At Antioch Paul made his first statement on this momentous theme, and

said: 'By Him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye

could not be justified by the law of Moses' (Acts 13:39).  Richard Baxter

says on this point:

'It is an error contrary to the scope of the gospel to say that the Law

of Works or of Innocency doth justify us, as performed either by

ourselves or by Christ.  For that law condemneth and curseth us, and we

are not justified by it, but from it or against it.  We have no

righteousness in reality or in reputation, which consisteth in

conformity to the preceptive part of the law; we are not reputed

innocent, but only a righteousness which consisteth in the pardon of

all sin, and right to life'.

We do not endorse completely the teaching of Richard Baxter, but we

believe these words are much closer to the truth than those which he opposes.

Let us look at some further statements of Paul on this matter of

righteousness apart from the law.  His first utterance on the subject

suggests the division which he followed out and enlarged in his epistles,

A justification from the law, and not by the law (Acts 13:39).

Justification is not by works of law, but by faith of Christ (Gal

So far as the law is concerned believers are dead (Gal. 2:19).

If righteousness came by the law, Christ's death would be in vain (Gal.

There is nothing said in these sweeping statements to indicate that the

apostle is only referring to man's defective obedience, but rather we are led

to reject law entirely, by whomsoever it may be obeyed, as a basis for gospel

justification.  Indeed, Philippians 3:6 lends its weight to the thought that

even though one should be found who had attained to the righteousness of the

law, such would still be in need of the higher righteousness of God if ever

he were to be accepted before Him.  Shall we teach that what Paul flung aside

as 'dung' only differs in degree and not in kind from that righteousness

which is upon all that believe?

The translation of the A.V. 'The righteousness of God' in many

passages, is too explicit, the R.V. reads, 'A righteousness of God', and

Moffatt reads 'God's righteousness'.  By the time we reach Romans 10:3 the

article is included, probably to refer us back to 'that righteousness of God'

already discussed.  We should consider these references together.

'For therein is God's righteousness revealed' (1:17).

'If our unrighteousness commend God's righteousness' (3:5).

'But now God's righteousness has been manifested' (3:21).

'Even God's righteousness through faith of Jesus Christ' (3:22).

'To declare His righteousness for the remission of sins' (3:25).

'To declare at this time His righteousness, that He might be righteous'

'For they being ignorant of God's righteousness ... have not submitted

themselves unto the righteousness of God' (10:3).