Mazmur 5:10

5:10 Condemn them, ¹  O God!

May their own schemes be their downfall! ² 

Drive them away ³  because of their many acts of insurrection, ⁴ 

for they have rebelled against you.

Yesaya 59:12

59:12 For you are aware of our many rebellious deeds, ⁵ 

and our sins testify against us;

indeed, we are aware of our rebellious deeds;

we know our sins all too well. ⁶ 

Yehezkiel 18:28-31

18:28 Because he considered ⁷  and turned from all the sins he had done, he will surely live; he will not die. 18:29 Yet the house of Israel says, ‘The Lord’s conduct is unjust!’ Is my conduct unjust, O house of Israel? Is it not your conduct that is unjust?

18:30 “Therefore I will judge each person according to his conduct, ⁸  O house of Israel, declares the sovereign Lord. Repent ⁹  and turn from all your wickedness; then it will not be an obstacle leading to iniquity. ¹⁰  18:31 Throw away all your sins you have committed and fashion yourselves a new heart and a new spirit! ¹¹  Why should you die, O house of Israel?

Roma 5:20

5:20 Now the law came in ¹²  so that the transgression ¹³  may increase, but where sin increased, grace multiplied all the more,

Roma 5:1

The Expectation of Justification

5:1 ¹⁴ Therefore, since we have been declared righteous by faith, we have ¹⁵  peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ,

Titus 1:15

1:15 All is pure to those who are pure. But to those who are corrupt and unbelieving, nothing is pure, but both their minds and consciences are corrupted.

[5:10]  ¹ tn Heb “declare/regard them as guilty.” Declaring the psalmist’s adversaries guilty is here metonymic for judging them or paying them back for their wrongdoing.

[5:10]  ² tn Heb “may they fall from their plans.” The prefixed verbal form is a jussive, expressing an imprecation. The psalmist calls judgment down on the evildoers. Their plans will be their downfall in that God will judge them for their evil schemes.

[5:10]  ³ tn Or “banish them.”

[5:10]  ⁴ tn The Hebrew noun used here, פֶּשַׁע (pesha’), refers to rebellious actions. The psalmist pictures his enemies as rebels against God (see the next line).

[59:12]  ⁵ tn Heb “for many are our rebellious deeds before you.”

[59:12]  ⁶ tn Heb “indeed [or “for”] our rebellious deeds (are) with us, and our sins, we know them.”

[18:28]  ⁷ tn Heb “he saw.”

[18:30]  ⁸ tn Heb “ways.”

[18:30]  ⁹ tn The verbs and persons in this verse are plural whereas the individual has been the subject of the chapter.

[18:30]  ¹⁰ tn Or “leading to punishment.”

[18:31]  ¹¹ sn In Ezek 11:19, 36:26 the new heart and new spirit are promised as future blessings.

[5:20]  ¹² tn Grk “slipped in.”

[5:20]  ¹³ tn Or “trespass.”

[5:1]  ¹⁴ sn Many interpreters see Rom 5:1 as beginning the second major division of the letter.

[5:1]  ¹⁵ tc A number of important witnesses have the subjunctive ἔχωμεν (ecwmen, “let us have”) instead of ἔχομεν (ecomen, “we have”) in v. 1. Included in the subjunctive’s support are א* A B* C D K L 33 81 630 1175 1739* pm lat bo. But the indicative is not without its supporters: א¹ B² F G P Ψ 0220^vid 104 365 1241 1505 1506 1739^c 1881 2464 pm. If the problem were to be solved on an external basis only, the subjunctive would be preferred. Because of this, the “A” rating on behalf of the indicative in the UBS⁴ appears overly confident. Nevertheless, the indicative is probably correct. First, the earliest witness to Rom 5:1 has the indicative (0220^vid, third century). Second, the first set of correctors is sometimes, if not often, of equal importance with the original hand. Hence, א¹ might be given equal value with א*. Third, there is a good cross-section of witnesses for the indicative: Alexandrian (in 0220^vid, probably א¹ 1241 1506 1881 al), Western (in F G), and Byzantine (noted in NA²⁷ as pm). Thus, although the external evidence is strongly in favor of the subjunctive, the indicative is represented well enough that its ancestry could easily go back to the original. Turning to the internal evidence, the indicative gains much ground. (1) The variant may have been produced via an error of hearing (since omicron and omega were pronounced alike in ancient Greek). This, of course, does not indicate which reading was original – just that an error of hearing may have produced one of them. In light of the indecisiveness of the transcriptional evidence, intrinsic evidence could play a much larger role. This is indeed the case here. (2) The indicative fits well with the overall argument of the book to this point. Up until now, Paul has been establishing the “indicatives of the faith.” There is only one imperative (used rhetorically) and only one hortatory subjunctive (and this in a quotation within a diatribe) up till this point, while from ch. 6 on there are sixty-one imperatives and seven hortatory subjunctives. Clearly, an exhortation would be out of place in ch. 5. (3) Paul presupposes that the audience has peace with God (via reconciliation) in 5:10. This seems to assume the indicative in v. 1. (4) As C. E. B. Cranfield notes, “it would surely be strange for Paul, in such a carefully argued writing as this, to exhort his readers to enjoy or to guard a peace which he has not yet explicitly shown to be possessed by them” (Romans [ICC], 1:257). (5) The notion that εἰρήνην ἔχωμεν (eirhnhn ecwmen) can even naturally mean “enjoy peace” is problematic (ExSyn 464), yet those who embrace the subjunctive have to give the verb some such force. Thus, although the external evidence is stronger in support of the subjunctive, the internal evidence points to the indicative. Although a decision is difficult, ἔχομεν appears to be the authentic reading.