Moo: “Works” Shorthand for “Works of the Law”?

The connection between v. 12a and v. 11a [in Romans 9] makes clear that “works” has general reference to human activity and cannot be restricted to any particular category of works.[162] At the same time, this new assertion advances Paul’s argument by making it clear that the temporal relationship between Jacob’s and Esau’s works and God’s choice mirrors a causal relationship as well: God’s choice not only came before they had done anything but also was not based on anything they had done. The particular phrase Paul uses here — “[not] on the basis of works”[163] — is prominent in Paul’s discussion of Abraham’s justification in Rom. 4 (vv. 2–8). The use of this phrase, along with the general way in which Paul states the matter, suggests that he has more in mind here than the situation of Jacob and Esau per se.

— The Letter to the Romans, 2nd ed., p. 602

Fn. 162 “… Contra Dunn, who argues that ἐξ ἔργων is shorthand for ἐξ ἔργων τοῦ νόμου (“works of the law”), interpreted in his distinctive approach to mean “faithfulness to the law.” Quite apart from our questions about Dunn’s interpretation of the phrase “works of the law” (for which see our comments on 3:20), we think it unlikely that, in the context, the simple “works” could stand in for the phrase “works of the law.” Not only is it problematic to think that Paul would have thought of the law in conjunction with Jacob and Esau (for Paul elsewhere insists that the law was given long after the time of the patriarchs [Gal. 3:17], contra, e.g., Wright), but he clearly intends this phrase to be a generalized summary of v. 11a, where Paul goes out of his way to stress the general nature of the “works” (Dunn’s suggestion that “works” and doing good and evil refer to different things is unlikely; see “Whence, What, and Whither?” 46).”

—

For Moo’s comments on the phrase “works of the law” in Romans 3:20, see here. For a list of all of my posts on Douglas Moo’s commentary on Romans, see here.