Ὁ οὖν νόμος κατὰ τῶν ἐπαγγελιῶν τοῦ θεοῦ; μὴ γένοιτο· εἰ γὰρ ἐδόθη νόμος ὁ δυνάμενος ζῳοποιῆσαι, ὄντως ⸂ἐκ νόμου ἂν⸃ ἦν ἡ δικαιοσύνη.

O oun nomos kata ton epaggelion tou theou; me genoito* ei gar edothe nomos o dunamenos zoopoiesai, ontos [?]ek nomou an[?] en e dikaiosune.

lex ergo adversus promissa Dei absit si enim data esset lex quae posset vivificare vere ex lege esset iustitia

Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, truly righteousness 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.

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.

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.

Is the law then against the promises of God? Certainly not! For if there had been a law given which could have given life, truly righteousness would 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 then have come by 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 therefore The Written Law contrary to The Promise of God? God forbid! For if a law had been given which was able to give life, truly righteousness would have been by The Written 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;

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 make alive, verily righteousness would have been of the law.

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.

Does this mean, then, that the laws given to Moses contradict God's promises? That's unthinkable! If those laws could give us life, then certainly we would receive God's approval because we obeyed them.

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.

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.

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 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, therefore, opposed to the promises of God? Absolutely not! For if a law had been given that could impart life, then righteousness would certainly have come 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 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.

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 law then against the promises of God? Certainly not! For if there had been a law given which could make alive, most certainly righteousness would have been of the law.

So should we say that God's Law works against God's promises? No, certainly that is not true! It is not possible for the rules of any law to give us life with God. If that could happen, then God would have accepted us as right if we obeyed those rules.

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,

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? Never may it be! For if there had been a Law given which could have given life, surely righteousness should have been by the Law.

“So,” you ask, “does the law contradict God’s promise?” Absolutely not! Never was there written a law that could lead to resurrection and life; if there had been, then surely we could have experienced saving righteousness through keeping the law. But we haven’t.

Well then, are God’s laws and God’s promises against each other? Of course not! If we could be saved by his laws, then God would not have had to give us a different way to get out of the grip of sin—for the Scriptures insist we are all its prisoners. The only way out is through faith in Jesus Christ; the way of escape is open to all who believe him.

Is the Law then opposed to the promises of God? Absolutely not! If the Law that had been given had the power to bestow life, then righteousness would have come through the 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.

Is the law then against the promises of God? No, in no wise, for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law.

Is the law therefore contrary to God’s promises? Absolutely not! For if the law had been granted with the ability to give life, then righteousness would certainly be on the basis of the law.

Is the Law then contrary and opposed to the promises of God? Of course not! For if a Law had been given which could confer [spiritual] life, then righteousness and right standing with God would certainly have come by Law.

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.

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.

Then is the law against the promises of God? Certainly not! For if there had been a law given that could give life, certainly righteousness would have been derived from the law.

Is the law, therefore, opposed to the promises of God? Certainly not! For if a law had been given that could impart life, then righteousness would indeed be by 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 promise of God? God forbid. However, if there had been a law given that could have given life, then no doubt righteousness would have come by the 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 then the law against the promises of God? God forbid [Far be it]. For if the law were given, that might quicken, verily were rightwiseness of law [For if there were a law given, which might quicken, verily rightwiseness were of law].

Is the law then against God’s promises? Of course not! No, if a law had been given that could have given life, then covenant membership really would have been by 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.

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.

Is the Law then to be looked upon as a contradiction of the promise? Certainly not, for if there could have been a law which gave men spiritual life then law would have produced righteousness (which would have been, of course, in full harmony with the purpose of the promise). But, as things are, the scripture has all men “imprisoned”, because they are found guilty by the Law, that to men in such condition might come to release all who believe in Jesus Christ.

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 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.

So, is the Law against the promises of God? Absolutely not! If a Law had been given that was able to give life, then righteousness would in fact have come from the Law.

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 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 law then opposed to the promises [of God]? Of course not! For if a law had been given that could bring life, then righteousness would in reality come from 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? ·Never [Absoluely not; May it never be]! That would be true only if the law could make us ·right with God [righteous]. But God did not give a law that can bring life.

Then is the Torah against the promises of God? May it never be! For if a law had been given that could impart life, certainly righteousness would have been based on 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.

So is the law opposed to God’s promises? Certainly not! What if a law had been given that could give life? Then people could become right with God 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 have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the 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 against the promises of God? No, it is not! If a law had been given that could give people life, then surely people would have become good people by 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 Torah, mimeila (consequently, as a result), against the havtachot (promises) of Hashem? Chas v’Shalom (G-d forbid!)! For if Torah had been given that had the ko’ach (power) to affect hitkhadshut (regeneration), then to be YITZDAK IM HASHEM ("justified with G-d") would indeed have been based on chukim of the Torah.

Does this mean, then, that the laws given to Moses contradict God’s promises? That’s unthinkable! If those laws could give us life, then certainly we would receive God’s approval because we obeyed them.

Is the law then contrary to the promises of God? God forbid! For if there had been a law given which could have given life, righteousness would indeed come through the law.

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.

Does this mean that the law is against God’s promises? Never! If there were a law that could give men life, then we could be made right by following that 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 law, therefore, opposed to the promises of God? Absolutely not! For if a law had been given that could impart life, then righteousness would certainly have come by the law.

Is the Law then against the promises of God? May it never be! For if a Law being able to give-life had been given, righteousness really would have been by the Law!