Through faith in His blood.

B

Righteousness of God declared.

The faith of Jesus (see Greek).

A

Apart from works of law ... Justified.

It will be observed that the section is bounded by the words 'without

law' and 'without works of law'.  Choris is better translated 'apart from',

the verbal form chorizo being found in Romans 8:35 and 39 ('Who shall

separate?') and in Hebrews 7:26 ('Separate from sinners').

God's righteousness has been manifested 'apart from law'.  Due

recognition of the tenses used will lead us to conclude that the 'hath been

manifested' precedes the 'is revealed' of Romans 1:17.  Now as 1:17 refers to

the gospel, so 3:21 refers to the Work of Christ.  In the Person and Work of

Christ 'God's righteousness hath been manifested apart from the law'.  Anyone

who knows the teaching of the Calvinistic Puritans will see in this statement

a serious challenge to their doctrine of the active obedience to the law of

Christ imputed to the believer.  This doctrine has been summarized by Dr.

Jenkyn as follows:

'The law said, "Do this and live".  The sinner could not "do this"

perfectly; therefore he must die.  Jesus Christ "did this" or obeyed

the law instead of the sinner, both as his substitute and as his

representative, and therefore the law could not again say to the sinner

"do this" since it had been done for him by his representative.  In

this theory the sinner is accounted as if he had obeyed the law'.

If this is the truth, it is evident that 'the righteousness

of God' and 'the righteousness as a result of perfect obedience to the law'

are one and the same thing, the righteousness of God by faith being nothing

more or less than the imputed obedience of Christ.  If this is the teaching

of the apostle Paul, we are sure that he will make it plain somewhere in his

writings, and never use expressions that would, even apparently, oppose it:

'Touching the righteousness which is in the law, blameless' (Phil.

This is Paul's inspired testimony concerning himself.  It is one of a

series of advantages and grounds for boasting in the flesh that he

enumerates.  Yet, even though he was 'blameless', he tells us that he counted

it 'loss' for Christ, and, still pursuing the thought, says:

'Not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which

is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by

faith' (Phil. 3:9).

Here a 'blameless righteousness of the law' is in direct contrast with

'the righteousness of God'.  Now if the righteousness of God be the

transferred obedience of Christ to this selfsame law, how comes it that Paul

makes no attempt to modify the statement here?

Are we justified by or from the law?