The Meaning of οὐ μὴ λογίσηται in Romans 4:8

 In verse 8, we read these words: “blessed is the man against whom the Lord will not count his sin.”

This verse causes serious problems for Roman Catholic theology on justification. Catholicism teaches that one can lose their justification if they commit a mortal sin and that it can be regained and lost over and over again. If you are justified, you will still have to suffer temporal punishments in purgatory over remaining sins in your life. Yet Romans 4:8 speaks clearly of the non-imputation/reckoning of one’s sin.

The Greek text of Romans 4:8 is as follows:

μακάριος ἀνὴρ οὗ οὐ μὴ λογίσηται κύριος ἁμαρτίαν.

Here the word “impute” or “count” is in the aorist subjunctive, which is also referred to as the emphatic negation subjunctive. And this is where Roman Catholicism’s view of justification starts to collapse. The aorist subjunctive indicates a strong sense of denial, even of potentiality. It is said that this is the strongest way to deny something in Greek. Here is what Daniel Wallace says in Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics:

“c. Emphatic Negation Subjunctive 1) Definition Emphatic negation is indicated by οὐ μὴ , plus the aorist subjunctive or, less frequently, οὐ μὴ, plus the future indicative (e.g., Matt 26:35; Mark 13:31; John 4:14; 6:35). This is the strongest way to negate something in Greek. One might think that the negative with the subjunctive could not be as strong as the negative with the indicative. However, while οὐ + the indicative denies a certainty, οὐ μὴ, + the subjunctive denies a potentiality. The negative is not weaker; rather, the affirmation that is being negatived is less firm with the subjunctive. οὐ μὴ, rules out even the idea as being a possibility: “οὐ μὴ is the most decisive way of negativing someth. in the future.”58 Emphatic negation is found primarily in the reported sayings of Jesus (both in the Gospels and in the Apocalypse); secondarily, in quotations from the LXX. Outside of these two sources it occurs only rarely. As well, a soteriological theme is frequently found in such statements, especially in John: what is negatived is the possibility of the loss of salvation. 

2) Illustrations Matt 24:35 οἱ λόγοι μου οὐ μὴ παρέλθωσιν  My words will not at all pass away. --- John 10:28 δίδωμι αὐτοῖς ζωὴν αἰώνιον, καὶ οὐ μὴ ἀπόλωνται εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα I give them eternal life, and they will not at all perish. ---John 11:26 πᾶς ὁ ζῶν καὶ πιστεύων εἰς ἐμὲ οὐ μὴ ἀποθάνῃ Everyone who lives and believes in me will never die. ---Rom 4:8 μακάριος ἀνὴρ οὗ οὐ μὴ λογίσηται κύριος ἁμαρτίαν Blessed is the man whose sin the Lord will not at all count. ---Heb 13:5 ouv mh, se avnw/ ouvdV ouv mh, se evgkatali,pw I will not at all fail you nor will I ever leave you.”

(Daniel Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament, pg. 468)

Notice that Wallace cites Romans 4:8, the verse we have been studying, as an example of where the emphatic negation subjunctive occurs. He says that οὐ μὴ denies even the possibility. οὐ μὴ does occur in Romans 4:8. Thus, Paul rules out even the possibility of God imputing sin to the “blessed man.” This refutes the Catholic idea of one losing one’s justification. Bear in mind that we have shown that Paul’s quote from Psalm 32 is in essence a description of what it means to be justified. You have the words “just as” in verse 6 which shows that Paul is essentially continuing his thought without interruption. Paul essentially answers the question of who the blessed man is in Romans 4:6 . He is the one to whom God “counts righteousness apart from works”. He is the one who is justified. And God will never count his sin against him. We should ask- It is possible for one to be justified yet still have their sin imputed to them? Surely not! Such an idea is an argument against the very root of Paul’s teaching in these verses. Due to the use of the emphatic negation subjunctive, this proves that Paul taught the one who is justified will never have their sin imputed to them. The thought of even the possibility of having one’s sin imputed to them who has already been justified is something that is denied by the Apostle Paul in the strongest way he could. This is a big problem for the Catholic view of justification.

“The Psalm moves to the singular, but this is surely no more than a stylistic device. The application is still quite general, and man means anyone at all. For Lord see on 1:4; here it refers to Yahweh, as commonly in LXX. The quotation uses an emphatic negative; God will certainly not count the sins in question against the man of whom the words are written. In the previous verse we have the positive: the sins are “forgiven” or “covered”; here we have the corresponding negative: they are not counted. The change to the singular, sin, is probably stylistic, though of course the word sometimes refers to the principle rather than to individual evil acts. But this distinction does not appear to be in mind here.” (Leon Morris, The Pillar New Testament Commentary: The Epistle to the Romans, pg. 200)

“οὐ μὴ λογίσηται is emphatic: ‘will in no wise reckon’.” (C.E.B. Cranfield, International Critical Commentary: Romans 1-8, pg. 234)

“An emphatic negative (οὐ μὴ λογίσηται) highlights God’s intention never to reckon sin and its punishment against the person whose sin has been forgiven.” (David G. Peterson, Commentary on Romans, pg.215)

“Paul backs this up by the example of the prophet David, who says that those are blessed of whom God has decreed that, without work or any keeping of the law, they are justified before God by faith alone. Therefore he foretells the blessedness of the time when Christ was born, just as the Lord himself said: “Many prophets and righteous men longed to see what you see and to hear what you hear and did not hear it.” (Ambrosiaster, Commenting on Romans, cited in Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture: Romans)