Abstract
The article questions J.D.G. Dunn's contention in his commentary Romans and elsewhere that by 'the works of the law' Paul meant not obedience to the law gener ally but specifically adherence to those practices prescribed by the law which most obviously marked off Jews from Gentile neighbours, in particular circumcision, keeping the sabbath and observance of food laws. On the basis of an examination of the two occurrences of 'the works of the law' in Romans and of the five occurrences of 'works', in which it appears to be used with the same sense as 'the works of the law', the article concludes that Dunn's contention should be rejected and the interpre tation of 'the works of the law' as meaning obedience to the law generally should be retained.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
