ἄδικος (adikos) in Romans 3:5: Adjective Nominative Singular Masculine
ἄδικος (adikos) in Romans 3:5
Textual Witness
At Romans 3:5, the Romans 3:5 source token ἄδικος is G94, A-NSM. The G94 Romans 3:5 Textus Receptus row therefore anchors this guide.
How The Form Affects Interpretation
Unjust accurately exposes the accusation being tested, but English readers need the question's expected negative answer. Paul voices and rejects the claim that God's judgment becomes unjust when human sin displays His righteousness more clearly.
How To Communicate It
Mark the question as an objection, then read through Paul's certainly not. This prevents a quoted challenge from being mistaken for the apostle's position.
What Not To Say
- Grammatical form should serve context, not override it.
- Do not infer divine injustice from the predicate form, and do not let the benefit God brings from evil remove guilt from those who do evil.
- The adjective itself carries no quotation marks; discourse context identifies the claim as an objection.
- Read unjust within Romans 3:5 as the G94 occurrence; broader theology requires the passage.
What Does The Label Mean?
Adjective: ἄδικος supplies the quality expressed as unjust in Romans 3:5, where it the adjective is a masculine singular predicate of God inside a question introduced to expect a negative answer.
Adjective ἄδικος carries no verbal tense or aspect in Romans 3:5; unjust is determined by its clause relation.
For G94 at Romans 3:5, no voice category is encoded by G94. Its unjust agreement with God as the masculine singular subject tested by the rhetorical question supplies the local relation.
ἄδικος has no mood marking. Its force belongs to Paul's humanly framed objection about divine judgment after unrighteousness highlights God's righteousness.
G94 at Romans 3:5 has no person marking. Its unjust agreement connects G94 with God as the masculine singular subject tested by the rhetorical question.
Nominative aligns ἄδικος with God as the masculine singular subject tested by the rhetorical question; case identifies that relation without deciding the paragraph's theology.
Singular matches God as the masculine singular subject tested by the rhetorical question. The Romans 3:5 wording, not number alone, fixes the expression's reach.
Masculine follows God as the masculine singular subject tested by the rhetorical question. The Romans 3:5 grammatical match adds no separate claim beyond that clause.
What The Form Does In This Verse
Ho Theos in the rhetorical question whether God is unjust to bring wrath
Paul's humanly framed objection about divine judgment after unrighteousness highlights God's righteousness
The adjective is a masculine singular predicate of God inside a question introduced to expect a negative answer.
Its presence records an objection rather than Paul's confession, and the nominative form does not make injustice an actual attribute of God.
How Much The Form Matters Here
High: Paul voices and rejects the claim that God's judgment becomes unjust when human sin displays His righteousness more clearly.
Nominative agreement identifies God as the subject under discussion, while the negative question and Paul's immediate rejection govern the force.. The adjective is a masculine singular predicate of God inside a question introduced to expect a negative answer.. Attached to ho Theos in the rhetorical question whether God is unjust to bring wrath. Governed by Paul's humanly framed objection about divine judgment after unrighteousness highlights God's righteousness. Its presence records an objection rather than Paul's confession, and the nominative form does not make injustice an actual attribute of God.
Does the adjective unjust state Paul's view of God in Romans 3:5? No. It belongs to a rhetorical objection that Paul names in human terms and immediately rejects.
Direct: Unjust accurately exposes the accusation being tested, but English readers need the question's expected negative answer.
The adjective itself carries no quotation marks; discourse context identifies the claim as an objection. The question concerns God's infliction of wrath, not whether human unrighteousness can accidentally serve His glory.
Predicate adjective asserts divine injustice: Rhetorical framing can test a proposition without endorsing it, and Paul rejects this proposition in verse 6. good outcome excuses evil: God's righteousness being displayed does not remove the creature's guilt or make judgment improper. morphology replaces literary context: The G94 form clarifies the unjust relation in Romans 3:5; the surrounding passage establishes its scope.
How The Interpretation Is Derived
At Romans 3:5, the Romans 3:5 source token ἄδικος is G94, A-NSM. The G94 Romans 3:5 Textus Receptus row therefore anchors this guide.
ἄδικος is the lemma behind unjust here. Within Romans 3:5, G94 retains this exact lexical identity.
Nominative agreement identifies God as the subject under discussion, while the negative question and Paul's immediate rejection govern the force.
Paul voices and rejects the claim that God's judgment becomes unjust when human sin displays His righteousness more clearly.
The exchange protects both God's righteousness in judgment and the moral responsibility of sinners within Romans' gospel argument.
Mark the question as an objection, then read through Paul's certainly not. This prevents a quoted challenge from being mistaken for the apostle's position.
Do not infer divine injustice from the predicate form, and do not let the benefit God brings from evil remove guilt from those who do evil.