (1p135' SiKaioouvn,) exalts a nation,
but sm is a leproach to any people" (FSV)
22) Prov 15 9
"The way of the wicked is an abomination to the LORD,
but he loves him who pursues righteousness
(1p13* *"]110 ' SicoKOVxac StKaiocuvtrv)" (ESV)
23) Piov 16 8
"Better is a little with righteousness (1p13*"3 / —)
than great revenues with injustice (DB270 &OD / --)" (ESV)
24) Prov 16 31
"A gray head is a crown of glory,
it is found m the way of righteousness (1p13* ""[1133 / ev oSoic SiKaioauvnc)"
(NASB)
25) Prov 21 21
"Whoever pursues righteousness and kindness
(10711 ~p13» *"|11 / o6oc SiKaioauvnc Kai eXenpoauvr|c)
will find life nghteousness (1p13*' --) and honor" (ESV)
(LXX seems to have read "]11 instead of *"|11) 56
26 28) Isa 32 16 17 (2x)

"Then justice ("DES/O Kpipa) will dwell m the wilderness,
and righteousness (IpIS I SiKaioouvn,) abide m the fruitful field
And the effect of righteousness (1p13"7! 127570 / xa tpya xfjc Sucaioouvric)
will be peace
and the result of righteousness (1p13"7! 7113157 / Kpaxnoei r| SiKaioauvn,),
quietness and trust forever" (ESV)
29) Isa 33 15
"The sinners (D'StDTJ / oi avopoi) m Zion aie afraid,
trembling has seized the godless (D*B37! / oi aaefSeTc)
'Who among us can dwell with the consuming fire7
Who among us can dwell with everlasting burnings 7 '
He who walks righteously (mp"13* ""pi / jtopeuopevoc EV SiKaioouvn,)
and speaks uprightly (DÎ^'O 1331 / XaX&v suOetav oSov),
who despises the gam of oppressions,
who shakes his hands lest they hold a bribe,
who stops his ears from hearing of bloodshed
and shuts his eyes from looking on evil,
Second occurrence of 1p1"£ is listed under "Righteousness before God "

Appendix - 504
he will dwell on the heights;

his place of defense will be the fortresses of rocks;
his bread will be given him; his water wdll be sure" (ESV).
30) Isa 46:12

12
"Listen to me, you stubborn of heart,
you who are far from righteousness:
(1p13"0 D ' p i n i l / oi paKpdv djto xfjc Sucaioauvric)
I bring near my righteousness ("""Ip13" / xijv SiKaioouvnv pou); it is not far off,
and my salvation will not delay;
1 will put salvation in Zion,
for Israel my glory" (ESV).
31) Isa 57:12
"I will declare your righteousness and your deeds
(""I'^P'TIXI '"]rip13* / xfjv SiKaioauvnv pou Kai xd Kara aou),
but they will not profit you" (ESV).
32) Isa 64:6 [64:5MT''LXX]

"We have all become like one who is unclean, and all our righteous deeds (13**"lp1*3~^>*D / ^doo. f|
SiKaioouvn, f|pcbv) are like a polluted garment. We all fade like a leaf, and our iniquities, like the wind, take
us away" (ESV).
33-34) Ezek 14:14, 20

"Son of man, when a land sins against me by acting faithlessly, and I stretch out my hand against it and
break its supply of bread and send famine upon it, and cut off from it man and beast, even if these three
men, Noah, Daniel, and Job, were in it, they would deliver but their own lives by their righteousness
19
(D71P13533 / ev xfj Sucatoouvn auxcov), declares the Lord GOD." ... "Or if I send a pestilence into that land
20
and pour out my wrath upon it with blood, to cut off from it man and beast, even if Noah, Daniel, and Job
were in it. as I live, declares the Lord GOD, they would deliver neither son nor daughter. They would
deliver but their own lives by their righteousness (D71p1*»"3 / ev xfj Sucaioauvn, auxcov)" (ESV).
35-37) Ezek 18:20. 24, 26 (see below)
38-41) Ezek 33:12, 13 (2x), 18 (see below)
42) Dan 9:18

"O my God, incline your ear and hear. Open your eyes and see our desolations, and the city that is called by
your name. For we do not present our pleas before you because of our righteousness (13*"jp13"~7"? JO /
LXX & Th: OUK £7ti xaic 8ucaioauvaic fjpcov), but because of your great mercy" (ESV).
43) Hos 10:12
"Sow for yourselves righteousness (1p13* / SiKaioauvn,); reap steadfast love; break up your fallow ground,
for it is the time to seek the LORD, that he may come and rain righteousness (pIS I SiKaioauvn.) upon
you" (ESV).
II.B. With verbs of doing (15)
1) Gen 18:19
"For I have chosen him, that he may command his children and his household after him to keep the way of
the LORD by doing righteousness and justice (*DE*"7pi 1p13" TI127577 / 7tot£tv SiKaioouvrp' Kai Kpioiv), so
that the LORD may bring to Abraham what he has promised him" (ESV).
Appendix - 505
2)Psl06 3[105 3LXX]

"Blessed are they who observe justice, who do righteousness at all times'" (ESV) ( t*>E270 "1027 "127K
n57_7"3*3 np""J2* 1275? / paKaptoi oi cpuAcxaaovxec Kpioiv Kai JTOIOUVXEC oucaioouvnv svrcavxiKaipco)
3) Prov 21 3
"To do righteousness and justice (*DE2?01 1p13" 1275? / JIOIEIV SiKaia Kai a^qOEUEiv) is more acceptable to
the LORD than sacrifice ' (ESV)
4) Isa 56 T~
"Preserve justice and do righteousness
(1p13" 127171 *DE2>0 11027 / cpulaoosoOe Kpiaiv 7toinoax£ 8tKaioouvr|v),
Foi My salvation (*715?127* / xo acoxqptov pou) is about to come
And My nghteousness (*7lp13" / xo eA,eoc pou) to be revealed" (NASB)
5) Isa 58 2
"Cry aloud, do not hold back, lift up your voice like a trumpet, declare to my people their transgression, to
the house of Jacob their sms 2 Yet they seek me daily and delight to know my ways, as if they were a
nation that did righteousness (1275? 7Ip12* / Sucaioauvnv 7ie7iomKcoc) and did not foisake the judgment
("0B27O / Kpiotc) of their God, the> ask of me righteous judgments (p13*~*tOB"*7D / Kpiaiv Sucaiav), they
delight to draw near to God" (ESV)
6) Ezek 3 20
"Son of man, I have made you a watchman tor the house of Israel Whenever you hear a word from my
mouth, vou shall give them warning from me 18 If I say to the wicked (57271 / o avopoc), You shall surely
die,' and vou give him no warning, nor speak to warn the wicked from his wicked way, in order to save his
life, that wicked person shall die for his iniquity, but his blood I will require at your hand 19 But if you
warn the wicked, and he does not turn from his wickedness, or from his wicked way he shall die for his
iniquity, but you will have delivered youi soul 20 Again, if a righteous peison (p"""2* / SiKaioc) turns from
his righteousness (lp13"0 / a7to xciov Sucaioauvcov auxou) and commits injustice (^15? 127571 / Kai 7toiqor|
jiapa7ixcopa) and I lay a stumbling block before him, he shall die Because you hav e not vv anted him he
shall die for his sm, and his righteous deeds that he has done (1275? 127K !J")p12" / at SiKaioouvai auxou ac
ejiomarv) shall not be remembered, but his blood I will require at your hand "' But if you warn the
righteous person (*£p"1 / o SiKaioc) not to sm, and he docs not sm, he shall suicly live, because he took
warning and you will have delivered your soul" (ESV)
7) Ezek 18 5
"If a man is righteous (p*13* / SiKaioc) and does what is just and right (1p13"l OB270 1275? / o Jtoicov
Kpipa Kai SiKaioouvnv) — if he does not eat upon the mountains or lift up his eyes to the idols of the
house oi Israel, does not defile his neighbor's wife or approach a woman in her time of menstrual impurity,
does not oppiess anyone, but restores to the debtor his pledge, commits no robbery, gives his bread to the
hungry and covers the naked with a garment, does not lend at mteiest or take any profit, withholds his
hand from injustice, executes true justice between man and man, walks m my statutes, and keeps my rules
by acting faithfully— he is righteous (p',135 / SiKaioc), he shall surely live, declares the Lord GOD" (ESV)
8-12) Ezek 18 19 21,22,24,27

"Yet you say, 'Why should not the son suffer for the iniquity of the father7' When the son has done what
is just and right (1275? 1p1351 CDB270 / SiKaioouvnv Kai sXeoq EJtoinofv), and has been careful to observe
all my statutes, he shall surely live The soul who sms shall die The son shall not suffer for the iniquity
Note context re Sabbath-keeping

Appendix - 506
of the father, nor the father suffer for the iniquity of the son The righteousness of the righteous ( 7lp135
p"1S7I / SiKaioouvri SiKaiou) shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon
himself
21
"But if a wicked person turns away from all his sms that he has committed and keeps all my statutes and
does what is ]ust and right (1p1"*l *">E2?0 1275? / 7ionjon, SiKaioouvnv Kai zXsoq). he shall surely live, he
22
shall not die None of the transgressions that he has committed shall be remembered against him, for the
righteousness that he has done (1275?~12?J" 17lp13""3 / EV xfj Sucaioauvri auxou, ij £7toinaev) he shall live
Have I any pleasure in the death of the wicked, declares the Lord GOD, and not rather that he should turn
from his way and live7 But when a nghteous person turns away from his righteousness ( p*1S 3312733
17lp13*0 / ev Se xcp d7tooxp£i|/ai SiKaiov EK xfjc SiKaioouvijc auxou) and does injustice and does the same
abominations that the wicked person does, shall he live? None of the righteous deeds that he has done
(1275? i2?K lTlpIl" 7*3 / 7taoai ai SiKaioouvai auxou, ac ETtoinaEv) shall be remembered; for the treachery
of which he is guilty and the sm he has committed, for them he shall die
25
"Yet you say. 'The way of the Lord is not just.' Heai now, O house of Isiael. Is my way not just 7 Is it not
your ways that are not just? When a nghteous person turns away from his righteousness ( p*12"~"312733
17lp1"»0 / ev xo) d7tooxpei|/ai xov SiKaiov eK xfjc Sucaioauvric auxou) and does injustice, he shall die for it,
27
for the injustice that he has done he shall die Again, when a wicked person turns away from the
wickedness he has committed and does what is just and right (1p13*l E3E270 2757*1 / Kai Jtonjap Kpipa Kai
8iKaioauvrrv), he shall save his life Because he considered and turned away from all the transgressions
that he had committed, he shall surely live; he shall not die" (ESV)
13-15) Ezek 33:14, 16, 19
12
"And you, son of man, say to your people, The righteousness of the righteous (p*13*7! 71p1*a /
SiKaioouvn, SiKaiou) shall not deliver him when he transgresses, and as for the wickedness of the wicked,
he shall not fall by it when he turns from his wickedness, and the righteous shall not be able to live by his
nghteousness when he sms Though I say to the righteous that he shall surely live, yet if he trusts in his
righteousness (17lp13»~75? / em xfj SiKaioauvn, auxou) and does injustice, none of his righteous deeds
(inp13*~T'"P / 7taaat ai SiKaioouvai auxou) shall be remembered, but in his injustice that he has done he
shall die Again, though I say to the wicked, 'You shall surely die,' yet if he turns from his sm and does
15
what is just and right (1p1351 L3E270 1275?* / Kai 7tonjor| Kpipa Kai SiKaioouvnv), if the wicked restores
the pledge, gives back what he has taken by robbery, and walks in the statutes of life, not doing injustice,
he shall surely live; he shall not die. None of the sms that he has committed shall be remembered against
him. He has done what is just and right (12757 1p1351 27B270 / Kpipa Kai Sucaioauvnv e7rom,a£v); he shall
surely live
17 18
"Yet your people say, 'The way of the Lord is not just,' when it is their own way that is not just. Wrhen
the righteous turns from his righteousness (lTlpllSO p*135~33127"3 / EV xcp &jtoaxpei|/ai SiKaiov hub xfjc
19
8iKaioouvn,c auxou) and does injustice, he shall die for it And when the wicked turns from his
wickedness
II and laws,
C Righteous does what
word is
(0)just and right (1p13"l "DE270 127571 / Kai 7tonjop Kpipa Kai 8iKaioouvnv), he
shall live by them" (ESV)
II.D. Gates, paths, cities, oaks, habitation of righteousness (0)
II.E. Righteousness as a status before God (14)
1) Gen 15.6
"And he believed the LORD, and he counted it to him as righteousness (IpIS 17 1227711 / Kai eXoyioOn,
auxcp Eic 8iKaioouvr|v)" (ESV)
Appendix - 507
2) Deut 6 25
24
"And the LORD commanded us to do all these statutes, to fear the LORD our God, for oui good always,
that he might preserve us alive, as we are this day 23 And it will be righteousness for us (137~1"17) 1p13**
/ Kai e>v£r|poouvq eoxai f|piv). if we are carefi.il to do all this commandment before the LORD our God, as he
has commanded us" (ESV)
3) Deut 24 13
10
"When you make your neighboi a loan of any sort, you shall not go into his house to collect his pledge
You shall stand outside, and the man to whom you make the loan shall bring the pledge out to you 1_ And
if he is a poor man, you shall not sleep m his pledge 13 You shall restore to him the pledge as the sun sets,
that he may sleep m his cloak and bless you And it shall be righteousness for you (1p13* 1*171 *"pi / Kai
eoxai aoi EXenpoauvn.) before the LORD youi God" (ESV)
4-5) 1 Kings 8 32 (|| 2 Chron 6.23)

u "If a man sms against his neighbor and is made to take an oath and comes and swears his oath before
32,
your altar m this house, " then hear in heaven and act and j udge (71*3327 / KptvsTc) your servants,
condemning the guilty (57271 57*27111 / avopijOfjvai dvopov) by bringing his conduct on his own head, and
vindicating the nghteous (p"H*S p"H3*7!7 / xou Sucaicbaai SiKaiov) by rewarding him according to his
righteousness (171p13*D / Kaxd xfjv SiKaioauvr|v auxou)" (ESV)
6) Job 33 26
Elihu " then man prays to God, and he accepts him (11351* / SsKxd auxcp Eoxai), he sees his face with a
shout of joy, and he restores to man his righteousness ("J"lp13* 2713JO D27*l / d7to8cba£i SE dv0p67toic
Sucaioauvnv)" (ESV)
7)Ps24 5 [23 5IXX]

3
"Who shall ascend the hill of the LORD 7
And who shall stand m his holy place7
4
He who has clean hands and a pure heart,
who does not lift up his soul to what is false
and does not sweai deceitfully
' He will receive blessing from the LORD
(111* TttsO 1"?~P J*??'1 / ouxoc W|p\|/exai euA,oyiav 7iapa Kupiou)
and righteousness from the God of his salvation
(15727* Tt 7J*0 1p13"l / Kai eA^ripoauvtrv 7tapa Oeou ocoxfjpoc; auxou)" (ESV) 58
8) Ps 106 31 [105 31LXX]

"Then Phinehas stood up and intervened, and the plague was stayed And that was counted to him as
righteousness (1p13*7 ""? 332771711 / Kai e/Loyia0n auxcp eiq SiKaioouvnv) from generation to generation
forever" (ESV)
9) Prov 21 21
"Whoever pursues nghteousness and kindness
(10711 1p13" ""|11 / 686c 8iKaioouvr|c Kai £X,£npoouvqc)
will find life, righteousness (Tipll" / - ) , and honor" (ESV)
(LXX seems to have read "[11 instead of ""ill). 59
58
The NIV has "He will receive blessingfromthe LORD and vindicationfromGod his Savior " So a case could be
made for categorizing this verse under "Vindication" above However, I believe itfitsbest here since there is no hint of
oppressors or accusers in context Rather, this is the LORD'S recognition and approval of those who are ethically
righteous
Appendix - 508
10) Isa 45:24

24
"Only in the LORD, it shall be said of me,
are righteousness and strength;
(T571 nip135 1DJ", *7 111*33 1$ I Xsycov AiKaioauvn, Kai Soqa 7tpog auxov fjc;ouaiv)
to him shall come and be ashamed
all who were incensed against him.
In the LORD all the offspring of Israel
shall be justified (IpIS* / SiKaicoGijaovxai) and shall glory" (ESV).
11) Isa 48:18

"Oh that you had paid attention to my commandments!
Then your peace would have been like a river,
and your righteousness ('"jTlpIS / rj SiKaioouvn, oou)
like the waves of the sea" (ESV).
12-13) Isa 59:9, 14

"Therefore justice is far from us,
and righteousness (1p"13J / 8iKaioouvp) does not overtake us;
we hope for light, and behold, darkness,
and for brightness, but we walk in gloom.
We grope for the wall like the blind;
we grope like those who have no eyes;
we stumble at noon as in the twilight,
among those in full vigor we are like dead men.
We all growl like bears;
we moan and moan like doves;
we hope for justice, but there is none;
for salvation, but it is far from us.
12
For our transgressions are multiplied before you,
and our sins testify against us;
for our transgressions are with us,
and we know our iniquities:
transgressing, and denying the LORD,
and turning back from following our God,
speaking oppression and revolt,
conceiving and uttering from the heart lying words.
Justice is turned back,
and righteousness (1p13* / SiKaioauvn,) stands afar off;
for truth has stumbled in the public squares,
and uprightness cannot enter.
Truth is lacking,
and he who departs from evil makes himself a prey.
The LORD saw it, and it displeased him
that there was no justice.
He saw that there was no man,
and wondered that there was no one to intercede;
then his own arm brought him salvation,
19
"Wlioever pursues righteousness ... willfindrighteousness" may appear redundant; perhaps that is why the LXX
leaves the second "righteousness" untranslated. However, it makes sense if the second "righteousness" is understood as
"righteousness before God," i.e., righteousness as approved, a status of righteousness before God. First occurrence of
7!p1*a is listed under "ethical righteousness."
Appendix - 509
and his righteousness (ITlpllJ / eXenpoouvu,)60 upheld him.

He put on righteousness (71P12S / SiKaioauvn,) as a breastplate,
and a helmet of salvation on his head;
he put on garments of vengeance for clothing.
and wrapped himself in zeal as a cloak" (ESV).
14) Malachi 3:3

"But who can endure the day of his coming, and who can stand when he appears? For he is like a refiner's
fire and like fullers' soap. He will sit as a refiner and purifier of silver, and he will purify the sons of Levi
and refine them like gold and silver, and they will bring offerings in righteousness (1p13*33 17130 *27"'30 /
Tipoadyovxec Guoiav ev Sucaioauvn) to the LORD" (ESV).
II.F. Honesty (1)
1) Gen 30:33
Jacob speaking to Laban: "So my honesty (*'71p13* / f) SiKaioauvn pou) will answer for me later, when you
come to look into my wages with you. Every one that is not speckled and spotted among the goats and
black among the lambs, if found with me, shall be counted stolen" (ESV).
III. CORRECTNESS
III.A. Speaking/swearing in righteousness, telling the truth (4)
1) Isa 45:23
"By myself I have sworn;
from my mouth has gone out in righteousness
a word that shall not return:
(1331 7!p13* "BO K3J" / eceêucexat EK XOU exopaxoc pou SiKaioauvn, oi Xbyox pou)
'To me every knee shall bow,
every tongue shall swear allegiance'" (ESV).
2) Isa 48:1
"Hear this, O house of Jacob, who are called by the name of Israel,
and who came from the waters of Judah,
who swear by the name of the LORD
and confess the God of Israel,
but not in truth or right" (ESV).
(1p13»*3 JOl TIOJO JO / ou p£xd d>,r|0eiac ouSe pexd SiKatoauvqc)
3) Isa 63:1
"Who is this who comes from Edom,
in crimsoned garments from Bozrah,
he who is splendid in his apparel,
marching in the greatness of his strength?
'It is I, speaking in righteousness,
mighty to save'" (ESV).
(5?"""71l7 331 1p13"33 13310 *3J* / eyeb 8taAiyopai SiKaioauvirv Kai Kpiotv acoxr)p(ou)
See "The Righteousness of God."

See "Clothed with righteousness."
Appendix- 510
4)Jer 4 2
"If you return, O Israel, declares the LORD,
to me you should return
If >ou lemove your detestable things from my presence,
and do not waver,
and if you swear, 'As the LORD lives,'
in truth, in justice, and m righteousness,
(1p13"33* C3B270D 7I0JO / psxa aA,n9eiac Kai EV KpioEi Kai EV SiKaioouvn,)
then nations shall bless themselves m him,
and m him shall they glory" (ESV)
HI B Just balances, weights (0)
HI C Doing something con cctly (1)
1) Zech 8 8
"Thus says the LORD of hosts behold, I will save my people from the east country and from the west
country, and I will bring them to dwell in the midst of Jerusalem And they shall be my people, and I will
be their God, m faithfulness and in righteousness (1p135331 nOK33 / EV aXijOsia Kai EV SiKaioouvri)"
(ESV)
IV. DIFFICULT CASES (5)
1)Judges 5 11
"To the sound of musicians at the watering places there they repeat the righteous triumphs of the LORD
(71171* 711p135), the righteous triumphs of his villagers (13T1B T\p1S) in Israel" (ESV) See LXX-A and
LXX-B
2-3) Ps 112 3,9 [111 3 9LXX]

Praise the LORD' Blessed is the man who fears the LORD,
who greatl> delights in his commandments'
His offspnng will be mighty m the land,
the generation of the upright will be blessed
Wealth and riches are in his house,
and his righteousness endures forever
(13y7 71105? 171p1351 / Kai ij SiKaioouvn, auxou pevei etc xov aicova xou atebvoc)
Light dawns m the darkness for the upright,
he is giacious merciful and righteous
It is well with the man who deals generously and lends,
who conducts his affairs with justice
for the righteous will nevei be moved,
he will be remembered forever
He is not afraid of bad news
his heart is firm trusting m the LORD
HIS heart is steady, he will not be afraid,
until he looks in triumph on his adversaries
He has distributed freely, he has given to the poor,
his righteousness enduies forever,
(15?/ 71105? 17lp13» / r| SiKaioouvri auxou pevei eic xov aicova xou aicovoc)
his horn is exalted in honor
10
The wicked man sees it and is angry,
he gnashes his teeth and melts away,
the desire of the wicked will pensh' (ESV)
Appendix - 5 1 1
4) Isa 61:11
"For as the earth brings forth its sprouts,
and as a garden causes what is sown in it to sprout up,
so the Lord GOD will cause righteousness (ipi35 / Sucaioauvri) and praise
to sprout up before all the nations" (ESV).
5)Malachi4:2[3:20 MT/LXX ]
"For behold, the day is coming, burning like an oven, when all the arrogant and all evildoers will be
stubble. The day that is coming shall set them ablaze, says the LORD of hosts, so that it will leave them
neither root nor branch. But for you who fear my name, the sun of righteousness (1p13» 2702? / fJAioc
8iKaioauvn,c) shall rise with healing in its wings. You shall go out leaping like calves from the stall" (ESV).
V. PLURAL (14x)
These are already included above but are collated here as an additional category.
God's righteous acts (5x)

Jdg 5:11(a); 1 Sam 12:7; Mic 6:5 - "The righteous acts of the LORD"
Ps 103:6 - "the LORD performs righteousness acts and justice for all who are oppressed"
Dan 9:16- "according to all your righteous acts let your anger turn aside"
Man's righteous deeds (ethical uprightness) (7x)

Jdg 5:11(b) - "the righteous deeds of his [the LORD's] villagers in Israel"
Ps 11:7 - "the LORD loves righteous deeds"
Isa 33:15 - "he who walks righteously"
Isa 64:5 - "him who joyfully performs righteousness deeds"
Ezek 18:24; 33:13 - a man's "righteous deeds"
Dan 9:18 - "not because of our righteousness deeds, but because of your great mercy"
Vindication/justification (2x)
Isa 45:24 - "only in the LORD are righteousness and strength" (v 25: "In the LORD all the offspring of
Israel shall be justified and shall glory")
Jer 51:10 - "the LORD has brought about our vindications"
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Primary Sources
Aristeas to Philocrates (Letter ofAristeas). Edited and translated by Moses Hadas. New York:
Harper & Brothers, 1951.
Aristotle: The Nicomachean Ethics. Loeb Classical Library. Translation by H. Rackham.

Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1934.
Aristotle, On Rhetoric: A Theory of Civic Discourse. Translation by George Kennedy. Oxford:

Oxford University Press, 1991.
Augustine: Anti-Pelagian Writings. Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, First Series, Vol. 5. Edited
by Philip Schaff. Peabody: Hendrickson, 1994.
Augustine: Later Works. The Library of Christian Classics 8. Translated by John Burnaby.
Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1955.
Bensly, Robert L. The Fourth Book of Ezra: The Latin Version Edited from the MSS. Texts and
Studies 3.2. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1895.
Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia. Edited by K. Elliger and W. Rudolph. 2nd Edition. Stuttgart:
Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1983.
Brock, S. P. Testamentum Iobi. Pseudepigrapha Veteris Testamenti Graece 2; Leiden: Brill,

1967.
Buitenwerf, Rieuwerd. Book III of the Sibylline Oracles and Its Social Setting with an
Introduction, Translation, and Commentary. Studia in Veteris Testamenti
pseudepigraphica 17. Leiden: Brill, 2003.
Calvin's Commentaries: The Epistles of Paul the Apostle to the Romans and to the
Thessalonians. Translated by Ross MacKenzie. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1960.
Charles, R. H.. Masehafa Kufase, or the Ethiopic Version of the Hebrew Book of Jubilees.
Anecdota Oxoniensia. Oxford: Clarendon, 1895.
, ed. The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament in English. 2 Vols.
Oxford: Clarendon, 1913.
512
Bibliography 513
. The Greek Versions of the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs. Oxford: The
Clarendon Press, 1908. Reprinted: Hildesheim: Georg Olms, 1960.
. The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs. Translations of Early Documents, Series

1: Palestinian Jewish Texts (Pre-Rabbinic). London: SPCK, 1925.
Charlesworth, James H., ed. The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha. 2 Vols. Anchor Bible
Reference Library. New York: Doubleday, 1983, 1985.
, ed. The Dead Sea Scrolls: Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek Texts with English
Translations. Princeton Theological Seminary Dead Sea Scrolls Project. Tubingen: Mohr
Siebeck/Louisville: Westminster/John Knox, 1993-.
Chrysostom. Homilies on the Acts of the Apostles and the Epistle to the Romans. Nicene and
Post-Nicene Fathers, First Series, Vol. 11. Edited by Philip Schaff. Peabody:
Hendrickson, 1994.
de Jonge, M. The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs: A Critical Edition of the Greek Text.
Pseudepigrapha Veteris Testamenti Graece 1,2. Leiden: Brill, 1978.
Demosthenes. Loeb Classical Library. Translation by J. H. Vince. Cambridge: Harvard

University Press, 1935.
Denis, A.-M. Concordance grecque des pseudepigraphes d'ancien Testament. Louvain-la-

Neuve: Universite Catholique de Louvain, Institut Orientaliste, 1987.
Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker. 2 Vols. 5th Edition. Edited by H. Diels and W. Kranz. Berlin:
Weidmann, 1952. ET: Kathleen Freeman. Ancilla to the Pre-Socratic Philosophers: A
Complete Translation of the Fragments in Diels, Fragmente der Vorsokratiker.
Digital Library of Classic Protestant Texts. Alexandria, Virginia: Alexander Street Press, 2007.
Dio Chiysostom. Loeb Classical Library. Various translators. London: William Heinemann,
1932.
Diodorus of Sicily. Loeb Classical Library. Translation by C. H. Oldfather. Cambridge: Harvard

Dionysius of Halicarnassus. Loeb Classical Library. Translation by Earnest Cary. London:

William Heinemann, 1948.
Dupont-Sommer, Andre. Les ecrits esseniens decouvertspres de la mer Morte. Paris: Payot,
1959. ET: The Essene Writings from Qumran. Translated by Geza Vermes. Oxford: Basil
Blackwell, 1961.
Bibliography 514
Epictetus: Discourses. Loeb Classical Library. Translation by W. A. Oldfather. London: William

Heinemann, 1925.
Fragmenta Pseudepigraphorum Quae Supersunt Graeca. Edited by Albert-Marie Denis.

Pseudepigrapha Veteris Testamenti Graece 3. Leiden: Brill, 1970.
Geffcken, J. Die Oracula sibyllina. Die griechische christliche Shriftsteller der ersten
Jahrhunderte 8. Leipzig: Heinrichs, 1902.
Greek Elegiac Poetry from the Seventh to the Fifth Centuries BC. Loeb Classical Library. Edited
and translated by Douglas E. Gerber. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1999.
Harrington, Daniel J. Pseudo-Philon, Les Antiquites Bibllques. Sources chretiennes 229-30.

Paris: Editions du Cerf, 1976.
Herodotus. Loeb Classical Library. Translation by A. D. Godley. London: William Heinemann,

1926.
. The Histories. Translation by Aubrey de Selincourt. Revised with introduction and

notes by A. R. Burn. London: Penguin, 1972.
Hesiod. Loeb Classical Library. Translation by Glenn W. Most. Cambridge: Harvard University
Press, 2006.
Isocrates. Loeb Classical Library. Translation by George Norlin. London: William Heinemann,
1929.
Josephus: Jewish Antiquities. Loeb Classical Library. Translation by H. St. J. Thackeray and
Ralph Marcus. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1998.
Klijn, A. Frederik J. Der Lateinische Text der Apokalypse des Esra. Texte und Untersuchungen
zur Geschichte der altchristlichen Literatur 131. Berlin: Akademie, 1983.
Library of Latin Texts - Series A. Turnhout, Belgium: Brepols.
Luthers Werke: Kritische Gesamtausgabe. Weimar: Hermann Bohlaus Nachfolger, 1938. ET:
Luther's Works: American Edition. Edited by Jaroslav Pelikan and Helmut T. Lehmann.
Saint Louis: Concordia, 1972.
Melanchthons Werke. Edited by Robert Shippedch. Gutersloh: Gerd Mohn, 1965.
Nicklesburg, George W. E. and James C. VanderKam. 1 Enoch: A New Translation Based on the
Hermeneia Commentaiy. Minneapolis: Fortress, 2004.
Bibliography 515
Novum Testamentum Graece. Edited by Eberhard and Erwin Nestle, Barbara and Kurt Aland, et
al. 27th Edition. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgellschaft, 2001.
Origen: Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans. 2 Vols. The Fathers of the Church 103, 104.
Translation by Thomas P. Scheck. Washington, D.C.: The Catholic University of
America Press, 2001, 2002.
The Oxyrhynchus Papyri, Parts. I-LXIX. Various editors. London: The Egypt Exploration
Society, 1898-2005.
Paraleipomena Jeremiou. Texts and Translations 1, Pseudepigrapha Series 1. Edited and

translated by Robert A. Kraft and Ann-Elizabeth Purintun. Missoula: Society of Biblical
Literature, 1972.
Parry, Donald W. and Emanuel Tov, eds. The Dead Sea Scrolls Reader. 6 Vols. Leiden: Brill,
2004-2005.
Pietersma, Albert and Benjamin G. Wright, eds. A New English Translation of the Septuagint
and the Other Greek Translations Traditionally Included under That Title. Oxford:
Plato's Republic. Translation by G. M. A. Grube. Indianapolis: Hackett, 1974.
Plato: Laws. Loeb Classical Library. Translation by R. G. Bury. Cambridge: Harvard University
Press, 2001.
Plutarch's Lives. Loeb Classical Library. Various translators. London: William Heinemann,
1914.
Plutarch's Moralia. Loeb Classical Library. Various translators. Cambridge: Harvard University
Press, 1939.
Polybius: The Histories. Loeb Classical Library. Translation by W. R. Paton. Cambridge:

Harvard University Press, 1954.
Ronsch, Hermann, ed. Das Buch der Jubilaen, oder Die kleine Genesis. Leipzig: Fues, 1874.
Septuaginta: id est, Vetus Testamentum graece iuxta LXX interpres. Edited by Alfred Rahlfs.
Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1935.
Septuaginta: Vetus Testamentum Graecum auctoritate Academiae Scientiarum Gottingensis

editum. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1931-.
Sextus Empiricus. Loeb Classical Library. Translation by R. G. Bury. Cambridge: Harvard

Bibliography 516
Sparks, H. F. D., ed. The Apocryphal Old Testament. Oxford: Clarendon, 1984.
Spittler, Russell P. The Testament of Job According to the SV Text. Texts and Translations 5,
Pseudepigrapha Series 4. Edited by Robert A. Kraft with Harold Attridge, Russell
Spittler, and Janet Timbie. Missoula: Society of Biblical Literature and Scholars' Press,
1974.
Thesaurus Linguae Graecae. University of California, Irvine, www.tlg.uci.edu
Thomas Aquinas: Lectures on the Letter to the Romans. Translated by Fabian Larcher. Edited by
Jeremy Holmes. Ave Maria, Florida: The Aquinas Center for Theological Renewal at
Ave Maria University, www. aqui nas. avern art a. edn/c ommen tari es. asp
Thucydides: History of the Peloponnesian War. Translation by Rex Warner. Introduction and
notes by M. I. Finley. London: Penguin, 1972.
Vermes, Geza. The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls in English. New York: Penguin Books, 2004.
von Arnim, Hans F. A., ed. Stoicorum Veterum Fragmenta. 4 Vols. Lipsiae: Teubner, 1903-
1924.
Whiston, William. The Works of Josephus: New Updated Edition. Peabody: Hendrickson, 1995.
William of St Thierry: Exposition on the Epistle to the Romans. Translated by John Baptist
Hasbrouck. Cistercian Fathers Series 27. Kalamazoo: Cistercian Publications, 1980.
Wise, Michael, Martin Abegg, Jr., and Edward Cook. The Dead Sea Scrolls: A New Translation.
New York: HarperCollins, 1996.
Xenophon. Loeb Classical Library. Translation by Walter Miller. Cambridge: Harvard University
Press, 1983.
Yonge, C. D. The Works of Philo. New Updated Edition. Peabody, Hendrickson, 1993.
Young, Douglas, ed. Theognis: Ps.-Pythagoras, Ps.-Phocylides, Chares, Anonymi Aulodia,

Fragmentum Teliambicum. Bibliotheca scriptorum Graecorum et Romanorum
Teubneriana. 2 nd Edition. Leipzig: Teubner, 1971.
Bibliography 517
Secondary Sources
Abbott, T. K. Essays Chiefy on the Original Texts of the Old and the New Testaments. London:
Longmans, Green & Co., 1891.
Achtemeier, E. R. "Righteousness in the Old Testament," Pages 80-85 in The Interpreter's

Dictionary of the Bible, Vol. 4. Edited by George A. Buttrick. Nashville: Abingdon,
1962.
Achtemeier, P. J. "Righteousness in the New Testament," Pages 91-99 in The Interpreter's

Dictionary of the Bible, Vol. 4. Edited by George A. Buttrick. Nashville: Abingdon,
1962.
Adamson, James B. The Epistle of James. New International Commentary on the New-
Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1976.
Aejmelaeus, Anneli. "Von Sprache zur Theologie: Methodologie Uberlegungen zur Theologie
der Septuaginta." In The Septuagint and Messianism. Edited by M. A. Knibb. Bibliotheca
ephemeridum theologicarum lovaniensium 195. Leuven: Leuven University Press, 2006.
Aitken, James K. "Review of Judentum und Hellenismus by Martin Hengel." Journal of Biblical
Literature 123 (2004): 331-41.
Allen, Leslie C. The Books of Joel, Obadiah, Jonah and Micah. New International Commentary
on the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1976.
. Psalms 101-150. Word Biblical Commentary 21. Waco: Word Books, 1983.
Alon, Gedalyahu. Jews. Judaism and the Classical World. Translated by Israel Abraham.
Jerusalem: Magnes, 1977.
Alter. Robert. The Art of Biblical Poetiy. New York: Basic Books, 1985.
. The Book of Psalms: A Translation with Commentary. New York: W. W. Norton,

2007.
Baer, D. A., and R. P. Gordon. """10!"!." Pages 211-18 in New International Dictionary of Old
Testament Theology and Exegesis, Vol. 2. Edited by Willem VanGemeren. Grand
Rapids: Zondervan, 1997.
Barclay, John M. G. Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora from Alexander to Trajan (323 BCE -
117 CE. Berkeley and Los Angeles: The University of California Press, 1996.
Bibliography -518
Barclay, John M. G. and Simon J. Gathercole, eds. Divine and Human Agency in Paul and His
Cultural Environment. London: T&T Clark, 2008.
Barnett, Paul. The Second Epistle to the Corinthians. New International Commentary on the New
Barr, James. The Semantics of Biblical Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1961.
. "Common Sense and Biblical Language." Biblica 49 (1968): 377-87.
. The Typology of Literalism in Ancient Biblical Translations. Mitteilungen des

Septuaginta-Unternehmens 15. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1979.
. "Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek in the Hellenistic Age," Pages 79-114 in The
Cambridge History of Judaism, Vol. 2. Edited by W. D. Davies and Louis Finkelstein.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989.
Barrett, C. K. A Commentary on the Second Epistle to the Corinthians. Harper's New Testament
Commentaries. New York: Harper & Row, 1973.
. The Epistle to the Romans. 2nd Edition. Black's New Testament Commentaries.
Peabody: Hendrickson, 1991.
Barth, Markus. "Jews and Gentiles: The Social Character of Justification in Paul." Journal of
Ecumenical Studies 5 (1968): 241-67.
Becker, Jiirgen. Das Heil Gottes: Hells- und Siindenbegriffe in den Qumrantexten und im Neuen
Testament. Studien zur Umwelt des Neuen Testaments 3. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck &
Ruprecht, 1964.
Benoit, P. "Qumran and the New Testament," Pages 1-30 in Paul and Qumran: Studies in New
Testament Exegesis. Edited by Jerome Murphy-O'Connor. London: Chapman, 1968.
Berger, Klaus. "Neues Material zur 'Gerechtigkeit Gottes'." Zeitschrift fur die neutestamentliche
Wissenschaft 68 (1977): 266-75.
Berlin, Adele. "Parallelism." Pages 155-62 in The Anchor Bible Dictionary, Vol. 5. Edited by
David Noel Freedman. New York: Doubleday, 1992.
Bickerman, Elias. Studies in Jewish and Christian History. Arbeiten zur Geschichte des antiken
Judentums und des Urchristentums 9. 3 Vols. Leiden: Brill, 1976-1986.
Bird, Michael F. The Saving Righteousness of God: Studies on Paul, Justification and the New
Perspective. Paternoster Biblical Monographs. Milton Keynes: Paternoster, 2007.
Bibliography - 519
. Introducing Paul: The Man, His Mission and His Message. Downers Grove:
InterVarsity, 2008.
Bird, Michael F. and Preston M. Sprinkle, eds. The Faith of Jesus Christ: Exegetical, Biblical,
and Theological Studies. Milton Keynes: Paternoster/Peabody: Hendrickson, 2009.
Black, Matthew. The Scrolls and Christian Origins: Studies in the Jewish Background of the
New Testament. Originally published in 1961. Reprint: Brown Judaic Studies 48. Chico:
Scholars Press, 1983.
Blass, F., A. Debrunner, and Robert W. Funk. A Greek Grammar of the New Testament and
Other Early Christian Literature. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1961.
Bollier, John A. "The Righteousness of God." Interpretation 8 (1954): 404-13.
Bonnard, P.-E. Le secondIsai'e, son disciple et leurs editeurs: Isaie 40-66. Paris: Gabalda, 1972.
Borgen, Peder and Soren Giversen, eds. The New Testament and Hellenistic Judaism. Peabody:
Hendrickson, 1995.
Bornkamm, Giinther. Paul. New York: Harper & Row, 1971.
Bousset, Willhelm. Die Religion des Judentums im spathellenistischen Zeitalter. 3 r Edition.

Edited by Hugo Gressmann. Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1926.
Boyd-Taylor, Cameron. "Calque-culations - Loanwords and the Lexicon." Bulletin of the

International Organization for Septuagint and Cognate Studies 38 (2005): 79-99.
Brauch, Manfred T. "Perspectives on 'God's Righteousness' in Recent German Discussion,"

Pages 523-42 in E. P. Sanders, Paul and Palestinian Judaism: A Comparison of Patterns
of Religion. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1977.
Braun, H. "Vom Erbarmen Gottes iiber den Gerechten: Zur Theologie der Psalmen Solomos."
Zeitschrift filr die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft A3 (1950-51): 1-54.
Bray, Gerald. "Justification: The Reformers and Recent New Testament Scholarship."
Churchman 109 (1995): 102-26.
, ed. Romans. Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture. Downers Grove:

InterVarsity, 1998.
. "Ambrosiaster," Pages 21-38 in Reading Romans Through the Centuries: From the
Early Church to Karl Barth. Edited by Jeffrey P. Greenman and Timothy Larsen. Grand
Rapids: Brazos, 2005.
Bibliography 520
Briggs, Charles Augustus. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Psalms.
International Critical Commentary. 2 Vols. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1907.
Broyles, Craig C. Psalms. New International Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament.
Bruce, F. F. 1 and 2 Corinthians. New Century Bible. London: Oliphants, 1971.
Bultmann, Rudolf. Theologie des Neuen Testaments. 2 Vols. Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1948.
ET: Theology of the New Testament. Translated by K. Grobel. New York: Scribners,
1955.
. "AIKAIOZYNH 0EOY'.'* Journal of Biblical Literature 83 (1964): 12-16.
. "Disoc K T V Pages 477-87 in Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, Vol. 2.

Edited by Gerhard Kittel. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964.
. The Second Letter to the Corinthians. Translated by Roy A. Harrisville.

Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1985.
Burke, David G. The Poetry of Baruch: A Reconstruction and Analysis of the Original Hebrew
Text of Baruch 3:9-5:9. Society of Biblical Literature Septuagint and Cognate Studies
10. Chico: Scholars Press, 1982.
Burkes, Shannon. "'Life' Redefined: Wisdom and Law in Fourth Ezra and Second Baruch."
Catholic Biblical Quarterly 63 (2001): 55-71.
Burrows, Millar. "Levirate Marriage in Israel." Journal of Biblical Literature 59 (1940): 23-33.
. "The Ancient Oriental Background of Hebrew Levirate Marriage." Bulletin of the
American Schools of Oriental Research 11 (1940): 2-15.
Byrne, Brendan. Romans. Sacra Pagina 6. Collegeville: The Liturgical Press, 1996.
Caird, G. B. "Towards a Lexicon of the Septuagint." Journal of Theological Studies 19 (1963):

453-75.
Cambier, Jules. "Justice de Dieu, salut de tous les homes et foi." Revue Biblique 71 (1964): 537-
83.
. L 'Evangile de Dieu selon I Epitre aux Romains: Exegese et theologie biblique.

Studia Neotestamentica 3. Paris: Desclee de Brouwer, 1967.
Campbell, Douglas A. The Rhetoric of Righteousness in Romans 3.21-26. Journal for the Study
of the New Testament: Supplement Series 65. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1992.
Bibliography 521
. The Quest for Paul's Gospel: A Suggested Strategy. London: T&T Clark, 2005.
. "The Meaning of SiKaioauvn ©sou in Romans: An Intertextual Suggestion." Pages

189-212 in As It Is Written: Studying Paul's Use of Scripture. Edited by Stanley E.
Porter and Christopher D. Stanley. Society of Biblical Literature Symposium Series 50.
Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2008.
. The Deliverance of God: An Apocalyptic Rereading of Justification in Paul. Grand

Rapids: Eerdmans, 2009.
. "The Faithfulness of Jesus Christ in Romans 3:22." Pages 57-71 in The Faith of
Jesus Christ: Exegetical, Biblical, and Theological Studies. Edited by Michael F. Bird
and Preston M. Sprinkle. Milton Keynes: Patemoster/Peabody: Hendrickson, 2009.
Cancik, Hubert, et al., eds. Brill's New Pauly: Encyclopaedia of the Ancient World. 20 Vols.
Leiden: Brill, 2002-.
Carson, D. A., Peter T. O'Brien, and Mark A. Seifrid eds. Justification and Variegated Nomism,
Vol. 1: The Complexities of Second Temple Judaism. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen
zum Neuen Testament 11/140. Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck/Grand Rapids: Baker Academic,
2001.
Carson, D. A., Peter T. O'Brien, and Mark A. Seifrid, eds. Justification and Variegated Nomism,
Vol. 2: The Paradoxes of Paul. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament
11/181. Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck/Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2004.
Cavallin, H. C. C. '"The Righteous Shall Live by Faith': A Decisive Argument for the
Traditional Interpretation." Studia Theologica 32 (1978): 33-43.
Cazelles, H. "A propos de quelques textes difficiles relatifs a la justice de Dieu dans l'Ancien
Testament." Revue Biblique 58 (1951): 169-88.
Chisholm, Hugh, ed. Encyclopaedia Britannica. 11th Edition. 29 Vols. Cambridge: Cambridge
Clark, Gordon R. The Word Hesed in the Hebrew Bible. Journal for the Study of the Old
Testament: Supplement Series 157. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1993.
Coats, George W. "Widow's Rights: A Crux in the Structure of Genesis 38." Catholic Biblical
Quarterly 34 (1972): 461-66.
Collins, John J. "The Development of the Sibylline Tradition." Aufstieg und Niedergang der
romischen Welt 11.20.1 (1986): 421-59.
Bibliography - 522
. "The Jewish Transformation of Sibylline Oracles." Pages 181-97 in Seers, Sibyls

and Sages in Hellenistic-Roman Judaism. Journal for the Study of Judaism: Supplement
Series 54. Leiden: Brill, 1997.
. Jewish Cult and Hellenistic Culture: Essays on the Jewish Encounter with
Hellenism and Roman Rule. Leiden: Brill, 2005.
Conzelmann, Hans. "Die Rechtfertigungslehre des Paulus: Theologie oder Anthropologic?"

Evangelische Theologie 28 (1968): 389-404. ET: "Paul's Doctrine of Justification:
Theology or Anthropology?" Pages 108-23 in Theology of the Liberating Word. Edited
by Frederick Herzog. Nashville: Abingdon, 1971.
. Grundrifi der Theologie des Neuen Testaments. Miinchen: Chr. Kaiser, 1968. ET:
An Outline of the Theology of the New Testament. Translated by John Bowden. New
York: Harper & Row, 1969.
Cotterell, Peter and Max Turner. Linguistics and Biblical Interpretation. Downers Grove:
InterVarsity, 1989.
Craigie, Peter C. Psalms 1-50. Word Biblical Commentary 19. Waco: Word Books, 1983.
Cranfield, C. E. B. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans. 2 Vols.
International Critical Commentary. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1975, 1979.
Creed, J. M. "nAPEZIZ in Dionysius of Halicarnassus and in St. Paul." Journal of Theological

Studies 41 (1940): 28-30.
Cremer, Hermann. Biblico-Theological Lexicon of New Testament Greek with Supplement.

Translated by William Urwick. 4th Edition. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1895.
. Die paulinische Rechtfertigungslehre im Zusammenhange ihrer geschichtlichen

Voraussetzungen. 2nd Edition. Gutersloh: Bertelsmann, 1900.
Cronbach, Abraham. "Righteousness in Jewish Literature, 200 B.C.-A.D. 100." Pages 85-91 in
The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible. Edited by George A. Buttrick. Nashville:
Abingdon, 1962.
Cross, F. L. and E. A. Livingstone, eds. The Oxford Dictionaiy of the Christian Church. 3 r
Edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997.
Cross, Frank Moore. The Ancient Library of Qumran and Modern Biblical Studies. London: G.
Duckworth, 1958.
Bibliography - 523
Dahl, Nils Alstrup. "The Doctrine of Justification: Its Social Function and Implications." Pages
95-120 in Studies in Paul: Theology for the Early Christian Mission. Minneapolis:
Augsburg, 1977.
Dahood, Mitchell. Psalms II: 51-100. The Anchor Bible 17. Garden City: Doubleday, 1968.
Danker, Frederick William, W. Bauer, W. F. Arndt, and F. W. Gingrich. A Greek-English

Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. 3 r Edition.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000.
Das, Andrew A. Paul, the Law, and the Covenant. Peabody: Hendrickson, 2001.
. "Beyond Covenantal Nomism: Paul, Judaism, and Perfect Obedience." Concordia

Journal 21 (2001): 234-52.
Davids, Peter H. The Letters of 2 Peter and Jude. Pillar New Testament Commentary. Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans/Leicester, England: Apollos, 2006.
Davies, Eryl W. "Inheritance Rights and the Hebrew Levirate Marriage," Parts 1-2. Vetus
Testamentum 31 (1981): 138-44,257-68.
de Jong, M. and J. Tromp. The Life of Adam and Eve and Related Literature. Guides to
Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1997.
Deissmann, Adolf. The Philology of the Greek Bible: Its Present and Future. London: Hodder &
Stoughton, 1908.
. St. Paul: A Study in Social and Religious History. Translated by L. R. M. Strachan.

London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1912.
Delitzsch, Franz. Biblical Commentary on the Psalms. 3 Vols. Translated by David Eaton.
London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1889.
Descamps, L. Les Justes et la Justice dans les Evangiles et le Christianisme primitif Louvain:
Publications Universitaires de Louvain/Gembloux: J. Duculot, 1950.
deSilva, David A. 4 Maccabees. Guides to Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha. Sheffield: Sheffield

Academic Press, 1998.
. Introducing the Apocrypha: Message, Context, and Significance. Grand Rapids:

Baker Academic, 2002.
. 4 Maccabees: Introduction and Commentary on the Greek Text in Codex

Sinaiticus. Septuagint Commentary Series. Leiden: Brill, 2006.
Bibliography 524
Dibelius, Martin. James. Hermeneia. Revised by Hemrich Greeven. Translated by Michael A.

Williams. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1976.
Diestel, Ludwig "Die Idee der Gerechtigkeit, vorzuglich im Alten Testament, biblisch-
theologisch dargestellt." Jahrbuch filr deutsche Theologie 5 (1860): 173-204.
Dines, Jennifer M. The Septuagint. Understanding the Bible and Its World. London: T&T Clark,
2004.
Dodd, C. H. The Bible and the Greeks. London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1935.
Dunn, James D. G. "The New Perspective on Paul." The Bulletin of the John Rylands Library 65
(1983): 95-122.
. Romans 1-8. Word Biblical Commentary. Dallas: Word Books, 1988.
. Romans 9-16. Word Biblical Commentary. Dallas: Word Books, 1988.
. Jesus, Paul, and the Law: Studies in Mark and Galatians. Louisville: Westminster
John Knox, 1990.
. "The Justice of God: A Renewed Perspective on Justification." Journal of
Theological Studies 43 (1991): 1 -22.
. The Theology of Paul the Apostle. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998.
, ed. Paul and the Mosaic Law. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2001.
. The New Perspective on Paul: Collected Essays. Wissenschaftliche

Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 11/185. Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2005.
. Romans. Daily Bible Commentary. Peabody: Hendrickson, 2007.
Lichrodt, Walther. Theology of the Old Testament. 2 Vols. Translated by J. A. Baker.

Philadelphia: Westminster, 1961.
Evans, Craig A. Ancient Texts for New Testament Studies: A Guide to the Background
Literature. Peabody: Hendrickson, 2005.
Even-Shoshan, Abraham. A New Concordance of the Bible. Jerusalem: Kiryat Sefer, 1990.
Fahlgren, Karl H. "Sedaka, nahestehende und entgegengesetzte Begriffe im Alten Testament."

Th.D. Dissertation. Uppsala University, 1932.
Bibliography 525
Falk, Daniel. "Psalms and Prayers." Pages 35-51 in Justification and Variegated Nomism,
Volume 1: The Complexities of Second Temple Judaism. Edited by D. A. Carson, Peter T.
O'Brien, and Mark A. Seifrid. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament
11/140. Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck/Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2001.
Fiedler, Martin J. "AiKaioauvn in der diaspora-jiidischen und intertestamentarischen Literatur."

Journal for the Study of Judaism 1 (1970): 120-43.
Fitzmyer, Joseph A. "The Gospel in the Theology of Paul." Pages 149-85 in To Advance the
Gospel: New Testament Essays. New Y'ork: Crossroad, 1981.
. Paid and His Theology: A Brief Sketch. Engelwood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1989.
. Responses to 101 Questions on the Dead Sea Scrolls. New York: Paulist Press,
1992.
. Romans: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary. The Anchor Bible
33. New York: Doubleday, 1993.
. "The Aramaic and Hebrew Fragments of Tobit from Cave 4." Catholic Biblical
Quraterly 57 (1995): 655-75.
. The Acts of the Apostles. The Anchor Bible 31. New York: Doubleday, 1998.
Fokkelman, J. P. Reading Biblical Poetry: An Introductory Guide. Translated by Ineke Smit.

Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2001.
. Major Poems of the Hebrew Bible: At the Interface of Prosody and Structural
Analysis. Studia semitica neerlandica. Assen: Royal Van Gorcum, 2003.
Futato, Mark D. Interpreting the Psalms: An Exegetical Handbook. Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2007.
Garnet, P. "Qumran Light on Pauline Soteriology," Pages 19-32 in Pauline Studies: Essays
Presented to F. F. Bruce on his 70th Birthday. Edited by D. A. Hagner and M. J. Harris.
Exeter: Paternoster, 1980.
Gasque, W. Ward. "Tarsus." Page 334 in The Anchor Bible Dictionary, Vol. 6. Edited by David
Noel Freedman. New York: Doubleday, 1992.
Gathercole, Simon J. Where Is Boasting? Early Jewish Soteriology and Paul's Response in
Romans 1-5. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002.
. "Torah, Life, and Salvation: Leviticus 18:5 in Early Judaism and the New
Testament," Pages 126-45 in From Prophecy to Testament: The Function of the Old
Testament in the New. Edited by Craig A. Evans. Peabody: Hendrickson, 2004.
Bibliography 526
. "The Doctrine of Justification in Paul and Beyond: Some Proposals," Pages 219-41
in Justification in Perspective: Historical Developments and Contemporary Challenges.
Edited by Bruce L. McCormack. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2006.
Gehman, H. S. "The Hebraic Character of LXX Greek." Vetus Testamentum 1 (1951): 81-90.
Gesenius, Wilhelm. Gesenius' Hebrew Grammar as Edited and Enlarged by the Late E.
Kautzsch. Edited by A. E. Cowley. Oxford: Clarendon, 1980.
Godet, Frederick L. Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans. Translated by A. Cusin. Grand
Goldingay, John. Psalms. 3 Vols. Baker Commentary on the Old Testament. Grand Rapids:
Baker Academic, 2006-2008.
Gooding, D. W. "Review of 'Righteousness' in the Septuagint of Isaiah: A Contextual Study, by

John W. Olley." Journal of Theological Studies 32 (1981): 204-12.
Gordon, T. David. "Observations on N. T. Wright's Biblical Theology With Special

Consideration of 'Faithfulness of God'." Pages 61-73 in By Faith Alone: Answering the
Challenges to the Doctrine of Justification. Edited by Gary L. W. Johnson and Guy P.
Waters. Wheaton: Crossway, 2006.
Grabbe, Lester L. Judaism from Cyrus to Herod. 2 Vols. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1992.
Greenman, Jeffrey P. and Timothy Larsen. eds. Reading Romans Through the Centuries: From
the Early Church to Karl Barth. Grand Rapids: Brazos, 2005.
Grundmann, W. "Der Lehrer der Gerechtigkeit von Qumran und die Frage nach der
Glaubensgerechtigkeit in der Theologie des Apostels Paulus." Revue de Qumran 2
(1960): 231-54. Revised/ET: "The Teacher of Righteousness of Qumran and the Question
of Justification by Faith in the Theology of the Apostle Paul." Pages 85-114 in Paul and
Qumran: Studies in New Testament Exegesis. Edited by Jerome Murphy-O'Connor.
London: Chapman, 1968.
Giittgemans, Erhardt. "'Gottesgerechtigkeit' und strukturale Semantik: Linguistische Analyse zu

SiKaioauvn Geou." Pages 59-98 in Studia Linguistica Neotestamentica: Gesammelte
Aufsdtze zur linguistischen Grundlage einer neutestamentlichen Theologie. Beitrage zur
evangelischen Theologie 60. Miinchen: Chr. Kaiser, 1971.
Hagner, Donald A. "Righteousness in Matthew's Theology." Pages 101-20 in Worship, Theology

and Ministry in the Early Church: Essays in Honor of Ralph P. Martin. Journal for the
Study of the New Testament: Supplement Series 87. Edited by Michael J. Wilkins and
Terence Paige. Sheffield: JSOT, 1992.
Bibliography 527
. Matthew. 2 Vols. Word Biblical Commentary 33AB. Dallas: Word Books, 1993,
1995.
. "Matthew: Apostate, Reformer, Revolutionary?" New Testament Studies 49 (2003):

193-209.
Haldane, Robert. Exposition of the Epistle to the Romans. New York: Robert Carter & Brothers,
1870.
Hamilton, Victor P. The Book of Genesis: Chapters 18-50. New International Commentary on
the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995.
Hanhart, Robert. "Die Bedeutung der Septuaginta in neutestamentlicher Zeit." Zeitschrift fur
Theologie und Kirche 81 (1984): 395-416.
Harrington, Daniel J. "The Biblical Text of Pseudo-Philo's Liber Antiquitatum Biblicarum."

Catholic Biblical Quarterly 33 (1971): 1-17.
. Invitation to the Apocrypha. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999.
Harris, Murray J. The Second Epistle to the Corinthians: A Commentary! on the Greek Text. New
International Greek Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2005.
Harrisville. Ill, Roy A. "niSTII XPETOY: Witness of the Fathers." Novum Testamentum 36
(1994): 233-41.
Harvey, Julien. '"Le Rib-Pattern,' Requisitoire prophetique sur la rupture de I'alliance." Biblica
43 (1963): 172-96.
Hastings, James, ed. Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics. 12 Vols. Edinburgh: T&T Clark,
1918.
Hatch, Edwin. Essays in Biblical Greek. Oxford: Clarendon, 1889.
Hatch, Edwin and Henry A. Redpath. A Concordance to the Septuagint and the Other Greek
Versions of the Old Testament. 3 Vols. Oxford: Clarendon, 1897, 1906.
Havelock, Eric A. "DIKAIOSUNE: An Essay in Greek Intellectual History." Phoenix 23 (1969):

49-70.
. The Greek Concept of Justice From Its Shadow in Homer to Its Substance in Plato.
Bibliography 528
Hays, Richard B. "Psalm 143 and the Logic of Romans 3." Journal of Biblical Literature 99
(1980): 107-15. Republished under the title, "Psalm 143 as Testimony to the
Righteousness of God." Pages 50-60 in idem, The Conversion of the Imagination: Paul
as Interpreter of Israel's Scripture. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2005.
. The Faith of Jesus Christ: The Narrative Substructure ofGalatians 3:1-4:11.

Society of Biblical Literature Dissertation Series 56. Chico: Scholars Press, 1983. 2 nd
Expanded Edition: Grand Rapids: Eerdmans/Dearborn: Dove, 2002.
. Echoes of Scripture in the Letters of Paul. New Haven: Yale University Press,
1989.
. "Justification." Pages 1129-33 in The Anchor Bible Dictionary, Vol. 3. Edited by

Hemer, Colin J. "Reflections on the Nature of New Testament Greek Vocabulary." Tyndale
Bulletin 38 (1987): 65-92.
Hendriksen, William. New Testament Commentary: Exposition of Paul's Epistle to the Romans.
Grand Rapids: Baker, 1982.
Hengel, Martin. Judentum und Hellenismus, Studien zu ihrer Begegnung unter bosonderer
Beriicksichtigung Paldstlnas bis zur Mitte des 2. Jh. vor Chr. Wissenschaftliche
Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 10. Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 19691, 19732. ET:
Judaism and Hellenism: Studies in their Encounter in Palestine during the Early
Hellenistic Period. Translated by John Bowden. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1974.
. The Hellenization' of Judaea in the First Century after Christ. Translated by John
Bowden. London: SCM, 1989.
, in collaboration with Roland Deines. The Pre-Christian Paul. Translated by John

Bowden. London: SCM, 1991.
. "Judaism and Hellenism Revisited." Pages 6-37 in Hellenism in the Land of Israel.
Edited by John J. Collins and Gregory E. Sterling. Notre Dame: University of Notre
Dame Press, 2001.
. The Septuagint as Christian Scripture: Its Prehistory and the Problem of Its
Canon. Translated by Mark E. Biddle. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2004.
Herzer, Jens. Die Paralipomena Jeremiae: Studien zu Tradition und Redaktion einer Haggada
desfriihen Judentums. Texte und Studien zum antiken Judentum 43. Tubingen: Mohr
Siebeck, 1994.
Bibliography 529
. 4 Baruch (Paraleipomena Jeremiou). Society of Biblical Literature Writings from

the Greco-Roman World 22. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2005.
Hill, David. "AIKAIOI as a Quasi-Technical Term." New Testament Studies 11 (1964-65): 296-
302.
. Greek Words and Hebrew Meanings: Studies in the Semantics of Soteriological

Terms. Society for New Testament Studies Monograph Series 5. Cambridge: Cambridge
Hillers, Delbert R. Covenant: The History of a Biblical Idea. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins
. Micah. Hermeneia. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1984.
Hodge, Charles. Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans. Revised Edition. Philadelphia:
William S. & Alfred Martien, 1864.
Holladay, William L. A Concise Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament. Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans/Leiden: Brill, 1991.
Hollander, H. W. and M. de Jonge. The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs: A Commentary.

Studia in Veteris Testamenti pseudepigraphica 8. Leiden: Brill, 1985.
Hornblower, Simon and Antony Spawforth, eds. The Oxford Classical Dictionary. 3 ld Edition.
Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003.
Horst, F. "Die Doxologien im Amosbuch." Zeitschrift fur die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 47

(1929): 45-54.
. "Gerechtigkeit Gottes im AT und Judentum." Pages 1403-1406 in Religion in

Geschichte und Gegenwart, Vol. 2. 3 rd Edition. Edited by Kurt Galling. Tubingen: Mohr,
1958.
Hossfeld, Frank-Lothar, and Erich Zenger. A Commentary on Psalms 51-100. Hermeneia. Edited
by Klaus Baltzer. Minneapolis: Fortress, 2005.
Hiibner, Hans. "Existentiale Interpretation der paulinischen 'Gerechtigkeit Gottes.' Zur

Kontroverse Rudolf Bultmann-Ernst Kasemann." New Testament Studies 21 (1974-75):
462-88.
Huffmon, H. B. "The Covenant Lawsuit in the Prophets." Journal of Biblical Literature 78

(1959): 285-95.
Bibliography 530
Jacobson, Howard. A Commentary on Pseudo-Philo's Liber Antiquitatum Biblicarum with Latin

Text and English Translation. Arbeiten zur Geschichte des antiken Judentums und des
Urchristentums 31.2 Vols. Leiden: Brill, 1996.
Jellicoe, Sidney. The Septuagint and Modern Study. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1968.
Jenni, Ernst and Claus Westermann, eds. Theological Lexicon of the Old Testament. Peabody:
Hendrickson, 1997.
Jepsen, A. "p"l?2 und Hjpii* im Alten Testament." Pages 78-89 in Gottes Word und Gottes
Land: Hans-Wilhelm Hertzberg zum 70. Geburtstag am 16. Januar 1965 dargebracht
von Kollegen, Freunden und Schiilern. Edited by H. Graf Reventlow. Gottingen:
Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1965.
Jeremias, Joachim. The Central Message of the New Testament. London: 1965. Republished:
Jesus and the Message of the New Testament. Fortress Classics in Biblical Studies.
Edited by Kenneth C. Hanson. Minneapolis: Fortress, 2002.
Jewett, Robert. "Major Impulses in the Theological Interpretation of Romans Since Barth."
Interpretation 34 (1980): 17-31.
. Romans: A Commentary. Hermeneia. Minneapolis: Fortress, 2007.
Jobes, Karen and Moises Silva. Invitation to the Septuagint. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic,
2000.
Johnson, Bo. "Die Bedeutungsuntershied zwischen sdddq und sedaqa." Annual of the Swedish
Theological Institute 11 (1977-78): 31-39.
. "p""!2*," etc. Pages 239-64 in Theological Dictionary? of the Old Testament, Vol. 12.
Edited by G. Johannes Botterweck, Helmer Ringgren, and Heinz-Josef Fabry. Grand
Johnson, S. "Paul and IQS." Hazard Theological Review 118 (1955): 157-65.
Johnson, S. L., Jr. "The Gospel that Paul Preached." Bibliotheca Sacra 128 (1971): 327-40.
Kalmin, Richard. "Levirate Law." Pages 296-7 in The Anchor Bible Dictionary, Vol. 4. Edited
by David Noel Freedman. New York: Doubleday, 1992.
Karlberg, Mark. Covenant Theology in Reformed Perspective. Eugene, Oregon: Wipf & Stock,
2004.
Bibliography 531
Karrer, Martn and Wolfgang Kraus eds. Die Septuaginta - Texte, Kontexte, Lebenswelten:
Internationale Fachtagung Veranstaltet Von Septuaginta Deutsch (LXX.D), Wuppertal
20.-23. Juli 2006. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 11/219.
Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2008.
Kasemann, Ernst. "Zum Verstandnis von Romer 3,24-26." Zeitschrift fur die neutestamentliche
Wissenschaft 43 (1950/51): 150-54. Republished: Pages 96-100 in idem, Exegetische
Versuche und Besinnungen, Erster Band. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1960.
. "Gottesgerechtigkeit bei Paulus." Zeitschrift fur Theologie und Kirche 58 (1961):

361-IS. Republished: Pages 181-93 in idem, Exegetische Versuche und Besinnungen,
Zweiter Band. 2nd Edition. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1965. ET: '"The
Righteousness of God' in Paul." Pages 168-82 in idem, New Testament Questions for
Today. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1969.
. "Rechtfertigung und Heilsgeschichte im Romerbrief." In Paulinischen

Perspektiven. Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1969. ET: "Justification and Salvation History in
the Epistle to the Romans." Pages 60-78 in idem, Perspectives on Paul. Philadelphia:
Fortress, 1971.
. "Justice for the Unjust." Colloquium 1 (1978): 10-16.
. An Die Romer. 4th Edition. Handbuch zum Neuen Testament 8a. Tubingen: Mohr
Siebeck, 1980. ET: Commentary on Romans. Translated by G. W. Bromiley. Grand
Kautzsch, Emil. Uber die Derivate des Stammes p~V% im alttestamentlichen Sprachgebrauch.
Tubingen: Eberhard-Karls-Universitat Tubingen, 1881.
Keck. Leander E. Romans. Abingdon New Testament Commentaries. Nashville: Abingdon,

2005.
Kec, Howard Clark. "The Ethical Dimensions of the Testaments of the XII as a Clue to
Provenance." New Testament Studies 24 (1977-78): 259-70.
Keener, Craig. 1-2 Corinthians. New Cambridge Bible Commentary. Cambridge: Cambridge
Kelly, J. N. D. A Commentary on the Epistles of Peter and of Jude. Harper's New Testament
Commentaries. New York: Harper & Row, 1969.
Kennedy, H. A. A. Sources of New Testament Greek: or the Influence of the Septuagint on the
Vocabulary of the New Testament. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1895.
Bibliography 532
Kertelge, Karl. "Rechtfertigung " bei Paulus: Studien zur Struktur und zum Bedeutungsgehalt des
paulinischen Rechtfertigungsbegriffs. Neutestamentliche Abhandlungen 3. Miinster:
Aschendorff, 1967.
. "SiKaioauvn, SiKaioco, SiKaicoua." Pages 325-35 in Exegetical Dictionary of the

New Testament, Vol. 1. Edited by Horst Balz and Gerhard Schneider. Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1990.
Kidner, Derek. Psalms 73-150: A Commentary on Books III-IV of the Psalms. London:
InterVarsity, 1975.
Kim, Seyoon. The Origin of Paul's Gospel. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen
Testament II/4. Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1981.
. Paul and the New Perspective: Second Thoughts on the Origin of Paul's Gospel.
Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002.
Kirkpatrick, A. F. The Book of Psalms. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1902.
Klein, Giinter. "Gottes Gerechtigkeit als Thema der neuesten Paulus-Forschung." Verkihidigung
und Forschung 12(1967): 1-11.
. "Righteousness in the New Testament." Pages 750-52 in The Interpreter's

Dictionary of the Bible, Supplementary Volume. Edited by Keith Crim. Nashville:
Abingdon, 1976.
Kline, Meredith G. The Structure of Biblical Authority. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1972.
. Kingdom Prologue: Genesis Foundations for a Covenantal Worldview. Eugene,

Oregon: Wipf & Stock, 2006.
Koch, D.-A. Die Schrift als Zeuge des Evangeliums: Untersuchungen zur Verwendung und zum
Verstandnis der Schrift bei Paulus. Beitrage zur historischen Theologie 69. Tubingen:
Mohr Siebeck, 1986.
Koch, Klaus. "pIS" im Alten Testament: Eine traditionsgeschichtliche Untersuchung." Ph.D.

Dissertation. University of Heidelberg, 1953.
. "Gerechtigkeit im Alten Testament," Pages 1501-1502 in Evangelisches

Kirchenlexikon, Vol. 1. Edited by Heinz Brunotte and Otto Weber. Gottingen:
. "Wesen und Ursprung der 'Gemeinschaftstreue' im Israel der Konigszeit."

Zeitschrift fur evangelische Ethik 5 (1961): 72-90.
Bibliography 533
. "pISS." Pages 507-30 in Theologisches Handworterbuch zum Alten Testament,

Vol. 2. Edited by Ernst Jenni and Claus Westermann. Miinchen: Chr. Kaiser, 1971-76.
. "Is There a Doctrine of Retribution in the Old Testament?" Pages 57-87 in

Theodicy in the Old Testament. Issues in Religion and Theology 4. Edited by James L.
Crenshaw. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1983.
Koehler, Ludwig and Walter Baumgartner. The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old
Testament. Translated by M. E. J. Richardson. 2 Vols. Study Edition. Leiden: Brill, 2001.
Koole, Jan L. Isaiah III, Vol. 2: Isaiah 49-55. Historical Commentary on the Old Testament.
Translated by Anthony P. Runia. Leuven: Peeters, 1998.
Kostenberger, Andreas J. "The Reception of Schlatter's New Testament Theology 1909-23."

Pages 9-22 in Schlatter, The Theology of the Apostles: The Development of New
Testament Theology. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1998.
Kraft, Robert A., ed. Septuagintal Lexicography. Society of Biblical Literature Septuagint and
Cognate Studies 1. Missoula: Scholars Press, 1975.
Kraus, Hans-Joachim. Psalms 60-150: A Commentary. Translated by Hilton C. Oswald. ET of

Biblischer Kommentar. Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1989.
Kraus, Wolfgang and R. Glenn Wooden, eds. Septuagint Research: Issues and Challenges in the
Study of the Greek Jewish Scriptures. Society of Biblical Literature Septuagint and
Cognate Studies 53. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2006.
Kugel, James L. The Idea of Biblical Poetry: Parallelism and Its History. New Haven: Yale
Kiimmel, Werner Georg. "ndpsaic; und ev8eic;ic;: Ein Beitrag zum Verstandnis der paulinischen
Rechtfertigungslehre." Zeitschrift flir Theologie und Kirche 49 (1952): 154-67. ET:
"ndpEaic; and £v§eic;ic;: A Contribution to the Understanding of the Pauline Doctrine of
Justification." Pages 1-13 in Distinctive Protestant and Catholic Themes Reconsidered
(Journal for Theology and the Church, Vol. 3). Edited by Robert W. Funk. Tubingen:
Mohr Siebeck/New York: Harper & Row, 1967.
Lagrange, Marie-Joseph. Saint Paul: Epitre aux Romains. 6th Edition. Paris: Gabalda, 1950.
Lambrecht, Jan. Second Corinthians. Sacra Pagina 8. CoUegeviUe, Minn.: The Liturgical Press,
1999.
Bibliography 534
Lane, William L. "Paul's Legacy from Phariseeism: Light from the Psalms of Solomon."
Concordia Journal % (1982): 130-38.
Lee, John A. L. "A Note on Septuagint Material in the Supplement to Liddell and Scott." Glotta
47 (1969): 234-42.
. A Lexical Study of the Septuagint Version of the Pentateuch. Society of Biblical

Literature Septuagint and Cognate Studies 14. Chico: Scholars Press, 1983.
Leggett, Donald A. The Levirate and Goel Institutions in the Old Testament: With Special
Attention to the Book of Ruth. Cherry Hill, New Jersey: Mack, 1974.
Lenski, R. C. H. The Interpretation of St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans. Minneapolis: Augsburg,
1936.
Levine, Lee I. Judaism and Hellenism in Antiquity: Conflict or Confluence? Seattle: The
University of Washington Press, 1998.
Liddell, Henry George, Robert Scott, Henry Stuart Jones, with the assistance of Robert
McKenzie. A Greek-English Lexicon. 9th Edition, with a Supplement 1968. Oxford:
Clarendon, 1989.
Lofthouse, W. F. "The Righteousness of God." Expository Times 50 (1939): 441-45.
Lohse, Eduard. "Die Gerechtigkeit Gottes in der paulinischen Theologie." Pages 209-27 in Die
Einheit des Neuen Testaments: Exegetische Studien zur Theologie des Neuen
Testaments. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1973.
. Theological Ethics of the New Testament. Translated by M. Eugene Boring.

Minneapolis: Fortress, 1991.
Longman, III, Tremper. "Psalm 98: A Divine Warrior Victory Song." Journal of the Evangelical
Theological Society 27/3 (1984): 267-74.
Louw, Johannes P. and Eugene A. Nida, eds. Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament
Based on Semantic Domains. New York: United Bible Societies, 1988.
Lowth, Robert. Lectures on the Sacred Poetry of the Hebrews (1787). 2 Vols. Translated by G.
Gregory. Anglistica & Americana 43. Hildesheim: Georg Olms Verlag, 1969.
Luhrmann, Dieter. "Paul and the Pharisaic Tradition." Journal for the Study of the New
Testament 36 (1989): 75-94.
Lust, Johann, Erik Eynikel, and Katrin Hauspie. Greek-English Lexicon of the Septuagint.
Revised Edition. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2003.
Bibliography 535
Lyonnet, S. "De 'Justitia Dei' in Epistola ad Romanos." Verbum Domini 25 (1947): 23ff, 118ff,
129ff 193ff, 257ff.
McClintock, John and James Strong, eds. Cyclopaedia of Biblical, Theological, and
Ecclesiastical Literature. 12 Vols. New York: Harper & Brothers, 1880.
McCormack, Bruce L., ed. Justification in Perspective: Historical Developments and

Contemporary Challenges. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2006.
McGrath, Alister E. Iustitia Dei: A History of the Christian Doctrine of Justification. 3 r Edition.
McKenzie, John L. Second Isaiah. The Anchor Bible 20. Garden City: Doubleday, 1968.
McKim, Donald K., ed. Dictionary of Major Biblical Interpreters. Downers Grove: IVP
Academic, 2007.
McLay, Timothy R. The Use of the Septuagint in New Testament Research. Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 2003.
Marshall, I. Howard. The Gospel of Luke. New International Greek Testament Commentary.
Martin, Ralph P. 2 Corinthians. Word Biblical Commentary 40. Waco: Word Books, 1986.
Mason, Steve. Josephus and the New Testament. 2n Edition. Peabody: Hendrickson, 2003.
Matera, Frank. 7/ Corinthians. The New Testament Library. Louisville: Westminster John Knox,
2003.
Matlock, R. Barry. "Saving Faith: The Rhetoric and Semantics of 7iiaxic; in Paul." Pages 73-89 in
The Faith of Jesus Christ: Exegetical, Biblical, and Theological Studies. Edited by
Michael F. Bird and Preston M. Sprinkle. Milton Keynes: Paternoster/Peabody:
Hendrickson, 2009.
Matthew, H. C. G. and Brian Harrison, eds. Oxford Dictionary of National Biography. Oxford:
Mays, James Luther. Micah: A Commentary. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1976.
. Psalms. Interpretation. Louisville: John Knox, 1994.
Mendenhall, George E. Law and Covenant In Israel and the Ancient Near East. Pittsburgh:
Biblical Colloquium, 1955.
Bibliography - 536
Meyer, H. A. W. Critical and Exegetical Hand-Book to the Epistle to the Romans. Translated by
John C. Moore and Edwin Johnson. Revised Edition. New York: Funk & Wagnalls,
1884.
Michel, Diethelm. Grundlegung einer hebrdischen Syntax. 2 Vols. Neukirchen-Vluyn:

Neukirchener, 1977.
Moo, Douglas J. The Epistle to the Romans. New International Commentary on the New
. The Letter of James. Pillar New Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans/Leicester, England: Apollos, 2000.
Moms, Leon. The Epistle to the Romans. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988.
Motyer, J. Alec. The Prophecy of Isaiah. Downers Grove, InterVarsity, 1993.

Moule, C. F. D. An Idiom Book of New Testament Greek. 2n Edition. Cambridge: Cambridge
Moulton, J. H. and G. Milligan. Vocabulary of the Greek Testament. London: Hodder &
Stoughton, 1930.
Mowinckel, Sigmund. The Psalms in Israel's Worship. 2 Vols. Nashville: Abingdon, 1962.
Miiller, Christian. Gottes Gerechtigkeit und Gottes Volk: Eine Untersuchung zu Romer 9-11.
Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments 86. Gottingen:
Miiller, Mogens. The First Bible of the Church: A Plea for the Septuagint. Journal for the Study
of the Old Testament: Supplement Seriesp 206. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press,
1996.
Mueller, David L. An Introduction to the Theology of Albrecht Ritschl. Philadelphia:

Westminster, 1969.
Muraoka, Takamitsu. "On Septuagint Lexicography and Patristics." Journal of Theological

Studies 35 (1984): 441-48.
, ed. Melbourne Symposium on Septuagint Lexicography. Society of Biblical

Literature Septuagint and Cognate Studies 28. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1990.
Bibliography 537
. "Septuagintal Lexicography: Some General Issues " Pages 17-47 in Melbourne

Symposium on Septuagint Lexicography. Edited by Takamitsu Muraoka. Society of
Biblical Literature Septuagint and Cognate Studies 28. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1990.
. Hebrew/Aramaic Index to the Septuagint Keyed to the Hatch-Redpath

Concordance. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1998.
. "Septuagintal Lexicography." Pages 85-90 in Biblical Greek Language and

Lexicography: Essays in Honor of Frederick W. Danker. Edited by Bernard A. Taylor,
John A. L. Lee, Peter R. Burton, and Richard E. Whitaker. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
2004.
. "Recent Discussions on the Septuagint Lexicography with Special Reference to the

So-called Interlinear Model." Pages 221-35 in Die Septuaginta - Texte, Kontexte.
Lebenswelten: Internationale Fachtagung veranstaltet von Septuaginta Deutsch
(LXX.D), Wuppertal 20.-23. Juli 2006. Edited by Martin Karrer and Wolfgang Kraus.
Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 11/219. Tubingen: Mohr
Siebeck, 2008.
. A Greek-English Lexicon of the Septuagint. Louvain: Peeters, 2009.
Murray, John. The Epistle to the Romans. New International Commentary on the New
Myers, Jacob M. I andII Esdras: Introduction, Translation and Commentaiy . The Anchor Bible
42. Garden City: Doubleday, 1974.
Nageli, Theodor. Der Wortschatz des Apostels Paulus: Beitrag zur sprachgeschichtlichen
Erforschung des Neuen Testaments. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1905.
Neuer, Werner. Adolf Schlatter: A Biography of Germany's Premier Biblical Theologian.

Translated by Robert W. Yarbrough. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1995.
Nicklesburg, George W. E. 1 Enoch 1: A Commentary on the Book of 1 Enoch, Chapters 1-36;

81-108. Hermeneia. Minneapolis: Fortress, 2001.
Niditch, Susan. "The Wronged Woman Righted: An Analysis of Genesis 38." Harvard
Theological Review 72 (1979): 143-49.
Notscher, Friedrich. Die Gerechtigkeit Gottes bei den vorexilischen Propheten. Alttestamentliche
Abhandlungen 6. Minister: Aschendorff, 1915.
Nygren, Anders. Commentary on Romans. Translated by Carl C. Rasmussen. Philadelphia:

Muhlenberg, 1949.
Bibliography - 538
O'Dell, J. "The Religious Background of the Psalms of Solomon (Re-evaluated in the Light of
the Qumran Texts)." Revue de Qumran 3 (1961): 241-57.
Oepke, Albrecht. "AiKaioouvrj Oeou bei Paulus in neuer Beleuchtung." Theologische

Literaturzeitung 78 (1953): 257-64.
Ogden, C. K. and I. A. Richards. The Meaning of Meaning: A Study of the Influence of Language
Upon Thought and of the Science of Symbolism. New York: Harcourt Brace, 1938.
Olley, John W. "Righteousness " in the Septuagint of Isaiah: A Contextual Study. Society of
Biblical Literature Septuagint and Cognate Studies 8. Missoula: Scholars Press, 1979.
. "'Righteousness' - Some Issues in Old Testament Translation into English." The

Bible Translator 38 (1987): 307-15.
Onesti, K. L. and M. T. Brauch. "Righteousness, Righteousness of God." Pages 827-37 in

Dictionary of Paul and His Letters. Edited by Ralph P. Martin Gerald F. Hawthorne, and
Daniel G. Reid. Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1993.
Oswalt, John N. The Book of Isaiah. New International Commentary on the Old Testament.
Ottley, R. R. The Book of Isaiah According to the Septuagint (Codex Alexandrinus). 2 Vols.
Otto, Eckart. "Gerechtigkeit, Biblisch, Alter Orient und Altes Testament." Pages 702-3 in
Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart, Vol. 3. 4th Edition. Edited by Hans Dieter Betz.
Parker, T. H. L. Commentaries on the Epistle to the Romans, 1532-1542. Edinburgh: T&T

Clark, 1986.
Pedersen, Johannes. Israel, Its Life and Culture. 2 Vols. London: Oxford University Press, 1926.
Pietersma, Albert. Translation Manual for "A New English Translation of the Septuagint"
(NETS). Ada: Uncial Books for IOSCS, 1996.
. "Context is King in Septuagint Lexicography - Or is It?" Paper presented at

Society of Biblical Literature Annual Meeting in San Diego. November 18, 2007.
. "Text-Production and Text-Reception: Psalm 8 in Greek," Pages 487-501 in Die

Septuaginta - Texte, Kontexte, Lebenswelten: Internationale Fachtagung veranstaltet
von Septuaginta Deutsch (LXX.D), Wuppertal 20.-23. Juli 2006. Edited by Martin Karrer
and Wolfgang Kraus. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 11/219.
Bibliography 539
. "Response to: T. Muraoka, 'Recent Discussions on the Septuagint Lexicography

with Special Reference to the So-called Interlinear Model,' in Die Septuaginta. Texte,
Kontexte, Lebenswelten (ed. M. Karrer and W. Kraus; Tubingen: J.C.B. Mohr [Paul
Siebeck], 2008) 221-235." Unpublished paper, 2008.
http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/nets/discussion/pietersma-re-muraoka.pdf.
Piper, John. "The Demonstration of the Righteousness of God in Romans 3:25, 26." Journal for
the Study of the New Testament 1 (1980): 2-32.
. "The Righteousness of God in Romans 3.1-8." Theologische Zeitschrift 36 (1980):

3-16.
. The Justification of God: An Exegetical and Theological Study of Romans 9:1-23.

nd
2 Edition. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1993.
. Counted Righteous in Christ: Should We Abandon the Imputation of Christ's

Righteousness? Wheaton: Crossway, 2002.
. The Future of Justification: A Response to N. T. Wright. Wheaton: Crossway,

2007.
Porter, Stanley E. and Christopher D. Stanley, eds. As It Is Written: Studying Paul's Use of
Scripture. Society of Biblical Literature Symposium Series 50. Atlanta: Society of
Biblical Literature, 2008.
Pritchard, James B. Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament. 3r Edition.
Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1969.
Przybylski, Benno. Righteousness in Matthew and His World of Thought. Society for New
Testament Studies Monograph Series 41. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1980.
Rabin, C. "The Translation Process and the Character of the Septuagint." Textus 6 (1968): 1-26.
Rajak, Tessa. The Jewish Dialogue with Greece and Rome: Studies in Cultural and Social
Interaction. Arbeiten zur Geschichte des antiken Judentums und des Urchristentums 48.
Leiden: Brill, 2001.
Reasoner, Mark. Romans in Full Circle: A History of Interpretation. Louisville: Westminster
John Knox, 2005.
Reimer, David J. "p""!l*." Pages 744-69 in New International Dictionary of Old Testament
Theology and Exegesis, Vol. 3. Edited by Willem VanGemeren. Grand Rapids:
Zondervan, 1997.
Bibliography 540
Reiterer, Friedrich V. Gerechtigkeit als Heil: Tsedeq bei Deuterojesaja: Aussage u. Vergleich
mit d. alttestamentlichen Tradition. Graz: Akademische Druck-u. Verlagsanstalt, 1976.
Reumann, John. "Justification of God: Righteousness and the Cross." Moravian Theological
Seminary Bulletin (1964): 16-31.
. "The 'Righteousness of God' and the 'Economy of God': Two Great Doctrinal
Themes Historically Compared." Pages 615-37 in Aksum, Thyateira: A Festschrift for
Archbishop Methodios of Thyateira and Great Britain. Edited by George D. Dragas and
Methodios G. Phougias. London: Thyateira House, 1985.
. "Righteousness (Early Judaism)," "Righteousness (Greco-Roman World),"

"Righteousness (NT)." Pages 736-73 in The Anchor Bible Dictionary, Vol. 5. Edited by
Reumann, John, Joseph A. Fitzmyer, and Jerome D. Quinn. "Righteousness " in the New
Testament: "Justification" in the United States Lutheran-Catholic Dialogue.
Philadelphia: Fortress/New York: Paulist, 1982.
Richard, Earl J. Reading 1 Peter, Jude, and 2 Peter: A Literary and Theological Commentary.
Macon, Georgia: Smyth & Helwys, 2000.
Ritschl, Albrecht. Die christliche Lehre von der Rechtfertigung und Versohnung. 3 Vols. Bonn:
A. Marcus, 1870-74.
Ropes, James Hardy. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle of St. James.
International Critical Commentary. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1948.
Rosel, Martin. Ubersetzung als Vollendung der Auslegung: Studien zur Genesis-Septuaginta.
Beihefte zur Zeitschrift fur die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 223. Berlin: de Gruyter,
1994.
Ryken, Leland, James C. Wright, and Tremper Longman III. The Dictionary of Biblical Imageiy.
Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1998.
Sakenfeld, Katharine Doob. The Meaning of Hesed in the Hebrew Bible: A New Inquiry. Harvard
Semitic Monographs 17. Missoula: Scholars Press, 1978.
Saldarini, Anthony J. "The Book of Baruch: Introduction, Commentary, and Reflections." Pages
927-82 in The New Interpreter's Bible, Vol. 6. Edited by Leander E. Keck. Nashville:
Abingdon, 2001.
Bibliography 541
Sanday, William and Arthur C. Headlam. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle
to the Romans. 5th Edition. International Critical Commentary. Edinburgh: T&T Clark,
1902.
Sanders, E. P. Paul and Palestinian Judaism: A Comparison of Patterns of Religion.

Sarna, Nahum M. Genesis. JPS Torah Commentary. Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication
Society, 1989.
Sawyer, John F. A. Semantics in Biblical Research: New Methods of Defining Hebrew Words
for Salvation. Studies in Biblical Theology 11/24. London: SCM, 1972.
. "S"*£*\" Pages 1035-59 in Theologisches Worterbuch zum Alten Testament, Vol. 3.

Edited by G. Johannes Botterweck and Helmer Ringgren. Stuttgart: W. Kohlhammer,
1982. ET: Pages 441-63 in Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, Vol. 6. Edited
by G. Johannes Botterweck and Helmer Ringgren. Translated by David E. Green and
Douglas W. Stott. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990.
. Isaiah. The Daily Study Bible. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1986.
Schenck, Kenneth. A Brief Guide to Philo. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2005.
Schlatter, Adolf. Gottes Gerechtigkeit: Ein Kommentar zum Romerbrief Stuttgart: Calwer, 1935.
ET: Romans: The Righteousness of God. Translated by Siegfried S. Schatzmann.
. The Theology of the Apostles: The Development of New Testament Theology.

Translated by Andreas J. Kostenberger. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1998.
Schmid, H. H. Gerechtigkeit als Weltordnung: Hintergrund und Geschichte des

alttestamentliche Gerechtigkeitsbegriffs. Beitrage zur historischen Theologie 40.
. "Creation, Righteousness, and Salvation: 'Creation Theology' as the Broad

Horizon of Biblical Theology," Pages 102-17 in Creation in the Old Testament. Edited
byBernhardW. Anderson. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984.
Schreiner, Thomas R. Romans. Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament. Grand
Rapids: Baker, 1998.
. Paul, Apostle of God's Glory In Christ: A Pauline Theology. Downers Grove:

InterVarsity, 2001.
Bibliography 542
. New Testament Theology: Magnifying God in Christ. Grand Rapids: Baker

Academic, 2008.
Schrenk, Gottlob. "avriSiKOt;." Pages 373-5 in Theological Dictionary of the New Testament,
Vol. 1. Edited by Gerhard Kittel. Translated by Geoffrey W. Bromiley. Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1964.
. "SIKTJ, KXX." Pages 180-229 in Theologisches Worterbuch zum Neuen Testament,

Vol. 2. Edited by Gerhard Kittel. Stuttgart: W. Kohlhammer, 1935. ET: Pages 178-225 in
Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, Vol. 2. Edited by Gerhard Kittel.
Translated by Geoffrey W. Bromiley. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964.
Schultz, Hermann. Alttestamentliche Theologie: Die Offenbarungsreligion auf ihrer

vorchristlichen Entwickelungsstufe. 5th Edition. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht,
1896.
Schulz, Siegfried. "Zur Rechtfertigung aus Gnaden in Qumran und bei Paulus: Zugleich ein
Beitrag zur Form- und Uberlieferungsgeschichte der Qumrantexte." Zeitschrift fur
Theologie und Kirche 56 (1959): 155-85.
Scullion, J. J. "Righteousness (OT)." Pages 724-36 in The Anchor Bible Dictionary, Vol. 5.
Edited by David Noel Freedman. New York: Doubleday, 1992.
Seifrid, Mark A. Justification by Faith: The Origin and Development of a Central Pauline
Theme. Supplements to Novum Testamentum 68. Leiden: Brill, 1992.
. Christ, Our Righteousness: Paul's Theology of Justification. New Studies in

Biblical Theology 9. Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 2000.
. "The 'New Perspective on Paul' and Its Problems." Themelios 252 (2000): 4-18.
. "Righteousness Language in the Hebrew Scriptures and Early Judaism," Pages

415-42 in Justification and Variegated Nomism, Vol. I: The Complexities of Second
Temple Judaism. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 11/140.
Edited by D. A. Carson, Peter T. O'Brien, and Mark A. Seifrid. Grand Rapids: Baker
Academic, 2001.
. "Paul's Use of Righteousness Language Against Its Hellenistic Background,"

Pages 39-74 in Justification and Variegated Nomism, Vol. 2: The Paradoxes of Paul.
Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 11/181. Edited by D. A.
Carson, Peter T. O'Brien, and Mark A. Seifrid. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2004.
. "The Narrative of Scripture and Justification by Faith: A Fresh Response to N. T.

Wright." Concordia Theological Quarterly 72 (2008): 19-44.
Bibliography 543
Seitz, Christopher R. "The Book of Isaiah 40-66." In The New Interpreter's Bible, Vol. 6.
Nashville: Abingdon, 2001.
Seland, Torrey. "Saul of Tarsus and Early Zealotism: Reading Gal 1,13-14 in Light of Philo's
Writings." Biblica 83 (2002): 449-71.
Shedd, William G. T. A Critical and Doctrinal Commentary on the Epistle of St. Paul to the
Romans. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1879.
Silva, Moises. "Semantic Bon-owing in the New Testament." New Testament Studies 22 (1975-
76): 104-10.
. "New Lexical Semitisms?" Zeitschrift fur die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft 69

(1978): 253-57.
. "Describing Meaning in the LXX Lexicon." Bulletin of the International

Organization for Septuagint and Cognate Studies 11 (1978): 19-26.
. "Bilingualism and the Character of New Testament Greek." Biblica 69 (1980):

198-219.
. Biblical Words and Their Meaning: An Introduction to Lexical Semantics. Grand

. God, Language, and Scripture: Reading the Bible in the Light of General
Linguistics. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1990.
. "Faith Versus Works of Law in Galatians." Pages 217-48 in Justification and

Variegated Nomism, Vol. 2: The Paradoxes ofPaul. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen
zum Neuen Testament 11/181. Edited by D. A. Carson, Peter T. O'Brien, and Mark A.
Seifrid. Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck/Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2004.
. Philippians. Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament. 2n Edition.

Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2005.
Simon-Shoshan, Moshe. "The Tasks of the Translators: The Rabbis, the Septuagint, and the
Cultural Politics of Translation." Prooftexts 27 (2007): 1-39.
Simpson, D. P. Cassell's Latin Dictionaiy: Latin-English, English-Latin. New York: Macmillan,

1968.
Singer, Isidore, ed. The Jewish Encyclopedia. New York: Funk & Wagnalls, 1904.
Skehan, Patrick W. and Alexander A. di Leila. The Wisdom of Ben Sira. The Anchor Bible 39.
New York: Doubleday, 1987.
Bibliography 544
Skolnik, Fred, and Michael Berenbaum, eds. Encyclopaedia Judaica. 2" Edition. Detroit:
Thomson Gale, 2007.
Smith, Ralph L. Micah-Malachi. Word Biblical Commentary 32. Waco: Word Books, 1984.
Snaith, Norman H. The Distinctive Ideas of the Old Testament. London: Epworth, 1944.
Soards, Marion L. "The Righteousness of God in the Writings of the Apostle Paul." Biblical
Theology Bulletin 15 (1985): 104-9.
. "Kasemann's 'Righteousness' Reexamined." Catholic Biblical Quarterly 49

(1987): 264-7.
Speiser, E. A. "'People' and 'Nation' of Israel." Journal of Biblical Literature 79 (1960): 157-
63.
. Genesis. The Anchor Bible 1. 3 rd Edition. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1986.
Spicq, Ceslas. "SiKaioc;, dikaios, etc." Pages 318-47 in idem, Theological Lexicon of the New
Testament, Vol. 1. Translated and edited by J. D. Ernest. Peabody: Hendrickson, 1994.
. Les Epitres de Saint Pierre. Sources bibliques. Paris: Gabalda, 1966.
Stegman, Thomas. The Character of Jesus: The Linchpin to Paul's Argument in 2 Corinthians.
Analecta biblica 158. Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 2005.
. Second Corinthians. Catholic Commentary on Sacred Scripture. Grand Rapids:

Baker Academic, 2009.
Stendahl, Krister. "The Apostle Paul and the Introspective Conscience of the West." Harvard
Theological Review 56 (1963): 199-215.
. Paul Among Jews and Gentiles. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1976.
Stone, Michael E. Faith and Piety in Early Judaism: Texts and Documents. Philadelphia:
Fortress, 1983.
. Fourth Ezra. Hermeneia. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1990.
Stott, John R. W. The Message of Romans: God's GoodNewsfor the World. The Bible Speaks
Today. Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1994.
Stowers, Stanley K. The Diatribe and Paul's Letter to the Romans. Society of Biblical Literature
Dissertation Series 57. Chico: Scholars Press, 1981.
Bibliography 545
. A Rereading of Romans: Justice, Jews, and Gentiles. New Haven: Yale

Strecker, Georg. Theology of the New Testament. Translated by M. Eugene Boring. New York:
Walter de Grayter, 2000.
Stuart, Moses. A Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans. 3 r Edition. Andover: Warren F.
Draper, 1854.
Stuhlmacher, Peter. Gerechtigkeit Gottes bei Paulus. 2nd Edition. Forschungen zur Religion und
Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments 87. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht,
1966.
. Versohnung, Gesetz und Gerechtigkeit: Aufsdtze zur bibllschen Theologie.

Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1981. ET: Reconciliation, Law, and
Righteousness: Essays in Biblical Theology. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1986.
. Der Brief an die Romer. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1989. ET: Paul's
Letter to the Romans: A Commentary. Translated by Scott J. Hafemann. Edinburgh: T&T
Clark, 1994.
. "The Theme of Romans." Pages 333-45 in The Romans Debate. Edited by Karl P.
Donfried. Peabody: Hendrickson, 1992.
. "Adolf Schlatter as Interpreter of Paul - An Attempt." Pages ix-xxiv in Adolf

Schlatter, Romans: The Righteousness of God. Peabody: Hendrickson, 1995.
. Revisiting Paul's Doctrine of Justification: A Challenge to the New Perspective,

with an essay by Donald A. Hagner. Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 2001.
. Biblische Theologie des Neuen Testaments, Band 1: Grundlegung - Von Jesus zu

Paulus. 3 rd Edition. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2005.
Talbert, Charles H. "Paul, Judaism, and the Revisionists." Catholic Biblical Quarterly 63 (2001):
1-22.
Tate, Marvin E. Psalms 51-100. Word Biblical Commentary 20. Dallas: Word Books, 1990.
Taylor, Bernard A. "Hebrew to Greek: A Semantic Study of a7rsfJSco for the New English
Translation of the Septuagint." Pages 136-48 in Biblical Greek Language and
Lexicography: Essays in Honor of Frederick W. Danker. Edited by Bernard A. Taylor,
John A. L. Lee, Peter R. Burton, and Richard E. Whitaker. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
2004.
Bibliography 546
Thackeray, Henry St. John. A Grammar of the Old Testament in Greek According to the
Septuagint, Vol. 1: Introduction, Orthography and Accidence. Cambridge: Cambridge
Thayer, Joseph H. Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament. 4( Edition.

Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1896.
Tholuck, Friedrich A. G. Exposition of St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans. Translated by Robert
Menzies. Philadelphia: Sorin and Ball, 1844.
Tobin, Thomas H. Paul's Rhetoric in Its Contexts: The Argument of Romans. Peabody:
Hendrickson, 2004.
Toury, Gideon. Descriptive Translation Studies and Beyond. Amsterdam: John Benjamins,
1995.
Tov, Emanuel. Tov, Emanuel. The Septuagint Translation of Jeremiah and Baruch: A
Discussion of an Early Revision of the LXX of Jeremiah 29-52 and Baruch 1:1-3:8.
Harvard Semitic Monographs 8. Missoula: Scholars Press, 1976.
. "Three Dimensions of LXX Words." Revue Biblique 83 (1976): 529-44.
. "Greek Words and Hebrew Meanings." Pages 83-126 in Melbourne Symposium on

Septuagint Lexicography. Edited by Takamitsu Muraoka. Society of Biblical Literature
Septuagint and Cognate Studies 28. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1990.
Toy, Crawford H. The Book of Proverbs. International Critical Commentary. Edinburgh: T&T
Clark, 1899, 1970.
Ullmann, Stephen. Semantics: An Introduction to the Science of Meaning. Oxford: Blackwell,

1977.
van der Horst, P. W. The Sentences of Pseudo-Phocylides with Introduction and Commentary.
Studia in Veteris Testamenti pseudepigraphica 4. Leiden: Brill, 1978.
VanderKam, James C. Textual and Historical Studies in the Book of Jubilees. Harvard Semitic
Monographs 14. Missoula: Scholars Press, 1977.
van Henten, Jan Willem. "Datierung und Herkunft des Vierten Makkabaerbuches." Pages 136-49
in Tradition and Re-interpretation in Jewish and Early Christian Literature: Essays in
Honour ofJiirgen C. H. Lebram. Studia post-Biblica 36. Edited by J. W. van Henten, et
al. Leiden: Brill, 1986.
von Rad, Gerhard. Old Testament Theology. 2 Vols. Translated by D. M. G. Stalker. Edinburgh:
Oliver and Boyd, 1962.
Bibliography 547
Wagner, J. Ross. Heralds of the Good News: Isaiah and Paul "in Concert" in the Letter to the
Romans. Supplements to Novum Testamentum 101. Leiden: Brill, 2002.
. "The Septuagint and the 'Search for the Christian Bible'." Pages 17-28 in
Scripture's Doctrine and Theology's Bible: How the New Testament Shapes Christian
Dogmatics. Edited by Markus Bockmuehl and Alan J. Torrance. Grand Rapids: Baker
Academic, 2008.
Wallace, Daniel B. Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996.
Wallis, Ian. The Faith of Jesus Christ in Early Christian Traditions. Society for New Testament
Studies Monograph Series 84. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995.
Waltke, Bruce K. A Commentary on Micah. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2007.
Waltke, Bruce K. and M. O'Connor. An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax. Winona Lake:
Eisenbrauns, 1990.
Waltke Bruce K. with Cathi J. Fredricks. Genesis: A Commentary. Grand Rapids: Zondervan,
2001.
Walton, John H. Genesis. NIV Application Commentary. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2001.
Watson, Francis. Paul and the Hermeneutics of Faith. London: T&T Clark, 2004.
. Paul, Judaism, and the Gentiles: Beyond the New Perspective. Revised Edition.
Watson, Nigel M. "Some Observations on the Use of AIKAKX2 in the Septuagint." Journal of
Biblical Literature 79 (1960): 255-66.
Watson. Wilfred G. E. "Gender-Matched Synonymous Parallelism in the OT." Journal of

Biblical Literature 99 (1980): 321-41.
Way, David V. The Lordship of Christ: Ernst Kasemann's Interpretation of Paul's Theology.
Oxford Theological Monographs. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1991.
Weingreen, J. "The Title Moreh Sedek." Journal of Semitic Studies 6 (1961): 162-74.
Weisberg, Dvora E. "The Widow of Our Discontent: Levirate Marriage in the Bible and Ancient
Israel." Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 28 (2004): 403-29.
Weiser, Artur. The Psalms: A Commentary. Translated by Herbert Hartwell. Old Testament
Library. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1962.
Bibliography 548
Wenham, Gordon J. Genesis 16-50. Word Biblical Commentary 2. Dallas: Word Books, 1994.
Werblowsky, R. J. Zwi, and Geoffrey Wigoder, eds. The Oxford Dictionary? of the Jewish
Religion. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997.
Westerholm, Stephen. Perspectives Old and New on Paul: The "Lutheran " Paul and His
Critics. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2004.
. "The Righteousness of the Law and the Righteousness of Faith in Romans."

Interpretation 58 (July 2004): 253-64.
Westermann, Claus. Isaiah 40-66: A Commentary. Old Testament Library. Translated by D. M.

G. Stalker. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1969.
Wevers, John William. Notes on the Greek Text of Exodus. Society of Biblical Literature
Septuagint and Cognate Studies 30. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1990.
. Notes on the Greek Text of Genesis. Society of Biblical Literature Septuagint and
Cognate Studies 35. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1993.
Whitley, C. F. "Deutero-Isaiah's Interpretation of sedeq." Vetus Testamentum 22 (1972): 469-75.
Whybray, R. N. Isaiah 40-66. New Century Bible. London: Oliphants, 1975.

Wilckens, Ulrich. Der Brief an die Romer. 2 Vols. Evangelisch-katholischer Kommentar zum
Neuen Testament. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener, 1978.
Wildberger, Hans. Isaiah 1-12: A Commentary. Translated by Thomas H. Trapp. Minneapolis:

Fortress, 1991.
Williams, Sam K. "The 'Righteousness of God' in Romans." Journal of Biblical Literature 99

(1980): 241-90.
Willis, Timothy. The Elders of the City. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2001.
Wilson, Walter T. The Mysteries of Righteousness: The Literary Composition and Genre of the
Sentences ofPseudo-Phocylides. Texte und Studien zum antiken Judentum 40. Tubingen:
Mohr Siebeck, 1994.
. The Sentences of Pseudo-Phocylides. Commentaries on Early Jewish Literature.

Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2005.
Bibliography - 549
Winninge, Mikael. Sinners and the Righteous: A Comparative Study of the Psalms of Solomon
and Paul's Letters. Coniectanea biblica: New Testament Series 26. Stockholm: Almqvist
& Wiksell Internationa], 1995.
Winston, David. The Wisdom of Solomon. The Anchor Bible 43. Garden City: Doubleday, 1979.
Witherington, Ben, III. Paul's Letter to the Romans: A Soclo-Rhetortcal Commentary. Grand
Wright, Benjamin G. "The Septuagint and Its Modem Translators." Pages 103-14 in Die
Septuaginta - Texte, Kontexte, Lebenswelten: Internationale Fachtagung veranstaltet
von Septuaginta Deutsch (LXX.D), Wuppertal 20.-23. Juli 2006. Edited by Martin Karrer
and Wolfgang Kraus. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 11/219.
Wright, N. T. "The Paul of History and the Apostle of Faith." Tyndale Bulletin 29 (1978): 61-88.
. "The Messiah and the People of God: A Study in Pauline Theology with Particular
Reference to the Argument of the Epistle of Romans." Ph.D. Dissertation, University of
Oxford, 1980.
. "A New Tubingen School? Ernst Kasemann and His Commentary on Romans."
Themelios 1 (\9%2): 6-\6.
. The Climax of the Covenant: Christ and the Law in Pauline Theology.
. The New Testament and the People of God. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1992.
. "On Becoming the Righteousness of God." Pages 200-8 in Pauline Theology, Vol.
2: 1 & 2 Corinthians. Edited by David M. Hay. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993.
. "Romans and the Theology of Paul." Pages 30-67 in Pauline Theology, vol. 3:
Romans. Edited by David M. Hay and E. Elizabeth Johnson. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1995.
. What Saint Paul Really Said: Was Paul of Tarsus the Real Founder of
Christianity? Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997.
. "The Law in Romans 2." Pages 131-50 in Paul and the Mosaic Law. Edited by
James D. G. Dunn. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2001.
. "The Letter to the Romans." Pages 393-770 in The New Interpreter's Bible, Vol.
10. Edited by Leander E. Keck. Nashville: Abingdon, 2002.
. Paul in Fresh Perspective. Minneapolis: Fortress, 2005.

Bibliography 550
. "New Perspectives on Paul." Pages 243-64 in Justification in Perspective:

Historical Developments and Contemporary Challenges. Edited by Bruce L.
McCormack. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2006.
. Justification: God's Plan and Paul's Vision. London: SPCK/Downers Grove:

InterVarsity, 2009.
Wiirthwein, Ernst. "Bemerkungen zu Psalm 51." Pages 381-88 in Neue Wege der
Psalmenforschung: FS W. Beyerlin. Herders biblische Studien 1. Edited by Klaus
Seybold and Erich Zenger. 2 nd Edition. Freiburg: Herder, 1995.
Yinger, Kent L. Paul, Judaism, and Judgment According to Deeds. Society for New Testament
Studies Monograph Series 105. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999.
Young, E. J. The Book of Isaiah. 3 Vols. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1972.
Zahl, Paul F. M. "A New Source for Understanding German Theology: Kasemann, Bultmann,
and the 'New Perspective on Paul'." Sewanee Theological Review 39 (1996): 413-22.
Zanker, O. "AiKaioauvn Oeou bei Paulus." Zeitschrift fitr systematische Theologie 9 (1931-32):
398-420.
Ziesler, John A. The Meaning of Righteousness in Paul: A Linguistic and Theological Enquiry.
Society for New Testament Studies Monograph Series 20. Cambridge: Cambridge
. Paul's Letter to the Romans. TPI New Testament Commentaries. Philadelphia:
Trinity Press International, 1989.
. Pauline Christianity. Revised Edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1990.
. "Justification by Faith in the Light of the 'New Perspective' on Paul." Theology 94

(1991): 188-94.
VITA
Charles Lee Irons
Born in the year 1968 in Los Angeles, Charles Lee Irons completed his Bachelor of Arts degree
at the University of California, Los Angeles, in June 1992, with a major in Greek. He earned the
Master of Divinity degree in Biblical Studies in June 1996 from Westminster Seminary
California in Escondido. He lives in Northridge, California, and is currently employed as the
Director of the Office of Research Administration at Charles R. Drew University of Medicine
and Science in Los Angeles. Mr. Irons is a ruling elder in the Presbyterian Church in America.
He is a member of the Society of Biblical Literature and the Evangelical Theological Society. He
is married to Misty Irons (nee Yoshikawa) and has three children.

Romans - Diss - DIKAISYHN THEOU, Examination of The Covenant Faithfulness Interpretation - Charles Lee Irons - 2011

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Romans - Diss - DIKAISYHN THEOU, Examination of The Covenant Faithfulness Interpretation - Charles Lee Irons - 2011

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Center for Advanced Theological Studies

A dissertation submitted to the faculty of the

Charles Lee Irons

All rights reserved

INFORMATION TO ALL USERS

By Charles Lee Irons

Dissertation Approval Sheet

This dissertation entitled

Charles Lee Irons

and submitted in partial fulfillment of the

requirements for the degree of

has been accepted by the Faculty of Fuller Theological Seminary

upon the recommendation of the following readers:

Charles Stephen and Margaret Martha Irons

coc Sifivoiyev fiulv xaq ypacpac;;

Figure and Tables vii

Chapter 1: History of Interpretation of AiKouoauvri Oeou in Paul 12

Chapter 2: Methodological Considerations 83

Chapter 3: Righteousness in Extra-Biblical Greek 115

Chapter 4: Righteousness in the Old Testament 150

Chapter 5: Righteousness in Jewish Literature 278

Chapter 6: Exegesis of AiKOUoawn ©eon in Paul 385

Chapter 7: Synopsis and Implications 467

Appendix: All Occurrences of "Righteousness" in the Old Testament 475

person I am today because of their Christian nurture.

I am indebted to my advisors in the New Testament Ph.D. program at Fuller

Theological Seminary. I am thankful for my primary advisor, Donald Hagner, who

supervision of F. F. Bruce. And so, through them, I consider myself honored to be a

second generation student of that great evangelical New Testament scholar.

to improve the clarity of my prose. As a self-taught scholar of New Testament Greek, he

accompanied me to the 2010 Annual Meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society in

Atlanta, where I read a paper summarizing my dissertation. I am also grateful to T. David

Figure 1. The Ogden-Richards Triangle 85

Table 1. Occurrences of the p"12S root in the Hebrew Bible 152

Table 2. Categories of Usage for p-J^/Hp"!^ with Statistics 154

Table 3. The AIK-group in LXX 166

Table 4. LXX Translation Choices for p"1S 168

Table 5. LXX Translation Choices for nj?"TS 168

Table 6. Hebrew words translated by 5iKaioai3vn in LXX 169

Table 7. Comparison of Categories of Usage: MT/Hebrew (p"13/nj?"]S) vs. 171

Table 8. AiKaiocuvn parallel with acainpia/cayrripiov in LXX Isaiah 231

Table 9. "Righteousness of God" in Hebrew Bible ("my, his, your") 259

Table 11. All 35 Occurrences of "God's Righteousness" in the DSS 284

Table 12. Categories of Usage for p^S/np-J? with Statistics 285

Table 13. All Occurrences of 5iKaioo-uvn in Tobit (NETS) 299

Table 14. Two Textual Traditions at 4 Ezra 8:31-36 326

Table 15. Parallel Terms in Romans 3:1-8 389

Table 16. AiKaiooT>vn (sans OEOU) in Paul 434

Table 17. The Ten "Righteousness of God" Texts in Paul 444

ABD Anchor Bible Dictionary. Edited by D. N. Freedman. 6 vols. New

ACCS Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture

AGJU Arbeiten zur Geschichte des antiken Judentums und des

AnBib Analecta biblica

ANE Ancient Near East(ern)

Temporini and W. Haase. Berlin, 1972-

ANTC Abingdon New Testament Commentaries

APOT The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament. Edited by

R. H. Charles. 2 vols. Oxford, 1913

ASTI Annual of the Swedish Theological Institute

ATA Alttestamentliche Abhandlungen

BASOR Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research

BCOT Baker Commentary on the Old Testament

BETL Bibliotheca ephemeridum theologicarum lovaniensium