ἀληθής, (alethes) in Romans 3:4: Adjective Nominative Singular Masculine

Adjective: ἀληθής, supplies the quality expressed as true in Romans 3:4, where it the nominative masculine adjective serves as the predicate quality affirmed of God in contrast with every human being as a liar.

Adjective ἀληθής, carries no verbal tense or aspect in Romans 3:4; true is determined by its clause relation.

For G227 at Romans 3:4, no voice category is encoded by G227. Its true agreement with God as the masculine singular subject of the clause supplies the local relation.

ἀληθής, has no mood marking. Its force belongs to Paul's rejection of the suggestion that human unfaithfulness could nullify God's faithfulness.

G227 at Romans 3:4 has no person marking. Its true agreement connects G227 with God as the masculine singular subject of the clause.

Nominative aligns ἀληθής, with God as the masculine singular subject of the clause; case identifies that relation without deciding the paragraph's theology.

Singular matches God as the masculine singular subject of the clause. The Romans 3:4 wording, not number alone, fixes the expression's reach.

Masculine follows God as the masculine singular subject of the clause. The Romans 3:4 grammatical match adds no separate claim beyond that clause.

The subject ho Theos within the appeal let God be true

Paul's rejection of the suggestion that human unfaithfulness could nullify God's faithfulness

The nominative masculine adjective serves as the predicate quality affirmed of God in contrast with every human being as a liar.

The adjective does not imply that God becomes truthful through human recognition or that every human statement is false in the same sense.

High: Human faithlessness cannot make God's covenant word unreliable. Paul's forceful contrast vindicates God and leaves human contradiction under His judgment.

Its masculine singular nominative form agrees with God and places true in the predicate assertion framed by let God be.. The nominative masculine adjective serves as the predicate quality affirmed of God in contrast with every human being as a liar.. Attached to the subject ho Theos within the appeal let God be true. Governed by Paul's rejection of the suggestion that human unfaithfulness could nullify God's faithfulness. The adjective does not imply that God becomes truthful through human recognition or that every human statement is false in the same sense.

Whom does the adjective true describe in Paul's emphatic contrast? It is the predicate description of God, whose faithfulness stands even when human beings prove unfaithful.

Direct: True directly represents the predicate adjective that Paul affirms of God.

Let God be true is an emphatic affirmation, not a suggestion that God's truth depends on a new condition. Every man a liar is a contrastive generalization within the argument, not a denial that people can utter true statements.

Predicate makes truth conferred: The construction affirms God's truthfulness; it does not portray people as granting that quality to Him. contrast erases every human truth: Paul contrasts divine reliability with human unfaithfulness in this argument rather than classifying every human sentence. morphology replaces literary context: The G227 form clarifies the true relation in Romans 3:4; the surrounding passage establishes its scope.

At Romans 3:4, the Romans 3:4 source token ἀληθής, is G227, A-NSM. The G227 Romans 3:4 Textus Receptus row therefore anchors this guide.

ἀληθής is the lemma behind true here. Within Romans 3:4, G227 retains this exact lexical identity.

Its masculine singular nominative form agrees with God and places true in the predicate assertion framed by let God be.

Human faithlessness cannot make God's covenant word unreliable. Paul's forceful contrast vindicates God and leaves human contradiction under His judgment.

The citation that follows places God's truthfulness within the scriptural pattern of God being shown righteous when He speaks and judges.

Present the adjective as part of Paul's God-centered answer to unbelief: human failure exposes our need, but it never destabilizes God's character or promise.

Do not use the nominative agreement as a complete doctrine of divine truthfulness, and do not make Paul's contrast deny common grace or truthful human speech.