the Week of Proper 21 / Ordinary 26
Click here to join the effort!
Read the Bible
New King James Version
Galatians 3:21
Bible Study Resources
Concordances:
- Nave'sDictionaries:
- AmericanEncyclopedias:
- CondensedDevotionals:
- EveryParallel Translations
Is the Law then contrary to the promises of God? May it never be! For if a law had been given which was able to impart life, then righteousness would indeed have been based on law.
Is the Law then contrary to the promises of God? May it never be! For if a law had been given which was able to impart life, then righteousness would indeed be by law.
So, is it possible things don't line up between the code God gave and the promise he gave to Abraham? Absolutely not! If the Code could grant us eternal life, then we would have it by being good at following rules.
Is the law then against the words of God? in no way; because if there had been a law which was able to give life, truly righteousness would have been by the law.
[Is] then the law against the promises of God? Far be the thought. For if a law had been given able to quicken, then indeed righteousness were on the principle of law;
Is the law therefore contrary to God's promises? Absolutely not! For if a law had been given that was able to give life, then righteousness would certainly be by the law.
Is the law then against the promises of God? Certainly not! For if there had been a law given which could make alive, most assuredly righteousness would have been of the law.
Is then the law against the promises of God? God forbid. But if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness would have been by the law.
God, however, is only one. Is the Law then opposed to the promises of God? No, indeed; for if a Law had been given which could have conferred Life, righteousness would certainly have come by the Law.
Is the Lawe then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had beene a Lawe giuen which could haue giuen life, verily righteousnesse should haue bene by the Law.
Then is the Law against the promises of God? Let it not be! For if a law had been given which had been able to make alive, indeed righteousness would have been out of Law.
Is the lawe then agaynst the promyses of God? God forbyd. Howbeit yf there had bene geuen a lawe which coulde haue geue life, the no doute righteousnes shulde come of the lawe.
Is the law then opposite to the promises? by no means. for if there had been a law given, which could have given life, certainly justification should have been by the law.
If such is the case, is the law, then, an anti-promise, a negation of God's will for us? Not at all. Its purpose was to make obvious to everyone that we are, in ourselves, out of right relationship with God, and therefore to show us the futility of devising some religious system for getting by our own efforts what we can only get by waiting in faith for God to complete his promise. For if any kind of rule-keeping had power to create life in us, we would certainly have gotten it by this time.
Is the Law then contrary to the promises of God? Certainly not! For if a system of law had been given which could impart life, then righteousness (right standing with God) would actually have been based on law.
Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could make alive, verily righteousness would have been of the law.
Is the law then against the promises of God? Certainly not; for if a law had been given which could make alive, then righteousness would indeed be by the law.
Ys the lawe then agaynst ye promes of God? God forbid. How be it yf ther had bene a lawe geve which coulde have geven lyfe: then no doute rightewesnes shuld have come by ye lawe.
Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could bring life, truly righteousness would have been by the law.
[Is] the law then against the promises of God? By no means: for if there had been a law given which could give life, verily righteousness would have been by the law.
the law, then, [is] against the promises of God? -- let it not be! for if a law was given that was able to make alive, truly by law there would have been the righteousness,
Does this mean that the law is against God's promises? Never! That would be true only if the law could make us right with God. But God did not give a law that can bring life.
Is the law therefore opposed to the promises of God? Absolutely not! For if a law had been given that was able to give life, then righteousness would certainly have come by the law.
Is the law, then, opposed to the promises of God? Certainly not! For if a law had been given that could impart life, then righteousness would certainly have come from the law.
Does the Law disagree with God's promises? No, it doesn't! If any law could give life to us, we could become acceptable to God by obeying that law.
Does this mean that the legal part of the Torah stands in opposition to God's promises? Heaven forbid! For if the legal part of the Torah which God gave had had in itself the power to give life, then righteousness really would have come by legalistically following such a Torah.
Is the law then contrary to the promises of God? Certainly not! For if a law had been given that could give life, then righteousness would indeed be by the law.
Is the Lawe then against the promises of God? God forbid: For if there had bene a Lawe giuen which coulde haue giuen life, surely righteousnes should haue bene by the Lawe.
Is the law then against the promises of God? Far be it: for if a law had been given, which could have wrought salvation, righteousness would truly have come as the result of the law.
Is the law then against the promises of God? Certainly not! For if there had been a law given which could make alive, most assuredly righteousness would have been of the law.
So is the law in conflict with the promises of God? Of course not! For if a law had been given that could give us life, then certainly righteousness would come through the law.Galatians 2:21;">[xr]
Is the law therefore against the promise of Aloha? Impossible: for if a law had been given which could make [fn] to live, certainly righteousness would have been by the law.
Is the law then opposed to the promise of God? Far be it. For if a law had been given, which could make alive, certainly, righteousness would have been by the law.
Is there a conflict, then, between God's law and God's promises? Absolutely not! If the law could give us new life, we could be made right with God by obeying it.
Is the Law against the promise of God? No! Never! If it had been possible to be saved from the punishment of sin by obeying the Law, then being right with God would have come by obeying the Law.
Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could make alive, verily righteousness would have been of the law.
Is the law then opposed to the promises of God? Certainly not! For if a law had been given that could make alive, then righteousness would indeed come through the law.
Is, the law, then, against the promises of God? Far be it! For, if a law had been given, which had been able to give life, verily, in law, would have been our righteousness;
Was the law then against the promises of God: God forbid! For if there had been a law given which could give life, verily justice should have been by the law.
Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law.
Therefore is the law opposed to the promises of God? May it never be! For if a law had been given that was able to give life, certainly righteousness would have been from the law.
Is the lawe then against the promise of God? God forbyd. For yf there had ben a lawe geuen which coulde haue geuen life: then no doubt righteousnesse shoulde haue ben by the lawe.
Does this mean that the law works against God's promises? Of course not. The law was never God's way of giving new life to people. If it were, then we could be made right with God by following the law.
Is the Law then contrary to the promises of God? Far from it! For if a law had been given that was able to impart life, then righteousness would indeed have been based on law.
Does this mean that the Law is against God's promises? No, not at all! For if human beings had received a law that could bring life, then everyone could be put right with God by obeying it.
Is thanne the lawe ayens the biheestis of God? God forbede. For if the lawe were youun, that myyte quikene, verili were riytfulnesse of lawe.
Contextual Overview
Bible Verse Review
from Treasury of Scripure Knowledge
the law: Matthew 5:17-20, Romans 3:31, Romans 7:7-13
God forbid: Galatians 2:17, Romans 3:4, Romans 3:6
for: Galatians 2:19, Galatians 2:21, Romans 3:20
righteousness: Romans 3:21, Romans 3:22, Romans 9:31, Romans 10:3-6, Philippians 3:6-9, Hebrews 11:7
Reciprocal: Deuteronomy 5:25 - this great Psalms 19:8 - enlightening Isaiah 42:21 - he will Luke 10:26 - General Acts 13:39 - from which Romans 7:13 - then Romans 8:3 - For what 1 Corinthians 6:15 - God 2 Corinthians 3:6 - for Galatians 3:17 - that it Galatians 3:19 - It was added Galatians 5:17 - and these Philippians 3:9 - which is of the 1 Timothy 1:8 - the law Hebrews 8:7 - had Hebrews 9:9 - that could Hebrews 12:14 - no man
Cross-References
And the woman said to the serpent, "We may eat the fruit of the trees of the garden;
but of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God has said, "You shall not eat it, nor shall you touch it, lest you die."'
Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves coverings.
I will greatly rejoice in the LORD, My soul shall be joyful in my God; For He has clothed me with the garments of salvation, He has covered me with the robe of righteousness, As a bridegroom decks himself with ornaments, And as a bride adorns herself with her jewels.
even the righteousness of God, through faith in Jesus Christ, to all and on all [fn] who believe. For there is no difference;
For He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.
Gill's Notes on the Bible
Is the law then against the promises of God?.... If the law was added because of transgressions, and curses for them, and if the inheritance is not of it, but by promise, were it, it would not be by promise, then, says an objector, it is against the promises: these are contrary to one another, and God, in giving the one and the other, must contradict himself: to which it is replied,
God forbid; a way of speaking the apostle uses, when he would express his abhorrence and detestation of anything, as here; for though the law and promises are distinct things, and have their separate uses, yet they are not contradictory to each other; the law has its use, and so have the promises; the promises do not set aside the law as useless on all accounts, nor does the law disannul the promises, but is subservient to them:
for if there had been a law which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law; but the law cannot give life, spiritual life to a dead sinner; God only can do this, Father, Son, and Spirit; so far is the law from giving it efficiently, that it is not so much as the means of it; it is not made use of this way; God makes use of the law to kill, but not to make alive; he makes use of the law to strike dead all a man's hopes of happiness, by the deeds of it; but it is the Gospel he uses to quicken and comfort; that is the Spirit that giveth life. The law requires as much of a dead sinner, as it did of Adam in innocence, but gives him no life, activity, and strength to perform; could it quicken him, and enable him to do all its demands perfectly, then there would be righteousness, and so justification by it, as by the promise; whence it appears that there is no contrariety in the law to the promises: the reason why there is no righteousness is, because it cannot give life, spiritual life and strength; and if so, then not eternal life; which is the free gift of God, and not the merit of men's works: this is directly contrary to a notion of the Jews, who cry up the law as a life giving law; say they n,
"great is the law, שהיא נותנת חיים לעושיה, "for it giveth life to them that do it", in this world, and in the world to come:''
and elsewhere o,
"the law is a tree of life to all that study in it,
למיהב לון חיי, "to give unto them life" in this world, and "to give unto them life" in the world to come.''
n Pirke Abot, c. 6. sect. 6. o Zohar in Gen. fol. 70. 3. & in Num. fol. 62. 1.
Barnes' Notes on the Bible
Is the law then against the promises of God? - Is the Law of Moses to be regarded as opposed to the promises made to Abraham? Does this follow from any view which can be taken of the subject? The object of the apostle in asking this question is, evidently, to take an opportunity to deny in the most positive manner that there can be any such clashing or contradiction. He shows, therefore, what was the design of the Law, and declares that the object was to further the plan contemplated in the promise made to Abraham. It was an auxiliary to that. It was as good as a law could be; and it was designed to prepare the way for the fulfillment of the promise made to Abraham.
God forbid - It cannot be. It is impossible. I do not hold such an opinion. Such a sentiment by no means follows from what has been advanced; compare the note at Romans 3:4.
For if there had been a law given which could have given life - The Law of Moses is as good as a law can be. It is pure, and truly, and good. It is not the design to insinuate anything against the Law in itself, or to say that as a law it is defective. But law could not give life. It is not its nature; and man cannot be justified by obedience to it. No man has ever yielded perfect compliance with it and no man, therefore, can be justified by it, compare the notes at Galatians 2:16; Galatians 3:10, note.
Verily righteousness should have been by the law - Or justification would have been secured by the Law. The Law of Moses was as well adapted to this as a law could be. No better law could have been originated for this purpose, and if people were to attempt to justify themselves before God by their own works, the Law of Moses would be as favorable for such an undertaking as any law which could be revealed. It is as reasonable, and equal, and pure. Its demands are as just, and its terms as favorable as could be any of the terms of mere law. And such a law has been given in part in order to show that justification by the Law is out of the question. If people could not be justified by a law so pure, and equal, and just; so reasonable in all its requirements and so perfect, how could they expect to be justified by conformity to any inferior or less perfect rule of life? The fact, therefore, that no one can be justified by the pure law revealed on Mount Sinai, forever settles the question about the possibility of being justified by law.
Clarke's Notes on the Bible
Verse 21. Is the law then against the promises of God? — Is it possible that the intervention of the law, in reference to one part of the Abrahamic seed, should annul the promise made to the other? It is impossible.
For if there had been a law, &c.] If any law or rule of life could have been found out that would have given life-saved sinners from death, and made them truly happy, then righteousness- justification, should have been by that law.
