Romans 1:1-16 I. . Romans 1:1-7 A. Salutation with long interposed parenthesis, suggested by "gospel of God." The parenthesis, expressing thoughts of which the writer’s mind is full, intimates the purport of the coming treatise. It also intimates his claim, afterwards more fully asserted (Romans 15:15, seq.), to demand a hearing from the Roman Church. It is St. Paul’s way, when full of an idea, thus to interrupt his sentences at the suggestion of a word. Somewhat similar interpositions are found in the opening salutations of Galatians and Titus, especially in the latter; but this is peculiar for its length and fulness. Romans 1:1 Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle. In his salutations to the Philippians and to Titus also St. Paul calls himself δοῦλος (i.e. "bondservant") of Jesus Christ; but usually only ἀπόστολος, or, as here, κλητὸςἀπόστολος, which is rightly translated in the Authorized Version, "called to be an apostle," Divine vocation to the office being the prominent idea. St. Paul often elsewhere insists on the reality of his vocation from Christ himself to be an apostle to the Gentiles; and this with regard to disparagement of his claim to be a true apostle at all on the part of some (cf. 1 Corinthians 9:1; 2 Corinthians 11:5; 2 Corinthians 12:12; Galatians 1:1, Galatians 1:12; Galatians 2:8). It does not follow from his thus asserting his claim here and afterwards in this Epistle that he was aware of any disparagement of it at that time among the Roman Christians; still less that he wrote his Epistle with a polemical purpose against the Judaizers, as some have supposed. Still, he may have suspected that some might possibly have been busy there, as they were in other places; and, however that might be, writing as he was to a Church not founded by, and as yet unvisited by, himself, he might think distinct assertions of his claim to be heard desirable. Separated (or, set apart) unto the gospel of God; i.e. to the preaching of the gospel, not the reception of it only, as is evident from the context. The word ἀφωρίσμενος here, as well as the previous κλητὸς, is best taken, in pursuance of the line of thought, as referring to the Divine counsels, not to the agency of the Church. It is true that the word is elsewhere used with the latter reference, as in Acts 13:2, ἈφορίσατεδὴμοιτόντεΒαρνάβανκαὶτὸν, Σαῦλονεἰςτὸἔργονὂππροσκέκλημαιαὐτούς, where the ἀφορισμὸς spoken of was subsequent to the Divine κλῆσις, and effected by human laying on of hands. But we have also St. Paul’s own words (Galatians 1:15), ὉΘεὸςὁἀφόρρισαςμεἐκκοιλίαςμητρόςμουκαὶκαλίσαςδιὰτῆςχάριτοςαὐτοῦ, where the ἀφορισμὸς is that of God’s eternal purpose, and previous to the κλῆσις (cf. Acts 9:15 and Acts 26:16, Acts 26:17). Romans 1:2 Which he promised before through his prophets in the Holy Scriptures concerning his Son. Here the parenthetical passage begins, extending to the end of Rom 1:6. It is unnecessary to complicate it by connecting περὶτοῦυἱοῦαὐτοῦ with the previous εὐαγγέλιονΘεοῦ. It goes more naturally with προεπηγγείλατο, denoting the subject of the Old Testament promises. By προφητῶν are meant not only the sacred writers distinctively so called, but (as in Hebrews 1:1) all who spoke of old under Divine inspiration, as by γραφαῖςἁγίαις is signified the Old Testament generally. This intimation of the gospel being the fulfilment of prophecy is fitly introduced here, as preparing the reader for the argument of the Epistle, in the course of which the doctrine propounded is shown to be in accordance with the Old Testament, and in fact anticipated therein. This is, indeed, a prominent point in the general teaching of apostles and evangelists. They announce the gospel as the fulfilment of prophecy, and the true completion of all the ancient dispensation; and it is to the Old Testament that, in addressing Israelites, they ever in the first place appeal. Thus St. Peter (Acts 2:14; Acts 3:18; Acts 4:11); thus Stephen (Acts 7:1-60.); thus St. Paul at Antioch in Pisidia, at Thessalonica, and before Agrippa (Acts 13:16; Acts 17:2; Acts 26:6, Acts 26:22); thus Philip to the Ethiopian proselyte (Acts 8:35); thus Apollos at Corinth (Acts 18:28). Our Lord himself had done the same, as in Matthew 5:17; Luke 4:21; Luke 24:27, Luke 24:44; John 5:39. All this is important as showing how the old and new dispensations are regarded together as parts of a whole, the old one being but the needful preparation for a fulfilment in the new, and so becoming intelligible; and thus how "through all the ages one eternal purpose runs." There was also a providential preparation in the Gentile world, though not so direct and obvious, and though, of course, not similarly noticed in addresses to disciples of the Law. But St. Paul intimates it; as in his speech on Areopagus, and also, as will be seen, in this Epistle. Even the gospel is set forth as but a further stage of progress towards a final consummation, as the dawn only of a coming daybreak. We have still but an earnest of our inheritance; the "earnest expectation of the creature" still awaits "the manifestation of the sons of God." Meanwhile, in the revelation already made through Christ, and the redemption accomplished by him, we are taught to cling to our faith in a Divine purpose throughout the world’s perplexing history—that of resolving at last all discords into eternal harmony, and making manifest "one great love, embracing all." This grand view of a providential order leading to a final consummation (though how and when we know not) pervades St. Paul’s writings, and should be kept in mind for a proper understanding of this Epistle. God’s promises through his prophets in Holy Scripture are said to have been "concerning his Son;" and a question hence arises as to the exact sense in which "his Son" is to be here understood; a consideration of which question may help our interpretation of the expression in the following verse, which is not without difficulty, ΤοῦὁρισθέντοςυἱοῦΘεοῦἐνδυνάμει. We may distinguish between three senses in which Christ is called "the Son of God." (1) With reference to his Divine pre-existence, the term expressing his relation to the Father from eternity, like the Λόγος (and probably the μονογενὴςυἱὸς) of St. John. (2) With reference to his incarnation, as being conceived by the Holy Ghost; as in Luke 1:35, ΔιὸκαὶτὸγεννώμενονἃγιονκληθήσεταιυἱὸςΘεοῦ. (3) With reference to the position assigned to the Messiah in psalm and prophecy, as the Son exalted to the right hand of God, and crowned with glory. It is with the last of these three references that the title is used in the Epistle to the Hebrews; where the ideal of sonship, found in the Old Testament, and imperfectly typified by the theoretic position of the theocratic kings, is regarded as prophetic, and pointing to Christ, in whom alone it is shown to be fulfilled. Hence in that Epistle his exaltation to the rank and dignity of Son is regarded as subsequent to his human obedience, and even the consequence and reward of it. It was "because of the suffering of death (διὰτὸπάθημαθανάτου)" that he has been "crowned with glory and honour" (Hebrews 2:9); it was after he had made a purification of sins that he "sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high," having "inherited" that "more excellent name"—the name of Son (Hebrews 1:4). It is by no means implied that the said Epistle does not recognize a true Sonship of Christ before his exaltation; he was all along "the Son" (cf. Hebrews 5:7, Καίπερὤνυἱὸςἔμαθεν, etc.), though not enthroned as such over mankind and all creation till after his resurrection; and, further, the essential doctrine of his pre-existent and eternal Sonship. in the first of the senses noted above, is distinctly taught (as in Luke 1:3), though not there by the use of the term "Son." All we say is that this word is used in the Epistle to the Hebrews to denote Christ’s position and office as the royal High Priest of humanity, exalted, after suffering, to the right hand of God, rather than his original Divine Personality; such being the significance of the title in the prophetic anticipations of the Messiah. Now, this being so, and it being the promises made "through his prophets in the Holy Scriptures concerning his Son" that are being spoken of in the passage before us, it may seem at first most probable that the idea here implied by the word "Son" is the same as in the Epistle to the Hebrews, and no more. We ought, however, to take further into account what St. Paul himself seems to signify by the term when he uses it elsewhere. It does not follow that his own conception of its significance was confined to what was apparent in "the prophets." Reading them in the light of the gospel revelation, he may have seen in their language more implied than it distinctly expressed, and himself intended to imply more. The passages in his Epistles, apart from this chapter, where Christ is called God’s Son are these: (1) Romans 5:10, "We were reconciled to God through the death of his Son;" (2) Romans 8:3, "Sending his own Son (τὸνἑαυτοῦυἱὸν) in the likeness of flesh of sin;" (3) Romans 8:29, "To be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the Firstborn among many brethren;" (4) Romans 8:32, "Spared not his own Son (τοῦἰδίοῦυἱοῦ);" (5) 2 Corinthians 1:19, "The Son of God … was not Yea and Nay;" (6) Galatians 4:4, Galatians 4:6, "God sent forth his Son,"—"sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father;" (7) Colossians 1:13, "Translates us into the kingdom of the Son of his love." In all these passages—except (3), in which the reference may be only to Christ in glory—the term "Son" denotes a relation (o the Father, peculiar to our Lord, previous to the death and exaltation, and in some of them, (2), (6), (7), previous to the Incarnation. Such previous relation is especially apparent in the sequence to (7), where "the Son of his love" is defined not only as "the Head of the body, the Church," and "the Firstborn from the dead," but also as "the Image of the invisible God, the Firstborn of all creation; for in him all things were created, the things in heaven, and the things on the earth, the things visible and the things invisible; all things through him and unto him have been created." With this may be compared Philippians 2:6-12, where an existence ἐνμορφῇΘεοῦ, anterior to incarnation, is undoubtedly declared, though the exaltation after human obedience, and the receiving then of "a name that is above every name" (cf. Hebrews 1:4), is spoken of as well. One other passage remains to be noticed, occurring, not in an Epistle, but in the sermon at Antioch in Pisidia (Acts 13:33), where the view of Christ’s Sonship which is found in the Epistle to the Hebrews (no more being expressed) appears as present to St. Paul’s mind. For there God is said to have "fulfilled the promise which was made unto the fathers, in that he hath raised up Jesus again; as it is also written in the psalm, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee." Here the Sonship assigned to "the Christ" in the second psalm is regarded as exhibited in the Resurrection. From this review of St. Paul’s usage it may be inferred that περὶτοῦυἱοῦαὐτοῦ in the text before us carries with it in his own mind the idea of pre-existent eternal Sonship, though what we may call Messianic Sonship may be all he means distinctly to intimate as declared by prophets. The bearing of this distinction on the interpretation of Php 2:4 will appear under it. It may be observed here that the absence of a fixed and definite usage in the application of the term "Son" to Christ, which (as has been seen) is found in the New Testament, is what might be expected there. Formal definitions of theological conceptions by means of language used uniformly in a recognized definite sense had not as yet been made. Among such conceptions that of the Holy Trinity though implied, is nowhere distinctly formulated as a dogma. It was reserved for the Church, under the guidance of the Spirit, to preclude misconception by precise dogmatic definitions. Romans 1:3 Which was made; or, was born. But the word in itself, γενομένου, need only mean that he became a Man of the seed of David; implying, it would seem, a pre-existence of him who so became. This, however, is more evident from other passages, in which ὢν, or ὑπάρχων, is opposed to γενόμενος (cf. John 1:1, John 1:14; Philippians 2:6, Philippians 2:7; cf. also Galatians 4:4, ἘξαπέστειλενὁΘεὸςτοῦυἱὸναὐτοῦγενόμενονἐκγυναικὸς). Of the seed of David according to the flesh. Κατὰσάρκα is here, as elsewhere, contrasted with κατὰπνεῦμα. Here κατὰσάρκα denotes the merely human descent of Jesus in distinction from his Divine Being (of. Acts 2:40; Romans 9:3, Romans 9:5; 2 Corinthians 5:16). His having come humanly "of the seed of David" is suitably noted here, where "the Son" is being set forth as fulfilling the Old Testament promises; for they uniformly represent the Messiah as thus descended, and it was essential to the Jewish conception of him that he should be so (cf. Matthew 22:42; John 7:42; and for the stress laid by the writers of the New Testament on the fact that Jesus was so—of which fact no doubt was entertained—cf. Hebrews 7:14, πρόδηλονγὰρ, etc. See, among many other passages, Matthew 1:1; Luke 2:4, Luke 2:5; Acts 2:30; Acts 13:23; 2 Timothy 2:8). Meyer, commenting on the verse before us, goes somewhat out of his way to set forth that only Joseph’s, not Mary’s, descent from David was in St. Paul’s mind, saying that "the Davidic descent of the mother of Jesus can by no means be established from the New Testament," and also that "Paul nowhere indicates the view of a supernatural generation of the bodily nature of Jesus." As to the first of these assertions, it may be observed that, in the opening chapters of our Gospel of St. Luke (representing certainly the early belief of the Church) our Lord seems to be regarded as actually descended from David—not legally so accounted only—though, at the same time, his supernatural generation is distinctly asserted (comp. Luke 1:32 with Luke 1:35). Hence we are led to infer Mary’s, as well as Joseph’s, descent from David, whether or not either of the genealogies given in St. Matthew’s and St. Luke’s Gospels represents hers. Further, with respect to those two genealogies (evidently independent ones, and both probably got from genealogical records preserved at Jerusalem), a probable way of accounting for the two distinct lines of descent through which Joseph seems to be traced to David, is to suppose one of them to be really Mary’s, the legal representative of whose family Joseph had become by marriage, so as to be entered in legal documents as the son of her father (see art. on "Genealogy of Jesus Christ," in ’Dictionary of the Bible,’ W. Smith, LL.D.). As to Meyer’s second assertion above alluded to, it is true that St. Paul nowhere refers to our Lord’s supernatural conception spoken of in the Gospels of St. Matthew and St. Luke. But it does not follow that it was not already included in the Church’s creed, or that St. Paul himself was unaware of it or disbelieved it. This is not the place for enlarging on the evidence, at the present day increasing in force, of the early origin of our existing Gospels, and of their being a true embodiment of the Church’s original belief. St. Paul’s silence as to the manner how the Son of God became incarnate may be accounted for by his not having had occasion, in his extant Epistles, to speak of it. He is occupied, in accordance with his peculiar mission, in setting forth the meaning and purpose of the Incarnation rather than its mode, and in preaching rather than catechetical instruction; and on the essential idea involved he is sufficiently explicit, viz. the peculiar Divine paternity of Christ, notwithstanding the human birth. Romans 1:4 Who was declared (so Authorized Version) the Son of God with (literally, in) power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection of (not as in Authorized Version, from) the dead. Supposing the intention here to be to declare the Son’s essential Deity, notwithstanding his human birth, we might have expected ὄντος after the γενομένου preceding. But the word used is ὁρισθέντος; and, further, the Resurrection is referred to, not a pre-existent state. The verb ὁρίζειν means properly to "appoint" or "determine;" and if this meaning be re-mined, the whole passage would seem to preclude the idea of Sonship previous to the Resurrection being in view. Hence commentators ancient and modern agree generally in assigning an unusual meaning to ὁρισθέντος-here, making it signify "declared," as in the Authorized Version. So Chrysostom, Τίοὗνἔστινὁρισθέντος; τοῦδειχθέντος, ἀποφανθέντοςκριθέντοςδυολογηθέντοςπαρὰτῆςἀπάντωνγνώμηςκαὶψήφου. It is maintained that this use of the word, though unusual, is legitimate; since a person may be said to be appointed, or determined, to be what he already is, when his being such is declared and manifested. Thus, it may be said, a king may be spoken of as appointed king when he is crowned, though he was king before; or a saint determined a saint when he is canonized; and the classical phrase, ὁρίζειντινὰΘεόν, in the sense of deify, is adduced as parallel. Thus the expression is made to mean that "the same who κατὰσάρκα was known only as the descendant of David, is now declared to be the Son of God" (Tholuck); Ὅριζεταιδὲεἰςυἰὸνκαὶκατὰτὸἀνβρώπινον" (Cyril); and St. Paul’s reason for thus putting it, in pursuance of his course of thought, is thus explained by Meyer; "Paul gives the two main epochs in the history of the Son of God as they had actually occurred, and had been prophetically announced;’’ also by Bengel thus, "Etiam ante exinanitionem suam Filius Dei is quidem fuit: sed exinanitione filiatio occultata fuit, et plene demure retecta post resurrectionem." This interpretation would be more satisfactory than it is if the verb ὁρίζειν were found similarly used in any other part of the New Testament. It occurs in the following passages, and always in its proper and usual sense: Luke 22:22; Acts 2:23; Acts 10:42; Acts 11:29; Acts 17:26, Acts 17:31; Hebrews 4:7. Of these especially significant are Acts 10:42 (ὍτιαὐτόςἔστινὁὡρισμενοςὑπὸτοῦΘεοῦκριτὴςζώντωνκαὶνεκρῶν) and Acts 17:31 (Διότιἔστησενἡμέρανἐνᾗμέλλεικρίνειντὴνοἰκουμένηνἐνδικαιοσύνῃἐνἀνδρὶᾧὥρισε, πίστινπαρασχὼνπᾶσινἀναστήσαςαὐτὸνἐκνεκρῶν). In both of these texts the word denotes God’s appointment or determination of Christ to the office of Judge, not merely a declaration or manifestation of his already being so; and it is to be observed that in the second the language is given as that of St. Paul himself, and that it corresponds with the passage before us in that the Resurrection is spoken of as the display to the world of Christ being so appointed or determined. Surely, then, there ought to be cogent reason for giving ὁρισθέντος a different meaning here; and, in spite of the weight of authority on the other side, it is submitted that we are under no necessity to do so, if we bear in mind what appeared under Acts 17:3 as to the different senses in which Christ is designated ΥἱὸςΘεοῦ. In the sense apparent is Messianic prophecy, and pervading the Epistle to the Hebrews, in the sense which seems intended by St. Paul himself in Acts 13:32, Acts 13:33, it was not till after the Resurrection that Christ attained his position of royal Sonship; it was then that the Divine ὁρισμὸς took effect in that regard. It is true that St. Paul (as was seen under Acts 13:3) himself conceived of Christ as essentially Son of God from eternity; but here, while speaking of the fulfilment of Messianic prophecy, and desiring to point out what was patent to all who believed that Christ had risen, he may fitly refer to his exaltation only, in virtue of which, further, he had himself received his apostolic commission, of which he proceeds to speak, and the assertion which he has had all along in view. The above interpretation of ὁρισθέντος appears, further, to have the weighty support of Pearson, who, speaking of Christ’s fourfold right unto the title of "the Son of God"—by generation, as begotten of God; by commission, as sent by him; by resurrection, as the Firstborn; by actual possession, as Heir of all—refers thus to Romans 1:4: ’Thus was he defined, or constituted, and ’appointed to be the Son of God with power by the Resurrection from the dead’", (Pearson on the Creed, art. 2.). Ἐνδυνάμει (to be connected with ὁρισθέντος) denotes the Divine power displayed in the Resurrection (cf. Ephesians 1:19, "the exceeding greatness of his power,… according to the working of the strength of his might, which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead;" cf. also 1 Corinthians 6:14; 1 Corinthians 15:43; 2 Corinthians 13:4). In the last two of these passages, power evidenced in resurrection is contrasted with human weakness evidenced in death: ΣπείρεταιἐνἀσθενειάἐγείρεταιἐνδυνάμειΚαὶγὰρεἴἐσταυρώθηἐξἀσθενείαςἀλλὰζῆἐκδυνάμεως. Τοκατὰσάρκα in Romans 1:3 is opposed, not simply κατὰπνεῦμα, but κατὰπνεῦμαἁγιωσὑνης (the spirit of holiness), so as to denote the Divine element that was all along in the Incarnate Son, in virtue of which he rose triumphant over human ἀσθένεια. We too are composed of σάρξ and πνεῦμα; but the πνεῦμα in Christ was one of absolute holiness—the holiness of Deity; not ἁγιότης, holiness in the abstract, attributed to Deity (Hebrews 12:10), nor ἁγιασμὸς "sanctification," of which man is capable; but ἁγιωσύνη, an inherent quality of Divine holiness ("Quasi tres sint gradus, sanctificatio, sanctimonia, sanctitas," Bengel). Because of this "spirit of holiness" that was in Christ, "it was not possible that he should be holden of" death (Acts 2:24). Through this, which was in himself—not merely through a Divine power external to himself calling him from the grave, as he had called Lazarus—he overcame death (cf. Acts 2:27; Acts 13:35, "Thou shalt not suffer thine Holy One to see corruption"). It was through this too (διὰπνεύματοςαἰωνίου) that he "offered himself without spot to God" (Hebrews 9:14); and in the same sense may be understood ἐδικαιώθηἐνπνεύματι (1 Timothy 3:16). Neither in these passages nor in the one before us is the Holy Spirit meant, in the sense of a distinct Person of the Holy Trinity. Further, the preposition in ἐξἀναστάσεως does not denote (as explained by Theodoret, Luther, and Grotius) the time from which the ὁρισμὸς began in the sense of ἐξοὗἀνέστη, but the source out of which it proceeded. "Ἑκ non mode tempus, sed nexum rerum denotat" (Bengel). Further, the phrase is not ’’resurrection from the dead," as in the Authorized Version, but "of the dead," which may be purposely used so as to point, not only to the fact of Christ’s own resurrection, but also to its significance for mankind. The same expression often occurs elsewhere with a comprehensive meaning (cf. Acts 23:6; Acts 24:21; 1 Corinthians 15:12-21; Philippians 3:11; also 1 Corinthians 15:22; Philippians 3:10). The resurrection of Christ expressed "the power of an endless life," here and hereafter, for mankind, carrying with it the possibility of the resurrection of all from the dominion of death in the risen Son. One view of the meaning of the whole of the above passage—that of Chrysostom and Melancthon—may be mentioned because of the weight of these authorities, though it cannot be the true one. They take κατὰπνεῦμαἁγιωσύνηςἐνδυνάμει, and ἐξἀναστάσεωςνεκρῶν, as co-ordinate, regarding them as the three proofs of Christ’s eternal Sonship. i.e. miracles, the communication of the Holy Ghost, and the resurrection. Jesus Christ our Lord; thus in conclusion distinctly identifying the Son of prophecy with the Jesus who had lately appeared, and was acknowledged by the Christians as the Messiah, and commonly by them called Κύριος. The force of the passage is weakened in the Authorized Version by the transposition of ΙησοῦΧριστοῦΚυρίουἡμῶν to the beginning of Rom 1:3, as also by the inclusion of Rom 1:2 in a parenthesis, so as to separate it from περὶτοῦυἱοῦ which follows. (See explanation given above.) Romans 1:5 Through whom we received grace and apostleship, unto obedience of faith among all the nations, for his Name’s sake. "We" here means, not Christians generally, but Paul himself (though probably, as also in all other cases where he similarly uses this plural, with the intention of including others, here his fellow-apostles); for the "grace" spoken of is evidently from what follows a special grace for the apostolic office to which he had been called. The word ἀποστολὴ occurs in a like sense in Acts 1:25. Εἰςὑπακοὴνπίστεως, etc., denotes the purpose of his apostleship, viz. to bring men everywhere, of whatever race, to believe and obey the gospel; not to a belief in it only, but to the obedience which comes of faith, or which faith renders. "Accepimus mandatum Evangelii ad omnes gentes pro-ferendi, cut illae per fidem obedient" (Calvin). Some take the phrase, ὑπακοὴνπίστεως, to mean "obedience to faith," faith being regarded, not as cause efficiens, but as a commanding principle exacting obedience to itself. So Meyer, who refers to passages where a genitive after ὑπακοὴ has this meaning: 2 Corinthians 10:5 (ὑπακοὴτοῦΧριστοῦ); 1 Peter 1:22 (ὑπακοὴτῆςἀληθείας); and also to Acts 6:7 (Υ̓πήκουοντῇπίστει). The last of these quotations would have been peculiarly apposite in support of the interpretation contended for, were not πίστεως in the text now before us anarthrous, so as to suggest subjective faith, rather than "the faith delivered to the saints," as in Acts 6:7. The question is, after all, of no importance with regard to the essential idea intended to be conveyed. Ἐνπᾶσιτοῖςἔθνεσιν seems to point especially to St. Paul’s own apostleship (cf. Acts 22:21; Galatians 1:16; Galatians 2:8, Galatians 2:9; Ephesians 3:1, Ephesians 3:8), though, of course, the apostleship of all, wherever exercised, had a similar worldwide purpose. In using the expression here, he anticipates what he is about to say as to his not shrinking from addressing even the Romans with authority; his mission being to all the nations. Υπὲρτοῦοηνόματοςαὐτοῦ is best connected with "obedience of faith." The phrase is of frequent occurrence (cf. Acts 5:41; Acts 9:15; Acts 15:26; Acts 21:13; also 2 Thessalonians 1:12). It is most usually connected with the idea of suffering in behalf of Christ. Romans 1:6 Among whom are ye also, called ones of Jesus Christ; and therefore included in my apostolic mission. Here the parenthetic passage ends, Romans 1:7 being the sequence of Rom 1:1. Romans 1:7 To all that be in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints (cf. κλητὸςἀπόστολον, in Romans 1:1). Bengel’s view, that by ἀγαπητοῖςΘεοῦ are specially meant the Jewish Christians, as being "beloved for the fathers’ sakes" (Romans 11:28), and by κλητοῖςἁγίοις the Gentile converts, is untenable. Both phrases are applicable to all. The word ἁγίοι, be it observed, is elsewhere used to denote all Christians, without implying eminence in personal holiness (cf. 1 Peter 2:9, ὑμεῖςδὲ … ἕθνοςἄγιον). Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. The union, here and elsewhere, of Jesus Christ with the Father as imparting heavenly blessing, implies his Deity no less than any dogmatic statement could do; for it is surely impossible to conceive the apostle thus associating with the Godhead one whom he regarded as a mere human being. The same form of benediction is found at the beginning of all St. Paul’s Epistles, and there can be no doubt that its meaning is as given above. For, though here, in 1 and 2 Corinthians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 1 and 2 Thessalonians, and Philemon, this collocation of words might allow the rendering, "Grace … from God, the Father of us and of the Lord Jesus Christ," yet in Galatians, 1 and 2 Timothy, and Titus, it is obviously inadmissible. And even without these instances the true meaning would have been probable from ἡμῶν coming before ἸησοῦΧριστοῦ. If the apostle had intended to express a common Fatherhood of God, he would surely not have written, "Our Father and Christ’s," but rather, "Christ’s and ours" (cf. John 20:17). Romans 1:8-17 B. Introduction, in which the writer expresses his strong interest in the Roman Church, his long-cherished desire to visit it, and the grounds of this desire. Romans 1:8 First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for you all, that your faith is spoken of (rather, proclaimed) in the whole world. We observe here, as in other Epistles, St. Paul’s way of beginning with complimentary language, and expression of thankfulness for the good he knew of in his readers. He thus intimates at the outset his own good feeling towards them, and predisposes them to take in good part any animadversions that may follow. "The whole world" is not, of course, to be taken literally, but as a phrase denoting general notoriety. Similarly in 1 Thessalonians 1:8, ἐνπαντὶτόπῳ. Any considerable number of converts in so important a place as Rome would be likely to become notorious in all Christian circles, and even outside them might have already begun to attract attention. Romans 1:9 For God is my witness, whom I serve in my spirit in the gospel of his Son, that without ceasing I make mention of you in my prayers. A like solemn asseveration is made with a like intention (Philippians 1:8; cf. also 2 Corinthians 11:31). It expresses the writer’s earnestness, and is in place for attestation of a fact known only to himself and God. The word λατρεύω, ("I serve"), when used in a religious sense, most usually denotes "worship," and specifically the priestly services of the temple (Hebrews 8:5; Hebrews 9:9; Hebrews 10:2; Hebrews 13:10). St. Paul’s λατρεία intended here is not ceremonial function, but a spiritual one (ἐντῷπνεύματίμου)—an inward devotion of himself to God’s service in proclaiming and furthering "the gospel of his Son." A similar view of the essential λατρεία of Christians is found in Romans 12:1; Romans 15:16; Philippians 3:3; 2 Timothy 1:3; Hebrews 9:14. Romans 1:10 Always (to be connected with δεόμενος following, not, as in the Authorized Version, with the preceding μνείανποιοῦμαι) in my prayers making request, if by any means now at length (in some way at length some day) I may be prospered to come unto you. The word εὐοδωθησόμαι, translated in the Authorized Version, "have a prosperous journey," though rightly so rendered with regard to its etymology and original meaning, does not necessarily imply being prospered in a journey. It was commonly used to denote being prospered generally (cf. 1 Corinthians 16:2; 3 John 1:2). Romans 1:11 For I long to see you, that I may impart unto you some spiritual gift, to the end ye may be established. Bengel, taking χάρισμα as the special gift of the Holy Ghost consequent on apostolic laying on of hands (cf. Acts 8:17, Acts 8:18), argues from this verse that neither St. Peter nor any other apostle could have been at Rome so far. Though his conclusion is probably true, it does not follow from his premiss; for τὶχάρισμαπνευματικὸν evidently means generally any gift of grace. All St. Paul implies is that he hopes to do them some spiritual good, so as to settle and strengthen them; and in the next verse, with characteristic delicacy, he even modifies what he has said, so as to guard against being supposed to imply that the benefit would be all on their side. Romans 1:12 That is, that I with you may be comforted in you, each of us by each other’s faith, yours and mine. The spirit of delicate courtesy here evinced, in addressing persons over whom one loss of a Christian gentleman than St. Paul was might have assumed a lordly tone, is apparent elsewhere in his Epistles (cf. Romans 15:15; Romans 16:19; 2 Corinthians 2:3; 2 Corinthians 3:1, seq.; 2 Corinthians 8:8; 2 Corinthians 9:2), and especially the whole Epistle to Philemon. Romans 1:13 But I would not have you ignorant, brethren, that oftentimes I purposed to come unto you (and was hindered hitherto), that I might have some fruit among you also, even as among the rest of the Gentiles. Some take the "but" at the beginning of this verse (οὐθέλωδὲ) as the apodosis to πρῶτονμὲν in Romans 1:8, with the meaning, "I am aware, and am thankful, that your faith is already notorious; but still I wish you to know that I have long had a desire to visit you." But the μὲν and δὲ are too far separated to commend this view. It is more after St. Paul’s style that there should be no apodosis to πρῶτονμὲν; his train of thought carries him on so that he forgets how he began his sentence; and Romans 1:13 comes naturally as the sequence of Rom 1:12, whether we render δὲ by "but," or (as in the Authorized Version) by "now," or (as in the Revised Version) by "and." The long-cherished intention here spoken of had been expressed by him when at Ephesus, before his departure to Macedonia (Acts 19:21). Feeling himself to be peculiarly the apostle to the Gentile world, and having already been the first agent in carrying the gospel into Europe (Acts 16:9, Acts 16:10), and having established it there in important centres of population, he ever kept in view an eventual visit to the imperial city itself, in the hope of its thence permeating the whole western world. What had so far hindered him appears from Romans 15:22 to have been principally missionary work which had first to be accomplished elsewhere. At last Providence carried him there in a way not of his own choosing. Thus man proposes, God disposes. In this verse the Roman Church seems certainly to be regarded as a Gentile one. What classes of converts probably at that time composed it has been considered in the Introduction. Whatever its nucleus, St. Paul plainly feels that, in sending this Epistle to it, he is carrying out his especial mission of extending the gospel to the Gentile world, though at the same time he writes mainly from a Jewish standpoint, appealing frequently to the Jewish Scriptures, with which he presupposes an acquaintance on the part of his readers. But the latter fact is not inconsistent with the supposition of their being, either then or prospectively, mainly of Gentile race. The gospel was everywhere preached as the fulfilment of Judaism (see note on Romans 15:2); and for understanding both its purport and its evidences, all would have to be to some extent indoctrinated in the ancient Scriptures. It is to be observed, too, that in the next verse the apostle implies a sense of now addressing a peculiarly civilized and cultivated community; he seems to have before him the prospect of his address reaching the educated and intelligent classes of society in the imperial city. And the Epistle, as it goes on, is in accordance with such an aim. For its arguments are addressed, not merely to believers in the Old Testament, but also generally to philosophical thinkers. The state of the world is reviewed, human consciousness is analyzed, deep problems which had long exercised the minds of philosophers are touched on, and the gospel is, in fact, commended to the world as God’s answer to man’s needs. Romans 1:14, Romans 1:15 Both to Greeks and Barbarians, both to wise and unwise, I am debtor. So, as much as is in me, to you also that are at Rome, I am ready to preach the gospel. The two divisions of mankind into (1) ἜλληνεςκαὶΒάρβαροι, (2) σοφοὶκαὶἀνοήτοι, are intended to include all, independently of nationality and culture, regarded from a Greek or Roman point of view. The Greeks, as is well known, called all others than themselves Βάρβαροι, so that ἝλληνεςκαὶΒάρβαροι included the whole world. Here the Romans are intended to be included among Ἕλληνες, being partakers in Hellenic culture, and in fact at that time its prominent representatives (cf. "Non solum Graecia et Italia, sod etiam omnis barbaria," Cicero, ’De Fin.,’ 2.15). Of course, σοφοὶ also includes them. The obvious intention of the writer is to place them in each of the higher categories, and so, while after his manner he pays his expected readers a delicate compliment, to insist that his mission is to the highest in position and culture as well as the lowest, cud that, bold in his convictions, he is not ashamed to preach the cross even to them. "Audax facinus ad crucem vocare terrarum Dominos" (Alex. More. quoted by Olshausen). Romans 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel (of Christ, in the Authorized Version, is very weakly supported by manuscripts; neither is it required), for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and to the Greek. In saying he was "not ashamed," St. Paul may have had in his mind our Lord’s own words (Mark 8:38 and Luke 9:26.) We are reminded in this verse of the passage, 1 Corinthians 1:17-31, where the idea here shortly intimated is enlarged on. He was fully aware that the pride of Greek philosophy would be likely to despise the message of the cross as "foolishness." It would be strange to them at first, and out of accord with their intellectual speculations. But he was convinced too that in it was contained the one view of things to meet human needs, and such as to commend itself in the end to thinkers, if their consciences could be roused. In preaching to the Corinthians he had indeed purposely refrained from presenting the gospel to them in "words of man’s wisdom," lest the simple message, addressed alike to all, should lose any of its essential power, or be confounded with the human philosophies of the day. But to them also, in his First Epistle, he declares that this was not because it was not "wisdom," as well as "power," to such as could so receive it. Among the more advanced, and therefore more receptive (ἐντοῖςτελείοις), he does, he says, "speak wisdom" (1 Corinthians 2:6), Christianity having, in fact, its own philosophy, appreciable by them. As is well said in the Exposition of 1 Corinthians in the ’Speaker’s Commentary,’ "No contrast is here at all between reason and revelation, as some think, but strictly between two philosophies—the philosophy of God and the philosophy of the world." Therefore to the Greek, as well as to the Jew, he is not ashamed to preach the cross; and in this Epistle, suitably to its purpose—more, it may be supposed, than his ordinary preaching—he does set forth the Divine philosophy of the gospel. But the message, he adds, is "to the Jew first," because it was to the people of the covenant (cf. 1 Corinthians 9:4, etc.) that the salvation in Christ was in the first place to be offered. Hence also, in all his missionary work, he first addressed himself to the synagogue, and only when he was rejected there, turned exclusively to the Gentiles. So at Rome too, when he afterwards went there (Acts 28:17-29). Romans 11:17-36 II. THE PART OF THE EPISTLE. Romans 8:17-39 C. The doctrine of the righteousness of God propounded, established, and explained. Romans 1:17 This verse, though connected in sequence of thought with the preceding verse, may properly be taken in conjunction with the doctrinal argument which follows, serving, in fact, as its thesis. For the righteousness of God is therein revealed from (or, by) faith unto faith: as it is written, But the righteous by (or, from) faith shall live. It is to be observed that ἐκ is the preposition before πίστεως in both clauses of the sentence, though our Authorized Version makes a difference. Further, we render, with the Authorized Version, "the righteousness of God," rather than "a righteousness," as in the Revised Version, notwithstanding the absence of the article. For what is meant is the definite conception, pervading the Epistle, of God’s righteousness. If there were room for doubt, it would surely be removed by ὀργὴΘεοῦ, also without the article, immediately following, and with the same verb, ἀποκαλύπτεται. The Revisers, translating here "tins wrath," have given in the margin as tenable "a wrath," apparently for the sake of consistency with their rendering of δίκαιοσύνη. But "a wrath of God" has no intelligible meaning. The expressions seem simply to mean God’s righteousness and God’s wrath. This expression, "the righteousness of God," has been discussed in the Introduction, to which the reader is referred. Its intrinsic meaning is there taken to be God’s own eternal righteousness, revealed in Christ for reconciling the world to himself, rather than (as commonly interpreted) the forensic righteousness (so called) imputed to man. Thus there is no need to understand the genitive Θεοῦ as gen. auctoris, or as equivalent to ἐνώπιονΘεοῦ. The phrase is understood in the sense that would be familiar to St. Paul and his readers from the Old Testament; and it is conceived that this intrinsic sense pervades the whole Epistle even when a righteousness imputed to man is spoken of; the idea still being that of the Divine righteousness embracing man. It is not clear in what exact sense ἐκπίστεωςεἰςπίστιν is to be understood. Most commentators, taking δικαιοσύνη to denote man’s imputed righteousness, connect ἐκπίστεως with it, as if ἡἐκ had been written (as e.g. in Romans 10:6). But the absence of ἡ, as well as the collocation of words, seems rather to connect it with ἀποκαλύπτεται. It may be meant to express the subjective condition for man’s apprehension, and appropriation, of God’s righteousness. The revelation of it to man’s own soul is said to be ἐκπίστεως while εἰςπίστιν expresses the result; viz. faith unto salvation. A like use of the preposition εἰς is found in Romans 6:19; 2 Corinthians 2:15, 2 Corinthians 2:16; 2 Corinthians 3:18. In the last of these passages ἀπὸδόξηςεἰςδόξαν, has a close resemblance to the expression before us. The quotation from Habakkuk 2:4 seems mainly meant to illustrate what has been said concerning faith, though the word δίκαιος, which occurs in it in connection with faith, may have also suggested it as apposite, as is evidently the case in Galatians 3:11, where St. Paul quotes it in proof of the position that ἐννόμῳοὐδεὶςδικαιοῦταιπαρὰτῷΘεῷ. The prophet had in immediate view the trials of faith peculiar to his own time, and had cried, "LORD, how long?" But he had stood upon his watch to look out for what the LORD would say unto him; and an answer had come to him to the effect that, in spite of appearances, his prophetic vision would ere long be realized, God’s promises to the faithful would certainly be fulfilled, and that faith meanwhile must be their sustaining principle—"The just shall live by his faith." So in the Hebrew. The LXX. has Ὁδὲδικαιόςμουἐκπίστεωςζήσεται (A.), or Ὁδὲδίκαιοςἐκπίτεωςμουζήσεται (B). The variations do not affect the general sense of the passage. Now some, supposing St. Paul to connect ἐκπίστεως with δίκαιος, as part of the subject of the sentence, would accuse him of giving the quotation a meaning not intended by the prophet, who evidently meant ἐκπίστεως to go with ζήσεται, as part of the predicate. But there is no reason for attributing this intention to St. Paul, except on the supposition that he had previously connected ἐκπίστεως with δικαιοσύνη, in the sense of ἡἐκπίστεως. But we have seen reason for concluding that this was not so. The quotation, in the sense intended by the prophet, is sufficiently apposite. For it expresses that faith is the life-principle of God’s righteous ones, while the whole passage at the end of which it occurs declares the salvation of prophetic vision to be entirely of God, to be waited for and apprehended by man through faith, not brought about by his own doings. Romans 2:18-29 (1) All mankind liable to God’s wrath. Romans 1:18-32 (a) The heathen world in general. Romans 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold back the truth in unrighteousness. Here the argumentation of the Epistle begins, the first position to be established being that all mankind without exception is guilty of sin before God, and therefore unable of itself to put in a plea of righteousness. This being proved, the need of the revelation of God’s righteousness, announced in Romans 1:17, appears. "The wrath of God" is an expression with which we are familiar in the Bible, being one of those in which human emotions are attributed to God in accommodation to the exigencies of human thought. It denotes his essential holiness, his antagonism to sin, to which punishment is due. It expresses an idea as essential to our conception of the Divine righteousness as do the words, "love" and "mercy." Wrath, or indignation, against evil is as necessary to our ideal of a perfect human being as is love of good; and therefore we attribute wrath to the perfect Divine Being, using of necessity human terms for expressing our conception of the Divine attributes. When the Name of the LORD Was proclaimed before Moses (Exodus 34:5, etc.), it was of One not only "merciful and gracious, long-suffering, and abundant in goodness and truth," but also "that will by no means clear the guilty." This last attribute is the same as what we mean by the Divine wrath. This "wrath of God" is said in the verse before us to be "revealed from heaven." How so? Is it in the gospel, as is God’s righteousness (Romans 1:18)? Against this view is the change of expression—ἀποὐρανοῦ instead of ἐναὐτῷ—as well as the fact that the gospel is not in itself a revelation of wrath, but the very opposite. Is it in the Old Testament? Possibly in part; but the marked repetition of ἀποκαλύπτεται in the present tense seems to point to some obvious revelation now; and, further, the first part of the proof, to the end of the second chapter, does not rest on the Old Testament. Is it what the apostle proceeds so forcibly to draw attention to—the existing, and at that time notorious, moral degradation of heathen society, which he regards as evidence of Divine judgment? This may have been before his view; and, as he goes on at once to speak of it, it probably was so prominently. But the revelation of Divine wrath against sin seems to imply more than this as the argument goes on, viz. the evident guilt before God of all mankind alike, and not only of degraded heathenism. It is difficult to decide, among the various explanations that have been offered, on any specific mode of revelation which the writer had in view. Perhaps no particular one exclusively. Commentators may be often unduly anxious to affix an exact sense to pregnant words used by St. Paul, who so often indicates comprehensive ideas by short phrases. He may have had before his mind various concurrent signs of human guilt, and the Divine wrath against it, at that especial time of the world’s history; all which, to his mind at least, brought conviction as by a light from heaven. And the gospel itself (though in its essence a revelation of mercy, so that he purposely avoids saying that wrath was in it revealed) still had been the most powerful means of all for bringing home a conviction of the Divine wrath to the consciences of believers. For its first office is to convince of sin and of judgment. Cf. the words of the forerunner, "O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come?" On all such grounds we may conceive that the apostle spoke of the wrath of God against human sin being especially at that time plainly revealed from heaven; and he desires to bring his readers to perceive it as he did. For now was the time of the Divine purpose to bring it home to all (cf. Acts 17:30, "The times of this ignorance God winked at, but now commandeth all men everywhere to repent"). "All ungodliness and unrighteousness’ (ἀσέβειανκαὶἀδικίαν) comprehends all evil-doing, in whatever aspect viewed, whether as impiety or as wrong. The phrase, τῶντὴνἀλήθειανκατεχόντων, is wrongly translated in the Authorized Version, "who hold the truth." If the verb κατέχειν allowed this rendering here, it would indeed be intelligible in reference to the knowledge of God, even by nature, which all men have or ought to have, though they do not act upon it, and the very potential possession of which renders them guilty. This is the thought of what immediately follows. Thus the sense would be, "They hold, i.e. possess, the truth; but they do unrighteousness." But whenever κατέχειν means "to hold," it denotes a firm hold, not a loose hold, such as would be thus implied. It occurs in this sense in 1 Corinthians 11:2 ("I praise you that ye keep the ordinances"). and 1 Thessalonians 5:21 ("Hold fast that which is good"). We must, therefore, have recourse to a second sense in which the verb is also used—that of "keeping back," or "restraining." Thus Luke 4:42 ("The people stayed him, that he should not depart from them") and 2 Thessalonians 2:6 ("Ye know what withholdeth"). The reference is still to the innate knowledge of God which all men are supposed to have had originally; but the idea expressed is not their having it, but their suppressing it. "Veritas in mente nititur et urget: sed homo eam impedit" (Bengel). Romans 1:19 Because that which is known of God is manifest in them; for God manifested it to them; rather than hath manifested, as in the Authorized Version. He manifested it, as appears from the following verse, in creation. In it to them from the first he manifested it; but in them (ἐναὐτοῖς) also, through the capacity of the human soul to see Divine power in creation. Romans 1:20 For the invisible things of him from (i.e. since, ἀπὸ) the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Divinity (θειότης, not θεότης); so that they are without excuse. The concluding clause is rendered in the Revised Version, "that they may be without excuse;" and it is true that εἰςτὸαἷναιαὐτοὺς does not express the fact that they now are so, but the subjective result of the manifestation, if disregarded. "Paulus directe excusationem adimit, non solum de eventu aliquo loquitur" (Bengel). It is, however, a question of importance, which has been much discussed, whether (as the rendering of the Revised Version might be taken to imply) the idea of Divine purpose, and [not result only, is involved in εἰςτὸεἷναι. The difference between the two conceptions is apparent from the Vulgate, ira at sint inexcusabiles, compared with Calvin’s in hoc ut. The bearing of the distinction on the doctrine of predestination is obvious, and it was consequently a subject of contention between the Lutherans and Calvinists. Meyer among moderns contends strongly that "the view which takes it of the purpose is required by the prevailing use of εἰς with the infinitive," referring in this Epistle to Romans 1:11; Romans 3:26; Romans 4:11, Romans 4:16, Romans 4:18; Romans 6:12; Romans 7:4, Romans 7:5; Romans 8:29; Romans 11:11; Romans 12:2, Romans 12:3; Romans 15:8, Romans 15:13, Romans 15:16. A comparison, however, of these passages does not seem to bear out his contention, it being apparently dependent on the context in each case, rather than the phrase εἰςτὸ, whether the idea of purpose comes in. Chrysostom among the ancients expressly opposed this view, saying, Καίτοιγεοὐδιὰτοῦτοταῦταἐποίησεν,ὁΘεὸς, εἰκαὶτοῦτοἐξέβη. Οὐγὰρἵνααὐτοὺςἀπολογίαςἀποστερήσηδιδασκαλίαντοσαύτηνεἰςμέσονπροὔθηκενἀλλἵνααὐτὸνἐπιγνῶσιν. So that they should be may be suggested as an adequate rendering, so as to avoid the idea of God’s manifestation of himself to men hating been from the first delusive, having condemnation, and not enlightenment, for its purpose. These two verses, 19 and 20, carry out the thought of τὴμἀλήθειανκατεχόντων in Romans 15:18, their purport being to show that the ἀσέβεια and ἀδικία of men have been in spite of knowledge, and therefore involve them all in sin. For sin implies knowledge of good and evil; it is not imputed to the brute beasts, who but follow their natural instincts, having no perception of God or a Divine law. Now, to man, even without any special revelation, God manifests himself in two ways—outwardly in nature, and inwardly in conscience. In these verses the outward manifestation is spoken of, the other being more especially noted in Romans 2:14, etc. But here, too, an inward manifestation is implied by the word νοούμενα, as before by ἐναὐτοῖς. To the animals below us the phenomena of nature may be but a spectacle before their eyes, making no appeal to a mind within. But to man they have a language—they awake wonder, awe, admiration, a sense of infinite mysterious power, and, to the receptive of such impressions, of ideal beauty indefinable. To the psalmists of old they spoke irresistibly of God; of one infinite and eternal Being, above and beyond all; and their consciences, owning the supremacy of good in the moral sphere, concurred with their sense of the evidences of beneficence in nature, so as to convince them also of the righteousness of God. All men (the apostle would say) were originally endowed with a like capacity of knowing God; and their failure in this regard, shown in the various forms of idolatry prevalent throughout the world, he views as the first stage in the development of human sin. The next stage is general moral degradation, regarded as the judicial consequence of the dishonour done to God. It is, indeed, a necessary consequence; for low and unworthy conceptions of Deity bring with them moral deterioration; when man’s Divine ideal becomes degraded, with it he becomes degraded too. Witness, for instance, the debauches and cruelties that so commonly accompanied idolatrous worship. Lastly, the final stage of this moral degradation is represented in an unveiled picture of the utter wickedness, and even unnatural vice, at that time prevalent and condoned in the heart of the boasted civilization of the heathen world. Such is the drift of the remainder of this first chapter. The argument suggests the following thoughts. (1) There is no mention here of Adam s transgression as the origin of human sin. The reason is that the apostle is arguing from a philosophical rather than a theological point of view, having Gentile as well as Jewish thinkers in his view as readers. His appeal in this chapter is not to the Old Testament at all, but to facts by all acknowledged. He is offering the world a philosophy of human history to account for the present perplexing state of things—for the undoubted discord between conscience and performance, between ideal and practice,—his purpose being to show universal guilt on the part of man. But his position here is quite consistent with what he says elsewhere (as in Romans 5:1-21.) of Adam’s original transgression. For his whole argument in this chapter involves the doctrine of the fall of man, who is conceived to have been originally endowed with Divine instincts, and to have forfeited his prerogative through sin; and this is the essential meaning of the picture given us in Genesis 3:1-24. of the original transgression. (2) The entire drift of the chapter is against the view of the condemnation of mankind being due simply to the sin of the progenitor being imputed to the race. For all men are represented as guilty, in that all have sinned against light which they might have followed. This view does not, indeed, preclude that of an inherited infection of nature predisposing all to sin; nay, it rather necessitates it; for why should the sin have been so universal but for such predisposing cause? Still, the distinction between the two views is important in regard to our conception of the Divine justice. 3. It may, however, be said that the distinction is without a real difference in this regard; for that, if the inherited infection is such that sin becomes inevitable (as seems to be implied by its alleged universality), it may appear as inconsistent with the Divine justice to condemn men for it, as it would be to impute to them their progenitor’s transgression. In reply to this difficulty, it may be said that Scripture nowhere says that men are finally condemned for it. On the contrary, the gospel reveals to us the atonement, preordained from the first, for the avoidance of such final condemnation; and this retrospective as well as prospective in its effects (Romans 3:25, Romans 3:26), and as far-reaching as was the original transgression (Romans 4:12, etc.). And our apostle (Romans 2:7, Romans 2:14, Romans 2:15, Romans 2:16) expressly asserts the salvation of all who, according to their light, have done what they could. The fact is, that in the argument before us (as in other passages of similar purport) it is only the principle, or the ground, of man’s possible justification before God that is under review. The intention is to show that this cannot be man’s own "works or deservings," as of debt, but is another which the gospel reveals. Be it observed, lastly, that a clear view of this position is important, not only for our apprehension of the truth of things and of the meaning of the gospel, but also for our right moral tone of mind and attitude before God. For not to be convinced of sin is to belie the true ideal of our conscience, and implies acquiescence in a moral standard below that of the Divine righteousness to which we are able to aspire. Romans 1:21 Because that, knowing God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful (rather, gave thanks); but became vain in their imaginations (διαλογισμοῖς, elsewhere more correctly rendered "thoughts" or "reasonings;" cf. 1 Corinthians 3:20, "The Lord knoweth the thoughts of the wise, that they are vain"—μάταιοι, as here, ἐματαιώθησαν), and their foolish heart was darkened. Romans 1:22, Romans 1:23 Professing themselves to be wise, they Became fools, and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into the similitude (literally, in similitude; cf. Psalms 106:20, whence idea and words are taken) of an image of corruptible man, and of birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. The expression, γνόντεςτὸνΘεὸν, refers to what has been said of τὸγνωστὸντοῦΘεοῦ, having been "manifest in them." It implies actual knowledge, not mere capacity of knowledge. Mankind is regarded as having lost a truer perception of God once possessed, idolatry being a sign of culpable degradation of the human race—not, as some would have us now believe, a stage in man’s emergence from brutality. Scripture ever represents the human race as having fallen and become degraded; not as having risen gradually to any intelligent conceptions of God at all. And it may well be asked whether modern anthropological science has really discovered anything to discredit the scriptural view of the original condition and capacity of man. The view here presented is that obfuscation of the understanding (σύνεσις) ensued from refusal to glorify and give thanks to known Deity. "Gratias assere debemns ob beneficia; glorificare ob ipsas virtutes divinas" (Bengel). Hence came ματαιότης, a word, with its correlatives, constantly used with reference to idolatry; cf. Acts 14:15; 1 Corinthians 3:20; Ephesians 4:17; 1 Peter 1:18; also in the Old Testament, 1 Kings 16:26 (ἐντοῖςματαίοιςἐπορεύαὐτῶν, LXX.), 2 Kings 17:15 (θησανὀπίσωτῶνμαρταίων, LXX.); Jeremiah 2:5; Jonah 2:8 (φυλασσάμενοιμάταιακαὶψευδῆ). Two forms of idolatry—both involving unworthy conceptions of the Divine Being—are alluded to, suggested, we may suppose, by the anthropomorphism of the Greeks and the creature-worship of Egypt, which were the two notable and representative developments of heathen religion. The expression, φάσκοντεςεἷναισοφοὶ, with the previous ἐντοῖςδιαλογισμαοῖς, have led some to suppose in this whole passage a special reference to the schools of philosophy. But this is not so. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/pulpit-commentary/ Romans 2:1-29 (b) Those who judge others, not excepting the Jews. Here a new stage of the argument, in proof of the position propounded in Romans 1:18, begins, and is continued to the end of the chapter. The position to be proved is that all mankind is guilty before God (see note on Romans 1:18). So far this has been shown with regard to the mass of the heathen world; its general moral corruption, prevalent and condoned, having been pointed out finally as a glaring proof; the main point of the argument having been to trace this state of things to man’s own fault, in that he had refused to retain and act on a knowledge of God originally imparted to him through nature and through conscience. From such refusal had ensued idolatry; thence, as a judicial consequence, profligacy; thence a general prevalence of abominable practices; and at last (in many at least) the "reprobate mind," lost to moral restraint, and approving of vice as well as practising it. Thus it is sufficiently proved that the heathen world, regarded as a whole, is under sin, and liable to the wrath of God. But the required proof that the whole of mankind is guilty is not yet complete. It might be said that there are many still who disapprove of all this wickedness, and sit in judgment on it, and who are, therefore, not themselves implicated in the guilt. To such persons the apostle now turns, his purpose being to show that their judging others does not exempt themselves, unless they can show that they are themselves sinless. All, he argues, are tainted with sin, and therefore implicated in the guilt of the human race, while the very fact of their judging others condemns them all the more. It is usually said by commentators that, the sin of the heathen world having been established in the first chapter, the second has reference exclusively to the Jews. But this is surely not so. The expressions, ἄνθρωπε and πᾶςὁκρίνων (Romans 1:1, Romans 1:3), seem evidently to include all who judge others; and it is not till Romans 1:9 that any distinction between Jew and Gentile comes in. Nor would the argument have been complete without refutation of Gentile as well as Jewish judgers of others. For the philosophical schools especially claimed superiority to the mass of mankind, and would be likely to resent their own inclusion in the general condemnation. Notably the Stoics, whose philosophy was at that time, as well as that of the Epicureans, extensively professed by educated Romans. Seneca was a contemporary of St. Paul. The Stoics might be suitably designated as οἱκρίνοντες: for they affected to look down from a position of calm philosophical superiority on those who followed their mere natural impulses, professing to be themselves guided by right reason, and superior to the passions of ordinary humanity. It was a home-thrust at them to ask—Are you, who thus judge others, as exempt as you profess to be from the vices you condemn? If the accounts that have come down to us of Seneca’s own life be true, he certainly was not a paragon of virtue. Now, be it observed that the sort of people now addressed are not concluded to be sunk into all the depths of sin spoken of above; their very affecting to judge others implies, at any rate, theoretic approval of the right. Nor does St. Paul anywhere suggest that there is no difference between man and man with regard to moral worth before God; nay, in this very chapter he forcibly declares the moral excellence of some, without the Law as well as with the Law, and eternal life as its reward (verses 7, 10, 14, 15). All he implies of necessity is that none whatever are so exempt from sin as to be in a position to judge others; and it is the judgment of others that he here especially attacks, as increasing, rather than exempting from, condemnation. For it involves in itself the sin of presumption, unless those that judge are sinless. But it may be said that the universal sinfulness of mankind is still not proved. For (1) it is not actually demonstrated that all of those who judge "do the same things." The answer to this objection is, that this does not admit of rigid proof, and that therefore the apostle deems it enough to appeal to the consciences of the judgers themselves as to how the matter stands with them. But it may be said (2) that the sinfulness of such persons as are spoken of in verses 7, 10, 14, 15, 29-such, namely, as sincerely strive after good without setting themselves up as judges—is still unproved. So it is in this chapter; and, for logical completeness, the proof must be taken as implied. It was, we may suppose in the writer’s mind, and afterwards, in Romans 7:1-25., where the inner consciousness of even the best is analyzed, the missing link of the argument is supplied. Romans 2:1, Romans 2:2 Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou doest (rather, dost practise; the word is πράσσεις, see Romans 1:32) the same things. But we know that the judgment of God is according to truth against them which commit (or, practise, as before) such things. As has been observed above, the fact that πᾶςὁκρίνων "does the same things," is not proved; it is incapable of patent proof, and so the argument takes the form of an appeal to the consciences of such persons. "Porro quia ipsos interioris impuritatis insimulat, quae ut humanos oculos latet, redargui convincique nequeat humanis testimoniis, ad Dei judicium provocat, cui nec tenebrae ipsae sunt absconditae, et cujus sensu tangi peceatoribus, velint nolint, necesse est" (Calvin). On κατὰἀλήθειαν, in Romans 2:2, Calvin also remarks, "Veritas porro haec judicii in duobus consistit: quod sine personarum respectu delictum puniet, in quocunque deprehenderit homine; deinde quod externam speciem non moratur, nec opere ipso contentus est nisi a vera sinceri-tate animi prodeat." Romans 2:3, Romans 2:4 And thinkest thou this, O man, that judgest them which practise such things, and doest the same, that thou (σὺ, emphatic) shalt escape the judgment of God? Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and long-suffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance? Two possible mental attitudes of ὁκρίνων are supposed—that of really calculating (λογίζῃ) on escaping the judgment, or that of obduration, consequent on God’s long forbearance towards him, in that "sentence is not executed speedily." (For a similar view of God’s merciful purpose in delaying the final judgment, and of man’s abuse of his forbearance, cf. 2 Peter 3:9.) Romans 2:5 But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself wrath in the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God. The "day of wrath" is the day of judgment, the final display of eternal righteousness, when the "forbearance" will be over; ever represented, notwithstanding the world’s redemption, under a terrible aspect for the persistently impenitent (cf. 2 Thessalonians 1:9). It may be here observed again that it is ὁκρίνων against whom these indignant denunciations are hurled, and this on the very ground of his thus setting himself up to judge while being himself guilty. Of him it is implied, not only that he shares the guilt of mankind, but also that he especially will not escape the final judgment. Of others who, conscious of their own failings, seek sincerely alter good, this is not said, however liable to condemnation on their own mere merits they may be. Indeed, the contrary is emphatically asserted in the verses that follow; nay, even eternal life is assured to such, whoever they may be, and under whatever dispensation, though it does not fall within the scope of the argument to explain in this place why or how. It is important for us to see this clearly for an understanding of the drift of the chapter, and of St. Paul’s whole doctrine with respect to human sin and its consequences. Romans 2:6 Who will render to every man according to his works. This assertion is no contradiction of the main portion of the Epistle as it proceeds, as to justification being not of works; the phrase here being, not on account of his works, but according to them. "Nequaquam tamen quid valeant, sed quid illis debeatur pretii pronunciat" (Calvin). The ground of justification is not here involved. All that is asserted is what is essential to any true conception of God’s justice, viz. that he has regard to what men are in assigning reward or punishment; it is what is given in Hebrews 11:6 as a first principle of faith about God, "that he is a Rewarder of them that diligently seek him." It is further evident from ἑκάστῳ, and still more from all that follows, that all such will be so rewarded, whether before Christ or after his coming, whether knowing him or not knowing him. Nor is the inclusion of the latter inconsistent with the doctrine that salvation is through Christ alone. For the effect of his atonement is represented as retrospective as well as prospective, and as availing virtually for all mankind (cf. Romans 3:25; Romans 5:15, Romans 5:18, Romans 5:20). Hence the narrow doctrine of some divines, who would confine the possibility of salvation to those who have had in some way during life a conscious faith in the atonement, is evidently not the doctrine of St. Paul. Romans 2:7-9 To them who by patient continuance in well-doing (literally, good work, ἔργουἀγαθοῦ, with reference to ἔργα preceding) seek for glory and honour and immortality (literally, incorruption, ἀφθαρσίαν), eternal life. But unto them which are contentious (so Authorized Version; in Revised Version, factious. As to true meaning, see below), and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth (rather, worketh, ἐργαζομένῳ, with reference again to ἔργα in Romans 2:6) evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile (literally, Greek). The expression, τοῖςἐξἐριθείας, is rendered in the Authorized Version "them which are contentious," ἐριθεία being translated "contention" also in 2 Corinthians 12:20; Galatians 5:20; Philippians 1:16; Philippians 2:3; James 3:14, James 3:16. So, too, the Vulgate, qui sunt ex contentione; and similarly Origen, Chrysostom, OEcumenius, Theophylact, Erasmus, Luther, Beza, Calvin, etc. This, however, is not the classical sense of the word, which is not connected with ἕρις ("strife"), but with ἔριθος, which means originally a day labourer, or a worker for hire, being so used in Homer. Hence ἐριθεία meant (1) labour for wages, and came to mean (2) canvassing or intriguing for office, and (3) faction, or party-spirit (cf. Arist., ’Pol.,’ 5. 2, 6; 3, 9). Notwithstanding the weight of ancient authority for its bearing the sense of "contention" in the New Testament, that of "faction" seems more likely and suitable in the passages where it occurs; and certainly so here, the idea seeming to be that the persons spoken of factiously renounced their allegiance to "the truth," obeying ἀδικία instead. We observe how expressions are here heaped up, significant of the Divine indignation against high-handed sin, unrepented and unatoned for, of which the apostle, in very virtue of his view of the eternal δικαιοσύνη, had an awful sense (see above on Romans 1:18; and of. 1 Thessalonians 1:8, etc.; and also Hebrews 10:27; Hebrews 12:29). Still, neither this verse nor James 3:5 is of necessity inconsistent with other well-known passages, where St. Paul seems to contemplate God’s reconciliation in the end of all things to himself in Christ (see Romans 5:15, et seq.; 1 Corinthians 15:24-29; Ephesians 1:9, Ephesians 1:10, Ephesians 1:22, Ephesians 1:23; Colossians 1:20). The "indignation and wrath" spoken of in the passages before us (being, as was said under Romans 1:18, inseparable from a full conception of the eternal righteousness) may still be conceived as having a corrective as well as a punitive purpose. Nor is the doctrine which has been called that of "eternal hope" of necessity precluded by statements which imply no more than that sin, unrepented and unatoned for, must inevitably undergo its doom in the unknown regions of eternity. The thought, at the end of Jas 3:9, for the first time passes distinctly to the Jew’s assumed exemption from the condemnation of the rest of mankind; and to this exclusively the remainder of the chapter is devoted. The "indignation," etc., it is said, will be upon the Jew first (cf. James 1:16), which may mean either in the first instance, or principally. His priority in Divine favor involves priority in retribution, while his pre-eminence in privilege carries with it corresponding responsibility (cf. Luke 12:47, Luke 12:48; also Psalms 1:3 -8 and 1 Peter 4:17). Then in James 3:10 a like priority is assigned to the Jew with respect to reward, the general assertion of Jas 3:7 being repeated (with some differ-once of expression) in order to complete the view of his prior position in both respects. For the covenant was with the Jews; the promises were to them: the Gentiles were as the wild olive tree, grafted in, and made partakers of the root and fatness of the olive tree (Romans 11:17). "Judaei particeps Graecus" (Bengel). Romans 2:10, Romans 2:11 But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile (literally, Greek, as before): for there is no respect of persons with God (cf. Acts 10:34). This, with what follows, is important, as bringing out in a striking way the clear doctrine of the New Testament that the Jews had no monopoly of Divine favour with respect to final salvation. Whatever advantages certain races of mankind seem undoubtedly to have above others in this world (and that this has been, and is so, with other races as well as the Jews is obvious), all men are described as standing on an exactly equal footing at the bar of eternal equity. Romans 2:12 For as many as have sinned without Law (ἀνόμως) shall also perish without Law (ἀνόμως). Their perdition, if it ensues, will not be due to transgression of a code they had not, but to sin against such light as they had; if without knowledge of Law they sinned, without reference to Law their doom will he, And as many as have sinned in Law (or, under Law. Ἐννόμῳ denotes the condition in which they were; cf. ἐνπεριτομῇ and ἐνὀκροβυστίᾳ, Romans 4:10) shall be judged by Law. The requirements of the Law which they knew they will be held accountable for transgressing—κριθήσονται here, instead of ἀπολοῦνται, because a definite standard of judgment is supposed (cf. Psalms 1:1-6.). Romans 2:13 For not the hearers of Law are just before God, but the doers of Law shall be justified; In this verse, as in the previous one, νόμου is anarthrous according to the best-supported readings, though the Textus Receptus has τοῦ before it. It has, therefore, been rendered above simply as Law, not as either the law, or a law, as the same word will be below, whenever it stands by itself without either the article or any modifying genitive. Much has been written by commentators on the senses in which this word νόμος is to be understood, as used by St. Paul with or without the article. In an Appendix to the Introduction to the Epistle to the Romans in the ’Speaker’s Commentary’ will be found a summary of the views taken by critics of repute, with exhaustive references to the usage of the word in the Septuagint, in the New Testament generally, and in the writings of St. Paul. It has not been thought necessary in this Commentary to discuss further what has been so amply discussed already. It may suffice to state certain principles for the reader’s guidance, which appear plainly to commend themselves to acceptance. (1) Ὁνόμος, with the article prefixed, always means the Mosaic Law. (2) Νόμος, without the article, may have, and often has, specific reference to the Mosaic Law; but, if so, the emission of the article is not arbitrary, but involves a difference of meaning. The article in Greek is prefixed to a word when the latter is intended to convey some definite idea already familiarized to the mind, and "the natural effect of its presence is to divert the thoughts from dwelling on the peculiar import of the word, and is adverse to its inherent notion standing out as a prominent point in the sense of the passage". Hence the omission of the article, where it might have been used, before a word has often the effect of emphasizing and drawing attention to the inherent notion of the word. We may take as an instance verse 17 in this chapter, where the Textus Receptus has ἐπαναπαύῃτῷνόμῳ but where the preferable reading omits the article. In either case the Mosaic Law is referred to; but the omission of the article brings into prominence the principle of justification on which the Jew rested—viz. Law, which exacts entire obedience. In the following verse (the eighteenth), in the phrase, κατηχούμενοςἐκτοῦνόμου the article is inserted, the intention being simply to say that the Jew was instructed in the well-known Law of Moses. The same difference of meaning is intimated by the omission or insertion of the article in verse 23 and elsewhere in other parts of the chapter and of the whole Epistle (see especially Romans 7:1-25.). The apostle, who, however spontaneous and unstudied might be his style of writing, by no means used phrases at random, would not surely have thus varied his expressions so often in one and the same sentence without intended significance. (3) Νόμος without the article seems evidently in many passages to be used by St. Paul to denote law in the abstract, without any exclusive reference to the Mosaic Law at all, or to any particular code of law. Doubtless the Mosaic Law, in which he had been educated, and which he had painfully proved the impossibility of keeping perfectly, had been to him the grand embodiment and representative of law; but he had hence been led to an abstract conception, ever before his mind, of law as representing the principle of exaction of full obedience to requirements; and when he says, as he so often does, that by law no man can be justified, he means that none can be so on the principle of complete conformity being required to the behests of Divine righteousness, whether as revealed from Mount Sinai or through the human conscience, or in any other way; for by law is the knowledge of sin and consequent guilt, but not the power of avoiding sin. Those who ignore the distinction as above explained, saying, as some do, that νόμος, whether with or without the article, always means simply the Law of Moses, fail to enter into the depth and generality of the apostle’s argument. The distinction will be observed in this translation throughout the Epistle (ὁνόμος being translated "the Law," and νόμος "law"), and it will be found always to have a meaning. (For one instance in which it is hardly possible to suppose St. Paul to have omitted and inserted the article in the same sentence without a meaning, cf. Galatians 4:21.) Romans 2:14, Romans 2:15 For when Gentiles, which have not law, do by nature (or, having not law by nature, do; cf. Romans 2:27, ἡἐκφύσεωςἀκροβυστία) the things of the Law (i.e. the Mosaic Law), these, not having law, are law unto themselves; which (οἵτινες, with its usual significance of quippequi) show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness (or, bearing witness therewith), and their thoughts betwixt each other accusing or else excusing (not, as in the Authorized Version, meanwhile accusing or else excusing one another, μεταξὺ being used as a preposition, governing ἀλλήλων). The "for" at the beginning of Rom 2:14 connects it with the preceding one thus: "Not hearers but doers of law will be justified." The Jew, therefore, has no advantage in the way of justification over the Gentile from being in a peculiar sense a hearer. For Gentiles also may be doers, though not of a positive revealed law, yet of the law of conscience. It is not, of course, implied that on the ground of any such doing they "shall be justified;" only that, so far as they do, they will, equally with the Jews, be rewarded. Nor is it said that any, in fact, do all that law enjoins. We observe the hypothetical form of expression, ὅτανποιῇ, and also, τὰτοῦνόμου, i.e. any of the Law’s requirements. The Law, for instance, says, "Thou shalt not steal;" and if a Gentile, though knowing nothing of the ten commandments, on principle refrains from stealing, his conscientious honesty will have its own reward as much as that of the Jew who refrains in obedience to the revealed commandment. A few of the expressions in these verses call for consideration. (1) What is meant by τὸἔργοντοῦνόμου, said to be "written in their hearts"? Τὸἔργον cannot be pleonastic, as supposed by Tholuck. One view is that it is equivalent to τὰἔργατοῦνόμου, which is an expression frequently used elsewhere (Romans 3:27, Romans 3:28; Romans 9:32; Galatians 2:16; Galatians 3:2, Galatians 3:5, Galatians 3:10); and the singular number has been explained as collective, as in 1 Corinthians 3:13; Galatians 6:4, and Galatians 6:7 above (so Meyer), or as "applying to each of the particular cases supposed in the ὅταν... ποιῶσιν" (so Alford). The objection to this view is that it is not the works of the Law that can be said to be written, but rather the Law itself from which the works proceed. Seeing that γραπτὸν implies evident reference to the tables of the Law, it seems best to take ἔργον as denoting the efficacy of the Law, as opposed to the letter, which alone was written on the tables. So in effect Bengel: "Legem ipsam cum sua activitate. Opponitur literae, quae est accidens." (2) How do they show (ἐνδείκνυνται) this ἔργοννόμου? Evidently, from the context of Gal 6:14, by doing τὰτοῦνὸμου; i.e. doing them (as is, of course, implied) as being the right things to do, and approving them. The very possibility of their doing this is evidence of an innate moral sense in the human heart, which, however it may often be obscured or perverted, remains as a characteristic of humanity, and is more or less operative in all communities. "Nulls enim gens unquam sic ab humanitate abhorruit ut non se intra leges aliquas contineret. Constat absque dubio quasdam justitiae et rectitudinis conceptiones, quas Graeci προλήψεις recant, hominum animis esse naturaliter ingenitas" (Calvin). (3) What is exactly meant by the conscience witnessing, and the thoughts accusing or else excusing? Συνειδήσις is not the Law in the heart, but rather our consciousness, whereby wittingly, in accordance with that Law, we approve or condemn. The compound verb συμμαρτυρούσης seems to denote a joint witness of conscience. In Romans 8:16 and Romans 9:1, where alone the word occurs elsewhere, it is followed by a dative, and means certainly concurrent witness. But, if so here, with what? Probably with the ἔνδειξις already spoken of. Right conduct on principle, and conscience approving, witness together to the inward law; or, conduct and conscience together witness to a man’s merits or demerits in accordance with that law. Then, what is added about the λογισμοὶ shows how conscience operates. Reason comes into play, evoked by conscience, to reflect on its witness, and definitely condemn or approve what has been done. A kind of court of judicature is supposed. Man calls himself to the bar of his own moral judgment; his conscience adduces witness to the character of his deeds, or rather, with his deeds bears witness for or against himself; his thoughts are as advocates on both sides, arguing for condemnation or acquittal. "Observa quam erudite describat conscientiam, quum dicit nobis venire in mentem rationes, quibus quod recte factum est defendimus; rursum quae nos flagitiorum accusent et redarguant" (Calvin). Romans 2:16 In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men, according to my gospel, by Jesus Christ. About this verse the main question is, what previous assertion the "when" refers to. The time denoted by "when" (whether we suppose κρίνει or κρινεῖ—i.e. the present or future tense—to have been intended by the writer) is certainly the ἡμέρα of 1 Corinthians 3:13, and ether passages—the day of doom, when "every man’s work shall be made manifest." Hence immediate connection of this verse with the preceding one, which would otherwise have been the natural one, seems to be precluded; for in 1 Corinthians 3:15 the present operation of conscience, during this present life, was described. One way of making the connection obvious is by understanding 1 Corinthians 3:15 as itself denoting the manifestation reserved for the day of judgment, when all will stand self-convicted. But not only the verb ἐκδείκνυντααι in the present tense, but also the fact of the whole verse being so obvious a description of present human consciousness, seems to preclude this view. Some would connect 1 Corinthians 3:16 with 1 Corinthians 3:12, of which it is in itself a natural sequence; and this connection is intimated in the Authorized Version, which includes the three verses that come between in a parenthesis. The objection to it is the length of the parenthesis. Probably the apostle, in his characteristic way, paid little regard to precise logical sequence; he only desired to express, in this concluding verse, that in the great day full justice would be done, and all that he had been speaking of would be made plain. My gospel means "the gospel committed unto me to preach" (cf. Romans 16:25; 2 Corinthians 4:3; 2 Thessalonians 2:14; 2 Timothy 2:8). The idea that it means "the Gospel according to St. Luke," said to have been written under St. Paul’s superintendence, is too improbable to call for serious notice. Romans 2:17 But if (the true reading being certainly εἰδὲ, not ἰδὲ, as in the Textus Receptus) thou (σὺ, emphatic) art named a Jew. The Israelites who had remained in Palestine, or who returned to it after the Captivity, seem thenceforth to have been designated Jews (Ἰουδαῖοι, though they included some of other tribes than that of Judah, notably that of Benjamin, of which St. Paul himself was, and of course of Levi. They are so called, whether resident in Palestine or elsewhere, throughout the New Testament, as well as by Roman writers. the term Ἑβραῖοι being applied in the New Testament (usually at least) to distinguish those Jews who adhered to the Hebrew language in public worship, and to national customs and traditions, from those who Hellenized (Ἑλληυισταί). It was the name on which the people prided themselves at that time, as expressing their peculiar privileges. The apostle, having at the beginning of this chapter addressed himself generally to "whosoever thou art that judgest," now summons the Jew exclusively to the bar of judgment, whose claims to exemption from the general condemnation have come to the front in the preceding verses. By the emphatic σὺ, he calls on him now to give an account of himself, and justify his pretensions if he can. The point of the argument is that the Jews were notoriously at that time no better than other nations in moral conduct—nay, their national character was such as to bring their very religion into disrepute among the heathen—and therefore doing, and not either privilege, knowledge, or profession, being according to the very Law on which they rested the test required, their whole ground for national exemption was taken away. And retest on law (νόμῳ, here without the article, so as to emphasize the principle on which the Jew professed to rest for acceptance), and makest thy boast of God. The Jew gloried, as against the heathen, in his knowledge and worship of the one true God. Romans 2:18 And knowest his will, and approvest the things that are more excellent, being instructed (κατηχούμενος, which implies regular training, whether catechetically in youth, or through rabbinical and synagogic teaching) out of the Law. So far the Jew’s own claims on the ground of his own position have been touched on; what follows expresses his attitude with regard to others. We may observe throughout a vein of irony. Romans 2:19, Romans 2:20 And art confident that thou thyself art a guide of the blind, a light of them which are in darkness, an instructor of the foolish, a teacher of babes, having the form of knowledge and of the truth in the Law. Here the form (μόρφωσις) does not mean the mere outward show, but the real representation in concrete form of knowledge and truth. The Jew had that; and the Law itself is by no means disparaged because the Jew presumed on it without keeping it (cf. Romans 7:12). Romans 2:21 Thou therefore which teachest another, teachest thou not thyself? The οὗν here does not involve an anacoluthon after the reading εἴδὲ in Romans 2:17, though St. Paul would not have much cared if it had been so. It serves only to sum up the lengthened protasis, and introduce the apodosis: "If … dost thou then," etc.? In what follows it is not, of course, implied that all Jews who relied on the Law were, in fact, thieves, adulterers, etc., but only that the Jews as a nation were no more exempt from such sins than others; and it may be that those specified were not selected by the apostle at random, but as being such as the Jews had a peculiar evil notoriety for at that time. Thou that preachest a man should not steal, dost thou steal? Romans 2:22 Thou that sayest a man should not commit adultery, dost thou commit adultery? thou that abhorrest idols, dost thou commit sacrilege? The word (ἱεροσυλεῖς) thus rendered in the Authorized Version means literally "robbest temples," though it may bear also the general meaning of "sacrilege." Commentators differ as to what is meant. Some, considering that the word would not have been used except to denote something really sacrilegious—some offence against true sanctity—refer it to the withholding of gifts and offerings from the temple at Jerusalem, or of tithes from the priests, or embezzlement of the temple revenues. Malachi 3:8, etc., is adduced in illustration, "Will a man rob God? Yet ye have robbed me. But ye say, Wherein have we robbed thee? In tithes and offerings,’’ etc. (cf. also Malachi 1:7-14). A passage also is quoted from Josephus, ’Archaeol.,’ B. 18, c. 5, where certain Jews are said to have appropriated to their own use purple and gold which had been given to them for the temple at Jerusalem by one Fulvia, a proselyte of theirs at Rome, in consequence of which the Emperor Tiberius, having been informed of the transaction by the lady’s husband, had banished all the Jews from Rome. Others take the word in a general sense to denote any profanation of sanctity. So Luther, Calvin ("profanatio divinae majestatis"), and Bengel ("sacrilegium committi’s, quia Deo non das gloriam, quae proprie Dei est"). Inasmuch, however, as definite malpractices of the Jews at that time, on account of which the name of God was blasphemed among the Gentiles (verse 24), seem to be here alluded to, the word may, perhaps more probably, be understood in its proper sense of plundering temples, meaning heathen temples—a practice which Jewish zealots, in their professed abhorrence of idolatry, might be addicted to when they had opportunity. A writer, though himself attaching no idea of sanctity to such temples, might still use the current term ἱεροσυλεῖν. SO, among the ancients, Chrysostom and Theophylact understand it; the latter, however, limiting it to taking away the ἀναθήματα. He says, "For if they did abhor the idols, yet nevertheless, dominated by covetousness, they touched the idol-offerings for filthy lucre’s sake." In doing this, he seems to imply, they broke the very Law which had enjoined their ancestors to "destroy the altars, and break down the images" of idolaters (Deuteronomy 7:5); for the sauna Law had forbidden them to "desire the silver and gold that is on them," or "take it unto thee, for it is an abomination to the Lord thy God" (Deuteronomy 7:25). A strong confirmation of the view that plundering of heathen temples is denoted by ἱεροσυλεῖς is found in Acts 19:37, when the town-clerk of Ephesus defended the Christians against the popular fury by declaring that they were not ἱεροσύλοι, that is (as he might mean) not temple-plunderers, such as ordinary Jews had the reputation of being. It has been objected against this view that there is a lack of recorded instances of such temple-plundering on the part of Jews, and that they could not have had much chance, as things then were, of thus displaying their zeal. But there may have been instances, notorious at the time, though not recorded; and, if so, the drift may be, "Thou displayest thy abhorrence of idolatry, enjoined by the Law, by acts of violence and greed, such as the very Law forbids." Romans 2:23, Romans 2:24 Thou that makest thy boast in law, through thy transgression of the Law dishonourest thou God? (or, thou dishonourest God). For the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you, as it is written. The reference is to Isaiah 52:5, where the LXX. has Δἰὑμᾶςδιαπαντὸςτὸὄνομάμουβλασφημεῖταιἐντοῖςἔθνεσι. The passage is not quoted as a prophecy now fulfilled, or as in its original reference exactly applicable, but only as serving to express well how the character of the Jews had brought their very religion into disrepute (el. Tacitus, ’Hist..’ Isaiah 5:4, etc.). The remainder of the chapter is devoted to a clear and final exposition of the principle, involved throughout all the previous verses, that Jewish privileges were of no profit in themselves, or without their meaning and purpose being understood and acted on. The thought now passes exclusively to circumcision, as being the original token of the covenant, and the Jew’s rite of initiation into his whole privileged position (Genesis 17:1-27.). When Jew had come to be the peculiar designation of the children of the covenant, persons were said to become Jews by circumcision. Thus Esther 8:17, "And many of the people of the land became Jews," where the LXX. has, ΚαὶπολλοὶτῶνἐθνῶνπεριετέμνοντοκαὶἸουδάιζον. It may be here observed that the known fact of other races as well as the Jews having practised, and still practising, circumcision is not subversive of the scriptural view of its being a peculiarly Jewish rite. For to the Jew alone it had a peculiar significance. Romans 2:25, Romans 2:26 For circumcision verily profiteth (not justifieth, but only profiteth: it is of advantage, and no unmeaning rite, if thou understandest and carriest out its meaning; it introduces thee into a state of knowledge and opportunity, and certainty of Divine favour), if thou keep the Law: but if thou be a transgressor of the Law, thy circumcision is made uncircumcision. If therefore the uncircumcision keep the ordinances of the Law, shall not his uncircumcision he counted for circumcision? Here, again, as in Romans 2:10, Romans 2:11, Romans 2:14, Romans 2:15, the impartiality of God’s dealings with all men alike is distinctly declared. Romans 2:27-29 And shall not the uncircumcision which is by nature (i.e. men in a state of nature, Without any distinct revelation, or sign of a peculiar covenant) judge thee (thou presumest, in virtue of thy position, to judge them; nay, rather, they shall judge thee), who by (rather, with, i.e. though in possession of) the letter and circumcision dost transgress the Law? For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: but he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, not in the letter (or, in spirit, not in letter. Both the nouns, πνεύματι, and γράμματι, here are without the article, so as to bring out their inherent significance. See above as to ὁνόμος and νόμος). Whose praise is not of men, but of God. In these two concluding verses we observe the double sense in which the term Ἰουδαῖος may be used. It denotes here one possessed of the true spirit of Judaism; in which sense the Gentile might be the better Jew. In a like double sense we may use the word "Christian’’ (cf. John 1:47, ἀληθῶςἸσραηλίτης; John 8:39, "If ye were Abraham’s children, ye would do the works of Abraham;" also John 4:1-54. and Galatians 3:7). So, too, περιτομή for spiritual circumcision (περιτομὴἀχειροτοίητος Colossians 2:11), in the sense of inward dedication to God’s service, and "putting off the body of the sins of the flesh" (Colossians 2:11; see also Philippians 3:2, Philippians 3:3). Such ethical significance of the rite appears even in the Old Testament. We read there of "uncircumcised lips" (Exodus 6:12, Exodus 6:30), or "ears" (Jeremiah 6:10), or "hearts" (Leviticus 26:41); and in Deuteronomy 30:6 we find the significant words." The LORD thy God will circumcise thine heart, and the heart of thy seed, to love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, that thou mayest live;" and in Jeremiah 4:4, "Circumcise yourselves to the Loan, and take away the foreskins of your hearts, ye men of Judah and inhabitants of Jerusalem." (Cf. Isaiah 3:1, "Put on thy beautiful garments, O Jerusalem, the holy city: for henceforth there shall no more come into thee the uncircumcised and the unclean.") Romans 2:1-3 Judgment, human and Divine. This sudden and impassioned appeal was made, in reality though not expressly, to the Jew. St. Paul imagined himself in the presence of a Hebrew fellow-countryman, whom he supposed to be listening to his burning denunciation of the vices and. crimes of heathen society. Now, the distinctive characteristic of Christianity as a moral system was its insistence upon righteousness, purity, and charity of heart, and not merely of conduct; and no one more thoroughly entered into this characteristic than did the apostle himself. With quick perception, St. Paul discerned, in the mind of the Jewish hearer or reader of his first chapter, indignation and disgust springing up at the picture of moral corruption which fairly represented the state of Gentile society. But the apostle wished to prove all men under condemnation—Jew and Gentile alike; and upon the Christian principle that morality is of the heart, he was able to do this, and was justified in doing it. Hence the language of indignation with which he turns upon the Pharisee, who recoils from Gentile iniquity, who pronounces upon those guilty of it the sentence of condemnation. "Thou art inexcusable; thou that judgest doest the same things!" The appeal is instructive, as to judgment passed upon man’s conduct by his fellow-men and by his God. I. THE OF MAN BY MAN, 1. It is always fallible. For who has knowledge sufficient to enable him to sit in judgment upon his fellow-sinners? 2. As a matter of fact, it is often unjust. For who is so perfectly upright and impartial as to be entrusted, not with judicial authority over men as agents, but with moral authority over them as accountable beings? 3. He who judges his fellow-man is liable to have his attention withdrawn from his own sins, errors, and ill deserts. He is troubled by the mote in his brother’s eye, and forgets the beam which is in his own eye. 4. In the case of fallible and sinful men, the ’condemnation of others is always condemnation of self. "Thou art the man!" is the response which is suggested The form of wrong-doing denounced may not be the identical form by which the denouncer is chiefly tempted; but the principle of sin is one, though the forms assumed be many. II. THE OF MAN BY GOD. 1. This is always and exactly just; for justice is a Divine attribute; and it would be absurd to attribute to the infinitely perfect Being, the Governor of the universe, either imperfection of knowledge or partiality and respect of persons. 2. It is not to be impugned. "The judgment of God is according to truth;" it needs no court of revision, no court of appeal; its decisions are final and unquestionable. 3. It is inevitable. Foolish and ignorant must be the man into whose mind the thought can enter that the Divine judgment can be escaped. . Let a man judge, not his fellow-men, but himself, lest he incur the righteous judgment of God. Romans 2:4-6 Long-suffering. It is certain that we live under a moral government administered by a holy and righteous Ruler, of infinite knowledge and irresistible power. Yet there are sinful men who, while admitting this to be the case, live as if they believed that government and retribution had no reference to themselves. The apostle, in this passage, appeals to such persons, expostulates with them, and shows them the guilt and folly of disregarding the Divine Law and authority, and of presuming too far upon the Divine forbearance. I. THE FACT OF GOD’S LONG-. This may be traced: 1. In human history, which abounds with examples of Divine patience with the sins of nations. 2. In the Christian dispensation, which is certainly the crowning proof of the long-suffering of the Eternal. 3. In individual experience; for no man who will be candid with himself will question that such forbearance has been exercised towards him. II. THE ABUSE OF GOD’S LONG-. There are many who, instead of gratefully acknowledging Divine forbearance, and using aright the opportunity of repentance and reformation which they owe to it, despise the riches of God’s long-suffering and mercy. 1. The facts upon which this abuse is founded are these: God in his nature is kind and gracious, delighting in the exercise of clemency and compassion. God in his retributive action is slow and patient, often withholding the condemnation and penalty threatened and deserved. 2. The false inferences drawn from these facts may be thus stated: Either, God will not fulfil the threats which he has made, will not enforce by the awful sanctions of his justice the laws which he has promulgated; or, we are for some reason exempt from the operations of God’s judicial authority. This last seems to have been the belief of many of the Jews, who, because theirs was the chosen and favoured nation, believed themselves secure from the penalties which would befall the unbelieving and impenitent sinners of the Gentiles. III. THE OF GOD’S LONG-. 1. It must not be forgotten that what the apostle calls "wrath," and righteous retribution, are facts in the government of the Eternal. They do not cease to be facts, because God is forbearing and kind. He can have no compromise with sin. He cannot overlook the distinction between the rebel and the loyal subject. He cannot admit to his favour and fellowship those who detest his laws and defy his authority. 2. And it is equally important to remember that the government of God is universal and impartial. It extends to all mankind. There is not one code for the Jew and another for the Gentile; one for the privileged and another for the unprivileged. "Because sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily, therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil." But in this case it is vain for them to hope that they shall escape God’s just censure—and condemnation. All alike are guilty; and all alike, if saved, must be saved upon the same terms—terms honourable to God, and beneficial to human nature and human society. IV. THE PURPOSE AND USE OF GOD’S LONG-. After all that has been said, it must yet be insisted upon that the attribute of Deity here referred to by the apostle is a glorious and blessed attribute, and that we cannot be sufficiently grateful to God for its exercise towards us, who stand so sorely in need of it. How shall we so use it that it may be for our truest and eternal advantage? 1. Believe it, as a truth harmonizing with Divine righteousness. 2. Submit to it, as an influence inducing to repentance. 3. Act upon it, as affording opportunity for practical reformation. Romans 2:11 Divine impartiality. The apostle’s immediate intention in thus stating the perfect equity of the Divine government, and the utter absence of partiality from his nature and from his administration, was to remove from the mind of any Jewish hearer or reader the belief that his descent from Abraham could be of any avail in God’s sight if moral and spiritual qualifications were lacking. But, as is so often the case, especially in St. Paul’s writings, local and temporary references gave occasion for the utterance of broad, general, and eternal principles. The simplicity and grandeur of this assertion must appeal to the moral nature of every reader of the Epistle. I. DIVINE WITH HUMAN . However it may be with God and his government, certain it is that, both in private and in public life, men’s treatment of their fellow-men has usually been marked by personal favouritism. No one can read those passages in the Old Testament referring to "gifts," i.e. bribes, and to "regarding the face "or the person of suitors, without perceiving how general was judicial corruption in the Oriental world. And there are allusions in the New Testament which prove to us that even the great Roman officials were not free from this taint. The prevalence of the practice of bribery, corruption, and favouritism must have suggested to the minds of ordinary men the possibility that the Judge of all regarded men’s persons. II. DIVINE IS BY . 1. There is the testimony of the unsophisticated conscience of man. Crime, no doubt, exists and flourishes in society; and men’s interests induce them to connive at its presence. But, explain it how we may, the fact is undeniable that the inner voice of reason and conscience bears witness to the justice and impartiality of God. Idolatry is indeed associated with beliefs and expedients based upon the unfairness and corruptibility of the deities held in honour or in dread. But let the idea of one supreme God take possession of men’s souls, and the moral nature with which they are endowed refuses to be satisfied except by a conviction that this Being is far above what are felt to be human infirmities and faults. If there be a God, that God is just. 2. Revelation supports this conviction. There are passages of Scripture which may seem to conflict with it, but these have been misunderstood and misinterpreted, or they would have been seen to be in consistency with what is the general tenor and the express teaching of the Word of God. How many are the passages in which the offerings of the insincere are indignantly rejected, in which we are taught that external circumstances and hypocritical pretences are valueless in the sight of him who "searcheth the heart, and trieth the reins of the children of men"! 3. The ministry of Christ is especially emphatic upon this point. It is sufficient to refer to our Lord’s rebuke of those who boasted that they were Abraham’s seed; he bade them reflect upon God’s ability to raise up even from the very stones of the fields children unto Abraham. And he constrained the acknowledgment from his enemies that "he regarded not the person of man." III. DIVINE IS IN CERTAIN . 1. In judgment God is just to all. There is one law by which all are judged. In the application of that standard a righteous regard is had to the opportunities of knowledge and enlightenment afforded by circumstances; but no other consideration is allowed to enter. 2. The salvation which is by Christ Jesus is provided for all alike. God is the "Saviour of all men, specially of them that believe" Christ died, not for any class, but for the ungodly, i.e. for all mankind, who alike needed redemption and salvation. And the heralds of the cross preached the Saviour to Jew and Gentile alike. IV. DIVINE AFFORDS MOST LESSONS TO ALL TO WHOM THE WORD OF GOD IS . 1. Here is a rebuke addressed to the proud, the self-righteous, the self-confident, to all who deem themselves the favourites of Heaven, and who indulge the persuasion that they are in possession of some special recommendation to the consideration of the Lord and Judge of all. 2. Here is encouragement for the timid and the lowly, They have good reason to believe that, if they are viewed with disfavour by men, on account of some supposed disadvantage or deficiency, they will not on this account be rejected by him who raiseth up those that he bowed down. Romans 2:13 Hearers and doers. It is impossible to overlook the resemblance which this passage bears to words of the great Teacher uttered towards the close of the sermon on the mount. In this, as in so many places, the apostle is evidently indebted for his thoughts, and almost his very words, to the Divine Fountain of all the streams of spiritual wisdom and life. I. A OF . 1. It is possible to hear the Law, and yet not to obey it. 2. In the case of the disobedient, the continued hearing of the Law may be the occasion of continued and even increased insensibility, indifference, and hostility. 3. Thus the very hearing and the familiarity resulting from it may become the ground of condemnation, because an aggravation of the offence. Thus the abuse of what is best leads to the worst results. The Law is holy, just, and good; but it is the severest condemnation of the rebellious and impatient. II. A OF LIFE. 1. In the case of those who perfectly fulfil the righteous Law of God, the consequence of their perfect obedience is justification by works. It is needless to say that no member of the human race has ever fulfilled this condition. There is none whom the Law thus justifies. One only among the sons of men has fulfilled all righteousness—even the Son of God himself, who came to fulfil the Law, not only by his teaching, but in his life. 2. Yet the very violation of the perfect Law of God is the means of calling men’s attention to the need and the provision of salvation by grace through faith in the Lord Jesus. 3. And in the case of those who are saved by grace, the Law of God becomes the standard of conduct, to attain which is the aim of all who are led by the Spirit of God. The whole moral life of the true Christian is an endeavour to fulfil that Law which was formerly the principle of condemnation, but has now become a principle of life. Romans 2:17-27 Tu quoque! Although himself a Jew, St. Paul shows no favor to his fellow-countrymen. No sooner has he characterized and condemned the sins of the heathen, than he turns upon the Israelites to include them in the same condemnation of sin and unbelief. In this passage, where close reasoning is combined with vigorous irony, he presses home upon those Jews who censure the flagitious crimes of heathenism the sentence which justice compels them to admit as their due. I. IS . 1. Hereditary advantages are undeniable. The Jew entered at birth into a heritage of favourable circumstances, belonging, as he did, to the nation distinguished by privileges at that age of the world unparalleled. 2. Acquired familiarity with the Law of God was a natural result of national privileges. From childhood, the Jew was trained to reverence God’s Name, to recite God’s Law, to listen to the teaching of God’s prophets. 3. There resulted a position of influence and responsibility in the discharge of the obvious duty of communicating and inculcating the Divine will. The Jew was the "guide of the blind," the "instructor of the foolish," the "tether of babes." He was the witness to the truth and to the commandments of the Eternal. Reflection may show us that we occupy, under the Christian dispensation, a similar position of privilege and responsibility. II. IS IMPUTED. 1. The crimes condemned are committed by those who condemn them. The list is indeed appalling. Upon the religious Jew are charged offences which it can hardly be supposed were all committed by one person, in one human life. Yet there is no limit to the possibility of man’s hypocrisy. Theft, adultery, sacrilege, blasphemy,—such are the awful crimes and sins which are charged upon the Jews, who professed so loudly their moral superiority to their Gentile neighbours. 2. The ungodly Jew not only commits the crimes he condemns; he hinders the cause it is his professed business to further and to advocate. To him is committed, as it were, the custody of monotheism; he is called upon to witness to the Divine nature and character, as contrasting with the conceptions of their deities cherished by the heathen. And lo! he becomes, by his immorality, the occasion of God being dishonored, of God’s Name being blasphemed among the Gentiles. The parallelism may be traced between the unfaithful Jew and the unfaithful Christian. III. IS . 1. Privilege avails not. It is in human nature to rely upon the enjoyment of great advantages. But the truth is, that the possession of privileges heightens responsibility. No man can be saved because he pleads that the light shone brightly round about him; the question must be—Did he walk in the light while he had the light? Circumcision did not save the Jew; similarly, mere outward participation in the sacraments of Baptism and Lord’s Supper will not save the professing Christian. The possession of privileges is no proof of their due and proper use. 2. The less favoured may, in character and life, excel the more favoured. The uncircumcised may keep the Law which the circumcised allows himself to break. This fact was seen and stated by the Lord himself, who continually warned his fellow-countrymen that many should come from the east and the west, and should sit down in the kingdom of God, whilst they should be thrust out. 3. The highly privileged who are unfaithful to their trust shall, it is foretold, be judged by those whose advantages have been fewer, but who have made a good use of such as they enjoyed. It must have astonished the Jew of repute and standing to be told that he should be judged by those of the uncircumcision. Yet this was quite in harmony with, the warning of the Divine Saviour that the men of Tyre and Sidon should rise up in the judgment against the unfaithful of his generation. Romans 2:28, Romans 2:29 The religion of the flesh exchanged for the religion of the spirit. It is difficult for us to understand all that was meant by this assertion. The apostle was a Hebrew of the Hebrews, and we know, from the general tenor of his writings, how highly he valued the religion in which he had been trained, and how warmly he was attached to the race from which he sprang. That those who remained Jews in faith, who gloried in having Abraham as their father, and who prized as their own peculiar possession the covenant and the oracles of God,—that they would experience a shock of surprise and resentment upon reading such language as this, is evident. And even those who had accepted Jesus as the Messiah for the most part retained much of their hereditary confidence in the special privileges of their nationality and their religion. Such teaching as this undoubtedly introduced a revolution into the heart of religious society—a revolution in thought, and a revolution in practice. I. A PROTEST. There is often no possibility of avoiding conflict and opposition in, expounding and maintaining the truth. Paul was certainly not the man to shrink from controversy; his was the nature of the warrior, and when he found himself face to face with error and sin, his nature was roused to its depths, his native combativeness found a congenial field of battle. And although Christianity was indeed the development and the fulfilment of Judaism, it could not but come into conflict with much which human nature had connected with Judaism by bonds not easily to be broken. Spiritual as were the intuitions of the inspired psalmists and prophets in whose writings the Hebrew people gloried, it is clear that, at the time of our Lord’s ministry, religious formalism was prevalent among the Jewish leaders and the Jewish people. Scribes and Pharisees were too often hypocrites. Religion was too much an affair of ritual and ceremonial observance. Even those who drew near unto God with their lips were deserving of censure, because their hearts were far from him. Now, the four Gospels make it plain to us that the ministry of Christ was a ministry of protest against a religion of form. He would not have directed so much of his teaching against the religion of the letter, had he not seen and felt the necessity of such an attitude of opposition, such action of controversy. And, indeed, he was perfectly aware—for he knew what was in man—that, the evil was one not simply of Jewish habit, but of human nature. Where is the religion, however spiritual in the apprehension of its true expositor, which has not degenerated into formalism? Man’s nature is bodily as well as spiritual; his religion must express itself, or it will die; words and outward worship, organization and official action, all seem, if not essential, yet contributive to religious life and efficiency. And it is most natural that, in the minds of the unthinking and the worldly, the symbol should take the place of the truth it symbolizes, the letter should overgrow the spirit, and officialism should substitute ministry. Certainly this is what happened in the case of Judaism. And against this the apostle of the Gentiles, in his Epistle to the Romans, raised the most vigorous protest which has proceeded from any disciple of Jesus. The seed of this protest was, indeed, sown in the teaching of the Master; but here we find that the seed was bearing fruit. The position which St. Paul occupied, the special work to which he was called, threw the burden of the protest and the controversy upon him. His ministry was hindered by the religious pedantry and bigotry of those who had been trained in the same school with himself. His large heart resented with indignation the formality, the narrowness, the pettiness, which he encountered wherever he met his fellow-countrymen in their synagogues. His commission was one which admitted of no terms, of no truce, with a religion of "the flesh," "the letter." If, as a worker, he was called upon to be the minister of Christ to the Gentiles, as a thinker it was his great vocation to exhibit the spiritual character of Christianity; and the identity of a spiritual with a universal religion must be obvious to every reflecting mind. The apostle’s detestation of a merely external religion is evident all through this Epistle, equally in the doctrinal and the practical sections. To no compromise upon this point would he for a moment consent. For a Jew who was a Jew only outwardly, he had no consideration, and circumcision merely in the flesh he held in no esteem. Even in our own time there is need of a protest against a religion of forms and of custom; there is no Church which is free from the danger here intimated; for the temptation against which the inspired apostle puts us upon our guard is a temptation which gathers strength from a principle and habit deep-seated in human nature itself. II. A . Over against the protest contained in the twenty-eighth verse is the positive assertion of the twenty-ninth. A man might be a descendant of Israel, and yet might not be a Jew, in the deeper and spiritual significance which the apostle attached to the designation. There were many who boasted that they were "Abraham’s seed," who had "Abraham to their father," according to natural descent, who yet lacked Abraham’s faith, the true "note" of incorporation in the elect race. And, on the other hand, there were many who were deemed by Hebrews "sinners of the Gentiles," who were "children of faithful Abraham," who were numbered among the Israel of God. Circumcision was a badge of nationality, and a sign and seal of the covenant which God entered into with his chosen people; but it conferred no special grace, and the grace which it symbolized was often received in vain, for privilege and prerogative are in many cases misused. But, under the new covenant, the only circumcision which avails is that of "the heart," "the spirit." Such is the peculiar character of Christianity, which commended it to the reason and the conscience of the apostle. There are passages in abundance to be found in the Old Testament which show that the enlightened and pious Hebrews were fully aware of the spiritual nature of religion. But the words of our holy Saviour made these precious truths as "current coin" to pass amongst men. The conception of God must be spiritual; the character of worship must be spiritual; the morality of Christ’s disciples must be spiritual; the religious life as a whole must be spiritual. "The letter," St. Paul assures us, "killeth; the spirit giveth life." The letter and circumcision were so largely abused by being regarded otherwise than as intended, that the apostle seems to have regarded them almost with suspicion, if not with aversion; by them, he saw, men transgressed the Law. Hence his insisting so strenuously, as here, upon the purity of the heart and the spirit. It is with the heart that man believes unto righteousness, with the spirit that he worships God; accordingly the supreme concern is that all be well here. Repentance, faith, consecration, hope, and love,—all are virtues of the inner nature. Where they are present, they will find expression in deeds and words; where they are absent, all deeds and words are vain. Most beautifully in accordance with this positive teaching of the apostle in this verse is the petition which in the Prayer-book is placed at the opening of the Communion Service, that God would "cleanse the thoughts of our hearts by the inspiration of his Holy Spirit." This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/pulpit-commentary/ Romans 3:1-8 (2) Certain objections with regard to the Jews suggested and met. In this passage, before proceeding with his argument, the apostle meets certain objections that might be made to what has been so far said. Some difficulty in determining his exact meaning arises from the concise and pregnant form in which the objections are put and answered, and from fresh ones arising out of the answers, which have also to be met. The objections are from the Jewish standpoint, though not put into the mouth of an objecting Jew, but rather suggested as likely ones by St. Paul himself. To the original readers of the Epistle, who were familiar with the tone of Jewish thought, the sequence of the ideas would probably be more obvious than to us. Reserving special consideration of successive clauses for our exposition of each verse, we may, in the first place, exhibit thus the general drift. Objection 1 (Romans 3:1). If being a Jew, if circumcision itself, gives one no advantage over the Gentile, what was the use of the old covenant at all? It is thus shown to have been illusory; and God’s own truth and faithfulness are impugned, if he is supposed to have given, as conveying advantages, what really conveyed none. (This last thought, though not expressed, must be supposed to be implied in the objection, since it is replied to in the answer.) Answer (Romans 3:2-4). (1) It was not illusory; it did convey great advantages in the way of privilege and opportunity; this advantage first, not to mention other. that "the oracles of God" were entrusted to the Jew. And (2) if some (more or fewer, it matters not) have failed to realize these advantages, it has been their fault, not God’s. It is man’s unfaithfulness, not his, that has been the cause of the failure. Nay, though, according to the hasty saying of the psalmist, all men were false, God’s truth remains; nay, further, as is expressed in another psalm (Psalms 51:1-19.), man’s very unfaithfulness is found to commend his faithfulness the more, and redound to his greater glory. Objection 2 (Romans 3:5). Based on the last assertion. But if man’s unfaithfulness has this result, how can God, consistently with his justice, be wrath with us and punish us for it? Surely the Jew (whose case we are now considering) may claim exemption from "the wrath" of God spoken of above, his unfaithfulness being allowed to have served only to establish God’s truth and to enhance his glory. Answer (Romans 3:6-8). I have suggested this objection as though the matter could be regarded from a mere human point of view, as though it were one between man and man; for it is true that a man cannot justly take vengeance on another who has not really harmed him. But such a view is inapplicable to God in his dealings with man; it does not touch our doctrine of his righteous wrath against sin as such. I can only meet it with a μὴγένοιτο. For (1) it would preclude God from judging the world at all, as we all believe he will do. Any heathen sinner might put in the same plea, saying, Why am I too (κἀγὼ) judged as a sinner? Nay, (2) since it involves the principle of sin being evil, not in itself, but only with regard to its consequences, it would, if carried out, justify the odious view (which we Christians are by some falsely accused of holding) that we may do evil that good may come. Romans 3:1, Romans 3:2 What advantage then hath the Jew! or what is the profit of circumcision! Much (πολὺ, a neuter adjective, agreeing with τὸπερισσὸν) every way (not by all means; the meaning is that in all respects the position of the Jew is an advantageous one): first (rather than chiefly, as in the Authorized Version. One point of advantage is specified, which might have been followed by a secondly and a thirdly, etc. But the writer stops here, the mention of this first being sufficient for his purpose. Others are enumerated, so as to elucidate the purport of κατὰπάντατρύπον, in Romans 9:4, Romans 9:5) for that they (the Jews) were entrusted with the oracles of God. The word λόγια (always used in the plural in the New Testament) occurs also in Acts 7:38; Hebrews 5:12; 1 Peter 4:11. Of these passages the most apposite is Acts 7:38, where the Divine communications to Moses on Mount Sinai are spoken of as λόγιαζῶντα (cf. Numbers 24:4, Numbers 24:16, where Balaam speaks of himself as ἀκούωνλόγιαΘεοῦ). Some (as Meyer), in view of the supposed, reference in the following verse to the Jews rejection of the gospel, take the word λόγια here to mean especially the revealed promises of the Redeemer. But neither the word itself nor its use elsewhere suggests any such limited meaning; nor does the context really require it. It may denote generally the Divine revelations of the Old Testament, which, for the eventual benefit of mankind, had been entrusted exclusively to the Jews. Romans 3:3 For what if some (τινες. The expression does net denote whether many or few; it only avoids assertion of universality of unbelief (cf. Romans 11:17; 1 Corinthians 10:7), though it is implied in the following verso that, even if it had been universal, the argument would stand) did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect? Alford renders ἠπίστησαν "were unfaithful," taking it in the sense of being "unfaithful to the covenant, the very condition of which was to walk in the ways of the Lord, and observe his statutes;" and this on the ground that the apostle is not as yet speaking of faith or the want of it, but, in accordance with the idea of the preceding chapter, of ἀδίκια (Romans 3:5) and moral guilt. But the meaning of words must not be forced to meet the views of interpreters; and we observe that ἀπιστεῖν and ἀπιστία are ever elsewhere used in their proper sense to denote want of faith. Still, it is to be observed that in the passage before us ἀπιστία in man is opposed to πίστις in God, so as to suggest a more general sense of ἀπιστία than mere unbelief. In view of this opposition, we may adopt the rendering of the whole passage in the Revised Version: "What if some were without faith? Shall their want of faith," etc.? Meyer and others, understanding (as said above) by λόγια the Divine oracles which were prophetic of Christ, refer ἠπίστησαν exclusively to the disbelief in him on the part of the majority of the Jews at the time of writing. But the aorist tense of the verb, as well as the context, is against the idea of such reference, at any rate exclusively. The context, both in Romans 2:1-29. and the latter part of this chapter after Romans 2:9, certainly suggests rather reference to the failure of the Jews throughout their history to realize the advantage of their privileged position; and this failure might properly be attributed to their want of faith, to the καρτδίαπονηρὰἀπιστίας (Hebrews 3:12), cf. Hebrews 3:19; Hebrews 4:2, together with Romans 4:11. Ἀπιστία in these passages is regarded as the root of ἀπειθεία. On the other hand, the whole drift of Rom 11:1-36. in this Epistle—where the present ἀπιστία of the chosen people shown in their rejection of the gospel is spoken of as not hindering, but furthering, the righteous purpose of God, and redounding in the end to his glory—suggests a like reference here. And it may have been in the apostle’s mind, though, for the reasons above given, it can hardly be the only one in the passage before us. Romans 3:4 God forbid (there is no better English phrase for expressing the indignant repudiation of μὴγένοιτο): yea, let God be true (γινέσθωἀληθὴς; i.e. "let his truth be established;" "Fiat, in judicio," Bengel), but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged, We can hardly avoid recognizing a reference to Psalms 116:11 in "every man a liar, the words of the LXX. being exactly given, though the general purport of that psalm does not bear upon the present argument. The apostle takes this phrase from it as expressing well what he wants to say, viz. that though all men were false (in the sense expressed and implied by the previous ἠπίστησαν), yet God’s truth stands. But it only leads up to the second quotation from Psalms 51:1-19., which is the important one, introduced by καθὼςγέραπται. In its final words, νικήσηςἐντῶκρίνεσθαίσε, the LXX. is followed (so also Vulgate, cum judicaris), though the Hebrew may be more correctly rendered, as in the Authorized Version, "be clear when thou judgest." The κρίνεσθαι of the LXX. may be understood passively in the sense of God being called to account, as men might be, for the justice of his dealings; or, perhaps, in a middle sense for entering into a suit or controversy with his people. Κρίνεσθαι means "going to law" in 1 Corinthians 6:1, 1 Corinthians 6:6 (cf. also Matthew 5:40), and in the LXX., with especial reference to a supposed controversy or pleading of God with men, Jeremiah 25:31; Job 9:2; Job 13:19. (See also Hosea 2:2, Κρίθητεπρὸςτὴνμητέραὑῶν.) The meaning of this concluding expression does not, however, affect the main purport of the verse, or its relevancy as here quoted. Occurring in what is believed to be David’s penitential psalm after his sin. in the matter of Uriah, it declares, in conjunction with the preceding verse, that, sin having been committed, man alone is guilty, and that God’s truth and righteousness can never be impugned. But it seems to imply still more than this, viz. that man’s sin has the establishment of God’s righteousness as its consequence, or even, it may be, as its purpose; for the conclusion of Job 13:4 in the psalm, naturally connected with "against thee only have I sinned" preceding, is so connected by ὄπωςἂν (in Hebrew, נעַמַלְ); and it is not out of keeping with scriptural doctrine that David should have intended to express even Divine purpose in that he had been permitted, for his sins, to fall into that deeper sin with the view of establishing God’s righteousness all the more. It does not, however, seem certain that the conjunction need of necessity be understood as relic; it may be embatic only. However this be, it is the inference from ὄπωςἀν that suggests the new objection of the following verse. Romans 3:5, Romans 3:6 But if our unrighteousness commend the righteousness of God, what shall We say? Is God unrighteous who taketh vengeance? (so the Authorized Version; rather, brings the wrath upon us (ὁἐπιφέρωντὴνὀργήν), with reference to the Divine wrath against sin, spoken of above). I speak after the manner of men. God forbid: for then how shall God judge the world! The purport of this reply appears sufficiently in the paraphrase given above. But the intended Bearing on the argument of Rom 3:7 is not at once apparent. Romans 3:7 For if the truth of God in my lie abounded to his glory, why am I also still judged as a sinner? One view is that this is a continuation or resumption of the question of Rom 3:5 on the part of the Jew, its drift being the same. But the word κἀγὼ, as well as the position of the verse after τῶςκρινεῖ, etc., suggests rather its being intended to express that any one throughout the world, as well as the Jew, might plead against’ deserved judgment, if the Jew’s supposed plea were valid. Nay, in that case, the apostle goes on to say, he, or any of us, might justify all wrongdoing for a supposed good end. Why not? Romans 3:8 And not (i.e. why should we not say), as we be slanderously reported, and as some affirm that we say, Let us do evil, that good may come? Whose (i.e. of those who do say so) condemnation is just. Romans 3:9-20 (3) The testimony of the Old Testament to human sinfulness. Objections having been thus raised and met, the apostle now confirms his position, that all mankind, Jew as well as Gentile, are under sin, by adducing the Scriptures of the Jews themselves. Romans 3:9 What then? are we better than they? No, in no wise: for we have before proved (or, charged, as in the Vulgate, causati sumus) both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin. The meaning of the first part of this verse has been much discussed. We may observe: (1) Τίοὗν seems to be rightly separated (as in Authorized Version) from προεχόμεθα because of the form of the answer to the question, οὐπάντως: after τίπροεχόμεθα; we should expect οὐδέν. (2) The Jews, with whom St. Paul identifies himself, must be supposed to put the question; not the Gentiles, as some have supposed. For there is nothing in the context to suggest the Gentiles as the speakers, nor does what follow suit the supposition. (3) The main question is as to the sense of προεχόμεθα, which occurs here only in the New Testament, and has, therefore, to be interpreted from consideration of the sense of which the verb is capable, and the probable drift of the argument. Some have taken it as a passive verb, with the meaning, "Are we surpassed?" i.e. are we Jews in worse case than the Gentiles on account of our greater privileges? The active verb, προέχειν, in the sense of "to excel," being both transitive and intransitive, its passive may be used in the same sense. An instance quoted in commentaries is καποὐδὲνεχομένοιςὑπὸτοῦΔιός (Plut., ’Mor.,’), "cum Jove minores non sint." So the recent Revisers, though dissented from by the American Committee. The strong objection to this interpretation is that there has been nothing so far even to suggest any superiority of the Gentile to the Jew, and that what follows does not bear upon any such idea. Thus to interpret would be to sacrifice the sense to supposed grammatical exigence, which, after all, is uncertain. Taking, then, προεχόμεθα as the middle voice, we have two interpretations before us; either, with Meyer, to render, Do we put forward (anything) in our defence?—which he maintains (though not conclusively) to be the only proper sense of the middle verb—or (as in the Authorized Version), Are we better (i.e. in better ease) than they? This rendering, though it gives essentially the same sense as if προέχομεν (intransitive) had been written, is commended by its suitableness to the course of argument, and the middle voice may, perhaps, he accounted for as denoting the Jews’ supposed claim of superiority for themselves. Thus the connection of thought is plain. The conclusion of Rom 2:1-29. had left the Jews on the same footing with the Gentiles before God in respect of sinfulness. But then objections had been raised on the ground of the acknowledged privileges of the chosen people; and such objections have been met. The apostle now sums up the result: What, then, is the state of the case? Have we any advantage to allege? No, not at all in the sense intended; the previous argument stands; and he proceeds to confine his position from the testimony of the Old Testament itself. Romans 3:10-18 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one: there is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God. They are all gone out of the way, they are altogether become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one (Psalms 14:1-7. or 53.). Their throat is an open sepulchre; with their tongues they hays used deceit (Psalms 5:9); the poison of asps is under their lips (Psalms 140:3): whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness (Psalms 10:7): their feet are swift to shed blood: destruction and misery are in their ways: and the way of peace have they not known (Proverbs 1:16 and Isaiah 59:7): there is no fear of God before their eyes (Psalms 36:1). These texts are from various unconnected passages of the Old Testament, quoted from the LXX., though not all accurately. They seem to be put together from memory by way of showing the general scriptural view of human depravity. It may be said that they do not establish the apostle’s position of all men being guilty; for that they are for the most part rhetorical rather than dogmatic, that most of them refer only to certain classes of men, and that the righteous are spoken of too, and this in the sequence of even the most sweeping of them all (that from Psalms 14:1-7. or lift.), which does, literally understood, assert universal sinfulness. Any such objection to the cogency of the quotations may be met by regarding them as adduced, not as rigid proofs, but as only generally confirmatory of the apostle’s position. See, he would say to the Jew, the picture your own Scriptures give you; observe their continued testimony to human depravity: and the main point of all the quotations is that which is brought out in the next verse, viz. that they had reference, not to the Gentile world, but to the chosen people themselves. Romans 3:19, Romans 3:20 Now we know that what things soever the Law (ὁνόμος here for the Old Testament generally as the embodiment and exponent of the Law) saith, it speaketh to them that are under the Law (not to the world outside, but to those within its own sphere): that every mouth (the Jew’s as well as the Gentile’s) may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. Because by works of law (νόμος here suitably without the article; see on Romans 2:13) shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for through law is knowledge of sin. In this concluding verse the apostle briefly intimates the reason of law’s inefficacy for justification, anticipating, after a manner usual with him, what is afterwards to be more fully set forth, as especially in Romans 7:1-25. The reason is that law in itself only defines sin and makes it sinful, but does not emancipate from it. Romans 3:21-31 (4) The righteousness of God, manifested in Christ and apprehended by faith, is the sole remedy, and available for all. The position enunciated in Romans 1:18 being now sufficiently established, the apostle enters here on his main argument, announced in Romans 1:17. Romans 3:21 But now the righteousness of God without law (i.e. apart from law) is (or, has been) manifested, being witnessed by the Law and the prophets. On the essential meaning of God’s righteousness (Θεοῦδικαιοσύνη), see on Romans 1:17, and Introduction. This passage, in which the thesis of Rom 1:17 is formally enunciated, is consistent with this meaning; in confirmation of which observe Romans 1:25, Romans 1:26, where δικαιοσύνηαὐτοῦ evidently means God’s own righteousness, as also above, Romans 1:5. If this view is correct, there is no need to follow commentators into their discussions of the significance of χωρὶςνόμου in supposed connection with the idea of man’s imputed righteousness; such as whether it is meant to declare justification through Christ to be without the aid of the Law—"sine legis adminiculo" (Calvin)—or to exclude all legal works, done before, or even after justification, from any share in the office of justification. However true these positions may be, what is said here seems simply to mean that God’s righteousness has been manifested in Christ in a different way, and on a different principle, from that of law. The principle of law is to enjoin and forbid, and to require complete obedience; but law, even as exhibited in the Divine Law of the Jews, has been shown to fail to enable man thus to attain to δικαιοσύνη; therefore, apart from this exacting principle, the righteousness of God is now revealed to man, embracing him in itself. The absence of the article before νόμου here, and its insertion in the latter clause of the same verse, where the Mosaic Law is definitely referred to, is fully explained by what has been said above under Romans 2:13. Being witnessed, etc., is introduced parenthetically by way of intimating that this manifestation of God’s righteousness, though "apart from law," is not in any opposition to the teaching of the Law and the prophets, being, in fact, anticipated by them. The proof of this appears afterwards in Romans 4:1-25. Romans 3:22 Even the righteousness of God through faith of Jesus Christ unto all (and upon all is added in the Textus Receptus, but ill supported) them that believe: for there is no distinction. We observe that the expression here used is not ἡδιὰπίστεως but simply διὰπίστεως. Thus διὰπίστεως does not naturally connect itself with δικαιοσύνηΘεοῦ as defining it, but rather with εἰςπάντας which follows, and perhaps with reference to the πεφανέρωται of Romans 3:21 understood. The idea, then, may be still that of God’s own righteousness, manifested in Christ, unto or towards all believers, who through faith apprehended it and became sharers in it. When St. Paul elsewhere speaks of the believer’s imputed righteousness, his language is different, so as to make his meaning plain. Thus Romans 4:6, ᾧὁΘεὸςλογίζεταιδικαιοσύνηνδικαιοσύνηςπίστεως; Romans 5:17, τῆςδωρεᾶςτῆςδικαιοσύνης; Romans 9:30 δικαιοσύνηντὴνἐκπίτσεως; Philippians 3:9, τὴνἐκΘεοῦδικαιοσύνηνἐπὶτῇπίστει. What we contend for is simply this—that the phrase δικαιοσύνηΘεοῦ means God’s own righteousness, which, manifested in the atoning Christ, embraces believers, so that to them too righteousness may be imputed (Romans 4:11). Romans 3:23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God. The "glory of God," of which all men are here said to come short (ὑσεροῦνται), has been taken to mean (1) honour or praise from God. "Dei favore et approbatione carent" (Sehleusner). So decidedly Meyer, Tholuek, Alford, and others. In this case Θεοῦ would be the gen. auctoris, which Meyer argues is probable from its being so in Θεοῦδικαιοσύνη. This argument (which is not worth much in any case) tells the other way if, as we hold, it is not so in the latter phrase. For the New Testament use of δόξα in the sense of "praise" or "honour," 1 Thessalonians 2:6 is adduced (Οὔτεζητοῦντεςἐνἀνθρώποιςδόξαν); also John 5:44 (ΔόξανπαρὰἀλλήλωνλαμβάνοντεςκαὶτὴνδόξαντὴνπαρὰτοῦμόνουΘεοῦοὐζητεῖτε); and especially John 12:43, where δόξα is, as here, followed by the genitive Θεοῦ without any connecting preposition: ἨγάπησανγὰρτὴνδόξαντῶνἀνθρώπωνμᾶλλονἤπερτὴνδόξαντοῦΘεοῦ ("the praise of God," Authorized Version). But, even apart from the different, and in itself more obvious, meaning of the phrase, δόξατοῦΘεου, where it occurs elsewhere, it is at least a question whether in the last cited passage it can be taken to mean praise or honour from God. It comes immediately after the quotation from Isaiah 6:9, etc., followed by "These things said Esaias, when he saw his glory (τὴνδόξααὐτοῦ), and spoke of him." Hence the meaning of Joh 12:43 may probably be that the persons spoken of loved mundane glory (cf. Matthew 4:8; Matthew 6:29) rather than the Divine glory, seen in the vision of faith, manifested to the world in Christ (cf. John 1:14, "We beheld his glory," etc.), and "loved" by those who have not the eyes blinded and the heart hardened. So, even in the previous passage of St. John’s Gospel (John 5:41, John 5:44), ἡδόξαἡπαρὰτοῦΘεοῦ may denote man’s participation in the Divine glory, rather than praise or honour, while δόξαπαρὰἀλλήλων may mean the mundane glory conferred by men on each ether. These considerations commend, in the passage before us, the interpretation (2) "Significatur ipsius Dei viventis gloria, vitam tribuens (cf. Romans 6:4); ad quam homini, si non peccasset, patuit aditus: sod peccator ab illo fine sue excidit, neque jam eum assequitur, neque gloriam illam, quae in illo effulsisset, ullo mode tolerare potest: Hebrews 12:20, et seq.; Psalms 68:2; quo fit ut morti sit obnoxius: nam gloria et immortalitas suut synonyma, et sic mors et corruptio. Absunt a gloria Dei, i.e. a summo fine homiuis aberrarunt. At justificati recuporant spom illius glorise. Vid. omnino c. Psalms 5:2, Psalms 5:11, 17; 8:30, etc." (Bengel). Further, the sense which the same expression seems evidently to bear in Romans 5:2 of this Epistle is of importance for our determination of its meaning here. We are not justified in understanding, with some interpreters, any specific reference to the "image of God" (cf. 1 Corinthians 11:7, εἰκὼνκαὶδόξαΘεοῦὑπάρχων) in which man was created, and which has been lost by the Fall, there being nothing to suggest it, or, with others, exclusively to the future glory, since the present ὑστεροῦνται seems to denote a present deficiency. The general conception appears sufficiently plain in Bengel’s exposition above given, according to which "the glory of God" means the glory of the Divine righteousness ("sempiterna ejus virtus et divinitas" Bengel on Hebrews 1:8), which man, through sin, falls short of. Romans 3:24-26 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: whom God set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood. Δικαιούμενοι agrees with πάντες in Romans 3:23. "Repente sic panditur scena amaenior" (Bengel). Δωρεὰν and τῆαὐτοῦχάριτι are opposed to the impossible theory of justification by law. And, as all sinned, so all are so justified potentially, the redemption being for all; cf. especially Romans 5:18. But potential justification only is implied; for the condition for appropriation is further intimated by διὰτῆςπίστεως following. The means whereby it becomes objectively possible is "the redemption that is in Christ Jesus." Here, as throughout St. Paul’s Epistles, and in the New Testament generally, the doctrine of atonement being required for man’s justification is undoubtedly taught, Christ being viewed as not only manifesting God’s righteousness in his life, and reconciling believers through his influence on themselves, but as effecting such reconciliation by an atoning sacrifice. The word itself (ἀπολύτρωσις) here used may indeed sometimes denote deliverance only (cf. Romans 8:23; Luke 21:28; Ephesians 1:14; Ephesians 4:30; Hebrews 11:35); but certainly, when used of the redemption of man by Christ, it implies atonement by the payment of a ransom (λύτρον or ἀντίλυτρον); cf. Ephesians 1:7; 1 Corinthians 6:20; Galatians 3:13; 1 Timothy 2:6; Revelation 5:9; Matthew 20:28; the ransom paid being said to be himself, or (as in Matthew 20:28) his life; Τὴνψυχὴναὐτοῦλύτρονἀντὶπολλῶν. It does not follow that all conceptions of schools of theology as to how the atonement was efficacious for its purpose are correct or adequate. It must, from the very nature of the subject, remain to us a mystery. It may be enough for us to believe that whatever need the human conscience has ever felt of atonement for sin, whatever human want was expressed by world-wide rites of sacrifice, whatever especially was signified by the blood required for atonement in the Mosaic ritual,—all this is met and fulfilled for us in Christ’s offering of himself, and that in him and through him we may now "come boldly to the throne of grace," having need of no other Προέθετο in Matthew 20:25 ("set forth," Authorized Version), may bear here its most usual classical sense of exhibiting to view ("ante omniam oculos possuit," Bengel); i.e. in the historical manifestation of the Redeemer. It may, however, mean "decreed," or "purposed’’ (cf. Matthew 1:13; Ephesians 1:9). The word ἱλαστήριον seems best taken as a neuter adjective used substantively, there being no instance of its application in the masculine to a person. Its ordinary use in the LXX (as also Hebrews 9:5) is to designate the lid of the ark (i.e. the mercy-seat), the noun ἐπίθεμα (which is added Exodus 25:17; Exodus 37:6) being supposed to be always understood, though the usual designation is simply τὸἱλαστήριον. Hence most commentators, including the Greek Fathers generally, understood ἱλαστήριον in this sense here, Christ being regarded as the antitype of the mercy-seat, as being the medium of atonement and approach to God. The main objection to this view is that it involves an awkward confusion of metaphors, it being difficult to regard him who was at once the Victim whose blood was offered, and the High Priest who offered his own blood, at the mercy-seat, as being also the Mercy-seat itself. (Thus, however, Theodoret explains: "The mercy-seat of old was itself bloodless, being without life, but it received the sprinkling of the blood of the sacrifice. But the Lord Christ and God is at once Mercy-seat, High Priest, and Lamb.") The difficulty is avoided if we take the word here in the sense of propitiatory offering, which in itself it will bear, a noun, such as θῦμα, being supposed to be (cf. 4 Maccabees 17:22; Josephus, ’Ant.,’ 16. c. 7; Dio Chrys., ’Orat.,’ 11.1). Whatever its exact meaning, it evidently denotes a true fulfilment in Christ of the atonement for sin undoubtedly signified by the type; as does further ἐντῷαὐτοῦαἵματι, which follows. For a distinct enunciation of the significance of bleed under the ancient ritual, as reserved for and expressing atonement, see especially Le Matthew 17:11. The meaning of the whole sacrificial ritual is there expressed as being that the life of man being forfeit to Divine justice, blood, representing life, must be offered instead of his life for atonement. Hence, in pursuance of this idea, the frequent references in the New Testament to Hebrews physical blood-shedding of Christ (cf. Hebrews 9:22, "Without shedding of blood there is no remission"). It is not, however, implied that the material blood of Christ, shed on the cross, in itself cleanses the soul from sin, but only that it signifies to us the fulfilment in him of the type of an atoning sacrifice. As to the construction of verse 25, it is a question whether ἐντῷαὐτοῦαἵματι is to be taken in connection with διὰτῆςπίστεως, meaning "through faith in his blood" (an unusual expression, though grammatically correct, cf. Ephesians 1:15), or with ἱλαστήριον. The emphatic position of αὐτοῦ, such as apparently to signify "in his own blood," favours the latter connection (cf. Hebrews 9:12-25, where the offering of Christ is distinguished from those of the Law in being διὰτοῦἀδίουαἵματος, not ἐναἵματιἀλλοτρίῳ). Thus the meaning will be that he was set forth (or purposed) as an ἱλαστήριον, available for us through faith, and consisting in the offering of himself—in, the shedding of his own blood. For showing of his righteousness because of the passing over of the sins done aforetime in the forbearance of God, in order to the showing of his righteousness in the time that now is, so that he may be righteous, and justifying (the word is δικαιοῦντα, corresponding with δικαιωσύνην and δίκαιων preceding) him that is of faith in Jesus. This translation differs materially from that of the Authorized Version, which is evidently erroneous, especially in the rendering of διὰτὴνπάρεσιν by "for the remission." Our translators, in a way very unusual with them, seem to have missed the drift of the passage, and so been led to give the above untenable rendering in order to suit their view of it. It is to be observed that two purposes of the setting forth (or purposing) of Christ Jesus as ἱλαστήριον are here declared, both denoted by the word ἔνδειξιν, which is repeated, being governed in the first clause of the sentence by εἰς, and in the second by πρὸς. Some say that the preposition is changed with no intended difference of meaning. But it is not St. Paul’s way to use his prepositions carelessly. Εἰς in the first clause may be taken to denote the immediate purpose of the propitiation, and πρὸς in the second to have its proper significance of aim or direction, denoting a further intention and result, consequent on the first. The first purpose, denoted by εἰς, was the vindication of God’s righteousness with regard to the ages past, in that he had so long passed over, or left unvisited, the sins of mankind. The propitiation of Christ. at length set forth, showed that he had not been indifferent to these sins, though in his forbearance he had passed them over. Cf. Acts 17:30, ΤοὺςμὲνοὗνχρόνουςτῆςἀγνοίαςὑπεριδὼνὁΘεὸς; also Hebrews 9:15, where the death of Christ, as the Mediator of the new covenant, is said to have been "for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first covenant," the meaning and efficacy of the "death" being thus regarded, in the first place, as retrospective (cf. also Hebrews 9:26). But then there was a further grand purpose, expressed by the πρὸςτὴνἔνδειξιν of the second clause that of providing a way of present justification for believers now, without derogation of the Divine righteousness. Such appears to be the meaning of this passage. Romans 3:27 Where then is the boasting? (that of the Jew, referred to in Romans 2:1-29., of his superiority to the Gentile with regard to justification). It is excluded. By what manner of (ποίου) law? Of works? Nay, but by the law of faith. Is it, then, here implied that the law of works would allow of boasting? Not so practically. But its theory would leave room for it, on the supposition of its conditions being fulfilled; it is a kind of law (observe ποίουνόμου;) which does not exclude it; for if a man could say, "I have fulfilled all the righteousness of the Law," he would have something wherein to glory. But the principle of the law of faith, which has been shown to be the only one available for the justification of either Jew or Gentile, in itself excludes it. It will be observed that the strict sense of the word νόμος, hitherto preserved, is extended in νόμοςπίστεως. (For the various applications of which the word is capable, see especially Romans 7:1-25.) Romans 3:28 For (γὰρ here, rather than οὗν, as in the Textus Receptus; though either reading rests on good authority, γὰρ suits best the course of thought, as introducing a reason for the assertion of the previous verse) we reckon that a man is justified by faith apart from works of law; i.e. the law of works, as a principle of justification, is, in fact, according to our reckoning, nowhere. It is to be particularly observed that χωρὶςἔργωννόμου implies no antinomian doctrine, nor any opposition to James (James 2:14, etc.). Its reference is not at all to works required or not required from man for acceptance, but simply to the ground or principle of his justification. Romans 3:29 Is God the God of the Jews only? is he not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also. This verse is in support of the doctrine, already asserted, and pervading the Epistle, of justification through Christ being for all mankind alike without distinction or partiality; and it comes in here in pursuance of the thought of the preceding verse. In it justification was said to be by faith, and apart from works of law, and therefore in itself available for the Gentiles, who had no revealed law, as well as for the Jews, who had. And why should it not be so? Is not the God of the Jews their God too? Yes. Romans 3:30 If indeed (εἴπερ rather than ἐπείπερ, as in the Textus Receptus) God is one, who shall justify the circumcision by faith, and the uncircumcision through faith. Here the unity of God is given as the reason of his being the God of the Gentiles as well as of the Jews. So also, 1 Timothy 2:5, εἷςγὰρΘεὸς is the reason why he wills all men to be saved. It is of importance to grasp St. Paul’s idea in his assertions of the unity of God. It is not that of numerical unity, but what may be called the unity of quality; i.e. not a mere assertion of monotheism as against polytheism, but that the one God is one and the same to all, comprehending all in the embrace of his own essential unity. God’s unity involved in St. Paul’s mind the idea of "One God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we unto him" (1 Corinthians 8:6); "who made of one blood every nation of men" (Acts 17:26); in whom we (all of us) "live and move and have our being" (Acts 17:28). Thus exclusion of the Gentiles from the paternal embrace of the one God is incompatible with the very idea, so conceived, of his unity. In the latter part of this verse it is said that God will justify the circumcision ἐκπίστεως, and the uncircumcision διὰτῆςπίστεως, the preposition being changed, and the second πίστεως being preceded by the article. The difference is not of essential importance, "faith" being the emphatic word. But it is not unmeaning. Ἐκ expresses the principle of justification; διὰ, the medium through which it may be had. The Jew was already in a position for justification through the Law leading up to Christ. He had only to accept it as of faith, and not of works of law (verse 20). The Gentile must attain to it through faith; i.e. his faith in the gospel now revealed to him. ἘπὶτῶνἸουδαίωντὸἀκπίστεωςτέθεικενὡςἂνἐγόντωνμὲνκαὶἑτέραςἀφορμὰςπρὸςδικαίωσιν, πίστεως" (Theodorus). Romans 3:31 Do we then make law void through faith? God forbid: nay, we establish law. The question naturally arises after what has been said about justification being χωρὶςνόμου. Do we then make out our revealed Law, which we have accounted so holy and Divine, to be valueless? Or. rather, as the question is more generally put (νόμον being without the article, and therefore translated as above), "Do we make of none effect the whole principle of law, embodied to us in our Divine Law? Regarded erroneously as a principle of justification, the apostle might have answered. "Yes, we do." But any disparagement of it, regarded in its true light and as answering its real purpose, he meets with an indignant μὴγένοιτο. On the contrary, he says, we establish it. Law means the declaration of righteousness, and requirement of conformity to it on the part of man. We establish this principle by our doctrine of the necessity of atonement for man’s defect. We put law on its true base, and so make it the more to stand (ἰστάνομεν) by showing its office to be, not to justify—a position untenable—but to convince of sin, and so lead up to Christ (cf. Romans 7:12, etc.; Galatians 3:24). In pursuance of this thought, the apostle, in the next chapter, shows that in the Old Testament itself it is faith, and not law, which is regarded as justifying; as, in the first place and notably, in the case of Abraham; thus proving the previous assertion in Romans 3:21, Μαρτυρουμένηὑπὸτοῦνόμουκαὶτῶνπροφητῶν. In Romans 7:1-25. he treats the subject subjectively, analyzing the operation of law in the human soul, and so bringing out still more clearly its true meaning and purpose. Romans 3:1, Romans 3:2 Prerogative. The differences in men’s circumstances and advantages are great, and are altogether inexplicable by human wisdom. We may not, probably we cannot, in all things "justify the ways of God to men." There is much in the inequality of the human lot that is perplexing to the reflective and sensitive mind, which we cannot reconcile with our belief in God’s perfect justice, and his omnipotent and universal rule. This, however, is an insufficient reason for doubting the conviction of our moral nature, for questioning the declarations of Scripture, that the Judge of all the earth doeth right. I. IT IS TO THE OF . This was the case with many of the Jews, who relied upon ancestral, hereditary advantages, and who even believed that, as children of Abraham, they were certain of Divine favour and of eternal life. Just as many in human society lay stress absurdly great upon their family, the status they enjoy in consequence of hereditary title or wealth, so is it in religious life. Not a few, like the Jews, rely far too much upon the Church with which they are connected, the ministry by which they are served, the sacraments to which they are admitted, the opportunities of knowledge, fellowship, and service with which they are favoured, it is too often forgotten that these privileges are only means to an end, and that the right and reasonable use of the means is necessary in order to the desired end. II. IT IS TO WHICH, IT IS , HAVE BEEN . It is a tendency of human nature to fly from one extreme to the other. St. Paul supposes some reader, convinced by what he has said of the possibility of gaining no benefit by advantages enjoyed, to turn completely round and to ask what advantages accrue to those who enjoy what seem to be remarkable privileges. "What advantage, then, hath the Jew? or what is the profit of circumcision?" And it is still, no doubt, often the case that men, convinced that it is vain to rely upon their religious privileges, question whether they are in any better position for possessing such privileges. Social advantages are so evidently serviceable, that men suppose the same must be the case with religious advantages; and when they find that the possession of these last is compatible with censure and condemnation, they are apt to turn round, and to say, "Better to be without privileges which may lead to nothing!" Yet this is an unreasonable way of regarding such matters. For— III. IT IS SO TO USE AS TO MAKE THEM THE MEANS TO GOOD. The apostle points out that the Jew occupied a position peculiarly favourable. "First of all, because they were entrusted with the oracles of God." This was evidently a sacred prerogative, and there were many of the favoured nation who made so good a use of their opportunities that they became, not only intelligently acquainted with Divine truth, but penetrated by the Divine Spirit, and consecrated to the Divine service. Similarly, although the possession of the Scriptures and the privileges of the Christian Church will be occasion of condemnation to those hearers of the gospel who are negligent, unbelieving, and impenitent; on the other hand, these will be means of grace, and they actually are such, to all who use such opportunities of knowledge, fellowship, and improvement in a right spirit and method. There is obvious justice in this arrangement; the greater the privilege, the greater the responsibility. "To whom much is given, of him much will be required." Those who are "entrusted with the oracles of God" may well be summoned seriously to consider what is becoming on the part of those so favoured, and diligently to use opportunities so precious, privileges and prerogatives so momentous and so unparalleled. Romans 3:19, Romans 3:20 The purpose of Law. Although it is the main intention of the apostle, in speaking of the Law, to show its insufficiency for the purpose with which its introduction and publication were commonly credited, his teaching would be misunderstood were he supposed to disparage it; for St. Paul held the Law of God in the highest reverence, although he did not attribute to it all with which it was connected in the mind of the unchristian Jew. I. THE PRIMARY PURPOSE OF THE LAW. This was unquestionably the revelation of the Divine character, attributes, and will. God is not only the perfectly holy Being; he is also the perfectly righteous Ruler. Truth declares what he is; Law declares what he will have his subjects to be. Accordingly, revelation takes the form, not only of the indicative, but of the imperative. Law is the expression of God’s justice, and of his will that all the subjects of his moral government should partake of his holiness, and, in their relations to one another and to him, should do those things that please him. His commandments, statutes, ordinances, are the utterance of his judgment as to what is good, what is best, for his intelligent creatures. II. THE PURPOSE OF THE LAW. It is upon this that the inspired apostle lays stress in the passage now before us. 1. The Law reveals sin. It is a standard beside which the deficiencies and errors of men’s conduct become plainly manifest. 2. The Law condemns the sinner. It is not simply a declaration of what is right; it exposes and censures what is wrong. It speaks the sentence against the violators of its rules. 3. The Law silences the sinner. It leaves him without justification, apology, or excuse. III. THE PURPOSE OF THE LAW. This is unquestionably, in the case of our humanity, to prepare the way for the gospel. The Law is the pedagogue, the slave who attends and conducts the pupil, and it leads unto Christ. "By the works of the Law shall no flesh be justified in God’s sight." Yet we cannot believe that a merciful God publishes the Law simply for the condemnation of men. It does reveal the heinousness of sin, making it appear exceedingly sinful. It does reveal the helplessness of the sinner. But all this is preparatory to a remedial and redemptive intervention. What the Law could not do, God does by the gift of his Son, who obeyed and magnified the Law in his own Person, and at the same time secured for sinful men, upon compliance with the conditions of faith and repentance, their exemption from the Law’s penalties, and their enjoyment of the Divine favour, participation in the Divine nature and life, and inheritance in the Divine and eternal blessedness. Thus that which appeared the instrument of wrath has been converted into the occasion of salvation. Romans 3:22 The distinctively Christian righteousness. The apostle has clearly shown that righteousness by the Law is not possessed by men, and that in this way is no hope for the salvation of the human race. Such is the negative conclusion to which facts and reason compel him. Yet it is not his vocation to preach a doctrine of despair. True, without righteousness there can be no salvation. Therefore, if light is to be cast upon human darkness, it must come else whither than from the Law. So it is that St. Paul preaches the new and distinctively Christian righteousness, to be secured by conditions that may be fulfilled by men of every race—a righteousness that avails before God, and ensures the acceptance and the spiritual welfare and elevation of men. I. THE AND OF THIS : IT IS OF GOD, OR DIVINE. 1. It has its source in God. In this it is distinguished from the rectitude which is "by works;" that in a sense is of human origin. It is shown to be "of grace," i.e. to be the provision of Divine favour, free and undeserved. And further, this expression, "of God," implies the perfection of this righteousness in comparison with all beside. 2. It is divinely adapted by God to man. There is presupposition of man’s helplessness and dependence; it is presumed—which is indeed the fact—that man cannot work out a righteousness of his own. Hence there is a ground for this new righteousness in a Divine provision of substitution. The apostle would be misunderstood were his teaching upon this point to be interpreted, as some have interpreted it, as representing God as indifferent to the person by whom suffering is endured and obedience rendered. Yet Christ, by his suffering the consequences of sin in this humanity and by his perfect obedience and holiness, has laid the foundation for the acquisition by man of the distinctively Christian righteousness. 3. It avails and is acceptable before God. According to the representations of the context, it consists in the remission of sins, and acquittal and acceptance before the Divine tribunal, and in the manifestation of positive Divine approval; which may be regarded as the two parts of "justification." It is evident that such righteousness is imputed, and not inherent—a theological expression which must not, however, be interpreted to imply its unreality. Thus the Divinity of the Christian righteousness may be made apparent, as an object of admiration and of aspiration. II. THE MEANS OF THE OF THIS —THROUGH FAITH IN JESUS CHRIST. In order to the fulfilment of this condition upon which the Christian righteousness may he attained, there must be: 1. Belief in the Scripture testimony concerning Christ, that he is the Son of God and the appointed Saviour of mankind. This is indispensable; for faith is not a vague sentiment—it has an Object, and an Object which justifies and deserves it. Yet, though indispensable, this is not sufficient. There must be also: 2. Trust or confidence in Christ as a personal Saviour. Faith is not merely intellectual assent; it is the consent of the heart and the will. It is capable of degree, and there is strong faith and weak faith. But the important point is that the soul, in the attitude and exercise of faith, is brought into personal relation with the holy Saviour. III. THE OF THIS : IT IS UNTO ALL, AND UPON ALL, THEM THAT BELIEVE. The rectitude itself is a possession which men may share, whatever their nationality, their condition in life, their individual history. And the condition of its attainment is equally universal; there is nothing in faith which limits its exercise to any special members, or any section of the human race. In this Christianity proves itself to be—and this is its glory, its Divinity—the universal religion. BY C.H. IRWIN Romans 3:1-8 The difficulties of Divine revelation, Jewish unbelief, and Divine justice. The apostle, in the two preceding chapters, has now shown that both Jews and Gentiles stand on the same platform as regards their need of a Saviour. Both are alike sinners in God’s sight. The Gentile, who has not the Law, if he does by nature the things contained in the Law, will be justified before God. "Shall not his uncircumcision be counted for circumcision?" (Romans 2:14, Romans 2:26). The Jew’s circumcision will profit him if it be a religion that affects the heart and the spirit (Romans 2:29). St. Paul, so quick to see the bearings of every statement, notices at once that a difficulty naturally arises here, and he is prompt to meet it. "What advantage, then, hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision?" I. THE DIVINE A GREAT . Notwithstanding all that had been said about the sins and shortcomings of the Jews, the Jews were still a privileged people. Nothing could ever destroy the fact that they were the chosen people of God, the people chosen to be the channel of God’s revelation to the world by the patriarchs and lawgivers and prophets, chosen also to be the channel through which the Divine Word become flesh and tabernacled among men—"of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came." The chief privilege which Paul mentions here was that "unto them were committed the oracles of God" (Romans 3:2). It is an advantage to have a Divine revelation entrusted to us. The possession and knowledge of God’s Word is a privilege not to be despised or lightly esteemed. There are degrees of nearness to the kingdom of God. While the gospel is "the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth," while there are such events as sudden conversions, yet there are some who are in a more favourable condition for receiving the gospel than others. St. Paul, though he was suddenly converted, bad a long and thorough training previously in the Word of God. The scribe who came to Christ, and whom the Saviour pronounced to be "not far from the kingdom of God," was one who had a thorough knowledge of the Scriptures, and who had been living a life of obedience to the Law of God. Such men were certainly more likely to be influenced by the personal power of Christ than those who had no previous knowledge of Divine truth. God works by miracles; but his ordinary method is to work by means. In these days of sensational evangelism it is well that we should not undervalue the importance of a thorough knowledge of the Scriptures. Paul wrote to Timothy, "From a child thou hast known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus." They who are well instructed in the Holy Scriptures are, as a rule, more likely to become true and permanent Christians than those who, under the influence of sudden excitement or emotion, without any previous religious knowledge, profess their readiness to follow the banner of Jesus. There are exceptions, but this would seem to be the rule. And those who are so highly privileged incur a serious and solemn responsibility. If unto us are committed the oracles of God, if we have the Bible in our hands and its truths treasured up in our minds, terrible indeed will be our guilt if we disobey its precepts, reject its invitations, and neglect its warnings. "To whom much is given, of them shall much be required." II. DIVINE NOT BY HUMAN . "For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God of none effect? God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged" (Romans 3:3, Romans 3:4). The promises of God will be fulfilled, even though there are some who do not believe on them. The Law of God will assert its claims, even though there are some who repudiate them. It will not save men from the punishment of their sin that they did not believe God’s Word when it says, "Whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap." God’s faithfulness is not affected by the unbelief of his own people. Some persons argue against the Bible because of the unbelief of those who profess to regard it as their guide. They argue against Christianity because of the inconsistencies of its professors. The argument is false. Christianity is to be judged by its own teachings and spirit, and not by the imperfect way in which even its professors have received and practised them. Christianity is the life and teaching of Jesus Christ, combined with the influence of his death upon the cross. No inconsistency of professing followers can ever mar the beauty and sinlessness of that perfect Example. No unbelief can ever do away with the inherent power that is in the cross of Jesus to save sinners. The preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but to them that are saved it is the power of God and the wisdom of God. III. DIVINE JUSTICE IS NOT BY THE OF HUMAN SIN. "But if our unrighteousness commend the righteousness of God, what shall we say? Is God unrighteous who taketh vengeance? (I speak as a man.) God forbid: for then how shall God judge the world?" (Romans 3:5, Romans 3:6). 1. God judges not consequences, but character. He looks at the heart and at the motives. The Jews’ unbelief was overruled by God for his own wise and gracious purposes. He brought good out of evil. But that did not make their unbelief the less guilty. In the eyes of the law, the guilt of a fraudulent person is not always estimated by the consequences of his acts. A man may forge his employer’s signature to cheques; but the employer may receive such information as will enable him to stop the cheques in time, and prevent the loss which would otherwise have resulted. But the forger’s guilt is not diminished because the consequences of his acts have been overruled. The law is not considered unfair or unrighteous if it punishes him, though his employer may not have suffered one penny of pecuniary loss. And even though the criminal’s conduct served in some way to bring out more clearly the integrity or kindness of his employer, yet even this would not be regarded as any mitigating circumstance in his guilt. So it is right that I should still be judged as a sinner, even though the truth of God hath abounded through my lie unto his glory (Romans 3:7). 2. Man is not justified in using sinful means to gain a good end. From the fact that God overrules sinful actions for his own glory and the good of humanity, it might appear to be a natural inference that it matters not what the morality of the action itself is so long as its object or result is good. "Let us do evil, that good may come" (Romans 3:8). Stated in this broad way, the immorality of the principle is apparent. And yet it is a principle which is too commonly acted upon. If you oppose some method of raising money for religious or charitable purposes, you will be constantly told, "Oh! it is for a good purpose." That is, simply, it does not matter how you get the money so as you get it. It does not matter what the means are so long as the end is good. Now, it is time that the Christian Church and Christian teachers should set themselves resolutely against such demoralizing ideas. How can the Christian Church rebuke the dishonest practices too common in the commercial world, money-making by unfair or questionable methods, so long as its own hands are not clean, so long as almost any method of making money is considered justifiable if it is in connection with a Church bazaar? The end does not justify the means. Let us not do evil, that good may come.—C.H.I. Romans 3:9-18 Total depravity of human nature. Here we have a dark picture of human nature in its fallen and unregenerate state. (The Bible view of human nature is more fully enlarged on below, on Romans 3:21-26.) Here the apostle, as it were, calls up before him the different parts of human nature, and obtains from each of them an admission and an evidence of the moral corruption with which they are tainted. "My conscience hath a thousand several tongues, And every tongue brings in a different tale, And every tale convicts me for a villain. All several sins, all used in each degree, Throng to the bar, crying all—Guilty! guilty!" I. A HEART. "There is no fear of God before their eyes" (Romans 3:18). There is no motive-power to regulate the life. There is no reverence for God’s Law within their spirit. There is no fear of offending the great Judge. There is no filial fear of grieving the heavenly Father. The conscience and heart have become seared and blunted. Remove the fear of God from heart and conscience, and what influence remains to check evil passions and to resist the insidious allurements of temptation? "The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom; and to depart from evil is understanding." II. A . "There is none that understandeth" (Romans 3:11). It is fashionable in some circles to speak as if it was a sign of weak intellect to be a Christian, to believe in the Bible, or to regard with reverence the Law of God. Yet assuredly it may be claimed without any presumption or prejudice that there has been at least as much of the world’s best intellect arrayed on the side of Christianity as on the side of its opponents. If there be credulity anywhere, there is credulity displayed in accepting as scientific truths what very often are pure speculations. If there is weakness anywhere, it would seem to be in disregarding the evidence in nature that points to a great personal and intelligent First Cause, or the evidence in history that points to a wise and overruling Providence. "The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God." It is sin, and not godliness, that is the evidence of a weak and depraved understanding. III. A WILL. "There is none that seeketh after God" (Romans 3:11). Nowhere is the depravity of human nature more painfully shown than in the exercise of the human will. How many deliberately choose evil rather than good! How many, with the experience of others to warn them, deliberately choose impurity rather than purity, intemperance rather than temperance! Life and death are put before them, yet they deliberately choose death. They reject the highest ideal of character, and follow poor and weak and wicked examples. They reject the inspiring hope of heaven and immortality, and only live for worldly pleasure or for worldly gain. They reject the fountain of living water, and seek out for themselves broken cisterns that can hold no water. To all such God appeals, in mercy, to make a right exercise of their will. "Turn ye, turn ye; for why will ye die?" IV. SPEECH. 1. Untruthfulness. "With their tongues they have used deceit" (Romans 3:13). Truth is essential to the well-being and happiness of society, to the very existence of commercial dealings. Yet how many there are who "use deceit" as a means of obtaining advantage or profit in business, as a means of obtaining some desirable object of their ambition! We have society deceitfulness, commercial deceitfulness, political deceitfulness. Against all such deceit the Bible sets itself. "Wherefore putting away lying, speak every man truth with his neighbour; for we are members one of another." 2. Slander. "The poison of asps is under their lips" (Romans 3:13). The sin of evil-speaking is a very widespread one, and it hardly receives sufficient discouragement from Christian people. Men and women who would shrink from doing their neighbour a bodily injury, who would be shocked at the idea of taking his property dishonestly, think it no harm to injure his character and reputation. "The poison of asps is under their lips." "O my soul, come not thou into their secret; unto their assembly, mine honour, be not thou united." 3. Profanity. "Whose mouth is full of cursing" (Romans 3:14). Here is a widespread evil of the present day. Everywhere one hears the profane use of the sacred Name. Just as the suicide acts "As if the Everlasting had not fixed His canon ’gainst self-slaughter," the profane person acts as if it had not been written with the finger of God, "The Lord will not hold him guiltless that taketh his Name in vain." V. LIFE. "Their feet are swift to shed blood: destruction and misery are in their ways: and the way of peace have they not known" (Romans 3:15-17). What a sad but true description of human life in its unregenerate and unchristianized condition! It is but the ordinary picture of what heathen nations were before the gospel entered into them. And where large communities throw off the restraints of religion, is it not what may be witnessed still, even in professedly Christian nations? Where there is no fear of the Law of God, there will be little fear of the law of man. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/pulpit-commentary/ Romans 4:1-25 (5) Abraham himself shown to have been justified by faith, and not by works, believers being his true heirs. The main points of the argument may be summarized thus: When Abraham obtained a blessing to himself and to his seed for ever, it was by faith, and not by works, that he is declared to have been justified so as to obtain it. Thus the promise to his seed, as well as to himself, rested on the principle of justification by faith only. The Law, of which the principle was essentially different, could not, and did not, in itself fulfil that promise; and that its fulfilment was not dependent on circumcision, or confined to the circumcised, is further shown by the fact that it was before his own circumcision that he received the blessing and the promise, Hence the seed intended in the promise was his spiritual seed, who are of faith such as his was; and in Christ, offering justification through faith to all, the promise is now fulfilled. Romans 4:1 What then shall we say that Abraham our father according to the flesh hath found? The connection, denoted by οὗν, with the preceding argument is rather with verses 27, 28 of Romans 3:1-31., than with its concluding winds, νόμονἱστάνομεν. This appears, not only from the drift of Rom 4:1-25., but also from the word καύχημα in Romans 4:2, connecting the thought with ποῦοὗνἡκαύχησις; in Romans 3:27. The line of thought is, in the first place, this: We have said that all human glorying is shut out, and that no man can be justified except by faith: how, then (it is important to inquire), was it with Abraham our great progenitor? Did not he at least earn the blessing to his seed by the merit of his works? Had not he, on that ground, whereof to glory? No, not even he; Scripture, in what it says of him, distinctly asserts the contrary. There is uncertainty in this verso as to whether "according to the flesh" (κατὰσάρκα) is to be connected with "our father" or with "hath found." Readings vary in their arrangement of the words. The Textus Receptus has ΤίοὗνἐροῦμενΑβραὰμτὸνπατέραἡμῶνεὐρηκέναικατὰσάρκα. But the great preponderance of authority is in favour of εὐρηκέναιἈβραὰμτὸνπροπάτοραἡμῶνκατὰσάρκα. The first of these readings requires the connection of κατὰσάρκα with εὐρηκέναι; the second allows it, but suggests the other connection. Theodoret, among the ancients, connecting with εὐρηκέναι, explains κατὰσάρκα thus: "What righteousness, of Abraham’s, wrought before he be- lieved God, did we ever hear of?" Calvin suggests, as the meaning of the phrase (though himself inclining to the connection with προπάτορα)," naturaliter vel ex seipso." Bull, similarly (’Harmonic Apostolica,’ ’Disputatio Posterior,’ c. 12.14-17), "by his natural powers, without the grace of God." Alford, following Meyer, says that κατὰσάρκα is in contrast to κατὰπνεύμα, and that it "refers to that department of our being from which spring works, in contrast with that in which is the exercise of faith." Difficulty is avoided if (as is the most natural inference from the best authenticated reading) we take κατὰσάρκα in connection with πάτερα or προπάτορα, in the sense of our forefather in the way of natural descent, the question being put from the Jewish standpoint; and this in distinction from the other conception of descent from Abraham, according to which all the faithful are called his children (cl. Romans 1:3; Romans 9:3, Romans 9:5, Romans 8:1 Romans 10:18). Among the ancients Chrysostom and Theophylact take this view. For the import of εὐρηκέναι, cf. Luke 1:30 (εὖρεςχάρινπαρὰτῷΘεῷ) and Hebrews 9:12 (αἰωνίανλύτρωσινεὑράμενος). Romans 4:2 For if Abraham was justified by works, be hath whereof to glory; but not before God. Many commentators take this verse to imply that, even if he was justified by works, he still had no ground of glorying before God, though he might have before men. But the drift of the whole argument being to show that he was not justified by works at all, this interpretation can hardly stand. "Not before God" must therefore have reference to the whole of the preceding sentence, in the sense, "It was not so in the sight of God." Before God (as appears from the text to be quoted) he had not whereof to glory on the ground of being justified by works, and therefore it follows that it was not by works that he was justified. Romans 4:3 For what saith the Scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned Unto him for righteousness. This notable text (Genesis 15:6), declaring the ground of Abraham’s acceptance, is similarly quoted in the cognate passage, Galatians 3:6. It has a peculiar cogency in the general argument from being in connection with, and with reference to, one of the Divine promises to Abraham of an unnumbered seed; so that it may be understood with an extended application to those who were to inherit the blessing, as well as to the "father of the faithful," and so declaring the principle of justification for all the "children of the promise." Further, it would be peculiarly telling as addressed to the Jews, who made such a point of their descent from Abraham as the root of all their position of privilege (cf. Psalms 105:6; Isaiah 41:8; Isaiah 51:2; Matthew 3:9; Luke 3:8; John 8:39). The two significant expressions in it are ἐπίστευσε (denoting faith, not works) and ἐλογίσθηεἰς The whole phrase, the apostle proceeds to say, implies that the reward spoken of was not earned, but granted. Romans 4:4, Romans 4:5 Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt (literally, according to grace, but according to the debt, i.e. according to what is due). But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is reckoned for righteousness. The expression, "him that worketh" (τῷἐργαζομένῳ), evidently means him that works with a view to a reward which he can claim; or, as Luther explains it, "one who deals in works;" or, as we might say with the same signification, "the worker." (For a like use of the present participle, cf. Galatians 5:3, τῷπεριτεμνομένῳ.) So also in Romans 4:5, τῷμὴἐργαζομένῳ means one who does not so work. Thus there is here no denial of the necessity of good works. It is the principle only of justification that is in view. "Neque enim fideles vult esse ignavos; sed tantum mercenarias esse vetat, qui a Deo quicquam reposcant quasi jure debitum" (Calvin). One view of the meaning of τῷἐργαζομένῳ is that it is equivalent to τῷἐργάτῃ, being meant as an illustration, thus: The workman’s wage is due to him, and not granted as a favour (so Afford). But this notion does not suit the τῷμὴἐργαζομένῳ in the following verse. The strong word ἀσεβῆ ("ungodly") is not to be understood as designating Abraham himself, the proposition being a general one. Nor does it imply that continued ἀσέβεια is consistent with justification; only that even the ἀσεβεῖς are justified through faith on their repentance and amendment (cf. Romans 5:6, ὑπὲρἀσεβῶνἀπέθανε). Romans 4:6-8 Even as David also describeth the blessedness. We might render, "David tells of the blessing on the man," etc.) of the man unto whom God reckoneth (λογίζεται, as before. Imputeth in the Authorized Version suggests the idea of a different word being used) righteousness apart from works, saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered. Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not reckon (λογίσηται, as before, and so throughout the whole passage) sin (Psalms 32:1, Psalms 32:2). The introduction of this testimony of David to the same principle of justification serves not only to explain it further, but also to show that under the Law too it continued to be recognized; and by David himself, the typical king and psalmist under the legal dispensation. But the argument from Abraham is not discontinued, being resumed in the next verse, and continued to the end of the chapter. If it be said that these verses from Psalms 32:1-11. do not in themselves declare a general principle applicable to all, but only the blessedness to sinners of having their sins forgiven, it may be replied, firstly, that the way in which the verses are introduced does not require more to be implied. All that need be meant is that the ground of justification exemplified in Abraham’s case is the same as is spoken of by David as still available for man, and crowned with blessing. But, secondly, it is to be observed that these verses represent and suggest the general tenor of the Book of Psalms, in which human righteousness is never asserted as constituting a claim to reward. "My trust is in thy mercy," is, on the contrary, the ever-recurring theme. St. Paul’s quotations from the Old Testament are frequently given as suggestive of the general scriptural teaching on the subject in hand, rather than as exhaustive proofs in themselves. Romans 4:9, Romans 4:10 Cometh this blessedness then (properly, is then this blessing) upon the circumcision only, or upon the uncircumcision also? For we say that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness. How (i.e., as the context shows, under what circumstances) was it then reckoned? when he was in circumcision, or in uncircumcision? Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision. Faith, and not works, having been shown to be the principle of Abraham’s justification, and those who were under the Mosaic Law, represented by David, having been seen to have shared the blessing of being so justified, the question still remains, whether it may not be confined to them only, or to Abraham’s circumcised descendants only. That this cannot be is shown in two ways: firstly (Romans 4:10-13), from the fact that Abraham was himself uncircumcised when he was spoken of as being thus justified, so that neither the capability nor the inheritance of such justification can be viewed as dependent on circumcision; and, secondly (Romans 4:13-16), it is argued that the Law could not appropriate the privilege to his carnal descendants, the very principle of law being the opposite of that on which Abraham is said to have been justified. Thus the seed, innumerable as the stars, to be understood as inheritors of the promise made to him, and sharers in his blessing, are not his circumcised descendants, but a spiritual seed—they which are of faith being the true children of Abraham (Galatians 3:7). Romans 4:11, Romans 4:12 And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had in uncircumcision (this was all that circumcision was—a visible sign and seal to his own descendants of the righteousness that is of faith; but not confining it to them, or in itself conferring it) that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be in uncircumcision, that righteousness might be reckoned unto them also. And the father of circumcision to them who are not of circumcision only, but who also walk in the steps of that faith of our father Abraham which he had in uncircumcision. The intention of Rom 4:12 is to express that, though the faithful who are not of Israel are Abraham’s children, yet his circumcised descendants have not lost their privilege. They are already his children according to the flesh, and his spiritual children too, if they walk in the steps of his faith (cf. John 8:37, "I know that ye are Abraham’s seed," compared with John 8:39, "If ye were Abraham’s children, ye would do the works of Abraham"). What now follows is to show (as above explained) that the Law could not be the fulfilment of the promise to Abraham, or appropriate its blessing to the Jews. Romans 4:13-15 For not through law was the promise to Abraham or to his seed that he should be the heir of the world, but through the righteousness of faith, For if they which are of law be heirs, faith is made void, and the promise made of none effect. For the Law worketh wrath: for where no law is, neither is there transgression. The point of the argument is that the principle of law is essentially different from that on which Abraham was justified, and which is hence to be understood in the fulfilment of the promise to him and his seed. How this is so is shortly intimated in Romans 4:15, the idea being more fully expounded in Romans 7:1-25. The idea is (as has been already explained) that law simply declares what is right, and requires conformity to it; it does not give either power to obey, or atonement for not obeying. Hence, in itself, it worketh, not righteousness, but wrath; for man becomes fully liable to wrath when he comes to know, through law, the difference between right and wrong (cf. John 9:41, "If ye were blind, ye should have no sin"). Exactly the same view of the impossibility of the Mosaic Law being the fulfilment of the promise to Abraham is found in Galatians 3:1-29., where also the real purpose of the Law, intervening thus between the promise and its fulfilment, is further explained. The expression in Galatians 3:13, "that he should be the heir of the world," has reference to the ultimate scope of the Abrahamic promises (see Genesis 12:2, Genesis 12:3; Genesis 13:14-16; Genesis 15:5, Genesis 15:6, Genesis 15:18; Genesis 17:2-9; Genesis 18:18; Genesis 22:17, Genesis 22:18). Now, it is true that in some of these promises the language used seems to denote no more than the temporal possession by Israel of the promised land, with dominion (actually realized under David and Solomon) over the whole country from the Mediterranean to the Euphrates, as in Genesis 13:14, Genesis 13:15; Genesis 15:18, etc. But their full scope transcends any such limited fulfilment, as where it is said that the promised seed should be as the stars of heaven, and as the dust of the earth that cannot be numbered, and that in it all the nations of the earth should be blessed. The prophets accordingly recognized a far larger ultimate fulfilment in their frequent pictures of the Messiah’s universal dominion; and there was no need for the apostle to prove here what the Jews already understood. The only difference between the view current among them and his would be that they would mostly have in view a universal worldly sovereignty with its local centre on the throne of David at Jerusalem, while he interpreted spirttually, seeing beyond the outward framework of prophetic visions to the ideal they imply. "Heres mundi idem est quod pater omnium gentium, benedictionem accipientium. Totus mundus promissus est Abrahae et semini ejus per totum mundum conjunctim. Abrahamo obtigit terra Canaan, et sic aliis alia pars; atque corporalia sunt specimen spiritualium. Christus beres mundi, et omuium (Hebrews 1:2; Hebrews 2:5; Revelation 11:15), et qui in eum credunt Abrahae exemplo (Matthew 5:5) (Bengel). It is to be observed that, though Abraham himself in Genesis 15:13 is spoken of as "the heir of the world," yet the preceding expression, "to Abrabam or to his seed," sufficiently intimates that it is in his seed, identified with him, that he is conceived as so inheriting. Romans 4:16, Romans 4:17 Therefore it is of faith, that it may be according to grace (κατὰχάριν, as in Romans 4:4); to the end the promise may be sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the Law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham, who is the father of all, (as it is written, A father of many nations have I made thee,) before him whom he believed, who quickeneth the dead, and calleth the things that are not as though they were. Romans 4:16 introduces no new thought, being but a summing up of what has been said, except that, in Romans 4:17, the text Genesis 17:5 is adduced in support of the extended sense in which "the seed of Abraham" has been understood. In Genesis 17:17, too, the thought is introduced of how Abraham evinced his faith; and this with a view of showing it to have been in essence the same as the justifying faith of Christians. Romans 4:18-21 Who against hope in hope believed (παρἐλπίδαἐπἐλπίδι—an oxymoron. For a similar use of ἐπἐλπίδι, see 1 Corinthians 9:10; also below, Romans 5:2. Its position in the Authorized Version might suggest its dependence on "believed," which is grammatically possible (cf. Romans 9:33; Romans 10:11), but unallowable here, since hope cannot well be regarded as the object of belief) to the end he might become the father of many nations, according to that which was spoken, So shall thy seed be (Genesis 15:5, viz. "as the stars"). And being not weak in faith, he considered not (i.e. paid no regard to as a hindrance to faith. The codices relied on by our recent Revisers omit ου) before κατενόησεν, and they accordingly translate, "he considered his own body," thus making the idea to be that he was fully aware of the apparent impossibility of his having a son, but believed notwithstanding. But the reading of the Textus Receptus has good support, and especially that of the Greek Fathers, and gives the best sense) his own body now dead (already deadened—νενεκρώμενον—i.e. with respect to virility. So, with the same reference, Hebrews 11:12), when he was about an hundred years old, neither yet the deadness of Sarah’s womb; but he staggered not at the promise of God through unbelief, but was strong (rather, was strengthened) in faith, giving glory to God; and being fully persuaded that what he had promised he was able also to perform. With regard to the construction of Rom 5:20, we may observe that, though in the Authorized Version, which is followed above, the prepositions put before "unbelief’’ and "faith" are varied, both words are datives without a preposition in the Greek, and apparently with the same force of the dative in both cases, the sense being, "With regard to the promise, etc., unbelief did not cause him to waver (οὑδιεκρίθητῇἀπιστία), but faith made him strong ἐνεδυναμώθητῇπίστει)." The purport of the whole passage is to show, with reference to Genesis 17:15-22; Genesis 18:9-16, how Abraham’s faith in the promise of a seed through Sarah, which seemed impossible in the natural course of things, corresponded in essence to our faith in "him that raised Jesus our Lord from the dead" (Genesis 18:24). It was faith in a Divine power above nature, able to quicken into supernatural life that which humanly is dead. And as Abraham’s faith in this promised birth of Isaac involved a further faith in the fulfilment through him of all the promises, so our faith in the resurrection of Christ involves faith in all that is signified and assured to us thereby—in "the power of a Divine life" in him, to bring life out of death, to regenerate and quicken the spiritually dead, and finally in "eternal redemption’’ and the "restitution of all things" (cf. John 3:6; John 5:25; Romans 6:3-12; 1 Corinthians 3:21-23; Ephesians 1:18-23; Ephesians 2:4-8; Revelation 1:18; to which many other similarly significant passages might be added). It may be observed that, not only in the instance here adduced, but in his whole life as recorded in Genesis, Abraham stands forth as an exemplification of habitual faith in a Divine order beyond sight, and trust in Divine promises. In this consists the religious meaning of that record for us all. Notably so (as is especially set forth in Hebrews 11:17, etc.) in his willingness to sacrifice the son through whom the promise was to be fulfilled, retaining still his faith in the fulfilment. Romans 4:22-25 Wherefore also it was reckoned to him for righteousness. Now it was not written for his sake alone, that it was reckoned to him; but for our sake also, to whom it shall be reckoned, who believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord front the dead; who was delivered for our offences, and was raised for our justification. It is to be observed that the word here and elsewhere translated "justification" is δίκαιωσις, corresponding with δικαιοσύνη. The correspondence is lost in English. The Vulgate preserves it by justitia and justificatio; and the Douay Version has, here as elsewhere, "justice" for δικαιοσύνη. But "righteousness" expresses the meaning better. Romans 4:11 The fatherhood of Abraham. It is remarkable that the whole of this chapter deals with Abraham—a proof, not only of the greatness of Abraham’s character, the conspicuousness of his position in the history of mankind, and the hold the grand figure of the patriarch possessed of the imagination of the apostle, but also of Abraham’s real importance in the development of the leading ideas of true religion. We are reminded that Abraham was the father of many nations—the father of the chosen people Israel, the ancestor of the Messiah, the promised Seed. But especially father is it brought before us here that Abraham is the of the faithful, inasmuch as he afforded an early and illustrious example of the virtue upon which St. Paul dilates at length in this Epistle to the Romans—the virtue of faith. I. ABRAHAM IS THE FATHER OF THE IN THAT HE IS AN EXAMPLE OF FAITH IN ITS TO SENSE AND TO HUMAN . The ancestor of the Hebrew nation received repeated assurances of the purpose of the Eternal with regard to himself and his posterity. There was no human likelihood of the fulfilment of these assurances; in themselves they were opposed to all reasonable probability, and there were special circumstances which increased a hundredfold their inherent unlikelihood. But they were, in Abraham’s belief, the assurances of God himself, and that was sufficient to command his immediate and unquestioning acceptance. The Divine is the proper object of human faith. Let a declaration be from God; then it should be received with an absolute and unhesitating trust. II. ABRAHAM IS THE FATHER OF THE IN THAT HIS FAITH WAS OF RITES AND . St. Paul lays great stress upon the historical fact that the exercise of Abraham’s faith in God preceded the institution of the symbolic rite of circumcision. This may seem to us an immaterial consideration; but from the point of view of the apostle it has great importance. He is arguing against an external, ceremonial view of religion, such as was too customary among the Jews, and indeed is too customary among all people through all time. And he made a "point" when he brought forward the fact that Abraham exercised faith in God whilst still uncircumcised; for this is a proof that the essence of religion does not depend upon external privileges, even though they be of Divine appointment. A lesson which we need to learn today, even as did the contemporaries of St. Paul. III. ABRAHAM IS THE FATHER OF THE AS HE THE POWER OF FAITH TO POSSESS THE MORAL NATURE AND TO CONTROL THE LIFE. The patriarch was not a man to yield the assent of the lips, and to withhold the practical acknowledgment which is the best proof of sincere profession. It is enough, in support of this, to remark that his whole subsequent life was affected and governed by his belief of God’s promise. He confessed himself a pilgrim in the land, but whilst for himself he sought a heavenly inheritance, he lived as one persuaded that Canaan was the destined property of his posterity. Faith without works is dead; Abraham’s faith was living. As Christians, we are called upon, not only to believe, but to live by faith, to show our faith by our works, and, if we believe God’s promises, to give them a place so prominent in our heart that they may sway our conduct and govern our actions. The life which we live in the flesh is to be by the faith of the Son of God. Only thus can we prove ourselves to be true children of faithful Abraham. IV. ABRAHAM IS THE FATHER OF THE BECAUSE IN HIM FAITH WAS SHOWN TO BE THE SPRING OF . We are told by the apostle that Abraham’s faith was reckoned to him for righteousness. This doctrine of imputation has been misunderstood, when it has been inferred from the teaching of the apostle that, faith being present, righteousness may be dispensed with. The real teaching of St. Paul aims at removing religion from outward actions to inward dispositions. The righteousness which God values is not the performance of services or the submission to rites, so much as the pure thoughts and intents of the heart. So far as what is external is valuable, it is as an indication of what is deep-seated within. Faith brings the soul into right relations with God, and these secure habits of obedience and subjection which display themselves in the words, the deeds, and the course of moral life by which a man is judged by his fellow-men. Romans 4:18 Hope against hope. Faith and hope are allied, though separate, exercises and habits of created, finite mind. Neither of the two is possible to God, who is independent and eternal, and can neither confide in a superior nor anticipate a future. Man’s highest welfare depends upon faith, which is the principle of a high and noble life. Hope is less necessary, yet it belongs to a complete development of human nature, which looks forward to the future as well as upward to the unseen. Faith must have an object, and hope must have a ground. Faith is in a person; hope has respect to experience anticipated. If there be faith in a Being who has given definite promises, there will be hope in whatever is the matter of those promises. He who believes in God will hopefully expect the fulfilment of Divine assurances. I. THERE IS HOPE WHICH IS BASED UPON NATURAL HUMAN . TO some extent, hope is a matter of temperament; circumstances which to a despondent man seem to afford no gleam of comfort in looking forward to the future, will arouse the brightest expectations on the part of the man of sanguine disposition. Still, hope is often precluded by the stern teaching of constant experience; and a man would prove himself mad if, in certain circumstances, he should look forward hopefully to the enjoyment of health, honour, or riches. Abraham, in the circumstances referred to in the context, might hope for many blessings; but, if illumined only by the experience of his own life and by the experience of preceding generations, he could not hope for a posterity which should take possession of the land of Canaan as their inheritance. And we, if enlightened only by earthly wisdom, could not venture to anticipate blessings which the gospel, upon Divine authority, assures to the believing and obedient. Human hope could not so far delude us. II. THERE IS HOPE WHICH IS BASED UPON THE OF THE ETERNAL. With God nothing is impossible; from God nothing is concealed. Therefore, when he deigns to reveal his purposes to men, and when those purposes are purposes of mercy, those to whom they are made are justified in embracing them and in acting upon them. In the case of Abraham, that which human hope would have had no ground for anticipating was assured by the firm and unchanging promises of the Supreme; and Divine hope justly prevailed. He hoped in God against any hope or failure of hope which might be natural to him as man. And Abraham did not hope in vain. He embraced and believed the promises. He and his family, "not having received the promises, but having seen them and greeted them from afar, confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth." Hope triumphed, even over the bitter trial connected with the sacrifice of Isaac. Looking forward to the future with the bright and piercing eye of hope, our father Abraham saw the day of the Messiah, and he rejoiced and was glad. . Often the Christian, if reduced to the limits of earthly anticipations, might give way to discouragement and fear. But he has hope, as "an anchor to his soul," by means of which he may ride out the storms of time. Let him hope against hope, and his confidence shall be justified, and his anticipations shall be realized. His is a hope which, in the beautiful language of the Apocrypha, is "full of immortality." Romans 4:20 "Strong in faith." There is nothing upon which men are more given to pride themselves than upon their strength. The athlete boasts of his strength of muscle and of bodily constitution, the thinker of his strength of intellect, the monarch of his strength in war, the self-confident man of his strength of character. Such boasting is vain. Man’s estimate of his own powers may seem absurd to other beings; in the presence of the Eternal and Almighty it is profane. Well did the prophet speak the familiar words of warning, "Let not the strong man glory in his strength." There is one respect, however, in which man may be strong. Weak in body in the presence of natural laws, weak in mind before the difficulties of life, man may nevertheless be "strong in faith.’’ Here no limits can be set; it is faith that "Laughs at impossibilities, And cries, ’It shall be done!’" I. STRONG FAITH IS BY THE OF HUMAN NATURE AND HUMAN . The apostles drew their examples of virtue, of practical religion, from the history of the fathers of their nation; the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews recounts the triumphs of faith as apparent in the life of their illustrious progenitors; and St. Paul in this passage, with a view to encourage his readers to the exercise of a living and mighty faith, quotes the example of Abraham, whom be terms "the father of us all." Certainly, there seemed, to human judgment, little likelihood of the fulfilment of Jehovah’s promise to the patriarch that the land of Canaan should be the possession of his seed. There was an antecedent improbability, so far as man’s foresight could penetrate. And there were special difficulties in the family circumstances of Abraham, which seemed insuperable. Yet, St. Paul reminds his readers, Abraham "staggered not at the promise of God through unbelief; but was strong in faith, giving glory to God." There is very much in our character and in our life which can only be successfully dealt with by the exercise of strong faith. Our sins, our sorrows, our privations, our ignorance and uncertainty with regard to the future, all call for faith. Intellectual doubts stand in the way of some men’s progress and welfare; temptations to worldliness and selfishness are formidable obstacles in the way of others. All have occasion to complain that the light of nature, of reason, is sometimes dim. All are tempted sometimes to discouragement and to despondency. When our hearts are weak and our knowledge is limited, and all our resources fail us, as must often happen in our human existence, where shall we look? Experience is at fault, reason hesitates, man’s help is vain. What we need at such times is "strong faith." II. STRONG FAITH IS BY THE AND THE OF GOD. Reflection and reason may teach us something of the Supreme; but the clearest light is shed upon his character and purposes by revelation; and it is in Christ Jesus that he has made himself most fully known to us; for "he that hath seen the Son hath seen the Father." If we have the assurance that God is wise and all-powerful, much of our doubt and difficulty will disappear, for we shall enjoy the conviction that our lot is not ordered by chance or fate, but by an overruling Providence. If we are encouraged upon satisfactory authority to believe that God is good and merciful, faithful and compassionate, such belief will relieve us from many apprehensions aroused by a feeling of our own innumerable errors and follies. Such a revelation has been vouchsafed to us. It should ever be borne in mind that the value of faith depends upon the object of faith. Placed upon feeble and fallible men, faith may often fail us; but settled and fixed upon infinite wisdom, righteousness, and love, it can sustain, direct, and cheer us throughout life’s pilgrimage. To Abraham certain direct and personal promises were given by God; and Abraham’s faith is recorded by the apostle in the statement that he was "fully persuaded that what he had promised he was able to perform." The promises given to mankind through Jesus Christ are no less explicit, and are far more interesting, precious, and far-reaching. We may have, and justly, a very moderate measure of faith in assurances given to us by our fellow-men, a very qualified confidence in themselves. But this ought not to be the case when the eternal and faithful God and his gracious promises are in question. Upon him and his words we may "build an absolute trust." "Believe in God," says Christ; "believe also in me." III. STRONG FAITH IS IN THE OF GOD’S PEOPLE. It was so in the case of Abraham, who became the father of many nations, whose posterity inherited the land of Canaan, and to whom his personal faith was "imputed for righteousness." It has ever been so with Christians who have walked, not by sight, but by faith. Confidence in an unseen, but ever-present, Divine, almighty Helper, has been the principle of every truly Christian life. It has brought pardon and peace to the heart of the penitent; it has caused many "out of weakness to wax strong;" it has brought light to those in darkness, and leading to those in perplexity, safety to those in danger, comfort to those in sorrow, and hope to those who were ready to perish. "This is the victory which overcometh the world, even your faith." Nor is this inexplicable; for by faith we lay hold of the strength that is irresistible and invincible, and the might of the believer is not his own, but God’s. Romans 4:21 Promise and performance. How condescendingly and graciously does our heavenly Father deign to communicate with his children! What proofs does he give of his interest in us, his sympathy with us! No better illustration of this can be found than in the promises of the holy Word. Stooping, as it were, to our level, God addresses to us not merely precepts to direct our conduct, but promises to sustain our courage and to animate our hope. Exceeding great and precious are the Divine promises uttered and fulfilled for the benefit of the spiritual family dependent upon the bounty, forbearance, and tender mercy of the Most High. I. DIVINE . The promise given to Abraham was of a special character, but both in itself, and in the way in which it was received and acted upon, it is peculiarly instructive to us as Christians. 1. The Giver of the promises upon which we, as believers in God’s Word, are called upon to rely, is the Being whose infinite resources, omniscient acquaintance with his people’s needs, and unfailing fidelity, place all his assurances apart from and altogether above those of others. 2. The matter of the Divine promises deserves our special attention; they have regard rather to spiritual than to temporal good, and whilst varied in their character, they are singularly adapted to the condition and necessities of men. 3. The receivers of these promises are creatures dependent altogether upon the Divine favour, with no resources of their own, and no hope save that which is based upon the faithfulness of God. 4. The purpose of the Divine promises is to remove natural fear and depression concerning the future, and in place thereof to instil a calm confidence, a bright and peaceful hope. If men were left to their own forecastings of the future, gloomy forebodings would often take possession of their souls; the promises of God are fitted to reassure and reanimate the downcast and cheerless. II. DIVINE . 1. This is assured and certain. We read of God that "he cannot lie." Abraham’s confidence was justified, when he was "fully assured that, what God had promised, he was able also to perform." 2. It is complete, satisfactory, and effectual. Abraham was removed from earth before the appointed time arrived for the fulfilment of the promises made to him and to his seed. Yet he foresaw with the clear vision of faith what in due season came to pass. His descendants received and possessed "the land of promise." It is so with all the performances of Eternal Wisdom and Compassion. Not one word that God has spoken shall fail; his promises are "all Yea and Amen in Christ Jesus." 3. God’s performance of his plighted word of assurance is such as to justify his people’s unhesitating confidence. How can we question either his ability or his willingness? "The voice that rolls the stars along Spake all the promises" BY C.H IRWIN Romans 4:1-25 Abraham’s faith. We have already seen how the apostle has prepared the way for the great doctrine of justification by faith. He showed in the first two chapters that man has no righteousness of his own, that he could not justify himself, but, on the contrary, that both Jew and Gentile are all under sin. "There is no difference: for all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God." Now, in this fourth chapter, he shows that this great fact—the necessity for justification by faith—has already been recognized by Abraham and David. He is writing to Jews, and he takes the case of two men of God with whose lives they were familiar, and whom they held in high respect. He shows that neither Abraham nor David rested in his own righteousness. They rested entirely in the sovereign grace and mercy of God. "Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness" (Romans 4:3). So David also describes the blessedness of those whose iniquities are forgiven and whose sins are covered; of the man to whom the Lord doth not impute sin (Romans 4:6-8). No two cases more appropriate or more telling could the apostle have selected in illustration of man’s universal need of a Divine righteousness. Here were two saints of God, the one called the friend of God, the other the sweet singer of Israel, and yet they both rested, not on their own good works, but on the mercy and free grace of God. True, David had grievously sinned against God, but he did not trust for forgiveness to any penances or works of merit which he might have done in atonement for his sin, but solely to the pardoning mercy of the Lord. Abraham’s faith, however, is the main subject of the chapter. I. ITS . The subject of faith is not merely an abstract theological question. Abraham’s faith, in particular, is not something which concerned Abraham but has no interest for us. We are told in the close of this chapter that "it was not written for his sake alone, that his faith was imputed to him for righteousness; but for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead; who was delivered for our offences, and raised again for our justification" (Romans 4:23-25). What, then, do we mean by faith? Faith is a strong inward persuasion manifesting itself in outward acts. We could have no better illustration of it than the life of Abraham. "Abraham believed God." His life was a life of faith in God. He trusted God’s word, and he took God’s way. Here, then, we have a simple definition of what faith means—trusting God’s word and taking God’s way. Is not this an eminently reasonable course for a human being to take? So Abraham thought. He was a man of experience when we have the first record of God speaking to him. He was seventy-five years old when God’s first command reached him—the command to leave his country and his father’s house. It would appear as if Abraham had begun before that time to look beyond the seen to the unseen. His spiritual instincts and his reason told him that those idols which the people round him worshipped could not represent the great Creator of the world. He had already a conviction that there was a God—a reasonable conviction based on the evidence of natural laws. He knew something of that almighty Being’s power, and wisdom, and immortality, and unchangeableness. And so he reached the conclusion, which became an irresistible conviction, that "what God had promised he was able also to perform" (Romans 4:18-21). He was "fully persuaded." Upon this Abraham based his faith. For these reasons he trusted God’s word and took God’s way. Is it not still more reasonable that we should have faith in God? We too have had experience, and not merely our own experience, but the experience of thousands of others from Abraham’s day till now, who have trusted God, and found that what he hath promised he is able also to perform. The history of the ages teaches us that heaven and earth may pass away, but that God’s words do not pass away; that men will change and die, and mighty empires crumble into dust, but that the mercy of the Lord is from everlasting to everlasting upon them that fear him. It teaches us also this lesson, that God’s way is always best, and that the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom. Abraham’s faith was a reasonable faith. It is a reasonable thing that we also should trust God’s word and take God’s way. II. ITS RESULTS. 1. Abraham’s faith led him to unfaltering obedience. It was a strange and apparently a harsh command which God gave to him, "Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father’s house, unto a land that I will show thee" (Genesis 12:1). But Abraham did not hesitate. He knew whom he had believed. It was God, the living God, his heavenly Father, who was speaking to him, and he felt he must obey. He knew that God would provide for him; he knew that God would lead him right. How many of us under similar circumstances would show such unhesitating, unfaltering obedience to God’s command? How many of us are willing to trust God to take care of us when we are doing his will? Alas! is it not true that we often hesitate to do his will, just because we cannot trust him to take care of us, to bring us safely through the difficulties and to crown our labours with success? But, then, it must be admitted that there is a real, practical difficulty here which sometimes perplexes God’s people. Some one may say, "Well, I am quite willing to do God’s will, to follow the path of duty, if I could only tell what it was. There are so many cases where I cannot see my way. If I could only hear God speaking to me as he did to Abraham, there would be no difficulty about it." I think the way to meet that difficulty is this. Saturate your mind with the spirit of the gospel, with the teachings of the Word of God, with the spirit of Christ. A Christian is one who has the spirit of Christ. And, while there will be inconsistencies, as a rule we can depend upon the Christian. A remarkable illustration of this was given in Abraham’s own case. Before Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed, the Lord said, "Shall I hide from Abraham that thing which I do? For I know him, that he will command his children and his household after him, and they shall keep the way of the Lord" (Genesis 18:17, Genesis 18:19). God had confidence in Abraham doing what was right, although in one case Abraham acted sinfully and inconsistently. So we can trust the Christian to act in a Christian way. There will be mistakes, inconsistencies, in his life. But there are some things we know he will not do. He will not be among the sabbath-breakers, among the profane, the foul and filthy speakers, among the intemperate, among those who defraud or those who defame their neighbour. And all this we know, because we know him to have the spirit of Christ. We must cultivate this spirit, then, if we would know what the path of duty is. 2. Abraham’s faith led him to unflinching self-sacrifice. There are two grand scenes in his life that illustrate this. One was when he gave Lot the permission to choose what portion of the land he would have. Abraham had the right to choose, but he relinquished his own rights in favour of his nephew. The other was when God called on him to offer up as a sacrifice his son Isaac. What a spirit of faith Abraham showed then! He trusted God, and so he took God’s way. He had himself said once before, "Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?" (Genesis 18:25). And now when God, who gave him his son, asks him to give him back again, his faithful servant is ready to do what God asks. It was enough. The Lord himself had provided a lamb for the burnt offering. But Abraham showed the greatness of his faith by the sacrifice he was ready to make. There is a process in mathematics called the elimination of factors. The factor self had been eliminated from Abraham’s character and life. So it will be with the true Christian. The spirit of self-sacrifice is the spirit of Christ, the spirit of Christianity. "If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow me." We must be ready to make sacrifice of self for Christ’s sake. Such, then, was Abraham’s faith. It was a reasonable faith, and a faith that resulted in unfaltering obedience and in unflinching self-sacrifice. He trusted God’s word, and he took God’s way. That is the way of salvation for every sinner. Such faith is the condition of all righteousness. If we are to please God, if we are to get to heaven, we must take God’s way. The manner of Abraham’s justification is an encouragement for every sinner, whether Jew or Gentile. If salvation had been by the Law, only those who had the Law, or who kept it, could be saved. But it is "of faith, that it might be of grace; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the Law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham" (Romans 4:16). The Jews’ beast that they were Abraham’s seed showed a narrow idea of what the promise was. Abraham was "the father of many nations" (Romans 4:17, Romans 4:18). Abraham’s true spiritual children are those who imitate Abraham’s faith.—C.H.I. BY T.F. LOCKYER Romans 4:1-8 A test case. Abraham was their father (John 8:1-59.)—this they were proud to acknowledge; but what was his relationship to God? I. ABRAHAM’S . Righteousness must be either absolute or imputed; e.g. a servant in employ, on the one hand tried and true, on the other hand false, but penitent and received again. Which was Abraham’s? 1. If of works, it was absolute, and therefore he was in a position of proud integrity before God. Was it so? The whole history proved the contrary. Humble dependence. 2. If imputed, it could only be as he accepted God’s promises, and lived by faith in them. And so saith the Scripture (Romans 4:3). II. ABRAHAM’S FAITH. What was the faith which was reckoned to him for righteousness? 1. Renunciation of self. (Genesis 15:1-21., 17.) He could do nothing. 2. Reliance on God. (Genesis 15:1-21., and implied in 17.) God could do all things. Such the general principle: faith is the laying hold of all God’s mighty love. Hence the spring of all righteousness. In Abraham’s case, faith in promises for the future pertaining to the kingdom of God. Virtually, it was the faith of his spiritual salvation. Was not David’s case the same? There are iniquities, sins; man can never undo them; God can cover them. So with us. Not of debt, but of grace—on God’s part; therefore, not of works, but of faith—on man’s part. And hence no arbitrary condition; the appropriation of all the wealth of good offered in God and by God. Well is it said, "Blessed are they," etc.—T.F.L. Romans 4:9-22 All things are of faith. The position is now established that righteousness is through faith. But, they might say, through the faith of a circumcised man; and the promise of the inheritance was through the Law; and surely the posterity of Abraham came according to the flesh. He answers—Righteousness, heritage, posterity, by faith alone. I. . 1. The righteousness of faith without circumcision. In Gem 15. we have the record of Abraham’s justification; the institution of circumcision is narrated in Genesis 17:1-27., fourteen years after. Abraham, therefore, was justified "in his Gentile-hood" (see Godet). Therefore, he is the father of Gentile believers; and in so far as he is the father of Jewish believers, it is because they are believers, not because they are Jews. 2. Circumcision a seal of the righteousness of faith. God strengthens man’s faith by visible signs and seals of the faith and of its results. So to Abraham circumcision was an abiding pledge that God accepted his faith for righteousness. And likewise the existence of a separated nation was a testimony to the world. But it was the faith alone that was effectual; circumcision did but attest. II. . The whole world is promised to the heirs of Abraham as a heritage; this of itself might suffice to show that the heirs are not merely descendants according to the flesh. But the condition of such inheritance shall show the meaning. 1. If the heritage were through Law, then faith and the promise fail. (1) "Faith is made void;" for it cannot grasp an impossibility, nor can it rightly lay hold of that which must be worked for. (2) "And the promise is made of none effect;" for an unfulfilled Law works God’s wrath towards man, which is in utter contrariety to the fulfilment of a promise of love. 2. Therefore the heritage is of faith, that it may be according to grace, etc. (1) Faith the sole condition of promise, that while God’s grace gives freely, man may freely receive. (2) Faith the sole characteristic of the heirs of the promise, that so the seed may be, not merely that which is of the Law (even combined with faith), but that which is of faith (apart from Law), comprising beth Jews and Gentiles who are the spiritual children of the great believer. III. . But it might be objected that an Israel according to the flesh was necessary, in order that the spiritual Israel might be at last accomplished. Truly. But, to cut away the last ground of boasting, even the Israel according to the flesh was the gift of God through faith. 1. The obstacles to such faith. "His own body," etc. And this all full in view: "he considered." 2. The warrant of faith. While viewing the obstacles, he staggered not. (1) God’s promise "A father of many nations." "So shall thy seed be. (2) God’s power. "Able to perform;" "quickeneth the dead," etc. "Wherefore also it was reckoned unto him for righteousness." As before, it was virtually the faith of his spiritual salvation; yes, the very faith which laid hold of the promise of posterity—a posterity that they deemed according to the flesh. Let us learn that by faith we may be righteous, by faith we may possess the earth, By faith we may impress for good the generations following. What an heirship is possible through the faith of one believer!—T.F.L. Romans 4:23-25 Our faith and righteousness. Abraham’s faith was virtually faith in the saving love of God; the special manifestation of that love to him was the raising up of a holy seed. Our faith is a faith in the ultimate Seed of Abraham which has been raised up as the supreme Manifestation of God’s love. I. OUR FAITH. Our faith and Abraham’s are one in this—that they lay hold upon God, and God at work for us. 1. The one supreme Object of our faith. God! Whatever God may say to us, whatever he may do for us, the essential Object of our faith is himself. Yes, himself in all his saving love. And though in successive ages he may have revealed more and more of his purposes as men were able to bear it, yet he himself has been ever the same, the Object of man’s trust. And though now his purposes and past actions may be variously conceived by men, and though indeed they may be more or less misconceived, yet if he himself, as the Good One, the saving God, be trusted, all is well. We "believe on him." 2. The special subject-matter of our faith. "That raised Jesus," etc. It was not revealed to Abraham how God would eventually work out salvation for mankind, but such salvation as he could grasp was promised—the raising up of a posterity which should possess the world. To us the full meaning of that promise has been made known. (1) The "delivering up" of Jesus "for our trespasses." Man’s sin the necessitating cause: "that he might be just," etc. (Romans 3:26). God’s love the efficient cause: "so loved the world," etc. (John 3:16). (2) The "raising" of Jesus "for our justification." The death did its work; man was justified (i.e. potentially). But if so, the justification of man through the death of Christ demanded his resurrection, just as the trespasses demanded his death. God raised him; our Lord of life for evermore. And it is this grandly operative love that claims our faith. II. OUR . 1. An objective righteousness, complete now by reason of our faith in the atoning work of Christ. What was potential for all men is actual to us, who have received it with humble hearts—even justification through Christ. 2. A subjective righteousness, pledged by the faith which trusts the living Lord. The faith itself the germ also of future righteousness, and therefore "reckoned" for what it will more and more perfectly bring forth. To us? Oh, simple condition—believe on him!—T.F.L. BY S.R, Romans 4:6-8 A happy man. It is essential in argument to have common ground where the debate can be carried on. The apostle could count on the agreement of his Jewish readers with his reference to the Scriptures as the court of final appeal. And whilst some modern hearers reject the claims of the Bible, the majority receive it as an inspired authority, so that the preacher’s business generally is to prove his case therefrom, and to press home its statements showing what is the appropriate action they involve. Having mentioned Abraham as an instance of justification by faith, the apostle proceeded to summon David as a witness to the same truth in the thirty-second psalm. I. GOD’S OF SINNERS. 1. Three expressions are employed in the verses cited, respecting sin. It is said to be forgiven, like a debt remitted, the score against us being erased. It is covered, as the mercy-seat hid the Law from view, or as a stone flung into the depths of the sea is buried in its waters, or as a mantle of fleecy snow conceals the defilements of a landscape. Likewise it is act reckoned against the delinquents, as if God turned a deaf ear and unseeing eye when complaint is lodged against him concerning the transgressions of the culprits. He smooths the wax tablets so that none can read the bill of indictment. 2. These expressions signify a complete pardon. The king may not care much for the presence of the pardoned rebel at his court, but the father is joyful at the return of the prodigal son. No intermediate state of indifference is possible in God’s attitude towards his creatures; when he forgives, there is full reconciliation. No look, no tone, hints at past unworthiness! 3. These expressions teach plainly gratuitous justification. No mention is made of human merit. Man’s repentance cannot obliterate or atone for the past; forgiveness means a wrong condoned, not undone, Man is a slave, who cannot purchase his freedom; he has thrown himself into bondage, and his only hope lies in free manumission. II. THE OF THE . 1. The penalties of sin are averted. This does not mean that all the consequences of past wrong-doing are prevented from following, but that the wrath of God rests no longer upon the sinner. The future sentence against evil is withheld, and the burden of guilt is thus removed. 2. Justification brings with it admission into a state of Divine favour. Acquittal includes more than a negative result, that of no condemnation; there is likewise a positive entrance into the kingdom of heaven, with all its sacred privileges and relationships. Filial love takes the place of the spirit of fear. 3. The blissful consciousness of a right condition. Instead of slurring over sin, trying vainly to forget it, the fact has been faced, the truth admitted, and the touch of God has rolled the load for ever from the conscience. The Scriptures assume the possibility of knowing ourselves forgiven. Faith opens the inner hearing to rejoice in the assurance, "Go in peace." The devout Israelite had the ceremonies of the temple to symbolize God’s plan of mercy as well as the declarations of inspired teachers. The Christian has words of Christ to rest upon, as also the apostolic commentaries upon the sacrifice and mission of Christ. "I’m in a new world," said one who realized his altered position God-wards. Peaceful in mind during life, serene in the prospect of death, with God as his Portion through eternity, surely this is happiness worthy of the eulogy of the psalmist.—S.R.A. Romans 4:16 Obtaining an inheritance. An honourable lineage is not to be despised. Many advantages accrue from the law of heredity, by which progenitors transmit distinguishing qualities to their descendants. But the text invites to an unusual course of begetting an ancestry and thus winning a noble inheritance—nothing less than claiming Abraham as our father. The qualification is to exhibit like faith with the father of the faithful. Faith is thus like the horn of Egremont Castle— "Horn it was which none could sound, No one upon living ground Save he who came as rightful heir." I. THE OF ABRAHAM’S FAITH TO THAT BY THE GOSPEL. 1. Each has God as its supreme Object, and rests on some promise of God. As the patriarch had respect to the word and power of the Almighty, so the Christian’s faith regards the wonder-working might of him who "raised up Jesus from the dead." That in the latter case we look back, not forward, makes no difference as to the essence of faith, and this resurrection becomes itself the ground of believing expectancy in relation to our own future salvation. 2. The subject of faith thereby differentiates himself from his fellows. Out of a world in a condition of rebellion and distrust, Abraham stood forth a monumental pillar of faith. Sin first entered in the guise of a doubt of God’s Word, and faith is the throwing off of all suspicion and the adoption of a right attitude before God. Men find it hard to trust God’s assurance of pardon and life. 3. The effect of faith is the same. The believer is justified, for God rejoices in the altered state. The implicit credence honours him, and is for his creatures’ lasting good. Christ’s mission was to show us the Father, revealing his displeasure at sin, and his self-sacrificing sympathy with the sinner. II. THE OF GRACE. 1. That the inheritance is won by faith involves the absence of valid merit on the part of the recipient. He receives not the wages of a workman, but the free donation of his King. Pride is pulled up by the roots in this manifestation of the kindness of God. Justification is an exercise of clemency for established reasons. 2. The same truth is recognized in the use of the term "promise." We are entitled to claim the heritage on the ground of God’s own declaration, not on the score of our personal worthiness. 3. Only by such a method could the promise to Abraham be fulfilled, that is, "made sure to all the seed." If dependent on physical connection, who but the Israelites could hope for the inheritance? If dependent on obedience to the Law, neither Jew nor Gentile could show conformity to the conditions. A world-wide blessing means the removal of both local and universal restrictions. III. THIS DIVINE PLAN BY ITS RESULTS. Complaints of arbitrariness and indifference vanish before this apprehended scheme of mercy. Faith tends to produce a righteousness of life which the stern threatenings of Law could never effect. The despairing criminal begins to see that past transgressions and failures need not debar him from hope of the prize, and with the entrance of this thought, new energy is infused into his soul. The greater contains the less. If God promise to save, he will not withhold minor temporal blessings. Let us, like Abraham, view the land of promise, look away from all in our surroundings that would check faith in God, and say, "I will trust, and not be afraid."—S.R.A. Romans 4:23, Romans 4:24 The gospel in Genesis. The story takes us back to that starry night when the twinkling lamps of the firmament were Abraham’s arithmetical calculator concerning the numerous posterity that should trace their descent to him. His faith triumphed over all the obstacles of sense, over all the arguments of improbability which reason suggested. He was a true servant of God, a holy man, yet does the historian speak of him as justified, not on account of his devoted life, his blameless conduct, but by his unwavering acceptance of the promise of the Almighty. Faith was indeed the root-grace out of which his virtues sprang; it was the secret sustaining power which supported him under the trials of a pilgrim and sojourner. The significant statement in Genesis was fastened on by the apostle and triumphantly wielded as a weapon to slay all Jewish prejudices against the gospel doctrine of justification by faith. What could be more convincing than to find the cardinal principle of Christianity in a place where no suspicion could attach to it—in the very account of Divine honour conferred on the great progenitor of the Hebrew nation? It was like finding in an old book an account of an experiment forestalling a modern discovery. I. THE A RECORD OF . The distinction between the revelation and its history is important, many theories of inspiration failing to recognize the human side visible in the record. The Bible contains the account of the way in which God has revealed and gradually achieved his great purpose of redemption, selecting the man, the family, the tribe, the nation, to be the channel of blessing to the world, till in the fulness of time there appeared the representative Man, Christ Jesus, consummating the revelation and its gracious effects. The Old Testament is not to be identified with Mosaism; it includes the Law, and more. The patriarchal dispensation and the prophetical teachings must be equally regarded. Nor was there any discrepancy between the grace of the patriarchal covenant and the rigour of the Law. The Law was a stern process of education, necessary to the continuity of development, as the green fruit is acid prior to its maturity. And when the Jew contemned Christianity as a bastard growth, the apostle pointed to the prediction of the gospel clearly presented in God’s dealings with Abraham, justifying Christianity as a legitimate scion of Judaism; the grandchild, as often happens, displaying features of likeness to the grandparent not so marked in the intermediate generation. II. OF A WRITTEN RECORD. A particular instance here of the general statement in Genesis 15:1-21. that "these things were written aforetime for our learning." Writing is the natural complement of articulate utterance, the chief instrument of the progress of the race. It perpetuates the memory of noble thoughts and deeds, enabling each generation to commence where its predecessor left off. Printing is improved writing, facilitating the multiplication of copies. The impression of a speech weakens and fades like the water-ripples caused by a stone, but the written page is powerful to the last, like the inhaling of the fragrance of a rose. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/pulpit-commentary/ Romans 5:1-21 (6) The results of the revelation of the righteousness of God, as affecting (a) the consciousness and hopes of believers; (b) the position of mankind before God. Romans 5:1-11 (a) As to the consciousness of individual believers. Romans 5:1 Therefore, being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ. Instead of the ἔχομεν of the Textus Receptus, an overwhelming preponderance of authority, including uncials, versions, and Fathers, supports ἔχωμεν ("let us have"). If this be the true reading, the expression must be intended as hortatory, meaning, apparently, "Let us appreciate and realize our peace with God which we have in being justified by faith." But hortation here does not appear in keeping with what follows, in which the results of our being justified by faith are described in terms clearly, corresponding with the idea of our having peace with God. The passage as a whole is not hortatory, but descriptive, and "we have peace" comes in naturally as an initiatory statement of what is afterwards carried out. This being the case, it is a question whether an exception may not be allowed in this case to the usually sound rule of bowing to decided preponderance of authority with respect to readings. That ἔχωμεν was an early and widely accepted reading there can be no doubt; but still it may not have been the original one, the other appearing more probable. Scrivener is of opinion that "the itacism of ω for ο, so familiar to all collators of Greek manuscripts, crept into some very early copy, from which it was propagated among our most venerable codices, even those from which the earliest versions were made." Romans 5:2 Through whom also we have (rather, have had—ἐδχήκαμεν—referring to the past time of conversion and baptism, but with the idea of continuance expressed by the perfect) the (or, our) access by faith (the words, "by faith," which are not required, are absent from many manuscripts) into this grace wherein we stand, and rejoice (properly, glory, καυχώμεθα, the same word as in the following verse, and most usually so rendered elsewhere, though sometimes by "boast." Our translators seem in this verse to have departed from their usual rendering because of the substantive "glory," in a different sense, which follows) in hope of the glory of God. Προσαγωγὴ (translated "access") occurs in the same sense in Ephesians 2:18 and Ephesians 3:12; in both cases, as here, with the article, so as to denote some well-known access or approach. It means the access to the holy God, which had been barred by sin, but which has been opened to us through Christ (cf. Hebrews 10:19). It is a question whether εἰςτὴνχάριν is properly taken (as in the Authorized Version) in immediate connection with προσαγωγὴν, as denoting that into which we have our access. In Ephesians 2:18 the word is followed by the more suitable preposition πρὸς, the phrase being, "access to the Father;" and this may be understood here, the sense being, "We have through Christ our access (to the Father) unto (ie. so as to result in) the state of grace and acceptance in which we now stand." As to "the glory of God," see above on Romans 3:23. Here our hoped-for future participation in the Divine glory is more distinctly intimated by the words, ἐπἐλπίδι. This last phrase bears the same sense as in 1 Corinthians 9:10, and probably in Romans 4:18 above. It does not mean that hope is that wherein we glory, but that, being in a state of hope, we glory. Romans 5:3-5 And not only so, but we glory in tribulations (or, our tribulations) also: knowing that tribulation worketh patience; and patience, experience; and experience, hope: and hope maketh not ashamed; because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts through the Holy Ghost which is given to us. The peace, the joy, the hope, that come of faith might be supposed unable to stand against the facts of this present life, in which, to those first believers, only peculiar tribulations might seem to follow from their faith. Not so, says the apostle; nay, their very tribulations tend to confirm our hope, and so even in them we also glory. For we perceive how they serve for our probation now: they test our endurance; and proved endurance increases hope. And this hope does not shame us in the end, as being baseless and without fulfilment; for our inward experience of the love of God assures us of the contrary, and keeps it ever alive. The word δοκιμὴ ("experience,’’ Authorized Version) means properly "proof," and is so translated elsewhere. The idea is that tribulations test, and endurance under them proves, the genuineness of faith; and approved faithfulness strengthens hope to the end, the same shall be saved "). By "the love of God" is meant rather God’s love to us than ours to God. What follows in explanation requires this sense. Of course, it kindles answering love in ourselves (cf. "We love God, because he first loved us"); but the idea here is that of God’s own love, the sense of which we experience, flooding our hearts with itself through the gift of the Holy Spirit. It may be observed that, though assurance of the fulfilment of our hope is here made to rest on inward feeling, yet this is legitimately convincing to those who do so feel. As in many other matters, so especially in religion, it is internal consciousness that carries the strongest conviction with it, and induces certitude. The verses that come next set forth the grounds of our sense of God’s exceeding love to us. Romans 5:6, Romans 5:7 For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly. For scarcely for a righteous man will one die: yet (literally,for) peradventure for the good man some would even dare to die. The general purport of Rom 5:7 is obvious, viz. to show how Christ’s death for the ungodly transcends all human instances of self-sacrifice for others. But the exact import of the language used is not equally plain. That of the first clause, indeed, and its connection with what precedes, presents no difficulty. The meaning is that Christ’s dying for the ungodly is a proof of love beyond what is common among men. The second clause seems to be added as a concession of what some men may perhaps sometimes be capable of. It is introduced by a second γὰρ (this being the reading of all the manuscripts), which may be meant as exceptive, "I do not press this without exception," being understood. So Alford; and in this case the "yet" of the Authorized Version, or though, may give its meaning. Or it may be connected with μόλις, thus: "Scarcely, I say, for there may possibly be cases," etc. But what is the distinction between δικαίου in the first clause and τοῦἀγαθοῦ in the second? Some interpreters say that there is none, the intention being simply to express the possibility of human self-sacrifice for one that is good or righteous in some rare cases. But the change of the word, which would, according to this view, be purposeless, and still more the insertion of the article before ἀγαθοῦ, forbids this interpretation. One view is that τοῦἀγαθοῦ is neuter, meaning that, though for a righteous individual one can hardly be found to be willing to die, yet for the cause of good, for what a man regards as the highest good, or pro bone publico (it might be), such self-sacrifice may be possible; This view is tenable, though against it is the fact that death in behalf of persons is being spoken of all along. The remaining and most commonly accepted view is that by "the good man" (the article pointing him out generally as a well-known type of character) is meant the beneficent—one who inspires attachment and devotion—as opposed to one who is merely just. Cicero (’De Off.,’ Romans 3:15) is quoted in support of this distinction between the words: "Si vir bonus is est qui prodest quibus potest, nemini nocet, recte justum virum, bonum non facile reperiemus." Tholuck quotes, as a Greek instance, Κῦρονἀνακαλοῦντεςτὸνεὐεργέτηντὸνἄνδρατὸνἀγαθόν (AElian, ’Var. Histor.,’ 3.17). Possibly the term ὁἀγαθὸς would have a well-understood meaning to the readers of the Epistle, which is not equally obvious to us. Romans 5:8 But God commendeth his own love towards us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. The emphatic "his own" is lost sight of in the Authorized Version. It is not in contrast to our love to God, but expressive of the thought that the love of God himself towards men was displayed in the death of Christ. This is important for our true conception of the light in which the mysterious doctrine of the atonement is regarded in Holy Scripture. It is not (as represented by some schools of theologians) that the Son, considered apart from the Father, offered himself to appease his wrath—as seems to be expressed in the lines, "Actus in crucem factus es Irato Deo victima"—but rather that the Divine love itself purposed from eternity and provided the atonement, all the Persons of the holy and undivided Trinity concurring to effect it (cf. Romans 3:24; Romans 8:32; Ephesians 2:4; 2 Thessalonians 2:16: John 3:16; 1 John 4:10, et al.). If it be asked how this Divine love, displayed in the atonement, and therefore previous to it, is consistent with what is elsewhere so continually said of the Divine wrath, we answer that the ideas are not irreconcilable. The wrath expresses God’s necessary antagonism to sin, and the retribution due to it, inseparable from a true conception of the Divine righteousness; and as long as men arc under the dominion of sin they are of necessity involved in it: But this is not inconsistent with ever-abiding Divine love towards the persons of sinners, or with an eternal purpose to redeem them. It may be added here that the passage Before us intimates our Lord’s essential Deity; for his sacrifice of himself is spoken of as the display of God’s own love. Romans 5:9, Romans 5:10 Much more then, being now justified by (literally, in) his blood, we shall be saved from the wrath through him. For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God through the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by (literally, in) his life. In these verses, the second being an amplification of the first, our relations to God are set forth, as before, by the analogy of such as may subsist between man and man. Men do not usually die for their enemies, but they do seek the good of their friends. If, then, God’s superhuman love reconciled us to himself through the death of his Son when we were still his enemies, what assurance may we not now feel, being no longer at enmity, of being saved from the wrath (τῆςὀργῆς, Romans 5:9) to which, as sinners and enemies, we were exposed! There is also a significance (Romans 5:10)in the words "death" and "life." Christ’s death was for atonement, and in it we are conceived as having died with him to our former state of alienation from God. His resurrection was the inauguration of a new life to God, in which with him we live (cf. Romans 6:3, et seqq.). The words "enemies" (ἀχθροὶ) and "reconciled" (καταλλάγημεν, καταλλαγέντες) invite attention. Does the former word imply mutual enmity, or only that we were God’s enemies? We may answer that, though we cannot attribute enmity in its proper human sense to God, or properly speak of him as under any circumstances the enemy of man, yet the expression might perhaps be used with regard to him in the way of accommodation to human ideas, as are anger, jealousy, and the like. There seems, however, to be no necessity for this conception here, the idea being rather that of man’s alienation from God, and from peace with him, through sin; as in Colossians 1:21, "And you, that were sometime alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works." So Theoderet interprets: Οἱἐχθροὶδὴτῶνἐντολῶναἷςμηδὲὑποκηκόασιγενόμενοιὥσπερφίλοιοἱὑπακηκοότες. So too, Clem. Alex., ’Strom.,’ 1. 3.: ΚαὶμήτεκαθὰπεοἐπὶτοῦΘεοῦοὐδενὶμὲνἀντικεισθαι, λέγομεντὸνΘεὸνοὐδεἐχθρὸνεἷναιτινόςπάντωνγὰρκτίστηςκαὶοὐδενἐστιτῶνὑποστάντωνὃμὴθέλει. Φαμὲνδὲαὐτῷἐχθροὺςεἶναιτοὺςἀπειθεῖςκαὶμὴκατὰτὰςἐντολὰςαὐτοῦπορευομένους. With regard to reconciled," it may be first observed that, however orthodox and capable of a true sense it may be to speak of God being reconciled to man through Christ (as in Art. 2, "to reconcile his Father to us"), the expression is not scriptural. It is always man who is said to be reconciled to God; and it is God who, in Christ, reconciles the world unto himself (2 Corinthians 5:19; cf. also Ephesians 2:16; Colossians 1:20, Colossians 1:21). Still, mere is evidently implied than that God reconciles men to himself by changing their hearts and converting them from sin by the manifestation of his love in Christ. The reconciliation is spoken of as effected once for all for all mankind in the atonement, independently of, and previously to, the conversion of believers. Faith only appropriates, and obedience testifies, the appropriation of an accomplished reconciliation available for all mankind. That such is the view in the passage before us is distinctly evident from all that follows after Colossians 1:12. Romans 5:11 And not only so, but we also glory in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received the reconciliation. We not only have an assured hope; we also glory already in our restoration to peace with God; our mental state is an exultant one even now. A tacit reference may be supposed to Romans 3:27 and Romans 4:2, where all human glorying was said to be shut out. Yes, this remains true—in ourselves we cannot glory; but in God, who has reconciled us, we can and do. It is to be observed that neither this nor other passages (such as Romans 8:30, seq.), where an exultant assurance of salvation is expressed, justify the doctrine of assurance, as sometimes understood; viz. in the sense that an individual believer may and ought to feel certain of his own final salvation, on the ground of having once been justified. The condition of continued faithfulness is all along implied (cf., among other texts, 1 Corinthians 9:27; Hebrews 6:4, etc.; Hebrews 10:26, etc.). Romans 5:12-21 (b) From consideration of the blessed effects on believers of faith in the reconciliation through Christ, the apostle now passes to the effects of that reconciliation as the position of the whole human race before God. His drift is that the reconciliation corresponds to the original transgression; both proceeded from one, and both include all mankind in their results; as the one introduced sin into the world, and, as its consequence, death, so the other introduced righteousness, and, as its consequence, life. It may be observed that in Romans 1:1-32 also he has in one sense traced sin backward through the past ages, so as to show how all mankind had come to be under condemnation for it. But the subject was regarded from a different point of view, the purpose of the argument being also different. There he was addressing the heathen world, his purpose being to convince the whole of it of sin, on the score of obvious culpability; and, suitably to this design, his argument is based, not on Scripture, but on observation of the facts of human nature and human history. It did not fall within his scope to trace the evil to its original cause. But here, having shown Jew and Gentile to be on the same footing with respect to sin, and having entered (at Romans 3:21) on the doctrinal portion of his Epistle, he goes to Scripture for the origin of the evil, and finds it there attributed to Adam’s original transgression, which implicated the human race as an organic whole. This is the scriptural solution of the mystery, which he here gives, not only as accounting for things being as they are, but also, in connection with the stage of the argument at which he has now arrived, as explaining the necessity and the purpose of the atonement for the whole guilty race, effected by the second Adam, Christ. Romans 5:12 Wherefore, as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all sinned. To this sentence, introduced by ὥσπερ, there is no apodosis. One has been sought in the course of what follows, and by some found in Romans 5:18. But Romans 5:18 is a recapitulation rather than resumption of the argument, and is, further, too far removed to be intended as a formal apodesis. It is not really necessary to find one. The natural one to the first clause of the sentence would have been, "So through One righteousness entered into the world, and life through righteousness;" and such may be supposed to have been in the writer’s mind. But, after his manner, he goes off to enlarge on the idea expressed in the second clause, and never formally completes his sentence. A similar anacoluthon is found in 1 Timothy 1:3. Sin is here, as elsewhere, regarded as a power antagonistic to God, which has been introduced into the world of man, working and manifesting itself in concrete human sin (cf. Romans 5:21; Romans 6:12, Romans 6:14; Romans 7:8, Romans 7:9, Romans 7:17). Its ultimate origin is not explained. Scripture offers no solution of the old insoluble problem, κόθεντὸκακὸν: its existence at all under the sway of the Omnipotent Goodness in which we believe is one of the deep mysteries that have ever baffled human reason. All that is here touched on is its entrance into the world of man, the word εἰσῆλθε implying that it already existed beyond this mundane sphere. The reference is, of course, to Gem fit., as the scriptural account of the beginning of sin in our own world. It is there attributed to "the serpent," whom we regard as a symbol of some mysterious power of evil, external to man, to which primeval man, in the exercise of his prerogative of free-will, succumbed, and so let sin in. Through sin entered also death as its consequence; which (primarily at least) must mean here physical death, this being all that is denoted in Genesis (comp. Genesis 3:19 with Genesis 2:17), and necessary to be understood in what follows in the chapter before us (see verse 14). But here a difficulty presents itself to modern thought. Are we to understand that man was originally so constituted as not to die?—that even his bodily organization was immortal, and would have continued so but for the fatal taint of sin? We find it difficult at the present day to conceive this, however bound we may feel to submit our reason to revelation in a matter so remote, so unknown, and so mysterious as the beginning of human life on the earth, in whatever aspect viewed, and indeed of all conscious life, must ever be. But St. Paul himself, in another place, speaks of "the first man" having been, even on his first creation, "of the earth, earthy" (1 Corinthians 15:45, 1 Corinthians 15:47), with a body, like ours, of" flesh and blood," in its own nature corruptible (1 Corinthians 15:50). Neither is the narrative of Gen 3:1-24. inconsistent with this idea. For it seems to imply that, but for his eating of the mystical "tree of life", the first man was in his own nature mortal, and that his liability to death ensued on his being debarred from it (Genesis 3:22). It may be impossible for us to understand or explain. The following considerations, however, may perhaps help us in some degree. (1) When we pay regard to man’s spiritual capabilities and aspirations, even as he is now, death does seem to us an anomaly—a contradiction to the ideal of his inner self. That a beast of the field should die appears to us no such anomaly; for it has done all that it seems to have been meant to do, or to be capable of doing: it has served as a link in the continuance of its kind, not having been conscious, as far as we know, of anything beyond its surroundings. But man (i.e. man as he is capable of being, so as to represent the capacity of humanity) connects himself in his inner self with eternity; his mind resents the idea of death, as an unwelcome stoppage to its development and its yearnings. It goes on ever maturing its power, enlarging its range, thirsting for higher knowledge, entertaining affections that seem eternal; and then bodily decay and death arrest its progress as it were in mid-career. Thus death, as it comes to us and affects us now, seems to involve a contradiction between man’s inner consciousness and the facts of his existence at present; it is shrunk from as something that ought not to be. It is true that, when faith has once grasped the idea of bodily death being but a transition to a better life, the anomaly disappears: but such is its aspect to the natural man: and thus we can enter into the scriptural idea of death, as it comes to us so inevitably now, being something not originally meant for man, though we may be unable to say how it would have been with him had not sin entered. (2) Though physical death, obvious to men’s eyes, and not spiritual death of the soul either in this world or in the world to come, is here evidently in view (see Genesis 3:14), yet we must bear in mind the general idea associated with the word "death" in the New Testament. It is sometimes used so as to imply more than the mere parting of the soul from the body, including in the conception of what it is all the woes and infirmities that flesh is heir to, which are its precursors in the present state of things (cf. 1 Corinthians 15:31; 2 Corinthians 4:10, 2 Corinthians 4:12, 2 Corinthians 4:16; 2 Corinthians 6:9), being thus regarded also as the visible sign before our eyes of man’s present alienation from the life that is in God. St. Paul, then, in the passage before us, though alleging mere natural death as sufficient evidence of sin, may be conceived as having in his view Death armed as he has been with a peculiar sting to man through all known time. The main point of his argument is that the doom recorded in Genesis as having been pronounced on Adam had obviously remained in force throughout the ages; and there is surely no difficulty in assenting to the position that the dominion of death, as it has been exercised since that doom, is evidence of its continuance, and consequently of sin. "For that all sinned" (more correctly so than, as in the Authorized Version, "all have sinned") seems to mean, not that all since Adam in their own persons committed sin, but that all sinned in him—were implicated in the sin of the progenitor (cf. verse 15; also 1 Corinthians 15:22, "in Adam all die;" and 2 Corinthians 5:14, where all are said to have died to sin in the death of Christ). The doctrine of original, as distinct from actual, sin, thus intimated, has been, as is well known, the subject of much controversy since the time of Pelagius. It does not fall within the proper scope of this Commentary to discuss the theories of divines, but rather to set forth candidly what the language of the portions of Scripture commented on in itself most obviously means, viewed in the light afforded by general Scripture teaching. With respect to the passage before us, it may suffice to say: (1) That more must be understood than the mere imputation of Adam’s transgression to his descendants, irrespectively of any guilt of theirs. This notion, which jars on our conception of Divine justice, is precluded by the entire drift of the earlier chapters of this Epistle, which was the actual culpability of mankind at large, and also by what follows here, sin itself being spoken of—not the imputation of it only—as being in the world after Adam, and universal too, as evidenced by the continued reign of death. All men are said to have sinned in the sin of the first transgressor, because sin was thus introduced, as a power in human nature antagonistic to God, and because this "infection of nature" has continued since. And thus (2) the Pelagian position is also precluded, according to which "original sin standeth (only) in the following of Adam" (Art. 9.), i.e. in actual imitation of his sin, which man is supposed to have still, as Adam had, the power to avoid. For it is expressly said (verse 14) that death reigned over—in proof that sin infected—even those who had not sinned after the similitude of his transgression. But (3) we must guard against confusion between the idea of man’s natural liability to condemnation on the ground of transmitted sinfulness, and that of God’s actual dealing with him. It is nowhere said or implied that the natural infection which they could not help will be visited on individuals in the final judgment. All that is insisted on by St. Paul is that man, in himself, as he is now, falls short of the glory of God, and cannot put in a plea for acceptance on the ground of his own righteousness. But he no less emphatically declares that "where sin abounded, grace did much more abound." Romans 5:13, Romans 5:14 For until Law (i.e. all through the time previous to the revelation of law) sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law. Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam’s transgression. Though νόμος, where it first occurs in Romans 5:13, refers definitely, as appears from the context, to the Law of Moses, yet it is without the article, as denoting the principle of law, of which the Mosaic code was the embodiment; and it has therefore, in accordance with the rule laid down in this translation, been rendered as above. The purport of these two verses, connected by γὰρ with πάντεςἣμαρτον of Romans 5:12, is to prove that the primeval sin did really infect and implicate the whole race of mankind. It might be supposed that those only would be implicated who had themselves transgressed, as Adam did, a known command; it being an acknowledged principle of Divine justice that only sin against law of which the sinner is conscious is imputed to him for con-detonation (cf. Romans 4:15; also John 9:41). Nay. but the universal dominion of death, the doom of sin, over all alike, whether or not they had themselves so sinned, was proof that sin was all along dominant in the world, infecting all. The Mosaic Law is spoken of as the distinct revelation of Divine Law to man; and therefore attention is first drawn to the fact that before that revelation, no less than after it, death had reigned over all. But is it thus implied that until the Law from Mount Sinai men had been without any kind of law, for transgressing which they were responsible? Not so. That Law is indeed regarded as the first definite enunciation of law under evident Divine sanction, after which, to those that were under it, sin became indubitably and exceeding sinful; but that men are conceived as having sinned previously against law of some kind, appears from the phrase, "Even over those (καὶἐπὶτοὺς) who had not sinned after the similitude of Adam’s transgression," i.e. consciously against a known command. This surely implies that some had so sinned; and thus the essential point of the argument is that even over those who had not so sinned (such as the unenlightened and invincibly ignorant, or persons dying in infancy) death had equally reigned. Who is the figure of him that was to come. This is added so as to bring round the thought to the main subject of the chapter, viz. the reconciliation of all mankind through Christ, to which the scriptural account of the condemnation of all mankind through Adam had, at Romans 5:12, been adduced as analogous. Who refers to Adam, who has just been for the first time named; he that was to come is Christ, who is called, in 1 Corinthians 15:45, "the last Adam." Adam was a type (τύπος) of Christ in that both represented entire humanity; one as the representative and author of fallen, the other of restored, humanity—the transgression of the one and the obedience of the other alike affecting all (see 1 Corinthians 15:18, 1 Corinthians 15:19). But there is a difference between the two cases; and this is pointed out in verse. 15, 16, 17, which follow. Romans 5:15-17 But not as the trespass, so also is the free gift. For if by the trespass of the one the many died (not, be dead, as in the Authorized Version. Observe also the articles before "one" and "many"), much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, of the one Man, Jesus Christ, abounded unto the many. And not as through one that sinned, so is the gift: for the judgment was of one (ἐξἑνὸς) unto condemnation, but the free gift is of (ἐκ) many offences unto justification. For if by the offence of the one death reigned through the one, much more they which receive the abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life through the One, Jesus Christ. The purport of these verses is (while keeping up the view of condemnation and justification being both derived to all from one) to show how the effects of the latter for good far transcend those of the former for evil. It is not easy, however, to explain the apostle’s exact intention in the contrasts which he draws. He seems to have written, after his manner, full of ideas which he did not linger to arrange in clear form. In Romans 5:15 the contrast between "trespass" (παράπτωμα) and "free gift" (χάρισμα) seems to be the leading idea. The suggesting thought seems to be—If (as has been shown) one man’s trespass had such far-reaching effects, much more must the grace of God (displayed also in One) have no less far-reaching effects. God’s grace must be more powerful than man’s trespass. And it is here asserted that it was so. The much more (πολλῷμᾶλλον) is best taken (as it must be in Romans 5:17) in a logical, not a quantitative sense; i.e. as enforcing the conclusion, not as intensifying the verb "abounded." So far the effects are not distinctly contrasted in respect to their extent; all that is implied in this verse is that both reach to the many (οἱπολλοὶ), i.e. the whole human race collectively; unless, indeed, the verb ἐπερίσσευσε implies excess of effect. It is to be observed that the phrase οἱπολλοὶ does not here mean, as is usual in classical Greek, the greater part, but the multitude, mankind being regarded collectively. It depends, however, on the writer’s mental horizon whether the phrase, taken by itself, is to be understood as comprehending all. The consideration is of importance in the case before us. On the one hand, it may be contended that, in the first clause of the verse, "the many" must mean all, for that undoubtedly all died (cf. Romans 5:12, εἰςπάνταςἀνθρώπουςὁθάνατοςδιῆλθεν), and that consequently all must be intended also in the second clause. So also in Romans 5:19, where it is said that δίκαιοικατασταθήσονταιοἱπολλοὶ. And it may be said, further, that the drift of the whole argument requires the view of the effects of the re- demption being at least coextensive with the effects of the fall. But, on the other hand, it is argued that St. Paul would not have used the phrase οἱπολλοὶ in Romans 5:15 and Romans 5:19 instead of πάντες as in Romans 5:12 and Romans 5:18, unless he had intended some difference of meaning, and that he varied his expression in order to avoid the necessary inference that all would be saved in fact. Certainly he teaches that the redemption is available and intended for all, as in Romans 5:18 where it is said to be εἰςπάνταςἀνθρώπους, εἰςδικαίωσιν; and this, it may be said, is enough to satisfy the view of its effects (i.e. in purpose and potentially) being coextensive with the effects of the fall But it does not seem to follow that man’s resistance to grace might not come in as a bar to the entire fulfilment of the Divine purpose; and hence these passages cannot be pressed as conclusive for the doctrine of universal final salvation. But in Romans 5:16, Romans 5:17 (to be taken together, Romans 5:16 being introduced by καὶ, so as to suggest a new idea, and Romans 5:17 being connected with it by γὰρ) the extent to which grace thus abounded, so as to transcend the effects of the original transgression, is distinctly set forth. The thought of these verses may, perhaps, be expressed otherwise, thus: The one trespass of the one original transgressor did indeed render all mankind liable to condemnation; but the free gift in Christ annulled the effect, not only of that one trespass, but also of all subsequent trespasses of mankind; an immense debt, accumulating through the ages of human history, in addition to the original debt, was by that one free grant obliterated. And further, while the original trespass introduced a temporary reign of death, the free gift of righteousness introduced life, in which the partakers of the gift themselves—triumphant over Death, who reigned before—shall reign; and, as in Romans 5:15 the idea was that God’s grace must be more powerful than man’s sin, so here it is implied that life in Christ must be more powerful than death in Adam. Life means here (as elsewhere when the life in Christ is spoken of) more than the present life in the flesh—more than the life breathed into. man when he first "became (ἐγένετοεἰς) a living soul" (1 Corinthians 15:45). It means the higher life imparted by "the last Adam," who "became a quickening Spirit" (1 Corinthians 15:45); eternal life with God, in the life of Christ risen, swallowing up mortality (2 Corinthians 5:4; cf. also John 11:25). Thus the "free gift" not only reverses the far-reaching effects of the original transgression, but even transcends what is intimated in Genesis as given to man in Paradise before his fall. The next two verses (18, 19), introduced by ἄραοὗν, are a summing up of what has been already said or implied. Romans 5:18 So then, as through one trespass (rather so than "by the offence of one," as in the Authorized Version) the judgment came upon all men unto condemnation, so also through one act of righteousness (so Revised Version. The expression is δἰἑνὸςδικαιώματος, contrasted with the preceding δἰἑνὸςπαραπτωματος) the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life, i.e. conferring life. "Declaratio Divina ilia, qua peccator, mortis reus, vitae adjudicatur, idque jure" (Bengel). Here, as was observed under Romans 5:15, the phrase used is εἰςπάνταςἀνθρώπους, not εἰςτοὺςπολλοὺς, thus indisputably denoting universality of effect, as of the παράπτωμα, so also of δικαίωμα. But there is no verb to make clear the force of the preposition εἰς. It may denote the result to which a cause tends, without implying its inevitable accomplishment. Thus (Romans 7:10), Εὐρέθημοιἡἐντολὴἡεἰςζωὴν, αὕτηεἰςθάνατον, where the same preposition expresses both the intended result of life and the actual result of death. Romans 5:19 For as through the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the One shall the many be made righteous. As to the significance of οἱπολλοὶ, see under Romans 5:15. The phrase, if taken as equivalent to πάντες, would seem here to imply even more than in Romans 5:15; for there it was only said that "the gift … abounded unto the many;" here an actual result is expressed by the future, δίκαιοικατασταθήσονται. But even so the universality of final salvation need not necessarily follow. The phrase is, "shall be constituted righteous," and might only mean that all will be put into the position of justified persons, capable as such of salvation, just as all had, through the first transgression, been put into the position of sinners, liable as such to condemnation; and the future tense might be taken to denote the continuance, through all future ages, of the availing effect of the accomplished atonement. Further, it may be remarked that if universal final salvation did seem to follow from the passage before us, it would still have to be understood consistently with the purport of Rom 6:1-23; Romans 7:1-25; Romans 8:1-39., which follow. In them the practical result to the believer of his justification through Christ is treated; and renunciation of sin, "living after the Spirit," is postulated as the condition for attaining the life eternal. Hence, if the doctrine of "eternal hope" be sound (and who can fail to desire that it should be so?), it must be to some unknown reconciliation beyond the limits of the present life that we must look in the ease of those who have not fulfilled the necessary conditions here. Thus, further, the doctrine cannot legitimately be allowed to affect our view of our responsibilities now. To us the only doctrine distinctly revealed on the subject of salvation is that it is in this present life that we are to make our "calling and election sure." Two ways are put before us—the way of life, and the way of death; the one leading to ζωὴαἰώνιος, the other to κόλασιςαἰώνιος. In Romans 8:6-10 (as elsewhere, see note on Romans 3:25) it was through the death, the blood, of Christ that we were said to have been reconciled to God; here it is through his obedience, opposed to the disobedience of Adam. Though the doctrine of the atonement, in all its depth, is beyond our comprehension now (see above on Romans 8:9), yet it is important for us to observe the various aspects in which it is presented to us in Scripture. Here the idea suggested is that of Christ, as the Representative of humanity, satisfying Divine righteousness by perfect obedience to the Divine will, and thus offering to God for man what man had lest the power of offering (cf. Psalms 40:10, "Lo, I come to fulfil thy will, O my God;" and Hebrews 9:14; Hebrews 10:9, et seq.; also Philippians 2:8, "became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross"). Romans 5:20, Romans 5:21 Moreover Law entered (rather, came in besides), that the trespass might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound (or, did abound exceedingly): that as sin reigned in death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord. Here νόμος (though without the article; see under Romans 5:13) refers to the Mosaic Law, the purpose of which in the economy of redemption is thus intimated, so as to complete the view. It was God’s purpose from the first that grace should in the end triumph over sin; but in the mean time law came in (cf. προσετέθη in the cognate passage, Galatians 3:19). For what end? Not in itself to accomplish the purpose, not to interfere with its accomplishment, but as an intervening dispensation to prepare for its accomplishment, by convincing of sin, and making it exceeding sinful, and so establishing the need of, and exciting a craving for, redemption. This intervening preparatory office of the Mosaic Law is set forth more at length in Galatians 3:19-26; and the working of the principle of law to this end in the human consciousness is analyzed in ch. 7. of this Epistle. Additional Note on Galatians 3:12. The significance of the words "life" and "death," as used in St. Paul’s Epistles and elsewhere, demands peculiar attention. They evidently bear a sense in many places different from that of ordinary use; and this in accordance with our Lord’s own recorded language, as, for instance, in his memorable words to Martha, given in John 11:25, John 11:26. The following considerations may aid our comprehension of what is meant. The mysterious principle or potency of life, even in the common acceptation of the term, varies not only in degree, but in kind; and the same living organism may be at the same time alive with respect to its own mode of vitality, and dead with respect to some higher one which vivifies others. The plant, while alive with respect to its own kind of life, is dead to the higher life of sentient beings. The brute beast, while alive with respect to mere animal life, is dead, as it were, to the higher life of intelligent man. A whole world of environing influences to which the mind of man responds, so as to live in them, are to the brute as nothing; it may be said to be dead to them. Now, Scripture teaches, and we believe, that there is a spiritual sphere of things above and beyond this visible sphere, which man is capable of apprehending, being influenced by, and living a still higher life than his natural life therein. He is thus capable through the higher and diviner part of his mysterious being, called by St. Paul his πνεῦμα (cf. 1 Thessalonians 5:23, Ὑμῶντὸπνεῦμακαὶἡψυχὴκαὶτὸσῶμα), when in touch with the Divine πνεῦμα. For man to be in vital correspondence with his spiritual environments is spiritual life; to be out of correspondence with them is spiritual death. And so, as the plant is dead to sentient life, though alive in its own life; or as the brute may be said to be dead to the higher life of man, though alive in mere animal life; so man may be dead as to spiritual life, though alive as to psychical life; and thus "dead while he liveth" (cf. 1 Corinthians 2:14, "The natural man (ψυχικὸςἄνθρωπος) receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God; for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned." In other words, he is dead to them). Further, this spiritual life, unlike the psychical life, is ever spoken of as eternal. For it consists in intercommunion of man’s immortal part with the spiritual sphere of things which is eternal. Nor does natural death interrupt it; for it is not dependent for its continuance, as is psychical life, on environments from which we are severed by the body’s death, but on such as are eternal. Thus, too, we see how it is that eternal life is regarded, not as one that will have its commencement after death, but as one to be enjoyed at present, and to which we are to rise in Christ even now. This idea is notably expressed in our Lord’s words above referred to: "I am the Resurrection, and the Life: he that believeth in me, though he die, yet shall he live; and whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die" (John 11:25, John 11:26). Doubtless we are bidden to look forward to a fulness and perfection of the eternal life, of which our present enjoyment of it is but an earnest, in the σῶμαπνευματικόν (1 Corinthians 15:44) in store for us hereafter—cf. "Beloved, now are we children of God, and it is not yet manifested what we shall be," etc. (1 John 3:2)—but still this is regarded as but the consummation of a life already begun. On the other hand, whatever penal consequences of a state of spiritual death may be spoken of as in store hereafter for the wicked, it is regarded as being itself but the continuance of a state of death in which they are before they pass away (cf. Revelation 22:11). In Romans 5:12, etc., to which this note refers, the above view of what is often meant by "death" ought to be kept before us. For, though the apostle seems evidently to be speaking of the natural death that comes to all, he must be taken as regarding it as but the symbol and evidence of the sway of that spiritual death to which all men are now, in their fallen nature, liable. The thoughts embodied in the above note have been derived from, or suggested by, ’Natural Law in the Spiritual World,’ by Henry Drummond, F.R.S.E., F.G.S.. Romans 5:1, Romans 5:2 Christian privilege. There has been laid, in the preceding chapters, a firm foundation for the doctrines, promises, and precepts recorded here. The apostle has depicted human sin, misery, and helplessness; has shown how impossible it is that man should be justified by the works of the Law, and that his sole hope lies in the free mercy of God; and has set forth Christ Jesus crucified and raised as the ground upon which Divine favour is extended to the penitent and believing, justifying this method of procedure as in harmony with the universal administration of the Divine government. If we take, with the Revised Version, the verbs in these verses as in the imperative mood, they then contain a summons to all true Christians to appropriate the spiritual privileges secured to them by the Author of eternal salvation. I. We have here a OF THE ’S . 1. What is it? Justification; a state of acceptance with God, who, for Christ’s sake, regards and treats the believer in Jesus as righteous, and not as guilty. Until the conscience is assured of Divine favour and forgiveness there is no solid peace. 2. Who secures it? Jesus Christ. Although Paul has already shown this at length, he refers again in both these verses to the Redeemer, to whom we owe justification, and all the blessings which follow in its train. It is through him that we "have had our introduction into this grace." 3. How is it obtained? By faith. Christ has done all that is necessary, on his part, to secure our salvation. But there is needed something upon our part. We have to receive upon the Divine terms, as a free gift, the greatest of all blessings. It is a spiritual act and attitude and exercise, indispensable to the new life. 4. By what title is it held? By that of grace; it is gratuitous. This is for our advantage; for no question is raised as to our fitness. The only question is as to God’s faithfulness; and this is not only pledged, but absolutely sure. II. We have here a OF THE ’S PRESENT , "We have," says the apostle," [or rather, ’let us have’] peace with God." 1. This is the peace of submission. The sinner is at enmity with God. In becoming a Christian, he lays down the weapons of rebellion, and ceases from his opposition to rightful authority It is a complete reversal of his former attitude. 2. This is also the peace of reconciliation. Concord is established. Divine rule is cordially accepted, Divine principles acknowledged, Divine precepts obeyed. The Christian takes God’s will for his will; and this is true peace. 3. It is, further, the peace of confidence. Nations are sometimes on the footing, with respect to one another, of an armed truce. Very different is the relation between the God of peace and his reconciled, obedient subjects; for they can rest in the assured enjoyment of his favour. Therefore theirs is a peace which passeth understanding, and a peace which is never to be violated. III. We have here a OF THE ’S HOPE FOR THE FUTURE. "Let us rejoice in hope of the glory of God." 1. Observe what it is we are encouraged to hope for. The expression is one which, in the nature of things, we cannot now fully comprehend. God’s glory is essentially moral and spiritual. Yet we are assured that Christians shall be changed into the same image, from glory to glory; that the Divine glory shall, in due time, be revealed in, or rather unto, us. It is a wonderful prospect, compared with which all human and terrestrial hopes are pale and dim. 2. To cherish such a hope occasions present joy. Even though our circumstances are distinguished by much that might naturally depress and dishearten us, even in suffering, weakness, or persecution, such a prospect as is here unfolded may well animate our hearts and sustain our courage. And as the realization of this hope grows nearer and nearer, it behoves the Christian to cherish this rejoicing more and more fondly and happily. Peace here, and glory hereafter, such is the Christian’s privilege! What more can he desire? What, comparable with this, can this world impart or proffer? . Let those who are without peace here, and without hope for the hereafter, consider whether there is any way to these blessings save that here propounded—the way of justification through faith in Christ. Romans 5:2-5 Christian discipline. Christianity is a religion intended both for heaven and for earth. It does not lose sight of the present when gazing into the future, visible to it alone. Beginning with our relation to God, it establishes thereupon our relation to men. It unfolds morality in the act of revealing the spiritual and Divine. It represents heaven, not merely as a compensation for the miseries of time and earth, but as a state attained by the training and the education which, in the order of Divine providence, time and earth are primarily intended to provide for men. I. THIS EARTHLY LIFE IS HERE AS A SCENE OF . That human existence is characterized by trouble and sorrow is a trite but indisputable truth. There is no person who has ever lived to whom all things have happened as he would have wished. And with most persons life has been, in many respects, a long contradiction of their natural tastes and preferences. Whether in body or in mind, in circumstances or in relationships, in associations or employment, by bereavement or defections, all men are, and have ever been, in some way or other afflicted. This condition of our earthly pilgrimage is to many an occasion of annoyance, irritation, murmuring, rebellion. Others, of a more reasonable habit of mind, submit, with a certain stolidity, to what they regard as inevitable evil. But true religion teaches a better way of accepting our lot. We are taught to expect tribulation, and we are not taught to regard piety as exempting from the common discipline. "Count it not strange concerning the fiery trial among you." Our great Leader passed through worse tribulation than any of his followers; though he did not merit any of his sorrows, whilst we deserve more than all of ours. He has also given us to understand what shall be our experience. "In the world," said he, "ye shall have tribulation." There is no discharge from this war. The Jews, indeed, often expected prosperity as a reward of piety; and a great English writer has said, "Prosperity was the blessing of the old covenant, adversity of the new." The cup is passed round in the household of God, and every member of that household must drink of it. Those specially afflicted may be reminded that, though it is no relief to them to learn that others suffer, it is an indication of Divine providence that the universal fact is a law intended to work purposes in harmony with the nature and character of the holy and benevolent Lawgiver. II. THE PROCESS IS HERE BY WHICH PROVES . The Apostle Paul took pleasure in showing the reasonableness of religious belief. He might have stood upon the authority of his inspiration, and have required his readers to accept tribulation as certain to benefit such of them as were true Christians. But he chose rather to show them how the discipline of Divine wisdom promotes the highest welfare of the faithful. There is a ladder, by the several steps of which the follower of Christ mounts from earthly trial to heavenly joy. The foot of the ladder may be upon the cold soil of earth, but its top reaches to the clouds. Let us bear in mind, however, that it is not a natural and necessary result of tribulation, that the afflicted should profit by it. It depends upon the light in which the sufferer views it, the spirit in which he accepts it, whether affliction is or is not a discipline of good. It must be a fellowship with Christ to be serviceable to so high an end; and the teaching must be that of the Spirit of God. Consider the steps of the process. 1. "Tribulation, worketh patience." This assertion would be contested by many, who are made impatient by this experience. Those who see much of their fellow-creatures know that there are many cases in which affliction produces fretfulness and moroseness, which grow as the affliction is protracted. Yet in how many instances is this teaching of the text verified! The naturally impetuous, hasty, wilful spirit is humbled, subdued, and curbed. In suffering, or in a position where it is necessary to contend with unreasonable men, or amidst many disappointments, there may be acquired a habit of self-command and self-restraint, which may both tend to personal happiness and may naturally increase influence over others. By "patience" here is to be understood something more than passive, quiet suffering; endurance and constancy are intended. The patient man is not he who lies down discouraged under difficulties, but the man who holds on his way with cheerful resolution and perseverance. Christian! you are called to patient continuance in well-doing. 2. "Patience worketh experience;" or, as in the Revised Version, probation, or, as in the ’Speaker’s Commentary,’ approval. The man who endures affliction is put to the proof, is tested. And this is a true and scriptural view of temptation. "Blessed is the man that endureth temptation: for when he hath been approved, he shall receive the crown of life." The sword is bent to the utmost to prove the temper of the steel; the gun is heavily charged to prove the strength and soundness of the metal; the precious ore is cast into the furnace to separate the gold from the dross; the wheat is threshed that the flail may, by the literal "tribulation," prove that there is grain as well as straw. So the good man is placed by a wise Providence in circumstances which bring out what there is in him, which give him occasion to call upon the Lord for help and guidance and deliverance. So far from calamity being a sign of God’s displeasure, let the afflicted be reminded, for their consolation, that Scripture represents human trouble in a very different light. "Whom he loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth." Call to mind the experience of the saints of old. Daniel is an example of a man who was tried and proved, and who was shown by his afflictions and persecutions to be a true and faithful servant of Jehovah. Paul himself led a life of labour, hardship, suffering, harassment, and sorrow; but by Divine grace he was thereby made strong for service, quick to sympathize. The story of every good man’s life, if truly told, will teach the same lesson. The Lord does not willingly afflict; there is a purpose in tribulation; it is trial which brings out and confirms all Christian virtue. 3. "Probation worketh hope." Here we seem to be getting out of the shadow into the sunshine. "Hope" is a pleasant, cheery word. Who has not known, in seasons of adversity and in moods of depression, what it is to be comforted by the sight of the rainbow which spans the cloud? The "strength-inspiring aid" of hope has often made the feeble mighty. Now, of all men, the Christian has most ground for hope. His expectation of direction, guardianship, and happiness rest, not upon the whisperings of fond imagination, or the promises of fallible fellow-men, but upon the word of a faithful and unchanging God. "Hope thou in God!" is the counsel religion offers to the downcast and the sad. Such hope as is based upon the Divine character, as is directed towards objects guaranteed by Divine assurances, is indeed "an anchor unto the soul." Trial may be a bitter medicine; but it works a wondrous, and sometimes a speedy and a perfect, cure for spiritual ills. Probation may seem a harsh, unkindly soil; but the crop of hope it bears proves its adaptation and fertility. There have been persons who in prosperity have known little of the brightness of the Christian’s hope, who have then been slow to look upwards to the sunlit hills, but whom adversity has benignly taught to turn their eyes away from things seen and temporal to things unseen and eternal. Hope may be despised by the worldly-wise and sensual; but it is a Christian grace in which the Lord of our life takes pleasure, and by which he urges the travellers onwards upon the road which leads to the blessed vision of himself. 4. "Hope maketh not ashamed." A common expression in Scripture. Men often cherish expectations which are never fulfilled, and these so disappointed are said to be put to shame; they have built on a sandy foundation, and in the storm of trial the edifice they have reared is swept away, and, as they gaze upon the wreck and ruin, they are overwhelmed with shame. But those who have hoped in the Lord, and trusted in his Word, shall never be ashamed or confounded, world without end. The apostle may be understood to say, "Hope worketh realization." Not that the hope fulfils itself; but that God, in his wisdom and love, fulfils it. We are all, in many respects, in the position of those that hope—that hope in the Lord. We are pilgrims, and we look for a city. We are warriors, and we lock for victory. We are labourers, and we look for rest. We are afflicted, and we look for relief and release. We are on earth, and we look for heaven. "If we hope for that we see not, then do we with patience wait for it." The best and purest hopes of the follower of Jesus, those which he inspires and warrants, those which respect himself, shall all be realized. We shall see our Saviour "as he is." We shall be "like him." We shall "serve him day and night in his temple" We shall be "ever with the Lord." Such hopes as these will not unfit us for the common duties of life; they will assist us to discharge those duties with diligence and cheerfulness. Yet, being sons, we are heirs; and the blessedness of inheritance casts the radiant light of heaven upon our earthly lot. III. WE ARE HERE OF THE DUTY AND OF . In the previous verse the apostle has summoned us to "rejoice in hope of the glory of God." This seems natural enough; but it does sound strangely to hear him add here, "Let us also rejoice in our tribulations"! This is paradoxical, against all ordinary notions of what is fitting. Yet it is just. If we have followed the steps of that process of discipline here described by St. Paul, we must see that it is reasonable enough that he should admonish us to rejoice in those experiences of human life which Divine providence so wisely and graciously overrules for our spiritual and eternal good. Paul himself exemplified his own lesson. When he and Silas were in prison at Philippi, with their feet in the stocks, at midnight they sang praises to God, and the prisoners heard them. When imprisoned in Rome, he could write, "Rejoice in the Lord alway: again I will say, Rejoice!" We may rejoice in tribulation, because it is the appointment of our heavenly Father. Our joy should be in our Father’s will; for he will support and sustain under the burden which he has imposed. We may rejoice in tribulation, because we are Christ’s people, and we share his lot when we suffer with and for him. "Insomuch," says Peter, "as ye are partakers of Christ’s sufferings, rejoice; that at the revelation of his glory also ye may rejoice with exceeding joy." "If we suffer with him, we shall also reign with him." We may rejoice in tribulation also, because we are assured that the patient and submissive shall, by the help of God’s Spirit, reap the harvest of spiritual profit and eternal life. "I reckon," says the apostle, "that the sufferings of this present life are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in [or, ’unto’] us." . The tribulations of life are common to all. But the profit of tribulation is for those only who receive Divine discipline in submission, and with faith in a Father’s wisdom and love. Sad is the position of those who have to endure the trials of life without the support of God’s love, or the prospect of eternal glory! Romans 5:5 God’s love in the heart. The process of spiritual discipline which the apostle has described is not a process natural to men, but one supernatural and special to the sincere Christian. The tribulations of this life do not work the good of all who are visited by them; on the contrary, many are hardened by the trials which are sent to humble and soften and improve. But they profit by earthly discipline who cordially receive the gospel of Christ, and whose spiritual nature is brought under the influence of the cross. For to such God is a loving Father, and all things that happen to them are regarded as appointed by him. They are enlightened by the Holy Spirit, who brings before them in their troubles the prospect of the future, inspiring hopes which Divine faithfulness shall surely realize, "because the love of God hath been shed abroad in their hearts." Observe— I. THE GIFT . "The love of God." This is probably not our love to God, but his love to us, which indeed ever, when recognized and felt, kindles the flame of affection within the breast of the Christian. 1. This love is properly part of the Divine nature and character. So distinctive is this gracious attribute of the Supreme Father, that we are told that "God is love." How different a representation of the Deity from those current among the unenlightened idolaters! How fitted to comfort and encourage the people of the Lord! 2. This love is regarded by Christians as especially revealed in Christ Jesus. In this Epistle, whilst the inspired apostle sets forth the Christ as revealing the righteousness of God, he also exhibits the Divine love as more conspicuously revealed in "the unspeakable Gift" than by any other means. In this representation, indeed, all the apostles are agreed. "Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the Propitiation for our sins." In this language St. John teaches the same precious lesson. There was love in the advent, love in the ministry, love in the death, love in the ascension, of our Saviour; and there is love in his intercession and his reign. 3. This love becomes, by Divine grace, the possession of the true believers in Christ. It is not merely something to be admired for its unparalleled moral splendour and beauty and excellence. It is to be appropriated and held and enjoyed. This leads us to consider— II. THE NATURE THAT IS FILLED BY THIS LOVE. It is "shed abroad in our hearts." If we believe in the love of a fellow-creature, and return that love, there is in such experience something more than belief; there is strong and joyful feeling. The heart is the home of love. And love constitutes the riches of the heart. It is so, not only in the mutual relations of human beings, but in the relation between the soul and God. No doubt, mystics and sentimentalists, monks and nuns, saints in their ecstasies and revivalists in their fervour, have often used language extravagant, sickly, and sentimental concerning the love of God in the heart. But unquestionably the danger with ordinary English Christians lies in the tendency towards the opposite extreme. We are in no great danger from sentimental raptures. But we are in danger of regarding religion too much as an affair of belief and of duty. Love is not, indeed, to begin and end in the heart; it is to become a motive to action, a principle of endurance, an inspiration to cheerfulness and content. But that it may be all this, it must first be a feeling, a hallowed, spiritual emotion. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/pulpit-commentary/ Romans 8:1-39 (7) Moral results to true believers of the revelation to them of the righteousness of God. The righteousness of God having been announced as revealed in the gospel (Romans 1:17), set forth as available for all mankind (Romans 3:21-31), shown to be in accordance with the teaching of the Old Testament (Romans 4:1-25), viewed with regard to the feelings and hopes of believers fell Romans 5:1-11) and to the position of the human race before God (Romans 5:12-21), the necessary moral results of a true apprehension of the doctrine are treated in this section of the Epistle. And first is shown from various points of view— Romans 7:1-6 (a) The obligation believers of holiness of life. The subject is led up to by meeting certain supposed erroneous conclusions from what has been said in the preceding chapter. It might be said that, if where sin abounded grace did much more abound—if in the obedience of the one Christ all believers are justified—human sin must be a matter of indifference; it cannot nullify the free gift; nay, grace will be even the more enhanced, in that it abounds the more. The apostle rebuts such antinomian conclusions by showing that they imply a total misunderstanding of the doctrine which was supposed to justify them; for that our partaking in the righteousness of God in Christ means our actually partaking in it—our being influenced by it, loving it and following it, not merely our having it imputed to us while we remain aloof from it; that justifying faith in Christ means spiritual union with Christ, a dying with him to sin and a rising with him to a new life, in which sin shall no longer have dominion over us. He refers to our baptism as having this only meaning, and he enforces his argument by three illustrations: firstly, as aforesaid, that of dying and rising again, which is signified in baptism (Romans 7:1-14); secondly, that of service to a master (Romans 7:15-23); thirdly, that of the relation of a wife to a husband (Romans 7:1-16). It will be seen, when we come to it, that the third of these illustrations is a carrying out of the same idea, though it is there law, and not sin, that we are said to be emancipated from. Romans 6:1 What shall we say then? So St. Paul introduces a difficulty or objection arising out of the preceding argument (cf. Romans 3:5). Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? Referring to the whole preceding argument, and especially to the concluding verses (Romans 5:20, Romans 5:21). Romans 6:2 God forbid! (Μὴγένοιτο: St. Paul’s usual way of rejecting an idea indignantly). We who (οἵτινες, with its proper meaning of being such as) died (not, as in the Authorized Version, "are dead." The reference is to the time of baptism, as appears from what follows) to sin, how shall we live any longer therein! The idea of dying to sin in the sense of having done with it, is found also in Macrob., ’Somn. Scip.,’ 1.13 (quoted by Meyer), "Mori etiam dicitur, cum anima adhuc in corpora constituta corporeas illecebras philosophia docente contemnit et cupiditatum dulces insidias reliquasque omnes exuit passiones." Romans 6:3 Or know ye not that so many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death! ἢ, if taken in the sense of "or," at the beginning of Rom 6:3, will be understood if we put what is meant thus: Do you not know that we have all died to sin? Or are you really ignorant of what your very baptism meant? But cf. Romans 7:1, where the same expression occurs, and where ἢ appears only to imply a question. The expression βαππτίζεσθαιεἰς occurs also in 1 Corinthians 10:2 and Galatians 3:27; in the first of these texts with reference to the Israelites and Moses. It denotes the entering by baptism into close union with a person, coming to belong to him, so as to be in a sense identified with him. In Galatians 3:27 being baptized into Christ is understood as implying putting him on (ἐνεδύσασθε) The phrases, βαπτιξεῖνἐπὶτῷὀνόματι, or ἐντῷὀνόματι, or εἰςτὸὄνομα, were understood to imply the same idea, though not so plainly expressing it. Thus St. Paul rejoiced that he had not himself baptized many at Corinth, lest it might have been said that he had baptized them into his own name (εἰςτὸἐμὸνὄνομα), i.e. into such connection with himself as baptism implied with Christ alone. Doubtless in the instruction which preceded baptism this significance of the sacrament would be explained. And if "into Christ," then "into his death." "In Christum, inquam, totum, adeoque in mortem ejus baptizatur" (Bengel). The whole experience of Christ was understood to have its counterpart in those who were baptized into him; in them was understood a death to sin, corresponding to his actual death. This, too, would form part of the instruction of catechumens. St. Paul often presses it as what he conceives to be well understood; and in subsequent verses of this chapter he further explains what he means. Romans 6:4 Therefore we were buried (not are, as in the Authorized Version) with him by baptism into death; that like as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, so we also should walk in newness of life. The mention here of burial as welt as death does not appear to be meant as a further carrying out of the idea of a fulfilment in us of the whole of Christ’s experience, in the sense—As he died and was buried, so we die and are even buried too. Such a conception of burial being in our case a further process subsequent to our death in baptism, is indeed well expressed in our Collect for Easter Eve: but the form of expression, "buried into death," does not suit it here. The reference rather is to the form of baptism, viz. by immersion, which was understood to signify burial, and therefore death. So Chrysostom, on John 3:1-36., Καθάπεργὰρἐντινιτάφῳτῷὕδατικαταδύοντωνἡμῶντᾶςκεφαλὰςὁπαλαὶοςἄνθρωποςθάπτεταικαὶκαταδὺςκάτωκρύπτεταιὅλοςκαθάπαξ. The main intention of the verse is to bring out the idea of resurrection following death in our case as in Christ’s. The sense, therefore, is—As our burial (or total immersion) in the baptismal water was followed by entire emergence, so our death with Christ to sin, which that immersion symbolized, is to be followed by our resurrection with him to a new life. As to the δόξατοῦπατρὸς, through which Christ is here said to have been raised, see what was said under Romans 3:23. "Δόξα est gloria divinae vitae, incorruptiblitatis, potentiae, et virtutis, per quam et Christus resuscitatus est, et nos vitae novas restituimur, Deoque conformamur. Ephesians 1:19, seqq." (Bengel). In some passages our Lord is regarded as having been raised from the dead in virtue of the Divine life that was in himself, whereby it was impossible that he should be holden of death. (see under Romans 1:4). And he said of his own ψυχή, "I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again" (John 10:18). But here as most commonly elsewhere, his resurrection is attributed to the operation of the glory of the Father—the same Divine power that regenerates us in him (cf. 1 Corinthians 6:14; 2 Corinthians 13:4; Ephesians 1:19, etc.; Colossians 2:12; also our Lord’s own prayers to the Father previously to his suffering, as given by St. John). The two views are not inconsistent, and may serve to show Christ’s oneness with the Father as touching his Godhead. The marked association here and elsewhere of union with Christ, so as to die and rise again with him, with the rite of baptism, supports the orthodox view of that sacrament being not only a signum significans, but a signum efficax; as not only representing, but being "a means whereby we receive" regeneration. The beginning of the new life of believers, with the power as well as the obligation to lead such a life, is ever regarded as dating from their baptism (cf. Galatians 3:27; Colossians 2:12). It is true, however, that in all such passages in the New Testament the baptism of ,adults is referred to; that is, of persons who at the time of baptism were capable of actual repentance and faith, and hence of actual moral regeneration, and they are supposed to have understood the significance of the rite, and to have been sincere in seeking it. Hence what is said or implied cannot fairly be pressed as applicable in all respects to infant baptism. This, however, is not the place for discussing the propriety of infant baptism, or the sense in which all baptized persons are regarded by the Church as in their very baptism regenerate. Romans 6:5 For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection. So the Authorized Version. But the English word "planted" (though the idea expressed by it has the support of Origen, Chrysostom, and other ancient Fathers; also of the Vulgate, and, among moderns, Beza, Luther, and others; while some, including Erasmus, Calvin, Estius, Cornelius a Lapide, understand "engrafted") probably suggests what was not intended. Σύμφυτος is from συμφύω (not συμφυτεύω), and need only express being made to grow together in close association. In classic authors it commonly means innate. It seems here used, not to introduce a new figure, whether of planting or grafting, but only to express the close union with Christ, already intimated, into which we entered in baptism. The Revised Version has "have become united with him," which may perhaps sufficiently express what is meant, though hardly a satisfactory rendering of σύμφυτοι, Tyndale and Cranmer translate "graft in deeth lyke unto him;" and perhaps "graft into" may be as good a rendering as any other. Meyer, Tholuck, Alford, and others take the dative τῷὁμοιώματι as governed by σύμφυτοι, equivalent to ὁμοίωςἀπεθάνομενὥσπεραὐτὸς (Tholuck). But it may be better to understand Χριστῷ: "Graft into Christ, in the likeness of his death," τῷὁμοιώματι being added because Christ’s death and ours, in the senses intended, are not the same kind of death literally, ours only corresponding to, and in a certain sense like his. The main purpose of this verse, as of Rom 6:4, is to press resurrection with Christ as following death with him. But why here the future ἐσόμεθα? Did we not rise with Christ to a new life when we emerged from our baptismal burial? Future verbs are used also with a similar reference in Romans 6:8 and Romans 6:14. Now, there are three senses in which our resurrection with Christ may be understood. (1) As above (cf. Colossians 2:12, etc., where the expression is συνηγέρθητε). (2) Our realization of our position of power and obligation in subsequent life—actually in practice "dying from sin and rising again unto righteousness" (cf. below, Romans 6:12-14). (3) The resurrection of the dead hereafter. Some (including Tertullian, Chrysostom, (Ecumenins) have taken sense (3) to be here intended; but, though the words themselves, ἐσόμεθα and συζήσομεν in Romans 6:8, suggest this sense, it can hardly be intended here, at any rate exclusively or prominently, since the drift of the whole passage is to insist on the necessity of an ethical resurrection now; and it is evident that the clause before us corresponds with οὕτωκαὶἥμεις, etc., in the previous verse, and to Romans 6:11, et seq. The future ἐσόμεθα is understood by some as only expressing consequence—a necessary conclusion from a premiss, thus: If such a thing is the case, such other thing will follow. If so, sense (1) might still be understood; so that the idea would be the same as in Colossians 2:12, etc., viz. that of our rising in baptism itself to a new life with Christ, in which sin need not, and ought not to, have dominion. But still the repeated use of the future tense (especially ἁμαρτίαὑμῶνοὐκυριεύσει in Colossians 2:14), together with the whole drift of what follows, seems rather to imply sense (2); that is, our realization of our position in our actual lives subsequent to baptism. If it be objected that in this case we should expect "we ought to be" rather than "we shall be" it may be replied that it is what God will do for us, rather than what we shall do for ourselves, that the apostle has in view. If he has made us partakers in the atoning death of Christ, having forgiven us all trespasses, etc. (Colossians 2:13, seq.), he will also make us partakers, as our life goes on, in the power of his resurrection too, delivering us from sin’s dominion. Further, if this be so, the thought may also include sense (3) For elsewhere the future resurrection seems to be regarded as only the consummation of a spiritual resurrection which is begun in the present life, Christians being already partakers in the eternal life of God, of which the issue is immortality; of. Ephesians 1:5, Ephesians 1:6; Colossians 3:3, Colossians 3:4; Galatians 2:20; also our Lord’s own words, which are peculiarly significant in this regard, "He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life. Verily, verily, I say unto you. The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live" (John 5:24, John 5:25). Again, "I am the Resurrection, and the Life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live: and whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die’ (John 11:25, John 11:26). Romans 6:6, Romans 6:7 Knowing this (cf. ἢἀγνοεῖτε, Romans 6:3), that our old man was (not is, as in the Authorized Version) crucified with him that the body of sin might be destroyed (or abolished, or done away, καταργήθῃ), that henceforth we should not serve (δουλεύειν, expressing bondage, or slavery; and so throughout the chapter in the word δοῦλοι, translated "servants") sin. For he that hath died is freed from sin. The word "crucified" has, of course, reference to the mode of Christ’s death into which we were baptized. It does not imply anything further (as some have supposed) as to the manner of our own spiritual dying, such as painfulness or lingering; it merely means that in his death our old man died (cf. Colossians 2:14, προφηλώσαςαὐτὸτῷσταυρῷ). The term "old man" (παλαὶοςἄνθρωπος) occurs also Ephesians 4:22; Colossians 3:9. It denotes man’s unregenerate self, when under sin and condemnation; the καινός or νεοςἄνθρωπος being his regenerate self. It is, of course, a different conception from that of ὁἐξω and ὁἔσωθενἄνθωππος of 2 Corinthians 4:16. In Ephesians and Colossians the old man is said to be put away, or put off, and the new one put on, as though they were two clothings, or investments, of his personality, determining its character. Here, by a bolder figure, they are viewed as an old self that had died and a new one that had come to life in its place (cf. 2 Corinthians 5:17, ΕἴτιςἐνΧριστῷκαινὴκτίσιςτὰἀρχαῖαπαρῆλθεν). The idea of a new man being born into a new life in baptism was already familiar to the Jews in their baptism of proselytes (see Lightfoot, on John 3:1-36.); and our Lord, discoursing to Nicodemus of the new birth, supposes him to understand the figure; but he teaches him that the change thus expressed should be no mere change of profession and habits of life, but a radical inward change, which could only be wrought by the regenerating Spirit. Such a change St. Paul teaches to be signified by Christian baptism; not only deliverance from condemnation through participation in the benefits of the death of Christ, but also the birth or creation of a new self corresponding to his risen body, which will not be, like the old self, under the thraldom of sin. "The body of sin" may be taken as meaning much the same as "our old man;" sin being conceived as embodied in our former selves, and so possessing them and keeping them in bondage. It certainly does not mean simply our bodies as distinct from our souls, so as to imply the idea that the former must be macerated that the latter may live. The asceticism inculcated elsewhere in the New Testament is in no contradiction to the ideal of mens sana in corpore sano. Our former sin-possessed and sin-dominated personality being now crucified with Christ, dead, and done away with, we are no longer, in our new personality, in slavery to sin, and are both bound and able to renounce it; "for he that hath died is freed [δεδικαίωταιa,, literally, ’is justified’] from sin." In Scotland, one who is executed is said to be justified, the idea apparently being that he has satisfied the claims of law. So here ’ δεδικαίωται. The word δουλεύειν, be it observed, in verse 6 introduces by the way the second figure under which, as above said, the apostle regards his subject, though it is not taken up till verse 16. Romans 6:8 Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him; i.e. as explained with regard to the future ἐσόμεθα under Romans 6:5. The explanation there given accounts for the phrase here, πιστεύομενὅτι, without its being necessary to refer our living with Christ exclusively to the future resurrection. For the continuance of God’s vivifying grace during life after baptism is a subject of belief. Romans 6:9 Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him. When it is implied here that death had once dominion over him, it is not, of course, meant that he was in his own Divide nature subject to death, or that ’it was possible that he should be holden of it." All that is implied is that he had made himself subject to it by taking on him our nature, and voluntarily submitted to it, once for all, as representing us (cf. John 10:17; Acts 2:24). Romans 6:10 For in that he died, he died unto sin once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God. "Died unto sin" certainly does not mean here, as some have taken it, died by reason of sin, or to atone for sin, but has the sense, elsewhere obvious in this chapter, of ἀποθνήσκειν, followed by a dative, which was explained under Romans 6:2. Christ was, indeed, never subject to sin, or himself infected with it, as we are; but he "bore the sins of many;" "the Lord laid on him the iniquity of us all." He submitted for us to the condition and penalty of human sin; but, when he died, he threw off its burden, and was done with it for ever (cf. Hebrews 9:28, "Unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation"). The purpose of thus describing the permanent life to God of the risen Christ is, of course, to show that the new life of us who are accounted to have risen with Christ must in like manner be permanent and free from sin. "Quo docere vult hanc vitae novitatem tota vila esse Christianis persequendam, Nam si Christi imaginem in se repraesentare debent, hanc perpetuo durare necesse est. Non quod uno momento emoriatur caro in nobis, sicuti nuper diximus: sed quia retrocedere in ea mortificanda non liceat. Si enim in coenum nostrum revolvimur, Christum abnegamus; cujus nisi per vitae novitatem consortes esse non possumus, sicut ipse vitam incorruptibilem agit" (Calvin). The next verse expresses this clearly. Romans 6:11 Even so reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God in Christ Jesus our Lord. In the verses which follow (12-14) the apostle exhorts his readers to do their own part in realizing this their union with the risen Christ, to give effect to the regenerating grace of God. For their baptism had been but the beginning of their new life; it depended on themselves whether sanctification should follow on regeneration, as it needs must do in order to salvation. Romans 6:12 Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, that ye should obey the lusts thereof. (The reading of the Textus Receptus, "obey it in the lusts thereof," has but weak support.) Though our "old man" is conceived of as crucified with Christ—though this is theoretically and potentially our position—yet our actual lives may be at variance with it; for we are still in our present "mortal body," with its lusts remaining; and sin is still a power, not yet destroyed, which may, if we let it, have domination over us still. Regeneration is not regarded as having changed our nature, or eradicated all our evil propensions, but as having introduced into us a higher power—"the power of his resurrection" (Philippians 3:10)—in virtue of which we may resist the attempted domination of sin. But it still rests with us whether we will give our allegiance to sin or to Christ. Οὐγὰρτὴνφύσινἦλθενἀνελεῖνἀλλὰτὴνπροαίρεσινδιορθῶσαι (Chrysostom). The lusts, obedience to which is equivalent to letting sin reign, are said to be those of our "mortal body," because it is in our present bodily organization that the lusts tempting us to evil rise. But it is not in their soliciting us, but in the will assenting to them, that the sin lies. "Quia non consentimus desideriis pravis in gratia sumus". "Cupiditates corporis sunt fomes, peccatum ignis" (Bengel). The epithet θνητῷ ("mortal’’) is fitly used as distinguishing our present perishable framework—the earthen vessels in which we have our treasure (2 Corinthians 4:7)—from our real inward personality, ἔσωθενἄνθρωπος (2 Corinthians 4:16), which is regarded as having risen with Christ, so as to live to God for ever. "Vos enim, viventes, abalienati estis a corpore vestro (cf. Romans 8:10)" (Bengel). Romans 6:13 Neither yield ye your members as instruments of unrighteousness unto sin: but yield yourselves unto God, as being alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness unto God. By our members seem to be meant, not merely the several parts of our bodily frame—eye. tongue, hand, foot, etc.—but generally all the parts or constituents of our present human nature, which sin may use as its instruments, but which ought to be devoted to God (cf. Colossians 3:5). Many commentators would translate ὅπλα "weapons" rather than "instruments," on the ground that St. Paul usually uses the word in this sense (Romans 13:12; 2 Corinthians 6:7; 2 Corinthians 10:4; Ephesians 6:11, Ephesians 6:13); and also that ὀψώνια in Romans 6:22, taken in the sense of the pay of a soldier (as in Luke 3:14; 1 Corinthians 9:7), is supposed to imply that the apostle has had all along the idea of warfare in view. The second of these reasons really proves nothing. Whatever the meaning of ὀψώνια in Romans 6:23, it is too far removed from the passage before us to be taken in any connection with it. Neither is the first reason at all cogent. Ὅπλα bears the sense of instruments as well as of weapons, and may more suitably bear it here. When St. Paul elsewhere speaks of armour, it is the armour of light, or of righteousness, which we are told to take up, and to put on, in order to fight against our spiritual enemies. Such a conception is inapplicable to our own members, which we have already, which we may use either for good or evil, and which require the protection of heavenly armour rather than being themselves armour; and we certainly could not be told to take them up or put them on. We may, in the next place, observe that the two clauses of this verse are differently expressed in two respects. (1) It is our members only that we are forbidden to yield to sin; but ourselves, with our members, we are bidden to yield to God. For few of the persons addressed, if even any, could be supposed, deliberately and of choice, to offer their whole being to the service of sin as such; they were only liable to succumb to sin, in this or that way, through soliciting lusts. But the regenerate Christian offers and presents his whole serf to God, and desires to be his entirely. (2) In the first clause we find the present imperative, παριστάνετε; but in the second the aorist imperative, παραστήσατε. The distinction between the two tenses in the imperative is thus expressed in Matthiae’s ’Greek Grammar:’ "that the aorist designates an action passing by, and considered abstractedly in its completion, but the present a continued and frequently repeated action." Our giving ourselves to God is something done once for all; our yielding our members as instruments of sin is a succession of acts of yielding. Romans 6:14 For sin shall not have dominion over you; for ye are not under law, but under grace. As to the force of the future here, οὐκυριεύσει, see what was said under Romans 6:5. Here also no more seems, at first sight, to be meant than that God, if we respond to his grace, will not let sin have dominion over us; we shall, in fact, if we are willing, be enabled to resist it. "Invitos nos non coget [peccatum] ad serviendum tibi" (Bengel). And the reason given is suitable to this meaning: "For ye are not under law" (which, while it makes sin sinful and exacts its full penalty, imparts no power to overcome it), "but under grace" (which does communicate such power). Thus understanding the verse, we see the distinction between βασιλευέτω in Romans 6:12 and κυριεύσει here. In Romans 6:12 we are exhorted not to let sin reign; we are to own no allegiance to it as a king whose rule we must obey. But it still will try to usurp lordship over us—in vain, however, if we resist the usurpation: οὑκυριεύσειἡμῶν. The sense thus given to the verse is what its own language and the previous context suggest. But Romans 6:15, which follows, suggests a different meaning. "What then? shall we sin, because we are not under law, but under grace?" Such a question could not arise on the statement of the preceding verse, if its meaning were understood to be that grace will enable us to avoid sin; it rather supposes the meaning that grace condones sin. Hence, in Romans 6:15 at least, a different aspect of the difference between being under law and being under grace seems evidently to come in; namely, this—that the principle of law is to exact complete obedience to its behests; but the principle of grace is to accept faith in lieu of complete obedience. If, then, ἁμαρτίαὑμῶνου) κυριεύσει in Romans 6:14 is to be understood in agreement with this idea, it must mean, "Sin, though it still infects you, shall not lord it over you so as to bring you into condemnation.’’ Calvin has a good note on the verse. He allows the first of the expositions of it given above to be "una quae caeteris prohabilius sustineri queat." But he thinks that Romans 6:15, following, requires the other, and he concludes thus: "Vult enim nos consolari apostolus, ne animis fatiscamus in studio bene agendi, propterea quod multas imperfectiones adhuc in nobis sentiamus. Uteunque enim peccati aculeis vexemut, non petest tamen nos subigere, quia Spiritu Dei superiores reddimur: deinde in gratia constituti, sumus liberati a rigida Legis exactione." It may be that the apostle, when he wrote Romans 6:14, meant what the previous context suggests, but passed on in Romans 6:15 to the other idea in view of the way in which his words might be understood. In what follows next (Romans 6:15-23) is introduced the second illustration (see former note), drawn from the human relations between masters and slaves. It comes in by way of meeting the supposed abuse of the statement of Rom 6:14; but it serves as a further proof of the general position that is being upheld. The word κυριεύσει in Romans 6:14 suggests this particular illustration. We being under grace, it had been said, sin will not be our master, whence the inference was supposed to be drawn that we may sin with impunity, and without thereby subjecting ourselves to the mastery of sin. Nay, it is replied, but it will be our master, if in practice we consent to be its servants. Romans 6:15, Romans 6:16 What then? shall we sin, because we are not under law, but under grace! God forbid. Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey (literally, unto obedience), his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness? This is not a truism, as it would seem to be if it only meant, "whoso servants ye become, his servants ye are." "Ye yield yourselves" (παριστάνετε, cf. Romans 6:13) denotes acts of yielding. "Ye are" (ἕστε) denotes condition. The meaning is that by our conduct we show which master we are under; and we cannot serve two (Matthew 6:24; Luke 16:13; of. John 8:34, "Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin;" and 1 John 3:7, "He that doeth righteousness is righteous"). The two incompatible services are here said to be of sin and of obedience, with their respective tendencies or results, death and righteousness. A more exact antithesis to the first clause would have been "of righteousness unto life;" life being the proper antithesis of death, and righteousness being afterwards said, in Romans 6:18 and Romans 6:19, to be what we ought to be in bondage to. But though the sentence seems thus defective in form, its meaning is plain. Ὑπακοῆς means here specifically obedience to God, not obedience to any master as in Romans 6:16; and though in English "servants of obedience,’’ as though obedience were a master, is an awkward phrase, yet we might properly say, "servants of duty," in opposition to "servants of sin;" and this is what is meant. It may be that the apostle purposely avoided here speaking of believers being slaves of righteousness in the sense in which they had been slaves of sin, because subjection to righteousness is not properly slavery, but willing obedience. He uses the expression, indeed, afterwards (Romans 6:18), but adds at once, ἀνθρώπινονλέγω, etc. (see note on this last expression). Death, "unto" which the service of sin is here said to be, cannot be mere natural death, to which all are subject. Meyer (with Chrysostom, Theophylact, and other ancients) takes it to mean eternal death, as the final result of bondage to sin; δικαιοσύνη, antithetically correlative, being regarded as applying to the time of final perfection of the faithful in the world to come—"the righteousness which is awarded to them in the judgment." Seeing, however, that the word δικαιοσύνη is used throughout the Epistle to denote what is attainable in this present life, and that θάνατος is often used to express a state of spiritual death, which men may be in at any time (see additional note on Romans 6:12; and cf. Romans 7:9, Romans 7:10, Romans 7:13, Romans 7:24; Romans 8:6, Romans 8:13; also John 5:24; 1 John 3:14), it is at least a question whether the final doom of the last judgment is here at all exclusively in the apostle’s view. Romans 6:17, Romans 6:18 But thanks be to God, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine whereunto ye were delivered. (Not, as in the Authorized Version, which was delivered you). Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness. There is no contradiction between what is here said and the fear previously implied lest the persons addressed might still serve sin. He refers them back to the time of their baptism, when he conceives them both to have understood their obligation (cf. Romans 6:3), and also to have been heartily sincere. The fear was lest they might have relaxed since, perhaps through infection with antinomian teaching. By the "form of doctrine" or "of instruction" (τύπονδιδαχῆς) is not at all likely to be meant (as some have supposed) any distinctive type of Christian teaching, such as the Pauline (so Meyer). Usually elsewhere, where St. Paul uses the word τύπος, it is of persons being examples or patterns to others (1 Corinthians 10:6; Philippians 3:17; 1 Thessalonians 1:7; 2 Thessalonians 3:9; 1 Timothy 4:12; Titus 2:7). Somewhat similarly, in Romans 5:14, Adam is τύποςτοῦμέλλοντος; and in 1 Corinthians 10:6 the things which happened to the Israelites in the wilderness were τύποι to us. These are all the instances of the use of the word in St. Paul’s Epistles. Here, therefore, it may be best to understand it (so as to retain the idea of pattern) as the general Christian code into which converts had been indoctrinated, regarded as a norma agendi "Norma ilia et regula, ad quam se conformat servus, tautum ei per doctrinam ostenditur; urgeri eum non opus est" (Bengel on διδαχῆς). Romans 6:19 I speak after the manner of men because of the infirmity of your flesh. Here ἀνθρώπινονλέγω ("I speak humanly") may be taken as referring to the expression immediately preceding, viz. ἐδουλώθητετῇδικαιοσύνῃ. St. Paul may mean, "In saying you were made slaves to righteousness, I am using human language not properly applicable to your spiritual relations. For you are not really in bondage now; you have been emancipated from your former bondage to sin, and are now called upon to render a free willing allowance to righteousness; being, in fact, sons, not slaves." This view of the true position of the Christian being one of freedom recurs so often and so forcibly with St. Paul that it is peculiarly likely to be the thought before him here; the very word ἐδουλώθητε would be likely to suggest it (cf. Romans 8:15, seq.; 2 Corinthians 3:17; Galatians 4:4-7; Galatians 5:1, Galatians 5:13). If (he would say) you fully realized your position as sons of God, you would feel it impossible even to think of sinning willingly; but, in accommodation to your human weakness, I put the case as if you had only been transferred from one bondage to another, so as to show that, even so, you are under an obligation not to sin. According to this view of the meaning of the passage, "the infirmity of your flesh" has reference to dulness of spiritual perception, σάρξ being opposed in a general sense to πνεῦμα. Had they been πνευματικοὶ, they would have discerned τὰτοῦπνεύματοςτοῦΘεοῦ without need of any such human view of the matter being put before them (cf. 1 Corinthians 2:14). Some, however, taking ἀσθένειαντῆςσαρκὸς to denote moral weakness, which renders the attainment of holiness difficult for man, understand ἀνθρώπινονλέγω as meaning, "I require of you no more than is possible Ñ for your frail humanity; for I call on you only to render to righteousness the same allegiance you once rendered to sin." This interpretation gives a totally different meaning to the clause. It has the support of Origen, Chrysostom, Theodoret, Calvin, Estius, Wetstein, and others; but it does not appear so natural or probable as the other, which is accepted by most modern commentators. For as ye yielded your members servants to uncleanness and to iniquity unto iniquity; even so now yield your members servants to righteousness unto sanctification (rather than holiness, as in the Authorized Version; the word is ἁγιασμός, always so translated elsewhere). This is a setting forth of what must follow in practice from the view that has been taken of the change in the Christian’s position resembling the transference of bondservants from one master to another. They must devote their members (see above on Romans 6:13) to the service of the new master in the same way as they had done to that of the old one; the aims or results of the two services being also intimated. The old service was in giving themselves up to uncleanness (with reference to sins of sensuality), and generally to ἀνομίᾳ, i.e. lawlessness, or disregard of duty; and its result is expressed by a repetition of the latter word. For sin leads to nothing positive; lawless conduct only results in a habit or state of lawlessness; whereas the service of righteousness in itself leads to sanctification to the abiding result of participation in the holiness of God. "Qui justitiae serviunt, proficiunt; ἄνομοι, iniqui, sunt iniqui, nil amplius" (Bengel). Romans 6:20-23 For when ye were the servants of sin, ye were free from righteousness (more literally, to righteousness; i.e. ye were not in any bondage to righteousness). What fruit had ye then (i.e. when you were formerly slaves of sin) in those things whereof ye are now ashamed?, for the end of those things is death. But now being made free from sin, and made servants to God, ye have your fruit unto sanctification; and the end life eternal. For the wages of sin is death; but the free gift of god is life eternal in Christ Jesus our Lord. The logical connection with the previous context of the above series of verses, beginning with Romans 6:20, as well as the sequence of thought running through them (intimated by the particles γὰρσῦν, and δὲ), is not at once obvious. It seems to be as follows: the γὰρ in Romans 6:20 introduces a reason for the exhortation of Rom 6:19, παραστήσατε, etc. But Romans 6:20 is not in itself the reason, being only an introduction to the statement of it in the verses that follow. The drift of the whole passage seems to be this: Yield ye your members to the sole service of righteousness; for (Romans 6:20) ye were once in the sole service of sin, owning no allegiance to righteousness at all; and (Romans 6:21) what fruit had ye from that service? None at all; for ye know that the only end of the things ye did then, and of which ye are now ashamed, is death. But (Romans 6:22) your new service has its fruit: it leads to your sanctification now, and in the end eternal life. Authorities, however, both ancient and modern, are divided as to the punctuation, and consequent construction, of Romans 6:21. In the Vulgate and the Authorized Version (as in the interpretation given above) the stop of interrogation is placed after "ashamed;" the answer, none, being understood, and "for the end," etc., being the reason why there is no fruit The other way is to take the question as ending at "had ye then," and "those things whereof," etc., as the answer to it, and for the end, etc., as the reason why they are ashamed. Thus: "What fruit had ye then (when you were free from righteousness)? The works (or pleasures) of which you are now ashamed were the only fruit; you are ashamed of them now; for their end is death." The latter interpretation is defended by Alford on the ground that it is more consistent "with the New Testament meaning of καρπός, which is ’actions,’ the ’ fruit of the man’ considered as the tree, not ’wages’ or ’reward,’ the ’fruit of his actions.’" This is true. But, on the other hand, it may be argued that such use of the word καρπός by St. Paul is always in a good sense; he usually regards sin as having no fruits at all; to the fruit of the Spirit is opposed, not any fruit of a different character, but the works (ἔργα) of the flesh (Galatians 5:19, Galatians 5:22); and in Ephesians 5:11 (again in opposition to the fruit of the Spirit) he speaks of the unfruitful works (ἔργοιςτοῖςἀκάρποις) of darkness. Thus the idea of Eph 5:21, understood as in the Authorized Version, seems closely to correspond with that of the passage last cited. "The things of which ye are now ashamed," in Ephesians 5:21, are "the works of darkness" of Ephesians 5:11; and in both places they are declared to have no fruit. Sin is a barren tree, and only ends in death. Cf. what was said above with respect to εἰςτὴνἀνομίαν and εἰςἁγιασμόν in Ephesians 5:19. It is true, however, that the expression in the next chapter, καρποφορῆσαιτῷθανάτῳ (Romans 7:5), in opposition to καρποφορήσωμεντῷΘεῷ, in some degree weakens the force of the above argument. We observe, lastly, on Ephesians 5:23, that to the "wages’’ of sin (ὀψώνια , used usually to denote a soldier’s pay) is opposed "free gift" (χάρισμα for sin earns death as its due reward; but eternal life is not earned by us, but granted us by the grace of God. As to the phrase, δουλωθέντεςτῷΘεῷ, in Ephesians 5:22, it can be used without the need of any such apology as seems to be implied in Ephesians 5:19 (according to the meaning of the verse that has been preferred) for speaking of our becoming slaves to righteousness. For we do belong to God as his δοῦλοι, and to Christ, having been "bought with a price" (cf. 1 Corinthians 7:23); and St. Paul at the beginning of his Epistles often calls himself δοῦλοςΧριστοῦ (cf. also Luke 17:10). But it does not follow that our service should be the service of slaves; it may be a free, willing, enthusiastic obedience notwithstanding; we obey, not because we are under bondage to obey, but because love inspires us (cf. Galatians 4:6, etc., "Because ye are sons, God sent the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father. Wherefore thou art no longer a servant, but a son"). Romans 6:1-11 The meaning of Christ’s resurrection. The prominent position occupied by the resurrection of our Lord in the apostolic writings and preaching need occasion no surprise; an event in itself so wonderful, and in its consequences so momentous, could not but be constantly in the minds and upon the lips of those to whom it was the supreme revelation of God. It may be well to gather up in a few sentences the import and significance of this central fact of Christianity. I. AS A FACT, THE OF CHRIST HAS A GENERAL AND WORLD-WIDE . The historian of humanity, the philosopher reflecting upon the most important factors in human life, is constrained to acknowledge the central and universal interest of our Lord’s rising from the dead. 1. It was a fulfilment of predictions, and a realization of hopes sometimes dim and sometimes bright. 2. It was the starting-point of the Christian religion. The existence of the Church of Christ is only to be explained by remembering how firmly the first promulgators of the new faith held the belief that their Lord had risen from the dead. 3. It was, in the view of the Christian community, the pledge of the general resurrection of all men to another life; it gave definiteness and power to the belief in personal immortality. II. AS A , THE OF CHRIST HAS A SPECIAL . 1. It is the chief external evidence of the Messiahship and Divinity of Jesus of Nazareth. It was in fulfilment of his own express declarations that, after enduring a death of violence, he rose victorious from the grave. His resurrection is in harmony with his claim to a nature and character altogether unique. 2. It is the seal of the efficacy of his mediatorial sufferings. However the humiliation and sacrifice of the Redeemer were related to the forgiveness and justification of men, it is certain that Christ’s rising from the dead was the completion of his redemptive undertaking on man’s behalf. III. AS A POWER, THE OF CHRIST HAS A AND . This is the aspect of this great fact which is insisted upon most strenuously in this passage, and its practical importance to every individual Christian is manifest. The true believer in Christ shares in his Lord’s resurrection. 1. Our sins were crucified in Christ’s death upon the cross, and in his resurrection we were delivered from their power. 2. Our past sinful life became dead to us as Christ died; and our newness of life began in his rising from the tomb. We have the sign of this, the apostle teaches us, in baptism, with its teaching regarding renewal and consecration. 3. By our faith in the resurrection of our Saviour, we are raised above trial, doubt, temptation, darkness, and fear. The cross tells us that it may consist with the wisdom and the goodness of God that for a season we should endure trouble, disappointment, and seeming failure. But the empty tomb assures us that for every good man and for every good work there is a resurrection appointed. Death is for a season; God’s people cannot be "holden of it." The corn of wheat dies, but it dies to live, and to bring forth much fruit. 4. In Christ’s resurrection the Christian is begotten to a living hope of an immortal inheritance, His people are appointed to share his triumph and his glory. Romans 6:4 "Newness of life:" a New Year’s sermon. Things new and old make up the sum of human experiences. All that is new becomes old, and the old disappears to come before us again in new combinations, in new shapes. The mind of man seems to have a natural leaning in both directions; we like the old because it is old, and the new because it is new. This is one of the contradictions inseparable from human nature. There is some truth in the common saying that the young prefer novelty and the aged cling to "use and wont." It is easy to see how, to the youthful, change should be welcome, for their knowledge is yet very limited, and new experiences are the appointed means of furnishing and equipping the mind. It is less easy to explain the conservatism of age and its dread of innovation, for experience must have taught the old how imperfect is everything that concerns man’s culture and condition; this trait of character may be largely owing to the increasing feebleness which indisposes to the unwonted exertion of the faculties, or to accommodation to new circumstances. True religion takes advantage of both these tendencies of human nature. It appeals to the natural attachment we feel to what is ancient and sanctioned by prolonged existence; and it appeals also to the yearning for progress and for fresh experiences, which we all either have felt in the past or feel today. But observe in what way revelation makes use of these natural tendencies, and remark the harmony there is between the moral necessities of man and the Divine communications of Scripture. Broadly speaking, whatever concerns God is commended by its antiquity and unchangeableness; whilst that which refers to man approaches us with the charm and the allurement of novelty. A moment’s reflection will show us why this should be so with true religion. Man, in his brief life, with his feeble purposes and his petty achievements, looks away from himself for the eternal and the unchanging. This he knows is not in himself or in his race; and he seeks it in the unseen God. And herein he is right. He does not seek these attributes in vain. For, knowing God, he knows that in him there is absolute being, unaffected by the changes to which all creation is subject. Man can find his true stability and his true peace only when he rests in the care and love of "the Father of lights, who is without variableness and shadow of turning." But, on the other hand, man, when he knows himself, is aware that his past has been a past unsatisfactory to himself, and blamable by his Creator and Judge. His changes have often been from evil to evil; and he looks forward, rather than behind him, for relief. His only hope is in his future. The old he can regard only with pain, with regret, with distress. If there is improvement, it must be in what is new—in a new condition, new impulses, new principles of the soul, in new associations and new help. Accordingly, Christianity comes to man with gifts of heavenly newness in her hand. Christianity establishes with man a "new covenant," and gives to him a "new commandment;" makes of him a "new creation," transforms him into a "new man." It opens up to him a "new way" unto the Father by the Mediator of a "new testament," gives him a "new name," and teaches him a "new song," and inspires him with the hope of a "new heaven anti a new earth." In short, it enables him to serve in "newness of spirit," and to walk in "newness of life." "Life" is, in the New Testament, used as equivalent to the history of the spiritual nature. The Lord Jesus professed to be "the Life," "the Life of men;" he came that "we might have life, and that more abundantly," and the acceptance of him as the Divine Saviour is designated the "passing from death unto life." This being understood, it will not be supposed that by "newness of life" the Apostle Paul refers to the life of the body, or to the outward circumstances in which physical life may be passed. And yet the context shows that he is not treating of the future and blessed life in the nearer presence of God. Accordingly, we understand by "newness of life" that which contrasts with the spiritual deadness which hung as a cloud of darkness over heathen humanity, and which contrasts also with the earlier and imperfect developments of spiritual vitality. It is a newness of life which is peculiar to the Christian dispensation, but is yet found wherever Christ is known, trusted, and loved. We greet the new year with gladness and with hope, because it seems to offer us the opportunity to begin life anew. We are thankful for the relief of leaving the past behind, and we cherish the hope that each new year will be one of greater spiritual progress and happiness than the years that are past. Christians wish to forget the things that are behind, and to reach forth to those things that are before. Some who have been undecided as to their course have resolved with the new year to make a fresh beginning in life, and henceforth to live by the faith of the Son of God, and to his service and glory. The subject ought, therefore, to be appropriate and welcome to such as are hopefully and prayerfully aspiring unto "newness of life." I. The newness of the Christian life will appear from the consideration that it is A LIFE IS CHRIST. This very language must be at first unintelligible to a person unacquainted with the gospel. That life should be in a person seems monstrous and meaningless. Yet Christ himself has said, "Abide in me, and I in you;" and his Apostle Paul has taught us that "if any man be in Christ, he is a new creation." Christ is the Basis upon which the Christian builds, the Foundation of the edifice of his new and higher life. Christ is the Vine-stem into which the Christian is grafted, and from which he draws all his vitality, his vigour, and his fruitfulness. Christ is the Head, in dependence upon whom the Christian is a living, active, and obedient member. The signs and evidences of this life are these: 1. The renewed man learns who Christ is, and what Christ has done and suffered for him. 2. The renewed man admits the claim Christ has upon his gratitude, his faith, his love; and trusts in him. 3. The renewed man consciously accepts life as the gift of God in Christ. 4. The renewed man, by maintaining fellowship with Christ, advances in the new and higher life. II. The newness of the Christian life is manifest from THE AGENCY BY WHICH IT IS . 1. A spiritual agency. 2. A Divine agency. 3. A freely acting and gracious agency. 4. A transforming agency. 5. A ceaseless and progressive agency. III. The newness of the Christian life is displayed in THE MOTIVES AND BY WHICH IT IS . 1. The love of Christ revealed and responded to is the motive power of this life. 2. The law of Christ becomes a law of friendship. 3. The approval of Christ is an animating and cheering power in the heart. 4. Thus self and the world, the common motives to action, fall into their proper place, or are banished from the Christian’s soul. IV. NEW are a feature of the Christian’s new life. V. The Christian life tends and points to A FURTHER AND HIGHER IN THE FUTURE. . Newness of life depends comparatively little upon outward circumstances. There is nothing in the colour of a man’s skin, the climate of a man’s birthplace, the nature of a man’s occupation, his condition whether of poverty or wealth, his education whether scanty or liberal, his age or his station,—there is nothing in all these things which can interfere with or hinder him from becoming a new man in Christ. Does it seem to any one that for him this is an impossibility, because of the unfavorable circumstances in which he finds himself? Disabuse yourself of this illusion, for illusion it is. It may not be within your power to become a learned man, or an eloquent man, a rich man, or a powerful man; but the circumstances which may prevent you from becoming learned or wealthy, mighty or persuasive, have no force to hinder you from becoming "a new man." The obstacles to this renewal are to be sought within, not without; they are to be found in the will, which is often resolved to resist the authority, to reject the truth, and to ignore the love of God. If you take a savage from his native woods, clothe him in civilized attire, place him in a lordly palace, surround him with books and with music, with paintings and with flowers, does he cease to be a savage? Not until the mind is changed. The man himself may remain the same, whilst all his surroundings are altered. These external changes do not make of him a new man, and his life has not in virtue of them become a new life. So is it with man in relation to the kingdom of Christ. Deprive a human being of the liberty which he has abused, remove him from his evil companionships, shut out from him the temptations to which he has been wont to yield, introduce him into Christian society, constrain him to frequent the means of religious instruction; yet his life has not thereby become a new life. The old nature is still there. The Ethiopian has not changed his skin, nor the leopard his spots. The man’s true life lies in the bent of his thoughts, the affections of his heart, the bias of his will; and whilst all these are toward evil, the old nature is supreme, and the new life is not yet. Love is the one only potentate at whose master-bidding old things will pass away. Before’s Love’s wizard wand alone, the ancient shadows will depart from the gloomy cave of the unregenerated soul, and that cave will become a temple peopled with the forms of the holy, and echoing with the songs of heaven. Divine love can make the wilderness a paradise, can change each thorn into a flower, and all the thistles into fruits. When Love smites the rock, the spring of health and of refreshing will gush forth. He who hears Love’s voice shall forget the weakness and the weariness of the pilgrimage; and his footstep, erst so heavy and so dull, shall bound elastic onwards. Romans 6:14 The enfranchisement by grace. The Law, by exhibiting the heinousness of sin and its awful consequences, was the occasion of the introduction of the gospel and of the victories of God’s grace. If, then, where sin abounds, grace much more abounds, some sophistical reasoner may propose to continue in sin. It is against this wretched argument that the apostle appeals in the language of the text. "Sin shall not have dominion over you; for ye are not under law, but under grace." The very fact which was adduced by some as an excuse for sin is shown to be the chief reason for freedom from sin. I. SIN HAS HAD, AND HAS, MASTERY OVER MEN. Sinners are under the rule and bondage of a tyrannical and wicked lord. Turning away in a rebellious spirit from their rightful King and Ruler, they have submitted themselves to the usurper’s sway. Sin takes possession of their affections, their judgment, and their will. II. UNDER THE LAW, MEN WERE AND UNDER THE MASTERY OF SIN. By the Law, the apostle means chiefly the Jewish Law; yet not this exclusively; for it appears that the unwritten law generally is intended in the argument of the Epistle. They were "under the Law" who lived under legal ordinances and sanctions, and who, in theory at all events, acknowledged its claim. Sin to them was transgression, and the motive for avoiding transgression was the fear of penalty to be inflicted by the Lawgiver and Judge. Now, it is urged that those under the Law were in very many cases the slaves of sin; for the Law entered that the offence might abound. History, sacred and profane, bears out these assertions. The standard of morality by which men judged themselves was low, and even to this they did not generally approach, much less attain. This was so with the Jews, and more conspicuously with the Gentiles. III. IT IS THE EFFECT OF THE OF GRACE TO SET MEN FREE FROM THE MASTERY OF SIN. 1. What is it to be "under grace"? It is voluntarily and consciously to receive the free favour of God bestowed through Jesus Christ upon all who believe. It is to participate in the new and distinctively Christian righteousness. It is in the exercise of faith to be brought into harmony with God’s government and purposes. It is to come under the influence of a new, Divine, and powerful motive, furnished by the infinite love and clemency of God. 2. How does being "under grace" set and keep a man free from sin? The apostle explains the process by employing three figures. According to the first, by baptism, the initiative act of faith and consecration, the Christian is joined to his Saviour in his death upon the cross, and, thus being united to an almighty Saviour, must consequently rise in the likeness of his resurrection to a new and holy life. According to the second, the Christian, forsaking the service of sin, yields himself by faith to the service of Christ, and is therefore bound to fulfil the obligations which he has undertaken. The third figure represents his state under the Law as abolished by faith in Christ, just as a woman is released from her husband by his death; fidelity to Christ’s service and law are as binding upon the Christian as is fidelity to her second husband on the part of the newly married woman. Duty and love combine to render the obligation to holiness stringent and effective. IV. THE POWER OF GRACE EXCEEDS THE POWER OF THE LAW. In explaining how this is we may observe: 1. The principles appealed to are higher; love and gratitude are higher than fear and interest. 2. The aid afforded is greater; it is the aid of the Holy Spirit of God. 3. The example set before the Christian is more stimulating and inspiring. 4. The prospects presented are more alluring and glorious. Romans 6:17 The mould of Christian doctrine. The Christian, in remembering what he was, deepens his impression of Divine grace, to which he owes it that the. change has been effected in which he now rejoices. St. Paul took a peculiar satisfaction in reviewing his own experience, and acknowledging his indebtedness to that Divine grace which had fashioned his character anew. And if the Christian will consider the state in which he would have been apart from the supernatural doctrine and influences of Christianity, he will see reason for gratitude in the provision made for the transformation and renewal of his character. In this verse the change is attributed, instrumentally, to the power of Christian doctrine, which is, as it were, a pattern by which he is reconstructed, or a mould into which the metal of his nature has been cast, in order to its taking a new and divinely ordered shape and form. I. THE IS AS A MOULD IN ORDER TO GIVE A NEW SHAPE AND FORM TO THE HUMAN . When iron is "cast," it is run, in a liquid state, into a shape or mould of earth or sand of the desired form; and thus the artificer produces a bolt or a cannon. Thus, in the intellectual and spiritual realm, ideas govern men; and the character and life are largely owing to the thoughts which are familiar and congenial And Christian doctrine is not an end, but a means; the righteousness and love of God, revealed in Christ, having power to reconstruct the character and to renew the life. The doctrine is alive with the power of the Holy Spirit of God. II. THE IS CAST INTO THIS MOULD, THAT HE MAY TAKE ITS NEW SHAPE AND FORM. The old elements of human nature, old errors and old sins, are dissolved and melted down when brought into contact with the gospel of Jesus Christ. Old things pass away, in order that all things may become new. We may fancy that the doctrine is delivered unto us, to do what we like with it; but the reverse is the case. We are delivered unto it, in order that it may do its work upon us. So it is with the Christian education of the young, and with the evangelization of the heathen. The mould of Christian doctrine imparts to him who is brought into living contact with it a new motive to holiness, in the redeeming and sacrificial love of the Saviour; a new rule of holiness, in his law and life; and new help towards holiness, in the provision of the Spirit’s help and grace. A moral transfiguration is effected, as the natural result of intelligent acceptance and voluntary allegiance. For if faith is the soul of obedience, obedience is the body of faith. There is no change so wonderful and so admirable as that which is wrought in human character by the moulding power of Christian doctrine. BY C.H. IRWIN Romans 6:1-14 The practical power of the Resurrection. Here the apostle enlarges still more fully upon the truth that the Christian’s faith leads not merely to the pardon of sin, but also to deliverance from its power. Because grace has abounded over sin, and our unrighteousness has commended the righteousness of God, it does not therefore follow that we are to continue in sin. If we have a real union with Christ, we have been baptized into his death. We are buried with him by baptism into death; "that like as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life" (Romans 6:4). I. THE FACT OF THE . That the resurrection of Christ is surrounded with mystery, no one will deny. But the evidence by which the great central fact itself is established is so strong, so clear, so decisive, that even scepticism has sometimes to admit itself convinced. The effect of the most able and adverse criticism has only been to establish more and more certainly the fact of the Resurrection, and thus to confirm more strongly the Christian’s faith. It is remarkable that two of the greatest rationalists of the present century, who doubted almost every fact of the New Testament history, admitted that the Resurrection was a fact which they could not doubt. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/pulpit-commentary/ Romans 7:1-6 Here comes in the third illustration of the moral obligation of the baptized. It rests on the recognized principle that death cancels the claims of human law on a person (cf. Romans 6:7); and this with especial reference to the law of marriage, as being peculiarly applicable to the subject to be illustrated, since the Church is elsewhere regarded as married to Christ. As has been observed above, it is from the Law that Christians are now said to be emancipated in the death of Christ; not from sin, as in the previous sections. Hence this section might at first sight seem to introduce a new line of thought. But it is really a continuation of the same, though differently viewed; for, in the sense intended by St. Paul, being under the Law is equivalent to being under sin. How this is has already more or less appeared; and it will be shown further in the latter part of this chapter. For elucidating the connection of thought between this and the preceding sections, it may be here briefly stated thus: A fundamental axiom with the apostle is that "where no law is, there is no transgression" (Romans 4:15; cf. Romans 5:13; Romans 7:9); i.e. without law of some kind (including in the idea both external law and the law of conscience) to reveal to man the difference between right and wrong, he is not held responsible; to be a sinner before God he must know what sin is. Human sin consists in a man doing wrong, knowing it to be wrong; or, at any rate, with an original power and opportunity of knowing it to be so. (This, be it observed, is the idea running through the whole of Rom 1:1-32., in which all mankind are convicted of sin; the whole drift of the argument being that they had sinned against knowledge.) Law, then, in making sin known to man, subjects him to its guilt, and consequently to its condemnation. But this is all it does; it is all that, in itself, it can do. It can remove neither the guilt nor the dominion of sin. Its principle is simply to exact entire obedience to its requirements; and there it leaves the sinner. The above view applies to all law, and of course peculiarly to the Mosaic Law (which the writer has all along mainly in view) in proportion to the authority of its source and the strictness of its requirements. Thus it is that St. Paul regards being under the Law as the same thing as being under sin, and dying to the Law as the same thing as dying to sin. Grace, on the other hand, under which we pass in rising again with Christ, does both the things which law cannot do: it both cancels the guilt of sin (repentance and faith presumed), and also imparts power to overcome it. Romans 7:1 Are ye ignorant, brethren (for I speak to persons knowing law), how that the Law hath dominion over a man for so long time as he liveth? i.e. so long as the man liveth; not so long as the Law liveth in the sense of viget, or "remains in force," though Origen, Ambrose, Grotius, Erasmus, and others, for reasons that will appear, understood the latter sense. It is not the natural one. Romans 7:2-4 For (this is an instance of the application of the general principle, adduced as suiting the subject in band) the woman that hath an husband (ὕπανδρος, implying subjection, meaning properly, that is under an husband) is bound to her living husband; but if the husband die, she is loosed (κατήργηται; cf. Romans 7:6 and Galatians 5:4. The word expresses the entire abolition of the claim of the husband’s law over her) from the law of the husband. So then if, while the husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if the husband die, she is free from the Law, so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man. Wherefore, my brethren, ye also were made dead to the Law through the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who was raised from the dead, that we may bring forth fruit unto God. The general drift of the above verses is plain enough; namely, that, as in all cases death frees a man from the claims of human law, and, in particular, as death frees the wife from the claims of marital law, so that she may marry again, so the death of Christ, into which we were baptized, frees us from the claims of the law which formerly bound us, so that we may be married spiritually to the risen Saviour, apart from the old dominion of law, and consequently of sin. But it is not so easy to explain the intended analogy in precise terms, there being an apparent discrepance between the illustration and the application with regard to the parties supposed to die. Even before the application there is a seeming discrepance of this kind between the general statement of Rom 7:1 and the instance given in Romans 7:2. For in Romans 7:1 it is (according to the view we have taken of it) the death of the person who had been under law that frees him from it, whereas in Romans 7:2 it is the death of the husband (representing law) that frees the wife from the law she had been under. Hence the interpretation of Rom 7:1 above referred to, according to which law, and not a man, is the understood nominative to liveth. But, even if this interpretation were considered tenable, we should not thus get rid of the subsequent apparent discrepance between the illustration and the application. For in the former it is the death of the husband that frees the wife; whereas in the latter it seems to be the death of ourselves, who answer to the wife, in the death of Christ, that frees us. For that it is ourselves that are regarded as having died to the Law with Christ appears not only from other passages (e.g. Romans 7:2, Romans 7:3, Romans 7:4, Romans 7:7, Romans 7:8, Romans 7:11, in Romans 6:1-23.), but also, in the passage before us, from άθανατώθητε in Romans 7:4, and ἀποθανόντες in Romans 7:6. (The reading ἀποθανόντος of the Textus Receptus rests on no authority, being apparently only a conjecture of Beza’s.) There are various ways of explaining. (1) That (notwithstanding the reasons against the supposition that have just been given) it is the Law, and not the man, that is conceived as having died in the death of Christ. Ephesians 2:15 and Colossians 2:14 may be referred to as supporting this conception. Thus the illustration and the application are made to hang together, the law of the husband being regarded as having died in the husband’s death, as the Law generally to us in Christ’s death; and we have already seen how Colossians 2:1 may be forced into correspondence. This view of the Law itself being regarded as having died has the weighty support of Origen, Chrysostom, Theophylact, Ambrose, and other Greek Fathers. Chrysostom accounts for the apostle introducing a different conception in Colossians 2:4: by suggesting that he avoided saying explicitly that the Law had died, for fear of wounding the Jews: Τὸἀκόλουθονἧναἰπεῖν, ὬστεἀδελφοίοὐκυριεύειὑμῶνὁνόμοςἀπέθανεγάρἈλλοὐκεἷπενοὕτωςἴναμὴπλήξητοὺςΙουδαίους. This explanation hardly commends itself as satisfactory; and besides, in addition to what has been already said, it may be observed that throughout the whole passage there is no phrase to suggest in itself the idea of the Law’s death, but only of some death which emancipates from law (ver. I being taken in its natural sense, and ἀποθάνοντες, in Colossians 2:4, being accepted as the undoubtedly true reading). (2) That in the illustration the wife is really supposed to die when the husband dies. The death of either party to the marriage-bond cancels it; and when one dies, the other virtually dies to the law that both were under. Thus the statement of principle in Colossians 2:1, the particular illustration in Colossians 2:2, Colossians 2:3, and the application are made to hang together. Meyer takes this view decidedly, and cites Ephesians 5:28, seq., to show that the husband’s death may be considered as implying the wife’s death also. (3) That there is a discrepance between the illustration and the application, the husband being regarded as dying in the former, and ourselves, who represent the wife, in the latter; but that this is of no consequence; the idea, common to both, of death abrogating the claims of law being sufficient for the apostle’s argument. Death, it may be said, however regarded in the application, is an ideal conception, and not an actual fact with respect to ourselves; and it is immaterial how it is regarded, as long as the idea comes out that through death, i.e. ours in the death of Christ, we are freed from the dominion of law. (So, in effect, De Wette, and also Alford.) (4) That the former husband is not the law, but the lust of sin (τὰπαθήματατῶνἁμαρτιῶν, Ephesians 5:5); the wife, the soul; the new husband, Christ. Augustine, who is the author of this view, puts it thus: "Cum ergo tria sint, anima, tanquam mulier; passiones peccatorum tanquam vir; et lex tanquam lex viri; non ibi peccatis mortuis, tanquam viro mortuo liberari animam dicit, sed ipsam animam mort peccato, et liberari a lege, ut sit alterius viri, i.e. Christi, cum mortua fuerit peccato, quod fit, cum adhuc manentibus in nobis desideriis et incitamentis quibusdam ad peccandum, non obedi-mus tamen, nec consentimus, mente servientes legi Dei". Beza, taking up the view of Augustine, puts it somewhat differently, and more clearly, thus: "There are two marriages. In the first, the old man is the wife; predominating sinful desires, the husband; transgressions of every kind, the offspring. In the second, the new man is the wife; Christ, the Husband; and the fruits of the Spirit (Galatians 5:22) are the children." This explanation being still apparently open to the objection that, in the illustration, the wife continues the same, but not so that which corresponds to her in the application, Olshausen explains thus: "In man the old man is distinguished from the new without prejudice to the unity of his personality, which Paul subsequently (Ephesians 5:20) signifies by ἐγώ. This true personality, the proper self of man, is the wife, who in the natural state appears in marriage with the old man, and, in intercourse with him, generates sins, the end of which is death (Romans 6:21, Romans 6:22). But in the death of the mortal Christ this old man is dead with him; and, as the individual man is grafted by faith into Christ. his old man dies, by whose life he was holden under the Law." The commentator on the Epistle in the ’Speaker’s Commentary’ adopts this explanation, with the remark that "St. Paul’s application of the figure is quite clear, if we follow his own guidance." The view rests mainly on, and certainly derives some support from, Ephesians 5:5 and Ephesians 5:6, if regarded as carrying out the application of the figure. Others, however, in view of the difficulties of the whole passage, may prefer to content themselves with explanation (3), as conveying as precise an idea as may possibly have been even in the apostle’s mind when he wrote. Commentators may sometimes go beyond their office in attributing to their author more exactness of thought than his words in themselves imply. It is to be observed that the con-eluding expression in Ephesians 5:4, "that we should bring forth fruit unto God," brings us back to the main purport of this whole section, which begins at Romans 6:1, viz. the obligation of a holy life on Christians. In Romans 6:5, Romans 6:6, which follow, the hindrance to our living such a life "when we were in the flesh," and our power of doing so now, are briefly intimated in preparation for what follows. It does not seem necessary to conclude—as is done by those who adopt interpretation (4) of what precedes—that the illustration of the marriage bond is meant to be kept up in these two verses. Romans 7:5 For when we were in the flesh, the passions of sins which were through the Law did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death. In the flesh, to which might be opposed in the Spirit (cf. Romans 8:9), denotes our state when under the power of sin, before we had risen to a new life in Christ; it is virtually the same as what is meant by being under the Law, as is shown by the opposed expression in Romans 7:6, κατηργήθημενἀπὸτοῦνόμου. What is signified by "the passions of sins" being "through the Law" will be considered under Romans 7:7 and Romans 7:8. Romans 7:6 But now (meaning, as things are, not at the present time, as is shown by the aorist following) we have been (properly, we were) delivered (κατηργήθημεν, the same verb as in Romans 7:2; see note on that verse) from the Law, having died to that wherein we were held; so that we serve in newness of the Spirit, and not in oldness of the letter. In the word "serve" (δουλεύειν) we observe a resumption of the idea of Rom 6:16, seq., where we were regarded under the aspect of being still bond-servants, though to a new master. There the apostle intimated that he was but speaking humanly in describing our new allegiance to righteousness as bond-service, such as we had once been under. Here he intimates the true character of our new service by the addition of the words, ἐνκαινότητιπνεύματοςκαὶοὐπαλαιότητιγράμματος. These are characteristic and significant expressions. "Spirit" and "letter" are similarly contrasted (Romans 2:29; 2 Corinthians 3:6). "Spiritum literae opponit, quia antequam ad Dei voluntatem voluntas nostra per Spiritum sanctum formats sit, non habemus in Lege nisi externam literam; quae fraenum quidem externis nostris actionibus injicit, concupiscientiae autem nostrae furorem minime cohibet. Novitatem. vero Spiritui attribuit, quia in locum veteris hominis succedit; ut litera vetus dicitur quae interit per Spiritus regenerationem" (Calvin). Otherwise, with regard to newness and oldness, "Vetustatis et novitatis vocabulo Paulus spectat duo testamenta" (Bengel). That the latter idea may have suggested the expressions seems not unlikely from 2 Corinthians 3:6-18 (cf. also Hebrews 8:6-13). For in both these passages the idea of the verse before us enters, and in both the old and new covenants are contrasted with regard to it. It may be enough here to say that the contrast in its essence is between exacted conformity to an external code (which was the characteristic of the old covenant) and inspired allegiance to the Law of God written on the heart (which is the characteristic of the new). Romans 7:7-25 (b) The relation of law to sin, and how law prepares the soul for emancipation in Christ from the dominion of sin. In the section of the argument which begins at Romans 7:1 we have seen that the idea of being under sin has passed into that of being under law, in such apparent connection of thought as to identify the positions. The apostle, seeing that readers might be perplexed by such identification, now, in the first place, explains what he has meant by it. Is the Law, then, sin? No, replies the apostle; the Law itself (with especial reference to the Mosaic Law as the great and authentic expression of Divine law) is holy; and its connection with sin is only this—that, in virtue of its very holiness, it convinces of sin, and makes it sinful. And then, to the end of Rom 7:1-25., he goes on to show how this is by an analysis of the operation of law on human consciousness. He presents to us a vivid picture of a man supposed at first to be without law, and therefore unconscious of sin; but then, through law coming in, acquiring a sense of it, and yet unable to avoid it. The man assents in his conscience to the good, but is dragged down by the infection of his nature to the evil. He seems to have, as it were, two contrary laws within himself, distracting him. And so the external Law, appealing to the higher law within himself, good and holy though it be, is, in a sense, killing him; for it reveals sin to him, and makes it deadly, but does not deliver him from it, till the crisis comes in the desperate cry, "O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?" (Romans 7:24). But this crisis is the precursor of deliverance; it is the last throe preceding the new birth; the Law has now done its work, having fully convinced of sin, and excited the yearning for deliverance, and in "the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus" the deliverance comes. How it comes is set forth in Romans 8:1-39., where the state of peace and hope, consequent on deliverance through faith in Christ, is portrayed in glowing terms, so as thus to complete the subject which we announced as being that of the sixth, seventh, and eighth chapters, viz. "the moral results to believers of the revealed righteousness of God." Two questions have been raised and discussed with regard to Romans 8:7-25. (1) Whether St. Paul, who writes throughout the passage in the first person singular, is describing his own personal experience, or only so writing in order to give vividness and reality to his picture of the experience of any human soul. (2) Whether he is describing the mental experience of an unregenerate or of a regenerate man. As to (1), his purpose undoubtedly is not to tell us about himself, but to depict generally the throes of the human soul when convinced of sin. But, in doing this, he as undoubtedly draws on his own past experience; recollections of the struggle he had himself gone through gleam evidently throughout the picture; he paints so vividly because he has felt so keenly. This makes the passage so peculiarly interesting, as being not only a striking analysis of human consciousness, but also an opening out to us of the great apostle’s inner self; of the inward pangs and dissatisfaction with himself which had, we may well believe, distracted him through the many years when he had been a zealot for the Law and apparently satisfied with it, and when—perhaps partly to stifle disturbing thoughts—he had thrown himself into the work of persecution. Then, further, the sudden change of tone observable in the eighth chapter, which is like calm and sunshine after storm, reveals to us the change that had come over him (to which he often elsewhere refers), when "the light from heaven" had shown him an escape from his mental chaos. He was then "a new creature: old things had passed away; behold, all things had become new" (2 Corinthians 5:17). As to question (2), an answer has been already virtually given; viz. that the condition described is that of the unregenerate; in this sense—that it is of one still under the bondage of sin and law, before the revelation to the soul of the righteousness of God, and the consequent rising to a new life in Christ. This seems obvious from its being the thought of law subjecting to sin that introduces the whole passage, and runs through it—the γὰρ which connects Romans 8:14 with what precedes denoting a continuance throughout of the same line of thought—and also from the marked change of tone in Romans 8:1-39., where the state of the regenerate is undoubtedly described. Further, we find, in Romans 8:5 and Romans 8:6 of Romans 7:1-25., the obvious theses of the two sections that follow, in the remainder of Rom 7:1-25. and in Romans 8:1-39. respectively. Their wording exactly corresponds to the subject-matter of these sections; and Romans 8:5 distinctly expresses the state of being under law, Romans 8:6 the state of deliverance from it. Further, particular expressions in the two sections seem to be in intended contrast with each other, so as to denote contrasted states. In Romans 7:9, Romans 7:11, Romans 7:13, sin, through the Law, kills; in Romans 8:2 we have "the law of the Spirit of life." In Romans 7:23 the man is brought into captivity; in Romans 8:2 he is made free. In Romans 7:14, Romans 7:18 there is invincible strife between the holy Law and the carnal mind; in Romans 8:4 the righteousness of the Law is fulfilled. In Romans 7:5 we were in the flesh; in Romans 8:9 not in the flesh, but in the Spirit. And, further, could St. Paul possibly have spoken of the regenerate Christian as "sold under sin" (Romans 8:14)? His state is one of redemption from it. We do not mean that the state which begins to be described at Romans 8:14 is one devoid of grace. A condition of progress towards regeneration is described; and the final utter dissatisfaction with self, and the keen yearning after good, imply a reused and enlightened conscience: it is the state of one who is being prepared for deliverance, and is not far from the kingdom of God. All, in fact, we say is that it is not till Romans 8:1-39. that the picture of a soul emancipated by a living faith in Christ begins. We may observe, further, that the mere use of the present tense in Romans 8:14 and afterwards by no means necessitates our supposing the apostle to be speaking of his own state at the time of writing, and therefore of the state of a regenerate Christian. He uses the present to add vividness and reality to the picture; he throws himself back into, and realizes to himself again, his own former feebleness; and he thus also more clearly distinguishes between the state described and the imagined previous one before law had begun to operate. The view which we thus confidently advocate is that of the Greek Fathers generally, the application of the passage to the regenerate Christian being apparently due to Augustine in his opposition to Pelagianism; i.e. according to his later view; for in his earlier days he had held with the Greek Fathers. Jerome also seems to have similarly changed his mind about it; and the later view of both these Fathers has been adopted by Anselm, Thomas Aquinas, Corn. a Lapide, and by Luther, Melancthon, Calvin, Beza, and others among the Protestants. What weighed with Augustine was that in Romans 8:17, Romans 8:20, Romans 8:22, more propension to good is implied than his doctrinal theory allowed to the natural man. Under a similar impression, Calvin says, commenting on Romans 8:17, "Porto hic locus palam evincit non nisi de pits qui jam regeniti sunt Paulum disputare. Quamdiu enim manet homo sui similis, quantus quantus est, merito censetur vitiosus." If, however, St. Paul’s intention, obvious from his own writing, does not fit in with Augustinian or Calvinistic theology, so much the worse for the latter. The verses in question do not, in fact, express more than the apostle elsewhere allows man to be capable of, and what observation of fact shows him to be capable of, though not having yet attained to Christian faith; viz. approval of, longing for, and even striving for, what is good. It is not more than the sincere and earnest, even in the Gentile world, have been already credited with in Romans 2:1-29. of this Epistle (Romans 2:7, Romans 2:10, Romans 2:14, Romans 2:15, Romans 2:26, Romans 2:29). It does not follow that such moral earnestness is independent of Divine grace; but there is a true and effective operation of Divine grace, suitable to men’s needs and capacities, before the fulness of Pentecostal grace. And further, however "far gone from original righteousness" man in his natural state may be, still that utter depravity attributed to him by some theologians is neither consonant with observed fact nor declared in Holy Writ. The image of God in which he was made is represented as defaced, but not obliterated. Be it observed, lastly, with regard to the whole question of the intention of this chapter, that its reference to the unregenerate precludes the wresting of some parts of it to support antinomianism. Calvin, though applying it, as said above, to the regenerate, thus alludes to and guards against any such abuse of Rom 2:17: "Non est deprecatio so excusantis, ac si culpa vacaret; quomodo multi nugatores justam defensionem habere se putant, qua tegant sua fiagitia dum in carnem ea rejiciunt." It was observed in the note at the head of Rom 2:1-29. that, though the thesis to be then proved was the sinfulness of all men without exception before God, this did not seem to be in that chapter rigorously proved with regard to those—and such it was allowed there were—who sincerely sought after righteousness, and refrained from judging others; and it was said that this apparent deficiency in the proof would be supplied in Romans 7:1-25. And so it is in this analysis of the inward consciousness of even the best in their natural state; recognizable by all as a true one in proportion to their own moral enlightenment and moral earnestness. This consideration is an additional reason for regarding Romans 7:1-25. as referring to the unregenerate; since otherwise a link in the argument on which the whole treatise rests would seem to be wanting. We may remark also, before proceeding with our exposition, that, though we hold Romans 7:1-25. to refer to the unregenerate, and Romans 8:1-39. to the regenerate state, between which a sharp line is here drawn, yet it need not follow that either the sense of having passed at a definite time from one to the other as represented in this ideal picture, or the consciousness of entire blessedness as portrayed in Romans 8:1-39., will be realized by all, who may still be regenerate and have undergone a true conversion. Owing to the weakness of the human will, which has to work with grace, and to the infection of nature that remains in the regenerate, the triumph of the grace of the new birth is seldom, in fact, complete; and so even saints may often be still painfully conscious of the conflict described in Romans 7:1-25. They will, indeed, have the peace and assurance of Rom 8:1-39. in proportion as "the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus" is potent and paramount in them; but still they may not attain all at once to the ideal of their regenerate condition. Similarly, in St. John’s Epistles the kingdoms of darkness and of light are set forth as totally distinct, and the regenerate are regarded as having passed entirely from the one into the other, so as to have the perfect love which casteth out fear; and it is of importance that the essential distinction between the two kingdoms should be kept in view. But still in actual life, as we cannot but feel, the majority of believing Christians have not so passed entirely; clouds from the old kingdom of darkness still partially overshadow most of those who, in the main, have passed into the light, and it may be difficult for us to determine to which kingdom some belong. Such would be the case even with those whom the apostle addressed—persons who had consciously, in adult life, risen to a new life in baptism; and still more will it be so with us, who were baptized in infancy, and may have grown up more or less, but few entirely, under the influence of the regenerating Spirit. Further, it is to be observed that, though the peace and confidence of Joh 8:1-59. be the growing result and reward of a true conversion, yet the practical tests of one are ever said by both St. Paul and St. John not to be feelings only, but the fruits of the Spirit in character and life. Romans 7:7 What shall we say then? (St. Paul’s usual phrase, with μὴγένοιτο following, for meeting and rejecting a possible misunderstanding of his meaning; cf. Romans 6:1.) Is the Law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known Bin, but through law. Αλλὰ, translated "nay," being thus taken, as in the Authorized Version, adversatively to the supposition of the Law being sin, and so a continuation of what is expressed by μὴγένοιτο. So far from the Law being sin, it exposes sin. Or it may be in the sense of "howbeit," as in the Revised Version, meaning—still, law has to do with sin so far as this, that it brings it out. For I had not known lust, except the Law had said, Thou shalt not covet; or rather, thou shalt not lust, so as to retain the correspondence of the verb with the preceding substantive. Observe, here as elsewhere, the significance of νόμος with and without the article. In the preceding section it was the Mosaic Law that wad specially in view, and it is the idea of being sin that is so indignantly repudiated at the beginning of this verse. So also, at the end, the Law of Moses is referred to as forbidding lust. Hence the article in both cases. But in the intervening phrase, εἰμὰδιὰνόμον, it is the principle of law generally that is regarding as making sin known. The adducing of ἐπιθυμία as being made known by the Law seems to have a significance beyond that of its being one particular instance of sin being so made known. It may imply that the very propension to evil, which is the root of sin, is thus only made known as sinful. The reference is, of course, to the tenth commandment. Without it men might not have been aware of the sinfulness of desires as well as of deeds, and thus, after all, been unacquainted with the essence of sin. Further, we may suppose it to be not without a purpose that the apostle varies his verbs expressive of knowing, τὴνἁμαρτίανοὐκἔγνων, and ἀπιθυμίανοὐκἤδεινἜγνων. majus est, ἤδειν minus. Hinc posterius, cure etiam minor gradus negatur, est in increments" (Bengel). Ἔγνων may express personal acquaintance with the working and power of sin; ἤδειν, no more than knowing lust as being sin at all. If so, it does not in itself imply that the Law excites lust, in the sense that I should not have lusted as I do had not the Law forbidden me to lust. Romans 7:8 But sin, taking occasion, through the commandment wrought in me all manner of concupiscence (or, of lust): for without (or, apart from) law sin is dead. Here, as in Romans 5:12, seq., sin is personified as a power, antagonistic to the Law of God, that has been introduced into the world of man, causing death. In Romans 5:1-21. its first introduction was found in the scriptural account of Adam’s transgression. It has ever since been in the world, as is evidenced by the continuance of the reign of death as it comes to all men now (Romans 5:13, Romans 5:14). But it is only when men, through law, know it to be sin, that it is imputed (Romans 5:13), and so slays them spiritually. Apart from law, it is as it were dead with respect to its power over the soul to kill. It is regarded here as an enemy on the watch, seizing its occasion to kill which is offered it when law comes in. It may be observed here that, though it is not easy to define exactly in all cases what St. Paul means by death, it is evident that he means in this place more than the physical death which seemed, at first sight at least, to be exclusively referred to in Romans 5:1-21. For all die in the latter sense of the word; but only those who sin with knowledge of law in the sense intended here (see also note on Romans 5:12). It is supposed by most commentators that the expression κατειργάσατο in this verse means, not only that "the commandment" brought out lust as sin, but further that it provoked it, according to the alleged tendency of human nature to long all the more for what is forbidden; Nitimur in vetitum semper, cupimusque negata. Whether or not we have this tendency to the extent sometimes supposed, the context certainly neither requires nor suggests the conception, either here or in Romans 5:5 and Romans 5:7. It is true, however, that the language of Rom 5:5 and Romans 5:8 does in itself suggest it. Against it is the reason which follows; "for without law sin is dead," which can hardly mean (as the strong word νεκρά would seem in such case to require) that lust itself is altogether dormant until prohibition excites it. Calvin interprets κατειργάσατο thus: "Detexit in me omnem concupiscentiam; quae, dum lateret, quo-dammodo nulla esse videbatur;" and on ἁμαρτιανεκρά remarks, "Clarissime exprimit quem sensum habeant superiora. Perinde enim est ac si diceret, sepnltam esse sine Legs peccati notitiam." Romans 7:9-11 For I was alive without (or, apart from) law once; but when the commandment came, sin revived (or, sprang into life), and I died. And the commandment, which was unto life, this I found to be unto death, For sin, taking occasion, through the commandment deceived me, and through it slew me. If, in saying, "I was alive once," the writer is at all remembering his own experience, the reference may be to the time of the innocence of childhood, before he had any distinct consciousness of the behests of law. Or it may be that he is only imagining a possible state without any consciousness of law, so as to bring out more forcibly the operation of law. On the general drift of Rom 7:9, Calvin says tersely, "Mors peccati vita est hominis: rursum vita peccati mors hominis." In Romans 7:11 the conception of sin’s action is the same as in Romans 7:8; but the verb now used is ἐξηπάτησε, with obvious reference to Eve’s temptation, which is regarded as representing ours (cf. 2 Corinthians 11:3). The view of the origin of human sin presented to us in Genesis is that man at first lived at peace with God; but that the commandment," Thou shalt not eat of it, lest thou die," was taken advantage of by the "serpent" (answering to personified ἁμαρτία in the passage before us), inspiring sinful lust; and that so the commandment (i.e. law), though in itself holy, became the occasion of sin, and of death as its consequence; and further, that all this came about through delusion (ἐξηπάτησε). The thing desired was not really good for man; but the ἐπιθυμία inspired by the tempter caused it to seem so. One great purpose of regenerating grace is to dispel this delusion; to bring us back to the true view of things as they are, and so to peace with God. Thus, in part, does the apostle teach us to regard the inscrutable mystery of sin, and the remedy for it in Christ. Romans 7:12, Romans 7:13 So that the Law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good. Has then that which is good become death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, through that which is good working death unto me; that sin might become exceeding sinful through the commandment. The question of Rom 7:7, "Is the Law sin?" has now been answered so far as this—that, far from being so, the commandment was in itself "unto life" (cf. Leviticus 18:5; Romans 10:5), only that sin took occasion by it, and so got power to slay. But still it would appear that law was ultimately the cause of death. Was, then, its purpose and effect, after all, deadly? for, though not sin, it seems to have been death to us. No, it is replied; away with the thought! Its effect was only to reveal sin in its true light; it was only an Ithuriel’s spear (’Par. Lost,’ bk. 4.),bringing out and exposing the deadly thing that before was latent. And (as is elsewhere set forth in pursuance of the line of thought) its effect in the end was really "unto life;" for its awakening of the sense of sin, and of a craving for redemption from it, was the necessary preparation for such redemption (cf. Galatians 3:19, seq.). Romans 7:14 For we know (we are all already aware of this; we recognize it as a principle; we can surely have no doubt of it; cf Romans 2:2; Romans 3:10) that the Law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin. The statement of Rom 7:12 is here in effect repeated as being one that cannot be gainsaid with respect to the Law, but with use now of the epithet πνευματικός; and this in opposition to myself being σαρκινός. The new word, πνευματικός, is obviously meant to express a further idea with respect to law, suitable to the line of thought now about to be pursued. Without lingering to mention varying suggestions of various commentators as to the sense in which the Law is here called spiritual, we may offer the following considerations in elucidation. Πνεῦμα and σάρξ are, as is well known, constantly contrasted in the New Testament. The former sometimes denotes the "Holy Spirit of God," and sometimes that highest part in ourselves which is in touch with the Divine Spirit. Σάρξ, though it may, in accordance with its original meaning, sometimes denote our mere bodily organization, is usually used to express our whole present human constitution, mental as well as bodily, considered as apart from the πνεῦμα. When St. Paul in one place distinguishes the constituent elements of human nature, he speaks of πνεῦμαψυχὴ, and σῶμα (1 Thessalonians 5:23). There ψυχὴ seems to denote the animal life or soul animating the σῶμα for the purposes of mere human life, but distinguished from the πνεῦμα, which associates him with the Divine life. Usually, however, πνεῦμα and σάρξ alone are spoken of; so that the term σάρξ seems to include the ψυχὴ, expressing our whole weak human nature now, apart from the πνεῦμα, which connects us with God (see Galatians 5:17, etc.). That in this and other passages σάρξ does not mean our mere bodily organization only, is further evident from sins not due to mere bodily lusts—such as want of affection, hatred, envy, pride—being called "works of the flesh" (cf. Galatians 5:19-22; 1 Corinthians 3:3). What, then, is meant by the adjective πνευματικός? Applied to man, it is, in 1 Corinthians 3:2, 1 Corinthians 3:3, opposed to σαρκικὸς (or σαρκινὸς), and in 1 Corinthians 2:14, to ψυχικὸς (cf. Jude 1:19); the latter word apparently meaning one in whom the ψυχὴ (as above understood), and not the πνεῦμα, dominates. Further, St. Paul (1 Corinthians 15:44) speaks of a σῶμαψυχικὸν and a πνευματικὸν, meaning by the former a tenement fitted for and adequate to the mere psychic life, and by the latter a new organism adapted for the higher life of the spirit, such as we hope to have hereafter; and in the same passage he uses the neuters, τὸψυχικὸν and τὸπνευματικὸν, with reference to "the first Adam," who was made, or became (ἐγένετο) εἰςψυχὴνζῶσαν, and "the last Adam," who was made εἰςπνεῦμαζωοποιοῦν. Thus πμεῦμα, generally, denotes the Divine, which man apprehends and aspires to, nay, in which he has himself a part in virtue of the original breathing into him of the breath of life (πνοὴνζωῆς) directly from God (Genesis 3:7), whereby he became a living soul (ἐγένετοεἰςψυχὴν) for the purposes of his mundane life (itself above that of the brutes), but retained also a share of the Divine πνεῦμα connecting him with God,and capable of being quickened so as to be the dominant principle of his being through contact with the πνεῦμαζωοποιοῦν. It would seem that the Law is here called πνευματικὸς, as belonging to the Divine sphere of things, and expressive of the Divine order. "The Law, both the moral law in the bosom of man, and the expression of that law in the Decalogue, is, as Augustine profoundly expresses it, a revelation of the higher order of things founded in the being of God. It is hence a πνευματικόν" (Tholuck). But man (tἐγὼδὲ), though still able to admire, nay, to delight in and aspire to, this higher order, cannot yet conform himself to it because of the σάρξ, infected with sin, which at present enthrals him: Ἐγὼδὲσαρκινὸςπεπραμένοςὑπὸτὴνἁμαρτίαν. Thus is fitly introduced the analysis of human consciousness with reference to law which follows. The word σαρκινὸς (which, rather than σαρκικὸς, is the best-supported reading) may be used to express merely our present constitution Ñ our being of flesh—so as to account for our inability, rather than our being fleshly, or carnally minded, as σαρκικὸς would imply. In two other passages (1 Corinthians 3:1 and Hebrews 7:16) authority is also in favour of σαρκινὸς instead of σαρκικὸς as in the Textus Receptus. Tholuck, however, doubts whether there was, in common usage, a distinction between the meaning of the two forms. The word πεπραμένος is significant. It denotes, not our having been originally slaves (vernae), but our having been sold into slavery. Slavery to sin is not the rightful condition of our nature. We are as the Israelites in Egypt, or as the captives in Babylon who remembered Zion. Hence the possibility of deliverance, if we feel the burden of our slavery and long to be free, when the Deliverer comes. Romans 7:15-25 For that which I do (rather, work, or perform, or accomplish, κατεργάζομαι) I know not: for not what I would, that I do (rather, practise; the verb here is πράσσω); but what I hate, that I do (ποιῶ). But if what I would not that I do, I consent unto the Law that it is good (καλός). Now then (νυνὶδὲ, not in temporal sense, but meaning, as the case is) it is no more I that work (κατεργάζομαι, as before) it, but sin that dwelleth in me. For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth not good (ἀγαθόν): for to will is present with me; but to perform (κατεργάζεσθθαι) that which is good (τὸκαλὸν) is not (ου), rather than οὐχαὐρίσκω as in the Textus Receptus, is the best-supported reading). For the good (ἀγαθόν) that I would I do not (οἰποιῶ): but the evil which I would not, that I practise (πράσσω). But if what I (ἐγὼ, emphatic) would not, that I do (ποιῶ), it is no longer I (ἐγὼ, again emphatic) that work (κατεργάζομαι) it, but sin that dwelleth in me. I find then the law, that to me who would do good, evil is present. For I delight in the Law of God after the inward man. But I see a different law in my members (on what is meant by "members" (μέλεσι) see note under Romans 6:13) warring against the law of my mind, and brining me into captivity to (or, according to some readings, by) the law of sin which is in my members. O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death? (probably in the same sense as "the body of sin" in Romans 6:6; see note thereon. Translate certainly as in the English Version; not this body of death, as if it meant this mortal body) Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the Law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin. In the note introducing this whole section (Romans 6:7 -25)its general drift has been intimated. The following additional comments may further explain the part of it which begins at Romans 6:15. (1) The initial γὰρ introduces proof of the ἐγὼ being in the condition spoken of in the preceding clause, viz. "sold under sin." For (the meaning is) am I not a bond-slave, when, as I feel is the case with me, I am not my own master? But, observe, the state that goes on to be described is that of an unwilling bond-slave; not of one who likes his bondage, and has no desire to be free. The conscience is supposed already, through the operation of law, to protest against sin; to hate its thraldom; not willingly to acquiesce in it. (2) The distinction between the verbs ποιῶ, πράσσωκατεργάζομαι, not observed in the English Version, but to which attention has been drawn in the above translation, has its meaning. Attention to the places where they occur will show their appropriateness in each case, denoting severally single acts, habitual practice, and general working, performance, or accomplishment. (3) The English Version is wrong in rendering, in Romans 6:15, "What I would, that I do not," so as to make the idea the same as that in Romans 6:19. There are really two different statements in the two verses—the first, of our doing what we wish not to do; the second, of our not doing what we wish to do; and after each the same conclusion is drawn in the same words, viz. that sin is the real worker (κατεργάζομαι being here the word appropriately used). (4) The conflicting principles, or energies, of human nature, between which the individual ἐγὼ, which wills and acts, is here regarded as being distracted, are the σάρξ in which sin dwells (which has been explained above; see note under Romans 6:14) on the one hand, and the νοῦς (Romans 6:23) of the ἔσωἄνθρωπος (Romans 6:22) on the other. The ἐγὼ is identified with the ἔσωἄνθρωπος, rather than regarded as an intermediate personality between the two. For it is spoken of throughout as willing what is good; and,. though in Romans 6:14 it is said to be σαρκινός, and though, in Romans 6:18, good dwells not in it, yet the first of these expressions only means that it is in the flesh at present, and therefore in bondage; and the latter is at once qualified by the addition, τουτέστινἐντῆσαρκίμου; it does not identify the ἐγὼ with the σάρξ. It is, we may remark in passing, this ἐγὼ—ὁἔσωἄνθρωπος—that is regarded as rising to a new life with Christ, so as to become a new man, delivered from bondage; this last expression, of course, involving a different idea from that of the inward man). It is to be observed, further, that throughout this section beginning at Romans 6:7, there is no distinction drawn (as elsewhere by St. Paul) between πνεῦμα and σάρξ; the idea of πνεῦμα, in fact, does not come in at all, except with regard to the Law, which is called πνευματικός. The reason is that the apostle is confining himself here to an examination of what man, even at his best, is in his mere human nature; of what thoughtful observers, though not theologians, may perceive him to be. It is a philosophical rather than a theological analysis. It is one that might commend itself to heathen philosophers, some of whom have, in fact, expressed themselves much to the same effect. Hence it is not till Romans 8:1-39., where man’s regeneration by the Divine πνεῦμα is portrayed, that the spiritual principle in himself, through which he is capable of such regeneration, comes into view. And it will be seen that it is this very idea of πνεῦμα that pervades that whole chapter. This essential distinction between the two chapters is sufficient in itself to disprove the theory that the regenerate state is described in Romans 7:1-25. (5) The senses in which the word νόμος is used in this chapter require to be perceived and distinguished, its usual sense (see under Romans 2:13) not being uniformly retained. There is, however, always some appended expression to indicate any new application of the word. We find it (a) in its usual sense, with the usual significance of the absence or the presence of the article, in Romans 7:7, Romans 7:9, Romans 7:12, Romans 7:14, Romans 7:16; and in Romans 7:22, still in the same sense, we have "the Law of God." We find also, (b) in Romans 7:23, "the law of my mind," whereby I delight in the "Law of God." Here "law" assumes a different sense from the other, but one in which the word is often used; as when we speak of the laws of nature, having in view, not so much a fiat external to nature which nature must obey, as the uniform rule according to which nature is found to work. The Latin word norma expresses the idea. Thus "the law of my mind" means the normal constitution of my higher and better self, whereby it cannot but assent to "the Law of God. Then (c) we have "the law of sin in my members;" i.e., in a similar sense, an antagonistic rule or constitution dominant in my σάρξ. Lastly, (d) in Romans 7:21, the general law (in like sense) of my complex human nature, which necessitates this antagonism: "the law, that when I would do good" (in accordance with the law of the mind), "evil is present with me" (in virtue of the other law). Ancient and other commentators have been much puzzled as to the meaning of Rom 7:21, from taking τὸννόμον at the beginning to denote the Mosaic Law, as νόμος usually does when preceded by the article. But not so when there is something after it to denote a different meaning; as there is here in the ὅτι at the end of the verse, meaning that, not (as some have understood it) because. (6) Difficulty has been found in the concluding clause of Rom 7:25, ἄραοὗν, etc. It follows the expression of thanksgiving, "Thanks be to God," etc., which certainly introduced the thought of deliverance from the state that had been described; and hence it is supposed by some that this clause must be a continuance of that thought, and so to be taken as an introduction to Romans 8:1-39. rather than a summing up of the preceding argument. It is said also, in support of this view, that more entire association of the ἐγὼ with the Law of God than was before intimated is here expressed; αὐτὸςἐγὼ being written instead of simply ἐγὼ, and δουλεύω being a stronger word than συνήδομαι (Romans 8:22). Thus the meaning would be, "Though in my flesh I still serve the law of sin (the φρόνημασάρκος still remains in me, notwithstanding my regeneration), yet now in my very real self I not only approve, but am in subjection to, the Law of God." It is, however, at least a question whether these slight differences of expression come to much; and both the introductory ἄραοὗν and the form of the clause suggest rather its being the summarized result of Rom 7:1-25. The additional emphasis added to ἐγὼ (which had, indeed, already been emphatic), and the substitution of δοελεύω for συνήδομαι, may serve only to bring out all the more strongly in the end what it had been the purpose of the whole passage to lead up to, viz. that man’s real self, when conscience is fully aroused, yearns for and is ready for redemption. There is no difficulty in so understanding the clause (as we should surely understand it naturally but for the preceding thanksgiving), if we regard the thanksgiving as a parenthetical exclamation, anticipating for a moment the purport of Rom 8:1-39. Such an exclamation is characteristic of St. Paul, and it adds life to the passage. Romans 7:6 The new spirit of Christian service. What God creates he creates for a purpose. When he gives life, there is a special career before the living creature; thus the fish is for the water, the bird for the air. When he imparts spiritual renewal, it is with a view to a new spiritual life. In re-creating human natures in the likeness of his own Son, God has it, so to speak, in his purpose that they should serve him, and that in "newness of the spirit." I. HAVE A NEW LORD TO SERVE. They are freed from the dominion of sin, from their state of bondage to the tyrant; they are endowed with spiritual liberty. And they are devoted to the personal service of Christ, that they may do his will, advance his cause, promote his glory. II. HAVE A NEW MOTIVE TO SERVICE. 1. The ground of their service is redemption, the distinctive fact and doctrine of the new economy. 2. The impulse to their service is grateful love, awakened by the experience of Christ’s redeeming power and grace. III. HAVE A NEW LAW OF SERVICE. This law is widely different from the "oldness of the letter." It extends to the spiritual realm, beginning-in fact within, and working outwardly. IV. HAVE A NEW EXAMPLE OF SERVICE. In the Lord Jesus they see the Servant of Jehovah, found in fashion as a man, assuming the form, the guise of a servant, ministering unto God and unto man, and in both relations fulfilling a perfect, flawless ministry. V. HAVE A NEW POWER FOE SERVICE. This is the help of the Holy Spirit, as the Spirit of zeal and holiness, of patience and of devotion. VI. HAVE A NEW MANNER OF SERVICE. They are not as the hireling who serves for wages, or as the bondman who serves from fear; but rather as the freedman who serves willingly and gratefully, as the child who serves from love. Christ introduced into the world a new style and tone of service; taught men the dignity and beauty of consecrated ministration. How precious and powerful this impulse and example have proved is known to every student of the history of Christ’s Church. VII. HAVE A NEW SCOPE FOR SERVICE. 1. Mutual service is an obligation in the Church springing from mutual love. The great are to serve the lowly, and the lowly the great. 2. Universal service is enjoined upon all who would do the will of the Divine Master. In both directions the service of those for whom Christ died is the service of Christ himself. VIII. HAVE A NEW REWARD FOR SERVICE. Nothing adventitious or external attracts those who are in sympathy with him who is at once the Servant and the Lord of all. Of all privileges, that most alluring and dear to their hearts is the favour of their Master, the joy of their Lord. Romans 7:7 Knowledge of sin by the Law. Although the apostle aimed in this Epistle to show that the Law by itself was unable and unfitted to secure men’s salvation, it is evident, both that he honoured the Law as an expression of the Divine character and will, and that he considered it, from a Christian point of view, to fulfil a most important purpose. Especially in this verse does he set forth the Law as awakening conscience of sin, and so preparing the way for the introduction of the gospel, both in the order of the Divine dispensations and in the course of individual experience. His own spiritual history is represented as typical: "I had not known sin, but by the Law." I. LAW IS THE OF THE WILL TO THE SUBJECT AND WILL. There is a sense in which the word "law" is commonly used in the exposition of physical science; it is in such connections equivalent to uniformity of antecedence and sequence. But this, though a proper employment of the term, is secondary and figurative; part of the connotation is intentionally abandoned. The faller meaning of law is seen when the reference is to requirement of certain modes of action; and when the requirement is made by one who has a just right to make it, a just claim upon the submission and obedience of those to whom the command is addressed. The superiority in the Lawgiver does not lie simply in physical power, but in moral character and authority. II. BEING UNDER SUCH LAW IMPLIES THE OF AND NATURE. The inferior animals are not, in the proper sense of the term, under law. Nor are babes, or idiots, or any whose moral nature is undeveloped. Man, as an intelligent being, can apprehend law; as an active and voluntary being, can obey law. Kant has put the matter in a very striking and a very just light, in saying that, whilst the unintelligent creation acts according to law, an intelligent being has the prerogative of acting according to the representation of law; i.e. he can understand, consciously adopt, and willingly and without constraint obey the law. Freedom is the power to obey or to disobey. III. IN TO THE OF THE LAW IS THE MEASURE OF TO THOSE WHO ARE SUBJECT TO IT. Confining attention to human beings possessed of thought, reason, and will, we cannot fail to detect degrees of acquaintance with the revelation which in various ways is vouchsafed to the race. There are those, as for example untutored savages, and the "waifs and strays" of a civilized community, whose knowledge of the Divine will is both very imperfect and very indistinct. Such in former ages was the case of the Gentiles as compared with the highly favoured Jews. Now, our Saviour himself, and, following his teaching, the inspired apostles, have plainly taught that responsibility varies with knowledge and opportunity. IV. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE OF EXPRESS AND VERBAL LAW . When the knowledge of duty is clear, defection and rebellion are aggravated in guilt. The sin of transgression is increased as the light sinned against is brighter. Such was the case with the Jews, who were worthy of sorer condemnation than the Gentiles, where both were disobedient. Comparatively, they only knew sin who knew the Law by which sin is prohibited. True, there is a general conscience, against which even the unenlightened transgressors are offenders; but they are the worse culprits who, having the light, walk not in it. V. THUS THE LAW, BY A HIGHER OF DUTY, AND BY MAKING SIN " SINFUL," THE WAY FOR THE OF THE DIVINE GOSPEL OF AND LIFE. The apostle avers that, but for the Law, he had not known sin, i.e. comparatively. If this had been all, he would have had little reason to thank the Law. But, in fact, the Law, proving the holiness and righteousness of God, and the powerlessness of man to obey, served to make the introduction of a new dispensation—that of grace—doubly welcome. Men were brought to feel their need of a Saviour, and, when that Saviour came, to receive him with alacrity and gratitude, and to use the means prescribed by which the penalties of the Law may be escaped, and the blessings of eternal salvation enjoyed. BY C.H. IRWIN Romans 7:1-17 The position of the Law under the New Testament. The apostle is here continuing his discussion of the immoral suggestion to which he alluded in the previous chapter (Romans 7:15), "What then? shall we sin, because we are not under the Law, but under grace?" I. THE OF THE LAW TO THE . 1. he Christian’s union with Christ involves his freedom from the Law. (1) From the Law as condemning him. "Ye are become dead to the Law by the body of Christ" (Romans 7:4). The Christian, by faith in Jesus Christ, becomes a participator in his death. "Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died; There is therefore now no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus." (2) From the Law as a motive-power. "But now we are delivered from the Law, having died to that wherein we were held [Revised Version]; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter" (Romans 7:6). The Authorized Version is here misleading when it translates, "that being dead wherein we were held." The apostle does not speak of the Law as being dead, but of Christians as being dead to the Law. The Law is not dead, but we are dead to it. We have a higher and a better life. 2. But this union with Christ and freedom from the Law do not imply that he is free to commit sin. The principles of the Law remain, though the power of it is gone, so far as justification or condemnation of the Christian is concerned. The Law was powerless to give fife. Through the sinfulness of our nature it brought forth fruit unto death (Romans 7:5). But our very freedom from the Law is in itself a reason for holy living. Christ implants in us a new principle. We now "serve in newness of spirit." Professor Croskery (’Plymouth Brethrenism’) deals with this subject very fully in a chapter on "The Law as a Rule of Life." "If Old Testament saints," he says, "could be under the Law cud yet not under curse, because they were under the promise—that is, under the covenant of grace—why should not New Testament saints, saved by grace, be under Law likewise, as a rule of life, without being overtaken by the curse? What difference was there between David’s sin and Peter’s sin, in relation to the Law? If David was bound to keep the ten commandments, including the seventh, are not New Testament saints similarly bound? Does not James settle this point when he says, ’He that said, Do not commit adultery, said also, Do not kill’ (James 2:11), and says this, too, to Christians? The passage [ch. 6:14] means, ’Ye are not under the Law as a condition of salvation, but under a system of free grace.’" The Law still remains as the rule of life, the standard of obedience. St. Paul himself says in this same chapter, "With the mind I myself serve the Law of God" (verse 25). And our Lord himself said, "Think not that I am come to destroy the Law or the prophets; I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil"(Matthew 5:17). II. THE OF THE LAW TO THE SINNER. 1. The Law reveals to him the depths and power of his own sinfulness. After the apostle has shown how, in the unregenerate nature, "the motions of sins, which were by the Law, did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death," he asks, "What shall we say then? Is the Law sin?" (verse 7). That is to say—Is the Law therefore in itself sinful? does it encourage sin? Far from it, he says. "Nay, I had not known sin, but by the Law." That is—I had not known the force or power of sin but by the law. "Sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful" (verse 13). Some would condemn the Bible because it describes sin, and pictures some of its best characters as falling into sins of gross description. But this, so far from being a defect of the Bible, is at once an evidence of its truthfulness, and an element in its purifying power upon humanity. The Bible does not describe sin to make us love it, but to turn us from it. So it is with the Law of God. It may awaken in our minds suggestions of sins that we would not otherwise have thought of (verses 7, 8), but conscience at once recognizes that this is due, not to the Law itself, but to the sinfulness of our nature. 2. The Law remains as the standard of right life. "The Law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good" (verse 12); "The Law is spiritual" (verse 14). Here is the answer to those who regard the Law as abrogated. The Law is still binding as the rule of life, the standard of morality. It therefore condemns the sinner. Thus still it becomes our schoolmaster, to bring us to Christ.—C.H.I. Romans 7:18-25 The inward conflict of the Christian heart. Two forces are for ever struggling for the soul of man. Goethe, the German poet, has immortalized that for us in his great drama of ’Faust,’ where Mephistopheles, the prince of evil, tempts a human being too successfully into the paths of destruction. Milton has immortalized it for us in his great epic, ’Paradise Lost.’ But these great poems are, after all, but echoes of the story of the Fall as told us in the Bible. These words of St. Paul are another echo of that story of the Fall. They might have been spoken by any of us. What folly to discuss the doctrine of human depravity as the result of the Fall, when every man carries the proof of it in his own breast! Thank God, there is a Paradise Regained as well as a Paradise Lost. There is a power of good as well as of evil working on the human heart. There is "a power, not ourselves, that makes for righteousness," and—something more than he who used those famous words meant by them—them is the personal power of a personal Saviour, coming down into this sinful world, and trying to lift men up again from their fallen and lost condition, by the power of his cress, by the power of his Divine love and mercy, by the power of his resurrection, by the power of his Spirit working upon their hearts. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/pulpit-commentary/ Romans 8:1-39 (c) The blessed condition and assured hope of such as are in Christ Jesus. The summary of the contents of this chapter, which follows the Exposition, may be referred to in the first place by the student, so as to assist comprehension of the line of thought. Romans 8:1 There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus. (The additional words of this verse in the Textus Receptus have but slight support, having probably been supplied from Romans 8:4. They are out of place here.) "Nunc venit ad liberationem et libertatem. Non autem ponit adversativam δὲ, autem, sed conclusivam a!ra, ergo; quia jam in fine capitis 7. confinia hujus status attigit. Nunc etiam plane ex diverticulo eximio in viam redit quae habetur cap. Romans 7:6" (Bengel). Romans 8:2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus made me free (not hath made me; the aorist refers to the time when the Christian became possessed of the Spirit of life in Christ) from the law of sin and death. Here is a distinct contrast to the state described in Romans 8:14, Romans 8:23 of Romans 7:1-25., and a realization of what was yearned for in Romans 7:24, "the law of sin and of death" being evidently "the law of sin in the members" previously spoken of. The ἐγὼ, before in captivity to this law, is now freed from it. And how? Not by its becoming a different ἐγὼ; not by a change of the constituent elements of human nature; but by the introduction of a new law—the law of the Spirit of life—which has emancipated the ἐγὼ from its old unwelcome thraldom. In virtue of this new law, introduced into my being, I am now free to give my entire allegiance to the law of God. Νόμος, be it observed, is here again used in a sense different from its usual one, and we thus have a still further νόμος, in addition to those defined in the note after Romans 7:25. The designation of this new law is in marked opposition to that in which the ἐγὼ was before said to be held; we have life in opposition to death, and the Spirit in opposition to the flesh, as well as freedom in opposition to captivity. The Spirit is, in fact, the Divine Spirit, taking possession of what is spiritual (now at length brought into view) in the inward man, making him partaker in the Divine life, and able to serve God freely. The expressions used bring out strikingly one essential distinction between Law and Gospel, viz. that the principle of the former is to control and discipline conduct by requirements and threats; but of the latter to introduce into man’s inner being a new principle of life, whence right conduct may spontaneously flow. Coercion is the principle of the one; inspiration of the other. An illustration may be found in the treatment of disease—on the one hand by attempted repression of specific ailments, and on the other by imparting a new vitality to the system, which may of itself dispel disease. It is shown next how this new state of freedom has been brought about. First, by what God in Christ has done for us apart from ourselves; the subjective condition in ourselves being introduced at the end of Rom 7:4, τοῖςμὴ, etc. Romans 8:3 For what the Law could not do (this is certainly what is meant by τὸἀδύνατοντοῦνόμου), in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in likeness of flesh of sin, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh. The Law could not deliver from the domination of sin; it was weak for such a purpose (cf. Hebrews 7:18, Hebrews 7:19) but this not through any defect in itself but as having to work through our sinful flesh which refused obedience. And it was not the office of law to regenerate; it could only command and threaten. Hence the deliverance came, and could only come, from God himself (and this in accordance with the grand idea of the whole Epistle, expressed by the phrase, "the righteousness of God"); and so he sent his own Son (i.e. his Son essentially—in a sense in which none of us can be called sons, himself Divine. The whole drift of the passage, as well as ἑαυτοῦ, requires this conception); and he sent him into the very sphere of things that required redemption, that by actual participation in it he might personally redeem it; for he sent him in likeness of our "flesh of sin." It is not said in flesh of sin; for that might imply sin in Christ’s individual humanity: but, on the other hand, "in likeness" (ἐνὁμοιώματι) does not imply docetism, as though Christ’s humanity were not real; for stress is evidently laid on the fact that it was in our actual human flesh that he "condemned" sin. The phrase appears to mean the same as what is expressed in Hebrews 2:17 and Hebrews 4:15: Ὤφειλεκατὰπάντατοῖςἀδελφοῖςὁμοιωθῆναι, and Πεπειραμένονκατὰπὰντακααθὁμοιότηταχαρὶςἁμαρτίας. The addition of περὶἀμαρτίας "adds to the how the wherefore" (Meyer). Both this and the preceding expression are most naturally and intelligibly connected with τέμψας; not, as some say, with κατέκρινε. Περὶ comes suitably after the former verb, as denoting the occasion and purpose of the sending (cf. προσένεγκεπερὶτοῦκαθαρισμοῦ, Luke 5:14). In Hebrews 10:8 (quoting from Psalms 40:7 in the LXX.) we find θυσίανκαὶπροσφορὰνκαὶὁλοκαυτώματακαὶπερὶἁμαρτίας, where the expression signifies offerings for sin; and in Hebrews 10:18 we have προσφορὰπερὶἁμαρτίας. The correspondence of phrase here suggests decidedly the idea of the purpose of atonement being intended to be expressed by it, though it does not follow that περὶἁμαρτίας is used here substantively as it seems to be in Hebrews 10:8. But in what sense are we to understand condemned (κατέκρινε) sin? We observe first that the verb appears to be suggested by κατάκριμα in Hebrews 10:1, the connection being that formerly sin condemned us, but now sin itself has been condemned; that is (as Meyer expresses it), deposed from its rule in the flesh—"jure sue dejectum" (Calvin). (Perhaps similarly, John 16:11, ὁἄρχωντοῦκόσμουτούτουκέκριται.) One view of the force of κατέκρινε (found in Origen, and taken by Erasmus and others), that it denotes the punishment of sin endured by Christ vicariously on the cross, is not only not obvious, but inconsistent also with τὸἀδύνετοντοῦνόμου preceding; for what the Law could not do, was not to punish sin, but to deliver from it. Nor is there, further, anything in the language used to confine the condemnation of sin, in whatever sense intended, to the atonement made for it on the cross itself. It was in the whole mission of the Saviour (expressed by πέμψας) that sin was "condemned;" and the idea may include his triumph over it in his human life no less than the penalty paid for it on the cross in behalf of man. "In the flesh" (connected with condemned, not with sin) does not mean Christ’s own flesh, but human nature generally. He represented man, having become for our sake the Soul of man; and we share his triumph over sin, made in our very human flesh, when we are baptized into his death, and become thereupon partakers of his resurrection. This idea, ever present to St. Paul’s mind, is expressed in the next verse, where our own appropriation of the condemnation of sin in Christ is declared. Romans 8:4 That the ordinance (or, righteous requirement, rather than righteousness, as in the Authorized Version. The word is δίκαιωμα, not δικαιοσύνη. It Occurs elsewhere in the New Testament, Luke 1:6; Romans 1:32; Romans 2:26; Hebrews 9:1; and in a like sense often in the LXX.; also, though with a difference of meaning, Romans 5:16, Romans 5:18) of the Law may be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. This, then, is the purpose of Christ’s victory over sin—that the requirement of the Law in us too may be fulfilled; which evidently means more -than that his victory may be imputed to us, on the ground of our faith only, while we remain as we were. The expression, δὶκαιωμαπληρωθῆ, and also the condition appended at the end of the verse, imply that the "Spirit of life" must so dominate over the flesh in ourselves that the Law may forfeit its claims over us. The sinful propensions of the flesh remain in us still (as the verses that follow distinctly show); but the Spirit that is in us is strong enough to overcome them now (cf. Galatians 5:16-18). It does not follow from this that any Christians will actually avoid all sin, or that they can be accepted on the ground of their own performance: to say this would be to contradict other Scripture (cf. James 2:10; 1 John 1:8); and Paul confessed himself to be not already perfected (Philippians 3:12). But perfection, through Christ who lives in them, is put before us as, at any rate, the aim of the regenerate (cf. Matthew 5:48); and by actual and progressive holiness they are to show that their union with Christ is real. His Spirit within them must, at any rate, give a new direction and tone to their characters and lives. Romans 8:5-8 For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit. For the mind of the flesh is death; but the mind of the Spirit is life and peace. Because the mind of the flesh is enmity against God; for it is not subject to the Law of God, neither indeed can be. So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God. These verses are added for explanation and enforcement of the condition demanded at the end of Rom 8:4; pressing the fact that "the infection of our nature"—"the lust of the flesh, called in Greek phronema sarkos" (Art. 9.)—with its antagonism to the Law of God, and its deadly tendency, remains even in the regenerate, and that hence we are still in danger of succumbing to it; but that if we do—unless the Spirit within us prove in practice the stronger power—the condition required for our individual redemption is not fulfilled. οἱἐνσαρκὶὄντες, in Romans 8:7, evidently does not mean those who are still in the body, but the same essentially as οἱκατὰσάρκαὄντες in Romans 8:5; ἐν denotes the element in which they live (see verse following). The δὲ which connects Romans 8:8 with the foregoing has its ecbatic, not its adversative sense. So then, in the Authorized Version, though not strictly equivalent, seems sufficiently to express the general idea. Romans 8:9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you. But (not now, as in the Authorized Version) if any man hath not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his. That is—Though I imply the possibility of even the baptized being still in the flesh, so as to be unable to please God, this is certainly not your condition; if, indeed (as is surely the case), your conversion was a reality, so that you have become really Christ’s; for the Spirit of Christ (which is the Spirit of God) of necessity dwells (so as to be the ruling power) in all such as are really his (cf 1 Corinthians 3:16). We observe here how "the Spirit of Christ" is identified with "the Spirit of God," so as to imply the essential Deity of Christ, and also to lend support to the doctrine of the double procession of the Holy Ghost (cf. 1 Peter 1:11). Observe, too, how persistently and continually the apostle presses his protest against antinomian abuse of the doctrine of grace, with which he began this section of his Epistle, at Romans 6:1, He never loses sight of it; it pervades the whole. If St. Paul, especially in this Epistle, is, on the one hand, the great exponent of the doctrine of justification by faith only, he is, on the other, no less the persistent preacher of the necessity of works. Sanctification is continually pressed as the necessary result, as well as evidence, of justification. He only shuts out human works from the office of justifying. Romans 8:10, Romans 8:11 But (or, and) if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; bat the Spirit is life because of righteousness. But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwelleth in you, he that raised up Christ (the previous Ἰησοῦν denotes the human person of our Lord; Χριστὸν his office, fitly used here in connection with the thought of his resurrection ensuring ours. Some readings give τὸν before, and Ἰησοῦν after, Χριστὸν) from the dead shall quicken also your mortal bodies, through his Spirit that dwelleth in you. These verses have been variously understood. It has been supposed by some that Romans 8:10 continues the thought of Rom 8:9; "the body" (τὸσῶμα) meaning the same as "the flesh (σάρξ),and dead (νεκρὸν) meaning νενεκρωμένον, i.e. mortified, or lifeless with respect to the power of sin that was in it (cf. Romans 6:6, ἵνακαταργηθῇτὸσῶματῆςἀμαρτίας). Thus the meaning of the first clause of Rom 8:10 would be, "If Christ be in you, the body of sin in you is dead; but you are alive in the Spirit." Decisive objections to this view are, (1) that the word σῶμα by itself is not elsewhere used as an equivalent to σάρξ, but as denoting our mere bodily organization. This statement is consistent with the metaphorical application of the word sometimes in a different verse, as in Romans 6:6, above quoted, and in Romans 7:24. Observe also τὰθνητὰσώματαὑμῶν in Romans 7:11, which can hardly be taken but as expressing what is intended here; (2) that διὰ with the accusative (διὰτὴνἁμαρτίαν) cannot be forced out of its proper meaning of "because of," which, according to the view we are considering, would be unintelligible; (3) that Romans 7:11, which is obviously connected in thought with Romans 7:10, cannot well be brought into tune with it according to the view proposed. All is made clear, in view both of language and of context, by taking these two verses as introducing a new thought, which is carried out afterwards in Romans 7:18, viz. that of the drawback to the full enjoyment and development of our spiritual life owing to the mortal bodies which clothe us now and the purpose is to bid us believe in the reality of our redemption, and persevere in correspondent life, notwithstanding such present drawback. Thus the idea is that, though in our present earthly state the mortal body is death-stricken in consequence of sin (δἰἁμαρτίαν)—subject to the doom of Adam, that extended to all his race (cf. Romans 5:12, etc.)—yet, Christ being in us now, the same Divine Spirit that raised him from the dead will in us too at last overcome mortality. cf. 1 Corinthians 15:22, "As in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive" (ζωοποιηθήσονται, the same word as in 1 Corinthians 15:11 here); and compare also all that follows in that chapter. This view of the meaning of the passage before us is strongly confirmed by our finding, in 2 Corinthians 4:7-5:6, exactly the same idea carried out at length, with a correspondence also of the language used. The frail, mortal, ever-dying earthen vessels, in which we have now the treasure of our life in Christ, are there regarded as crippling the expansion of our spiritual life, and causing us to "groan, being burdened" (cf. in the chapter before us, verse 23, ἐνἐαυτοῖςστενάζομεν); but the very consciousness of this higher life within him, yearning so for an adequate and deathless organism, assures the apostle that God has one in store for him, having already given him "the earnest of the Spirit." And this seems to be what is meant hereby "shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you." As to particular expressions in the verses before us, νεκρὸν, applied to "the body," may be taken to mean infected with death, and doomed to it, the apostle now draws a conclusion (expressed by ἄραοὗν) from what has been so far said, so as to press the more the obligation of a spiritual life in Christians. Romans 8:12, Romans 8:13 So then, brethren, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live after the flesh; for if ye live after the flesh, ye must (μέλλετε, expressing here a result that must; follow. The Authorized Version has "shall;’ not distinguishing the force of the phrase from that of the simple future ζήσεσθε which follows), die; but if by the Spirit ye do mortify (rather, do to death, or make to die, so as to correspond to the die preceding) the deeds of the body, ye shall live. Here "the body" (τοῦσώματος) must be taken in the same sense as in Romans 8:10, Romans 8:11. True, the "deeds" spoken of are, in fact, those of the flesh; but the body is regarded as the organ of the lusts of the flesh, and it is fitly named here in connection with the thought of the preceding verses. The word translated. "deeds" is πράξεις, denoting, not single acts, but rather doings—the general outcome in action of fleshly lusts using the body as their organ. Μέλλετεἀποθήσκειν and ζήσεσθε, viewed in connection with ζωοποιήσει in Romans 8:11, seem to point ultimately to the result hereafter of the two courses of life denoted: but not, it would seem, exclusively; for our future state is constantly regarded by the apostle as the continuance and sequence of what is begun in us already—whether of life in Christ now unto life eternal, or of death in sin now unto death beyond the grave. The general idea may be stated thus: If ye live after the flesh, the power in you to which you give your allegiance and adhesion will involve you in its own doom, death; but if ye live after the Spirit, you identify yourselves with the Spirit of life that is in you, whereby you will be emancipated at last even from these your mortal bodies, whose doings you already slay. Romans 8:14-17 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God. For ye received not the spirit of bondage again unto fear; but ye received the Spirit of adoption, wherein we cry, Abba, Father. The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are children of God: and if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified with him. In Romans 8:14 is introduced a further ground for the assertion in Romans 8:13, ζήσεσθε; viz. the felt sonship to God of those who have so received his Spirit as to be led (i.e. practically actuated) by it. We say "felt" because, though in this verse the sonship is alleged as a fact, yet, in the following verses (15,16) the inward experience of true Christians is appealed to as evidence of such sonship. Then, in Romans 8:17, the thought is carried out, that sonship implies inheritance, and hence a share in the glorified eternal life of Christ. (This conclusion makes further evident what was meant to be implied above in the expression ζήσεσθε.) "When, after your conversion," the apostle would say, "ye received the Spirit, it did not inspire you with the fear of slaves, but with filial love and trust. And this you know also is the feeling that we give vent to in the congregation, when we cry out [κράζομεν, denoting emotional utterance], Abba, Father." This last expression is given by St. Mark as our Lord’s own in the garden of Gethsemane (Mark 14:36). We may conclude that the Aramaic word ἀββᾶ was the one used by him, and heard by St. Peter, who is said to have been St. Mark’s informant in the composition of his Gospel; the equivalent Greek word, ὁπατήρ, having been added originally by the evangelist in explanation. Afterwards it may be further supposed that the Greek-speaking Christians came to use the whole phrase, as it had been delivered to them, in their own devotions, as representing our Lord’s own mode of addressing the Father, and so as expressing peculiarly their union with Christ, and their filial relation to God in him. It is probable also, from the way St. Paul here introduces the expression (κράζομεν, changing from the second to the first person plural), that it was in customary use, perhaps at some special parts of the service, in congregational worship. It occurs once more in a passage closely corresponding with the one before us, and which should be studied in connection with it (Galatians 4:6). It is to be observed how, in verse 17, the idea of our sonship now, and consequently of our being joint-heirs with Christ, leads up to a resumption of the now prevailing thought of our present condition in the mortal body being no bar to our final inheritance of life. It is our being as yet in these mortal bodies that is the cause of our present suffering; but he also was in the body, and he also so suffered; and our sharing in his sufferings really unites us the more to him, and the more ensures our final inheritance with him (cf. 2 Corinthians 1:5, 2 Corinthians 1:7; Philippians 3:10). The apostle introduces next a deep and suggestive view, both in explanation of our now being subject to suffering, and in confirmation of our expectation of future glory notwithstanding. He points to nature generally, to God’s whole creation, so far as it is under our view in this mundane sphere, as being at present "subject to vanity," and, as it were, groaning under some power of evil, which is at variance with our ideal of what it should be, and from which there is a general and instinctive yearning for deliverance. Our present sufferings—all those drawbacks to the full enjoyment of our spiritual life—are due to our being at present in the body, and so forming part of the present system of things. But that general yearning is in itself significant of a deliverance; and so the sympathetic witness of nature confirms the hope of our higher spiritual yearnings, and encourages us to endure and wait. Such is the general drift of the passage, continued to the end of verse 25. Particular thoughts and expressions will be noticed in the course of it. Romans 8:18, Romans 8:19 For I reckon that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed to us-ward. (So, as in the Revised Version, or upon us, as Tyndale and Cranmer, rather than in us, as in the Authorized Version. The expression is εἰςἡμᾶς, and the idea is of Christ appearing in glory, and shedding his glory on us, cf. 1 John 3:2.) For the earnest expectation of the creature (or, creation) waiteth for the revelation of the sons of God. "Revelatur gloria: et tum revelantur etiam filii Dei" (Bengel). God’s sons will be revealed as being such, and glorified (cf. 1 Corinthians 4:5; also 1 John 3:2). Ἠκτίσις, in this verse and afterwards, has been variously understood. The word properly means actus creationis, and is so used in Romans 1:20; but usually in the New Testament denotes what has been created, as, in English, creation. Sometimes, where the context limits its application, it denotes mankind, as Mark 16:15 and Colossians 1:23; or it may be used for an individual creature (cf. Romans 8:39; Hebrews 4:13). Where there is nothing to limit its meaning, it must be understood of the whole visible creation, at any rate in the world of man. Thus in Mark 10:6; Mark 13:19; 2 Peter 3:4. And so here, except so far as the context limits it; for see especially πᾶσηἡκτίσις in verse 22. It is, indeed, apparently so limited to the part of creation of which we have cognizance at present; for see οἴδαμεν in verse 22, which denotes a known fact. But is there any further limitation, as many commentators contend? Putting aside as untenable, in view of the whole context (see especially verse 23), the view of those who understand the new spiritual creation of the regenerate to be meant, we may remark as follows: (1) That ἡκτίσις includes certainly all mankind, not excepting the regenerate. Καὶἡμεῖςαὐτοὶ in verse 23 means that "we who have the firstfruits of the Spirit" are included, not that we are a class apart. (2) The whole animal creation is included too. So general a term as πᾶσαἡκτίσις could not surely have been used if man only had been meant. And it is obviously true that the whole sentient creation, as well as man, has a share now in the general suffering. To the objection that the irrational creatures cannot be conceived as sharing in the "hope" and "earnest expectation" spoken of, it may be replied that, so far as it seems to be implied that they do, it may only be that the apostle, by a fine prosopopeia, conceives them as feeling even as the human mind feels concerning them. But, further, conscious hope and expectation does not seem, if the language of the passage be examined, to be distinctly attributed to them. All that is of necessity implied is that they share in the groaning from which we crave deliverance. (3) Inanimate nature too may be included in the idea, it also seeming to share in the present mystery of evil, and falling short of our ideal of a terrestrial paradise. Tholuck appositely quotes Philo as saying that all nature ἀσθένειανἐνδέχεταικαὶκάμνει. It may be that St. Paul had in his mind what is said in Genesis of the cursing of the ground for man’s sake, and of the thorns and thistles; and also the pictures found in the prophets of a renovated earth, in which the desert should rejoice and blossom as the rose. Calvin comments on the whole passage thus: "Omissa expesitionum varietate, hunc locum accipio, nullum esse elementum, nullamque mundi pattern, quae non, veluti praesontis miseriae agnitione tacta, in spem resurrectionis intenta sit." Again, "Spem creaturis quae sensu carent ideo tribuit, ut fideles oculos aperiant ad conspectum invisibilis vitae, quamvis adhuc sub deformi habitu lateat." Romans 8:20, Romans 8:21 For the creature (or, creation, as before) was subjected to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who subjected it in hope. Because (or, that; i.e. in hope that) the creature (or, creation) also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the liberty of the glory of the sons of God. The aorist ὑπετάγη ("was subjected") seems to imply that the present "vanity" and "bondage of corruption" were not inherent in the original Creation, or of necessity to last for ever. Thus the assertions of Gen 1:1-31: and 31, stand unshaken, viz. that in the beginning God created all things, and that all at first was "very good." The ideas, resorted to in order to account for existing evil, of matter (ὕλη) being essentially evil, and of a δημιουργός, other than the Supreme God, having made the world, are alike precluded. It might serve as an answer to the argument of Lucretius against a Divine origin of things- "Nequaquam nobis divinius esse paratam Naturam rerum, tanta star praedita culpa" Why the "creature" was thus "subjected" is not here explained. No solution of the old insoluble problem of τοθὲντὸκακὸν is given. All that is, or could be, said is that it was διὰτὸνὑποτάξαντα, meaning God. It was his will that it should be so; this is all we know; except that we find the beginning of evil, so far as it affects man, attributed in Scripture to human sin. But he so subjected his creation in hope. This expression may refer to the protoevangelium of Gen 3:15, or to the never-dying hope in the human heart; to either or to both. The latter idea is expressed in the myth of Pandora’s box. Further, the creature is said to have been so subjected "not willingly" (οὐχἑκοῦσα). No sentient beings acquiesce in suffering; they resent evil, and would fain flee from it. Man especially unwillingly submits to his present bondage. When in Genesis 3:21 the hope is expressed of the creature (or creation) itself being eventually freed from the present bondage of corruption, it may be that the human part of creation only is in the writer’s eye; but it may be also (there being still no expressed limitation of the word κτίσις) that he conceives a final emancipation of the whole creation from evil (cf. Ephesians 1:10; 1 Corinthians 15:23-27; 2 Peter 3:13). But if so, it is not said that the peculiar glory of the sons of God will extend to all creation, but only that all will be freed into the freedom of their glory; which may mean that the day of the revelation of the sons of God in glory will bring with it a general emancipation of all creation from its present bondage. Such a great final hope finds expression in the verse— "That God, which ever lives and loves, One God, one law, one element, And one far-off Divine event, To which the whole creation moves." (’In Memoriam.’) The present condition of things is in Genesis 3:20 denoted by ματαιότης, and in Genesis 3:21 by τῆςδουλειάςτῆςφθορᾶς. The first of these words is the equivalent in the LXX. of the Hebrew לכֶהֶ, which means properly "breath," or "vapour," and is used metaphorically for anything frail, fruitless, evanescent, vain. It is often applied to idols, and it is the word in Ecclesiastes where it is said that "all is vanity" (cf. also Psalms 39:5, Psalms 39:6). It seems here to denote the frailty, incompleteness, transitoriness, to which all things are now subject. "Ματαιότης sonat frustatio, quod creatura interim non assequatur quod utcunque contendit efficere" (Erasmus). Φθορᾶς intimates corruption and decay. Romans 8:22, Romans 8:23 For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now. And not only so, lout ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan Within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body. The present unwilling subjection of the whole visible creation to evil is here still more forcibly expressed, and spoken of as being what is known—a subject of experience to all who observe and think; and it is added that this state of things continues still—it is "until now." The yearned-for deliverance has not yet come; and therefore we should not be surprised if we too, the regenerate, while in the body, are not yet exempt from our share in the universal groaning. For we have but the first fruits of the Spirit as yet, not its full triumph; cf. "the earnest of the Spirit" (2 Corinthians 1:22), and "the earnest of our inheritance " (Ephesians 1:14). Its being said that we still wait for our adoption as sons is not inconsistent with other statements (as in Ephesians 4:5-7, and above, Ephesians 4:14, etc.), to the effect that we are already adopted, and are already sons; for υἱοωεσία here denotes the final realization of our present sonship, when the sons of’ God shall be revealed (Romans 8:19). Similarly, our redemption (ἀπολύτρωσις) is here regarded as future. In one sense we are redeemed already; in another we await our redemption, i.e. the full accomplishment thereof. It is the consummation called by our Lord ἡπαλιγγενεσία (Matthew 19:28), and by St. Peter, ἀποκατάστασιςπάντων (Acts 3:21). cf. 2 Peter 3:13, and Revelation generally. "Of our body" seems to be added with reference to what has been seen above as to our present "mortal bodies" being both the organs of the lust of the flesh and the hindrances to the proper development of our inward spiritual life. Romans 8:24, Romans 8:25 For by (or, in) hope we were saved; not are saved, as in the Authorized Version. The aorist ἐσώθημεν, like ἐλάβετε in Romans 8:15, points to the time of conversion. The dative ἐλπίδι, which has no preposition before it, seems here, to have a modal rather than medial sense; for faith, not hope, is that whereby we are ever said to be saved. The meaning is that when the state of salvation was entered upon, hope was an essential element in its appropriation. A condition, not of attainment, but of hope, is therefore the normal condition of the regenerate now; and so, after shortly pointing out the very meaning of hope, the apostle enforces his previous conclusion, that they must be content at present to wait with patience. But hope that is seen is not hope: for what a man seeth, why doth he yet hope for? But if we hope for that we see not, then do we with patience wait for it. Now comes in a further thought, and a very interesting one. Romans 8:26, Romans 8:27 Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for what we should pray for as we ought we know not: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered. And he that searcheth the hearts knoweth what is the mind of the Spirit, because (or, that) he maketh intercession for the saints according to the will of God. Here, then, is a further source of help and comfort to Christians under present trials. Of themselves they know not what relief to crave. St. Paul himself knew not what to pray for as he ought, when he asked for removal of his thorn in the flesh; if left to themselves, their long waiting and their manifold perplexities might damp their hope; but a Helper beyond themselves comes in to succour them, viz. the Holy Spirit himself, who intercedes (ὑπερεντυγχάνει) for them. But how? Not as the Son intercedes for them, apart from themselves, at the mercy-seat; but within themselves, by inspiring them with these unutterable (or, unuttered) groanings; and they are conscious that such deep and intense yearnings are from the Divine Spirit moving them, and teaching them to pray. They may not still be able to put their requests of God into definite form, or even express them in words; but they know that God knows the meaning of what his own Spirit has inspired. This is a deep and pregnant thought. Even apart from the peculiar faith and inspiration of the gospel, the internal consciousness of the human soul, with its yearnings after something as yet unrealized, affords one of the most cogent evidences of a life to come to those who feel such yearnings. For ideals seem to postulate corresponding realities; instinctive longings seem to postulate fulfilment. Else were human nature a strange riddle indeed. But Christian faith vivifies the ideal, and intensifies the longing; and thus the prophecy of internal consciousness acquires a new force to the Christian believer; and this all the more from his being convinced that the quickening of spiritual life of which he is conscious is Divine. The psalmist of old, when he sang, "As the hart panteth after the waterbrooks, so panteth my soul after thee, O God," felt in these ardent though inarticulate pantings a presage of fulfilment of his "hope in God." So the devout Christian; and all the more in proportion to the intenseness and definiteness of his yearnings, and his conviction that they are from God. Romans 8:28 And we know that to them that love God all things work together for good, to them that are called according to his purpose. A still further reason for endurance. Not only do these inspired groanings strengthen our hope of deliverance; nay, also we know (whether from God’s Word, or inspired conviction, or experience of their effects) that these very trials that seem to hinder us are so overruled as to further the consummation to them that love God (cf. above, Romans 5:3, etc.); and at the end of the verse there is added, as introducing a still further ground of assurance, τοῖςκατὰπρόθεσινκλητοῖς; the significance of which expression is shown in the following versos, which carry out the thought of it. Romans 8:29, Romans 8:30 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren. And whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified. Thus is introduced the doctrine of predestination. This is indeed a principal passage on which theological theories with regard to it have been built. It, with the context, is the basis of the definition of predestination in Art. 17. It is, therefore, of great importance to consider carefully what the apostle here really says, and appears most obviously to mean; it being the duty of the expositor to pay regard to this only, in view of the language used, the way it is introduced, and any cognate passages that may throw light upon it. We may observe, in the first place, that it is plain that more is spoken of here than national election, or predestination to a state of privilege, which is the subject especially treated in Romans 9:1-33. Individual predestination is in view; and this not to gospel privileges only, but also carrying with it the result of glory. But it still remains to be seen whether such predestination is regarded as (1) absolute, i.e. irrespective, with regard to its final result, of the condition of man’s use of grace given; and, if so, whether (2) arbitrary, i.e. irrespective of the Divine foreknowledge of what men would be, and themselves deserve. The Calvinistic view is that God from all eternity, of the mere good pleasure of his will, selected certain persons out of mankind to be the heirs of glory; the Arminian is that he foresaw from all eternity who would, in the exercise of their own free-will, respond to his purpose, and, in virtue of such foreknowledge, preordained them to glory. It is hardly necessary to consider whether there is any countenance given to the view that predestination ensures salvation, however a man may live; the obligation of actual holiness in Christians being (as we have seen) so strongly insisted on all along. If, then, the Calvinistic theory should appear to be supported, it must be with the proviso that predestination of necessity carries with it the grace of perseverance in good works, or at any rate a true conversion before the end, as well as final glory. Let us, in the first place, observe the way in which St. Paul introduces the subject, so as better to understand his drift. He has been speaking of the trials and imperfections of the present life, and urging his readers not to be discouraged by them, on the ground that, if they continue to "live after the Spirit," these things will by no means hinder, but rather further, the final issue. To strengthen this position he introduces the thought of God’s eternal purpose; in effect thus: Your being in the state of grace in which you now feel yourselves to be, is due to God’s eternal purpose to call you to this state, and thus in the end to save you. It is impossible that the circumstances in which he places you now, or any power whatever, should thwart God’s eternal purpose. But it is not of necessity implied by anything that is actually said that the persons addressed might not themselves resist the Divine purpose. In fact, their own perseverance appears to be presupposed already, and they have been urged to it all along, as though their use of grace depended on themselves. Hence the apostle in this passage does not really touch the theoretic questions that have been raised by theologians, his purpose being simply the practical one of encouraging his readers to persevere and hope. We may now examine the successive expressions in the passage, and see what they imply. In Romans 9:28 the context shows πάντα to have especial reference to external circumstances of trial, and not at all to men’s own sins. Calvin, commenting on it, quotes St. Augustine as saying, "Peceata quoque sua, ordinante Dei providentia, sanctis ideo non nocere ut potius corum saluti inserviant;" but while he assents to this proposition, he denies, with truth, that any such meaning is intended here. It may be observed, in passing, that Augustine’s proposition, though it sounds strange, may, in a certain sense, be accepted as true: "We must continually err in order to be humble; our frailty and sins are the tools that God uses". Further, τοῖςκλητοῖς cannot be understood as limiting τοῖςἀγαπῶσιτὸνΘεὸν, as though among those that love God only some are "the called;" nor can κατὰπρόθεσιν be understood as limiting κλητοὶ, as though even of the called not all are called with the purpose of saving them. Only a preconceived idea could surely have suggested such an interpretation of the verse. In Romans 9:29 (γιγνώσκειν bearing the sense of "to determine," as well as of "to know") προέγνω may possibly mean "predetermined’’ rather than "foreknew." Elsewhere in the New Testament, when used of men, it has the latter sense (Acts 26:5; 2 Peter 3:17). When used of God, it may, as here, have either meaning (cf. Romans 11:2; 1 Peter 1:20); but in the text last referred to the first meaning seems more probable. So also of πρόγνωσις in Acts 2:23 and 1 Peter 1:2. The distinction would not be of much importance but for the fact that the sense of "foreknew" has been pressed in support of the Arminian view; viz. that Divine predestination was consequent on the Divine foreknowledge of what men would be. It would not, indeed, really prove this view, since it might only mean that God knew beforehand the objects of his intended mercy. Calvin, though translating praecognovit, strongly rebuts the Arminian inference, saying, "Insulsi colligunt illi, quos dixi, Deum non alios elegisse nisi quos sua gratia dignos fore praevidit." Again, "Sequitur notitiam hanc a bene placito pendere, quia Deus nihil extra seipsum praeseivit quos voluit adoptando, sod tantum signavit quos eligere volebat." Προώρισε (which might, perhaps, be better rendered preordained, which is its proper meaning, so as to avoid the necessary idea of irresistible destiny which is commonly associated with the word predestinate) must be taken, not absolutely, but in connection with συμμόρφους. That the elect should in the first place be "conformed to the image of Christ" is all that is, here at least, denoted as preordained by God. The expression, συμμόρφουςτῆςεἰκόνος, etc., may be understood, from the preceding context, to refer, primarily at least, to participation in Christ’s sufferings (cf. Hebrews 2:10). Coming to verse 30, we find the following sequence: (1) eternal foreknowledge (or eternal purpose), (2) preordination to fellowship with Christ, (3) calling (to acceptance of the gospel), (4) justification, (5) glorification. Ἐδικαίωσε (4) means the participation in God’s δικαιοσύνη, the passing into a "state of salvation" through faith in baptism. But what is meant by ἐδόξασε (5) has been a subject of discussion. Some, in view of the aorist, not future, tense of the verb, understand it of sanctification subsequent to justification, regarded as participation in the glory of the Divine holiness. Others, in view of the significance of the word itself, understand future glory, the aorist being accounted, for by the apostle’s taking in one view the whole process of salvation with its final result, which is contemplated as accomplished. Perhaps both ideas are included, present sanctification being regarded as the commencement and earnest of the full glory to be revealed in "the sons of God" hereafter. In any case, we are not bound by what is here said to conclude that final glory of necessity follows the previous stages. For the apostle may be only setting forth the process and result when grace is not resisted. But certainly he implies that, when the result is glory, all is to be traced, not to man’s initiation or deservings, but to Divine grace, and the Divine purpose of mercy from eternity. In the remainder of this chapter the apostle rises into a strain of glowing eloquence, into a very song of triumph, in view of the assured hope of faithful Christians. Faithfulness, be it once more observed, is presupposed throughout the passage, which is quite wrongly understood as encouraging confidence in any on the ground of their conviction that they are certainly, even in spite of themselves, predestinated to glory: it only encourages perseverance in spite of trial on the ground of our feeling that, if we do persevere, we cannot fail, because God is on our side, and it is his eternal purpose to save us. Romans 8:31-34 What shall we then say to these things? (πρὸταῦτα, meaning "with respect to," not "against "). If God be for us, who can be against us? (τίς, not τί, in opposition to ὁΘεὸς: who—what adverse power—can there possibly be, stronger than God?). He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all (evidently not for the elect only, but for all mankind; cf. on Romans 5:18), how shall he not with him also freely give us (i.e. grant us of his free grace) all things? (πάντα, corresponding to ὑπὲρπάντων). Who shall lay anything to the charge of God’s elect! It is God that justifieth. Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us. A different punctuation of these two verses is preferred by some, and seems more natural and more forcible; thus: Who shall charge God’s elect? God who justifieth? Who is he that condemneth? Christ who died? etc. A similar answering a question by asking another is found below in Romans 8:35. The further thought is thus implied that, if neither God charges, nor Christ, the Judge, condemns, who can do either? The apostle next goes on to say that, there being none to charge and condemn us at last, so also there is none that can remove us from our state of acceptance now. For who or what can possibly prove stronger than Christ’s love, which has called us to it? The enumeration that follows of things that might possibly be supposed to remove us shows again that it is not our own sins, but external circumstances of trial, that are being viewed all along as powerless to hinder our salvation. Romans 8:35-39 Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? (i.e. the love of Christ to us, and in the same sense "the love of God" below; cf. τοῦἀγαπήσαντοςἡμᾶς in Romans 8:37). Shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword? As it is written, For thy sake we are killed all the day long; we are accounted as sheep for the slaughter. Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors (ὑπερνικῶμεν—we not only conquer in spite of them; we conquer all the more because of them; cf. Romans 5:3, etc., and Romans 8:28) through him that loved us. For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall he able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord. In these two concluding verses the thought is distinctly extended from circumstances of trial to all powers, human or superhuman, that may be conceived as assaulting us through them, or in any way opposing us. But it is still adverse powers and influences, not our own failure in perseverance, that are in view. It is not necessary to define what is exactly meant by each of the expressions in these verses. Enough to say that what is meant is, that nothing whatever, in heaven or earth, or under the earth, can thwart God’s good purpose for us, or separate us from his love. Romans 8:1-39 Summary The following paraphrastic summary of this important chapter, free from the encumbrance of notes, may help to a clearer perception of its drift and sequence of thought:— Romans 8:1 There is then no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus. Romans 8:2 For a new law—the law of the Spirit of life—is introduced into their being, by virtue of which they are freed from their old state of bondage to the law of sin and death. Romans 8:3 And this because of what God himself did for mankind in his own Son, Christ, who, in our very flesh, and in behalf of mankind, did what man himself was powerless to do—triumphed over sin and condemned it. Romans 8:4 And in us Leo (united to him by faith, and having spiritually died and risen again with him) the requirement of the Law is fulfilled, so that it forfeits its claim to condemn us now; but only on this condition in ourselves, that we walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. Romans 8:5-8 For there are two φρονήματα in us still, of the flesh as well as of the Spirit; the one tending to death and the other to life; and it is only those who give themselves to the latter that can share in the life to which it tends. Romans 8:9 And you can give yourselves to this, if you are true Christians; if the Spirit of Christ dwells in you, without which you are not his. Romans 8:10 So our condition is this: We have within us the Spirit, which is life; but we have the body clinging to us still, which is death-stricken because of sin. Romans 8:11 But if the Spirit of him who raised up Christ from the dead be in us, he will quicken our mortal bodies too, delivering us at last, through the same vivifying Spirit, from all lingering power of death over us. Romans 8:12 The conclusion is (as has been insisted on all along), that we are bound, as Christians, in our present lives, to live, not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. Romans 8:13 If we do not, then (notwithstanding our redemption) we must needs die—yea, die the death beyond the grave, which is the doom of sin; but if we do, then we shall live—yea, live at last (as the sequel shows to be implied) in the eternal life of Christ with God. Romans 8:14-17 For the Spirit you received when you became Christians was one of sonship; our habitual earnest cry of "Abba, Father," expresses our feeling of it; the Spirit still witnesses with our spirit that we are God’s children; and sonship implies heirship—heirship with Christ, through our union with whom we feel ourselves to be sons; and, if we have to share in his sufferings now, this only unites us the more to him, and fits us the more for our inheritance of eternal life with him. Romans 8:18 For what of all these present sufferings, these present drawbacks to the lull triumph of the πνεῦμα in you, these present evidences that the σῶμανεκρὸν still clings to you? They are nothing to the destined glory; they are not worth consideration in comparison with it. Romans 8:19-22 And, after all, these present drawbacks are but our inevitable share in the condition of imperfection under which all creation, as we see it now, is labouring. The whole world presents to us the picture of an ideal not realized, but ever yearned for. All we can say about it is that it has pleased God to subject it for a time to vanity and the bondage of corruption, but so as to leave hope alive. Romans 8:23 And we too, while in this mortal body, must needs share in this universal groaning; but, having already the firstfruits of the Spirit—the earnest already of a diviner life—we especially yearn all the more for deliverance, and expect it hopefully. Romans 8:24, Romans 8:25 When we entered on our state of salvation as Christians, it was in hope; our essential condition became then one of hope, which is incompatible with present attainment of our hope; we must, therefore, needs endure and waif, bearing these present trials. Romans 8:26, Romans 8:27 And if our trials are great, and we know not ourselves what relief to pray for, we have the comfort of believing that the Holy Spirit intercedes for us within ourselves by inspiring all these unutterable yearnings, which he that searcheth the heart knows the meaning of, and will answer according to the mind of the Spirit who inspired them. Romans 8:28 We know, too, that all things, even all these present trials, far from harming us, work together for good to them that love God, being called according to his purpose. Romans 8:29, Romans 8:30 Yes, called according to his purpose; here is a further ground of hopeful assurance. For his having called us to be Christians at all, and justified us through faith, shows that it was his eternal purpose in so calling us, to conform us to the image of his Son, that he might be the Firstborn among many brethren; and that so we, being thus made his brethren, might inherit with him. In short, his having preordained us to our present state of salvation carries with it his preordaining us also to its end and purpose, which is glory. Romans 8:31-34 If God be thus for us, who can be against us? He who has already given up his own Son for us all will surely grant us all. And, if God has chosen us, who shall arraign us? God himself, who already justifies us? No. Christ, who died, rose again, ascended to the right hand of God, and now intercedes for us? No. And against them what other power can possibly prevail? Romans 8:35-37 Certainly not these present trials and calamities, however severe; though "we are killed all day long, and are appointed as sheep for the slaughter." Through Christ, who so loved us as to share them, we are conquerors all the more by means of them. Romans 8:38, Romans 8:39 For I am persuaded that no powers or circumstances whatever, external to ourselves, will ever separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus our Lord, or consequently bar our attainment of our final inheritance. Additional Note on Romans 8:29, seq. The view given above of St. Paul’s intention and meaning is by no means meant as ignoring the essential mystery of predestination, however regarded. Divine omnipotence combined with omniscience on the one hand, and human free-will on the other, seem indeed to human reason to be incompatible ideas; yet we are compelled to entertain both—the one on the ground, not only of scriptural teaching, but also of our conception of the Divine Being; the other on the ground, not only of our conception of Divine justice, but also of our own irresistible consciousness, and of scriptural teaching too. Such difficulty of reconciliation between two apparently necessary ideas is not peculiar to theology; philosophy has it too; and there are necessitarians among philosophers, as well as predestinarians among theologians, equally contradicting man’s irresistible consciousness of having the power of choice. We can only regard the conflicting conceptions as partial apprehensions of a great truth which as a whole is beyond us. The apparent contradiction between them may be due to the failure of finite beings to comprehend infinity. They have been compared to two parallel straight lines, which, according to geometrical definition, can never meet, and yet, according to the higher mathematical theory, meet in infinity; or we may take the illustration of an asymptote, which from a finite point of view can never possibly touch a curve, and yet, in analytical geometry, is found to cross it at an infinite distance. For the practical purposes of life both ideas may be entertained; and it is only human attempts to reconcile them in theory, or to escape the difficulty by denying free-will altogether, that have given rise to the endless controversies on the subject. It is important to observe how St. Paul, though he distinctly intimates both conceptions (as he must needs do as a preacher of God’s truth in all its aspects), and though his allusions to predestination have been made a main support of Calvinistic views, never really propounds a theory. When he alludes to the subject, it is with a practical purpose; and when (as in this chapter) he speaks of God’s predestination of believers to glory, his purpose is to encourage them to persevere in holiness on the ground of their assurance of God’s eternal purpose concerning them, the essential human conditions being all along supposed to be fulfilled (see also note on Hebrews 6:16-20, in ’Pulpit Commentary’). Romans 8:1 "No condemnation." In reading this chapter, it cannot but be felt that there was, in the mind of the apostle, a very vivid sense of the contrast between the character, the position, and the prospects of the true Christian, and those of unbelievers, whether Jews or Gentiles. This contrast is kept up, either verbally or implicitly, from the beginning to the close of what is felt to be one of the most encouraging and precious portions of the apostle’s writings. I. THE ’S AND . It is plain that, in the view of St. Paul, personal religion did not consist in external condition or relationships, in association with any family, or nation, or visible society. Christians are those who are "in Christ Jesus." 1. The language is instructive as to the Divine provision for man’s spiritual welfare made in the incarnation, ministry, and sacrifice of the Son of God. To be accepted and approved by the great Ruler and Lord of all is a condition made dependent upon association with that Being in whom God at once revealed his character and purposes, and reconciled the world to himself. 2. A spiritual union is implied. To be "in Christ Jesus" is what he himself has enjoined: "Abide in me." And the New Testament represents Christ’s people as "in him," "found in him," "standing in him," "walking in him;" and after this life as "sleeping in him," and "dead in him." 3. The purposes of union with Christ are involved in this description. (1) Christians are hidden in Christ for safety; as in the cleft of a rock which affords shelter from the storm, as in the city of refuge whither the fugitive flees, and in which he finds himself safe from the pursuer. (2) Christians are grafted in Christ for life; they are branches in the living Vine. (3) They are joined to him for guidance, as members of the mystical body. 4. The power and principle of union with Christ are assumed. On the human side the union is effected by faith; on the Divine side it is rendered possible by the impartation of the grace of the Holy Spirit. II. THE ’S AND . 1. What is the condemnation from which those who are in Christ are relieved? Doubtless, the penal consequences of sin, the Divine displeasure and judicial anger, the present punishment of remorse and fear, the future punishment of destruction and death. 2. Who removes it? The Lord and Judge, whose prerogative it is to pass sentence of condemnation, retains in his own hands the right to remit the punishment of those sentenced, and to set guilty but repentant criminals free to enjoy a spiritual liberty. 3. On what grounds, and in virtue of what provision, does the righteous Lord remove the condemnation? For his own mercy’s sake, and in virtue of the redemption which was wrought by Jesus Christ our Saviour, so fully stated and explained in this Epistle. 4. With what results? The conscience of the sinner is relieved; the favour of the holy God is vouchsafed; the privileges and pleasures of the Christian life are opened up, and final acquittal is definitely and certainly assured. . 1. Let the Christian rest in no inferior view of his position; for this assurance of liberty is one which every believer in the Lord Jesus is invited and is warranted to take to himself. 2. Let those who are under condemnation by reason of sin remember that there is one way of escape and acquittal, and only one; and let this be sought and found without delay. Romans 8:2 "The Spirit of life." What interest we always feel in life! Among things earthly, the main distinction, to our minds, is that between the living and the lifeless. Among the snows of Alpine heights, the blue gentian flower is welcome to the eye of the mountaineer. Amid the hot wastes of the sandy deserts, sweet is the oasis of green shrubs and shady palm trees which spring up around the solitary fountain. The child loves to watch the butterfly fluttering from bush to bush, the lizard peeping out and darting in among the heather and the ling of the common, the dragon-fly weaving graceful dances over the sunny waters of the secluded peel. Who does not and a calm delight in marking the grayling leap from the silvery brook, the heron lift itself in slow flight from the reedy banks of the tidal river, the hawk circle in the blue sky, the antlered deer bound into the lake and fleet through the glades of the forest? Amidst the loneliness of the ocean, what a relief to the mariner to witness the gambol of the sea-monster, or even to hear the cry of the wild storm-bird! And, to the thoughtful mind, how far deeper the interest felt in the more complex, the more varied—the moral—life of men! Whether in the mountain or the plain, by the sea, in the well-tilled fields, or in the busy city where myriads throng and jostle, wherever human life meets the eye and ear, we feel ourselves in the presence of God’s greatest works. Here is the spiritual realm; here the moral conflict; here the probation, the discipline, which regard eternity. For the interest of the life of man lies not in its picturesque or its pathetic aspect, but in the working of great principles, to issues dear to the very heart of God. The life of the body engrosses indeed much of men’s energies and cares. Yet we all feel that it is the higher life. the soul-life—that is of supreme moment and deathless interest to man. There is a life of the spirit, which multitudes may disregard, but which to the Creator, and to all enlightened minds, seems the one great end for which worlds were made and man was fashioned. It is the office of religion to summon men’s attention to this life, precious, beautiful, and immortal; to tell men that, unless they live this life, they live in vain; to assure them that the privileges and the probation of earth have a view to this higher conscious, spiritual existence and growth, And Christianity comes to men, telling them of a Divine Saviour, in whom "was life," and who came "that we might have life, and that we might have it more abundantly;" telling them of a spiritual agency provided by God to awaken them from the death of sin unto the life of righteousness; telling them of the presence and the power among men of "the Spirit of life." It is the spiritual life, enkindled and sustained by this Divine Spirit, which is the aim and the reward of a Father’s pity and a Saviour’s love. Contrasting with that death from which it is a deliverance, it is a preparation for that eternity which is the infinite scope for its development. Consisting in the exercise and growth of the highest and noblest powers with which the Creator has endowed mankind, amidst the circumstances which Providence has arranged for their manifestation, it brings the dependent being to share the Divine nature, and fits it to inherit the heavenly kingdom. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/pulpit-commentary/ Romans 11:1-36 2. The present position and prospects of the Jewish nation con-sidereal. Romans 9:1-5 (1) Deep regret expressed for the present exclusion of the Jewish nation from inheritance of the promises. This section is not necessary for the main argument of the Epistle, which would have been complete without it for an exposition of God’s righteousness, Romans 12:1-21. following naturally the conclusion of Rom 8:1-39., and these intervening chapters having no immediate connection with the preceding or succeeding context. But it was a subject too deeply fixed in St. Paul’s mind to be left unnoticed. And besides, what he had said at the beginning of his treatise, and afterwards implied, seemed to call for some explanation in the face of existing facts. For he had said (Romans 1:16), that the gospel "was the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile;" and throughout he has regarded it as the fulfilment of the peculiar promises made to the Jews themselves, who were to have precedence, though not monopoly, in the inheritance of its blessings. How, then, was this view consistent with the fact that the Jews in general, even more than any others, were now excluded from this inheritance? The apostle has already, even in the course of his argument, paused to meet certain supposed difficulties of this kind in the short section, Romans 3:1-8; but now he takes up the whole subject formally, and considers it in all its bearings. First, in Romans 9:1-33., he expresses his deep sorrow for the fact; but shows it to be not inconsistent either with God’s faithfulness to his promise, or with his justice, or with the Word of prophecy. Romans 9:1 I say the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience also bearing witness with me in the Holy Ghost. For similar solemn asseverations by St. Paul of the truth of what was known to himself alone, cf. Romans 1:9; 2 Corinthians 11:31; Philippians 1:8; 1 Timothy 2:7. The peculiar solemnity of this may be due to the peculiar depth of his feelings on the subject. It is not necessary to suppose him to be moved by a fear of his patriotic enthusiasm being doubted, now that he had turned Christian, and argued so strongly against Jewish monopoly of privilege But it may have been so. For the force of ἐνΧριστῶ, of. 2 Corinthians 2:17; 2 Corinthians 12:19; Ephesians 4:17; 1 Thessalonians 4:1. It is not an adjuration, but denotes the element in which he moves and speaks. Similarly, ἐνΠνεύματιἁγίῳ following (cf. 1 Corinthians 12:3), which, of course, could not be on oath. Romans 9:2, Romans 9:3 That I have great heaviness and continual sorrow in my heart. He does not say what for, leaving it to appear in what follows. The broken sentence is significant of emotion. For I could wish that I myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh. None of the ways that have been suggested for evading the obvious meaning of this assertion are tenable. One such way is to take the imperfect ηὐχόμην as expressing what he once wished, viz. before his conversion; so that the meaning would be, "My interest in my own people is such that, in my zeal for them, I once myself desired to be entirely apart from Christ; I myself said, Ἀνάθεμα (1 Corinthians 12:3), and persecuted his followers." Neither the natural force of the imperfect here (as to which cf. Acts 25:22; Galatians 4:20), nor that of ἀνάθεμαεἷναι, nor the context, allow this subterfuge. Another way is to understand ἀνάθεμαεἷναι as implying only devotion to temporal destruction, i.e. to a violent death. In Leviticus 27:1-34, every animal devoted to the Lord (in the LXX. ἀνάθεμα) is surely to be put to death; and this has been conceived as all that is implied here. So Jerome, ’Quaest. 9, ad Algas.,’ and Hilary, ’Ad Psalms 8:1-9.’ But how then about ἀπὸΧριστοῦ? The words ἀνάθεμα and ἀνάθημα, from ἀνατίθημι, both denote primarily what is offered or set apart; the latter being applied to things devoted to God’s honour and service (cf. Luke 21:5), the latter always in the New Testament used to denote rejection or devotion to evil. It occurs in Acts 23:1-35. 14; 1 Corinthians 12:3; 1 Corinthians 16:22; Galatians 1:8, Galatians 1:9. It certainly means here separation from the communion of Christ, in the same sense as κατηργήθστεἀπὸτοῦΧριστοῦ (Galatians 5:4). Even if the expression ἀνάθεμαεἷναι be understood as meaning in itself excommunication only (as ανάθεμαἐστω in ecclesiastical usage), the addition of ἀπὸτοῦΧριστοῦ evidently implies more than mere separation from outward Church communion. The apostle can hardly mean otherwise than that he would forfeit his own communion with Christ on behalf of (ὑπὲρ) his countrymen, if so they as a nation could be brought to accept the gospel. This certainly was a strong thing to say, and it may seem to us to imply an impossibility, if we compare it, for instance, with Romans 8:38, "I am persuaded," etc. But we need not understand a passing expression of feeling, however real, as a deliberate utterance. The imperfect ηὐχόμην implies only that the fact had passed through his mind in the intensity of his desire for the salvation of his brethren. It corresponds with the saying of Moses under the like strong emotion, "Yet now, if thou wilt forgive their sin—; and if not, blot me, I pray thee, out of the book which thou hast written" (Exodus 32:32). Bengel remarks well," Ex summa fide nunc summum ostendit amorem, ex amore divine accensum. Res non poterat fieri, quam optarat: sed votum erat pium et solidum, quamlibet cum tacita conditione, si fieri posset." Also, "De mensura amoris in Mose et Paulo non facile est existimare. Eum enim modulus ratiocinationum nostrarum non capit; sieur heroum bellicorum animos non capit parvulus." St. Paul proceeds, in the spirit of a patriotic Jew, which he ever retained, to enumerate the peculiar privileges of the chosen people, their possession of which rendered their present failure to realize their purpose so peculiarly disappointing and distressing. Romans 9:4, Romans 9:5 Who (οἵτινες, with its usual sense of quippe qui) are Israelites; whose is the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the Law, and the service of God, and the promises; whose are the fathers, and from whom is Christ as concerning the flesh, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen. Here "the adoption" (ὑιοθεσία) means the selection of Israel to be God’s peculiar people (cf. Exodus 4:22, "Israel is my son, even my firstborn;" Deuteronomy 14:1, "Ye are the children of the Lord your God;" Hosea 11:1, "When Israel was a child, I loved him, and called my son out of Egypt;" also Exodus 19:5. Cf. also τέκνατοῦΘεοῦ in Exodus 19:8 below). It is, of course, a different idea from that of the spiritual υἱοθεσία of believers (at present as in Romans 8:15, or to come as in Romans 8:23), though it might be typical of it. "The glory" (ἡδόξα) seems best explained by reference to 2 Corinthians 3:7-18, where the visible glory, said to have rested on the mercy-seat and to have illuminated for a time the face of Moses, is regarded as expressing the glory, in a higher sense, of the old dispensation, which, however, was destined to fade away in the greater glory of the revelation of God in Christ. The word may be thus taken to denote, not simply the Shechinah, or the glory on Mount Sinai, but rather what was signified by these manifestations. It was probably a recognized term in use with reference to the giving of the Law. "The covenants" (αἱδιαθῆκαι), and "the promises" (αἱἐπαγγελίαι), both in the plural, include those made with and given to Abraham and the other patriarchs, as well as the Mosaic ones. The former word is wrongly taken by some as denoting the tables of the covenant. Ἡλατρεία is obviously the divinely appointed ceremonial worship, the typical significance of which is explained at length in the Epistle to the Hebrews, where the same word is used. "The fathers" (οἱπατέρες) are the patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the original recipients of the promises, descent from whom was made such account of by the Jews, as being the foundation of their privileges (cf. Matthew 3:1-17. 9; Luke 3:8; Luke 13:28; John 8:39; and, for the use of πατέρες in this sense, cf. Acts 3:22; Acts 13:32; Romans 15:8; Hebrews 1:1). The last and crowning distinction of the Jewish race is mentioned last, viz. the fleshly descent therefrom of Christ, even of him who in his higher nature is "over all, God blessed for ever." This is certainly the most obvious meaning of the conclusion of 2 Corinthians 3:5, as far as the language is concerned, and the one understood by all ancient commentators. Some moderns, however, as is well known, have raised objections to this interpretation of the clause, based solely on the supposed improbability that St. Paul would have so designated Christ. Some would, therefore, get over this imagined difficulty by putting a full stop after κατὰσάρκα, and taking what follows as a doxology to God the Father, thus: "God, who is over all, be blessed for ever." The apostle is supposed, according to this interpretation, to have been moved to this parenthetical utterance by his contemplation of the Divine favours to Israel, which he had been recounting. Some have suggested the full stop being put after πάντων, so as to refer ὁὢνἐπὶπάντων to Christ, and take only what follows as a doxology, or, as some would have it, as a statement. But, in either case, the idea of so unlikely a breaking up of the sentence may be dismissed as untenable. Others, without thus breaking up the sentence, take the whole of it, beginning with ὁὢν, to be, not a doxology, but a statement, thus at- tempting to meet the objection to its being a doxology (to be noticed presently), arising from the collocation of the words. But a mere assertion that God is blessed for ever would seem peculiarly uncalled for and purposeless here. Meyer, being a critic of deserved repute, and an upholder of the modern interpretation of the clause, taking the whole of it together as a doxology to the Father, it may suffice to state his arguments. (1) That St. Paul, though regarding the Son of God as the image of God, of the essence of God, the agent in creation and preservation, the judge of all, the object of prayer, and the possessor of Divine glory and fulness of grace (Romans 1:4; Romans 10:12; Philippians it. 6; Colossians 1:15, etc.; Colossians 2:9; Ephesians 1:20, etc.; 1 Corinthians 8:6; 2 Corinthians 4:4; 2 Corinthians 8:9), never expressly calls him Θεὸς, but always clearly distinguishes him as the Κύριος from Θεὸς; and that the passages in which Θεὸς has been supposed by some to apply to him (as in 2 Thessalonians 1:12, ΚατὰτὴνχάριντοῦΘεοῦἡμῶνκαὶΚυρίουΙησοῦΧριστοῦ; and Ephesians 5:5; Titus 1:4) are wrongly so understood; ὅς, not Θεὸς, being also undoubtedly the original reading in 1 Timothy 3:16. (Of St. Paul’s usual distinction between Θεὸς and Κύριος, when he is referring to the economy of redemption, other instances are found in 1 Corinthians 8:6; 1 Corinthians 12:4, 1 Corinthians 12:5, 1 Corinthians 12:6; Ephesians 4:4, Ephesians 4:5, Ephesians 4:6. That he does usually so distinguish is undoubted.) (2) That, according to the old ecclesiastical interpretation, "Christ would be called here, not only God, but even God over all, and consequently would be designated as Θεὸςπαντοκράτωρ, which is absolutely incompatible with the entire view of the New Testament as to the dependence of the Son on the Father." (3) That "in the properly apostolical writings (2 Peter 3:18 does not belong to them, nor does Hebrews 13:21) we never meet with a doxology to Christ in the form which is usual in doxologies to God." Meyer adds in a note, "2 Timothy 4:18 certainly refers to Christ; but this is just one of the traces of post-apostolic composition. Now, to these arguments it may be replied as follows: To (1) that, though it may be true that St. Paul in no other passage expressly calls Christ Θεὸς, yet his doctrine with respect to his Divine nature is in accordance with the expression; for surely the term Θεὸς is applicable to him who is spoken of, as e.g. in Philippians 2:6 and Colossians 1:15, etc.; that his usual distinction between the supreme God and Christ as Mediator by no means precludes his declaring in express terms Christ’s essential Deity in a passage where such a declaration is suitable and called for; that even St. John, who is acknowledged by all to have peculiarly set forth the Divine essence of Christ, only once uses the expression, ΘεὸςἧνὁΛόγος, or any exactly equivalent to it. To argument (2) it may be replied that the language used does not identify Christ with the Father as ὁπαντοκράτωρΘεὸς, especially if we suppose a comma after πάντων, so that the meaning would he, "Christ who is over all, God blessed for ever." That Christ is "over all" is what is distinctly declared elsewhere by St. Paul, and Θεὸς, etc., may be appended predicatively to denote his Divine essence. As to argument (3), it is necessary to exclude not only 2 Peter and Hebrews, but also 2 Timothy from the list of apostolical writings in order to give it any force. But even so it would be irrelevant; for the sentence before us is not a doxology, but an assertion: it is, according to the ancient interpretation, not "Blessed be Christ as God for ever;" but" Christ, who is God blessed for ever." The positive reasons for retaining the ancient interpretations may be stated as follows: (1) Not one of the Greek or other Fathers, or any interpreter before Erasmus, is known to have understood it otherwise. (2) It gives the most obvious sense of the words themselves. It may well be contended that no other would have been thought of, but for the supposed discrepance with the apostle’s usual way of speaking of Christ. (3) Whereas a doxology to God the Father does not seem called for here, or to have any very obvious bearing on the writer’s train of thought, some assertion of the Divine greatness of Christ seems wanted to complete the representation of the final and crowning privilege of the race of Israel. Ὁὢνἐπὶπάντων would indeed suffice for this purpose, if it could be dissevered from what follows. But, as has been said above, it is not allowable so to break up the sentence. Cf also Romans 1:4, where the statement that Christ had been born of the seed of David, according to the flesh, is followed by an assertion also of his Divine Sonship. (4) If the sentence had been intended as a doxology, εὐλογητὸς ought properly to have preceded Θεὸς (cf. Luke 1:68, ΕὐλογητὸςΚύριοςὁΘεὸςτοῦἸσραὴλ; Ephesians 1:3, ΕὐλογητὸςὁΘεὸςκαὶΠατὴρ, etc.; 1 Peter 1:3, where the same expression occurs); whereas in every other passage where εὐλογητὸς follows the subject of the sentence, it is an assertion, and not a doxology (cf. Romans 1:25; 2 Corinthians 11:31). (5) The whole objection to the ancient interpretation rests solely on the views of modern critics as to what they think St. Paul was likely to mean—not on what his language most obviously intimates that he did mean—a very unsafe principle of interpretation. Our safe conclusion seems to be that modern criticism has not made out a sufficient case for departing from the unanimous ancient interpretation of this passage. Romans 9:6-13 (2) (a) After this avowal of his deep sorrow, and his reasons for feeling it, the apostle now proceeds to deal with the subject. First (as has been said above) he shows (Romans 9:6-13) that the present exclusion of the great majority of the Jews from Christian privileges does not imply any unfaithfulness on God’s part to his ancient promises; and thus it follows that the fact of their exclusion is no proof of the gospel not being the true fulfilment of those promises. Romans 9:6, Romans 9:7 But it is not as though the Word of God hath taken none effect (or, hath come to naught, ἐκπεπτωκεν). For they are not all Israel who are of Israel: neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called. The promises to the patriarchs never, from the first, implied the inheritance of them by all the physical descendants of those patriarchs; even in Israel there is a recognized distinction between being of the race of Israel and being the true Israel of God; in the original promise to Abraham the descendants of Ishmael (though equally with those of Isaac, his physical seed) were excluded. And so even the race of Israel is but a part of the whole seed of Abraham, to whom the promise was made. Hence it follows that the present exclusion of the majority of even the race of Israel from the inheritance of the promises is not inconsistent with the original purport of those promises. The quotation from Genesis 21:12, "In Isaac," etc., is properly (as in the original Hebrew) "In Isaac shall a seed be named to thee;" i.e. "In Isaac it shall come to pass that posterity of thine shall have the name and position of the seed of Abraham, and be recognized as the inheritors of the promise" (Meyer). Romans 9:8, Romans 9:9 That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for seed. For the word of promise is this, At this time will I come, and Sarah shall have a son (Genesis 18:10). In other words, it is not in virtue of mere carnal descent, but of the promise, that any are so counted; mere carnal descent establishes no claim. It is to be observed that in the first recorded promises to Abraham (Genesis 13:15; Genesis 15:5; Genesis 17:7) there was no restriction; and so through Ishmael, who is also called Abraham’s seed (Genesis 21:13), as well as through Isaac, the fulfilment might have been. But the subsequent promise (Genesis 17:19, Genesis 17:21; Genesis 18:10, Genesis 18:14) limited it to Isaac; which limiting promise is, therefore, in Romans 9:9, referred to. With τέκνατοῦΘεοῦ in Romans 9:8 Compare ἡυἱοθεσίαα (Romans 9:4), and also Isaiah 63:16. The apostle may have been led to use the expression here in view of the spiritual sonship to God of Christians (cf. Romans 8:15, etc.)which was typified and prepared for by the υἱοθεσία of the chosen seed. A still further limitation of "the children of the promise" is next referred to; and one still more telling for the apostle’s argument. It might be said that Ishmael was not, even carnally, the true seed, as being bern, not of the with, but of the bondwoman; or perhaps that he had forfeited any claim he might have had by his proved unworthiness (Genesis 21:9, etc.). But Esau and Jacob were twin children, not only of the same patriarch (ἐξἑνὸς), but also of the same wedded wife; and yet one was chosen and the other rejected, and this even before birth; so that, as the selection was not due to carnal descent, so neither could it be due to proved desert. Thus by this second consideration is disposed of the Jew’s assertion of an indefeasible claim to inheritance of the promises on the ground of his boasted works, as by the other is disposed of his claim on the ground of his race. St. Paul’s argument to the Jews of his own day would be—You cannot set up a claim to be all of you the necessary inheritors of the promises for all time on the ground either of your carnal descent or of your works, since the selection of Israel himself did not depend on either of these grounds; nor can you say that my position (viz. that Christian believers, to the exclusion of most of you, are now the true inheritors of the promises) implies unfaithfulness in God to his ancient promises; for it is in accordance with the principle on which, according to your own Scriptures, he fulfilled of old his promises to the patriarchs. St. Paul, however, is not to be understood here as writing with a direct polemical intention, but rather as discussing a problem which had at one time perplexed himself, and which seemed to him to call for solution. Romans 9:10 But not only this; but Rebecca also, when she had conceived by one, even by Isaac our father. The sentence thus begun is not formally completed, being taken up—after the parenthetical Romans 9:11—by "It was said unto her" in Romans 9:12. Romans 9:11-13 For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election (i.e. the principle of his electing to privileges of his own good will and purpose, and not on the ground of any fancied human claims) might stand (μένῃ, i.e. should remain in force, ever applicable), not of works, but of him that calleth; it was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger (Genesis 25:23). As it is written, Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated (Malachi 1:2, Malachi 1:3). It is here to be carefully observed that, though Jacob and Esau were individuals, yet it is not as such, but as the progenitors and representatives of races, that they are here spoken of. So it was, too, in both the passages quoted from the Old Testament. In Genesis 25:23 the words are, "Two nations are in thy womb, and two manner of people shall be separated from thy bowels; and the one people shall be stronger than the other people; and the elder shall serve the younger." In Malachi 1:2 the prophet’s entire drift is to set forth the Divine favour shown, from the first and still, to the race of Israel as compared with the race of Edom. Hence, as well as from the purport of the chapter as announced at its beginning, it is evident that the subject of individual predestination does not really come in, as it did in ch. 8., but only that of nations or races of men to a position of privilege as inheritors of promises. It will be seen, also, as we go on, that the introduction in illustration of the case of the individual Pharaoh does not really affect the drift of the chapter as above explained. The strong expression, "Esau I hated" (applicable, as shown above, not to the individual Esau, but to the race of Edom) is capable of being explained as meaning, "I excluded him from the love I showed to Israel." The evidence of such alleged hatred the prophet expresses thus: "and laid his mountains and his heritage waste for the dragons of the wilderness;" whereas Israel, it is implied, had been protected from such desolation. As to the necessary force of the word in the Hebrew (אכש), we may compare Genesis 29:30, Genesis 29:31, where in Genesis 29:30 it is said that Jacob loved Rachel more than Leah, and in Genesis 29:31, as meaning the same thing, that Leah was hated; and Deuteronomy 21:15, "If a man have two wives, one beloved and another hated." In both these passages the same verb is used as in Malachi, and need not, in either case, mean more than disregarding one in comparison with another who is loved. For the use, in the New Testament, of the Greek word μισεῖν in a sense for the expression of which our English "to hate," in its usual acceptation, is evidently too strong, cf. Luke 14:26 (to be compared with Matthew 10:37) and John 12:25; so also, though not so distinctly, Matt, John 6:24 and Luke 16:13. It is, moreover, not improbable that the Prophet Malachi, in his patriotic ardour, had in his mind the idea of wrath against the race of Edom on the part of the LORD, as "the people," as he afterwards says, "against whom the LORD hath indignation for ever." But even so, the glowing language of prophets need not be taken as dogmatic assertion; and certainly not as binding us to believe that any race of men is, in the literal sense of the expression, hated of Cod. Such a view is in evident contradiction to the general teaching of Scripture, and notably so to that of St. Paul, who has so emphatically declared that God "made of one blood all nations of men," and is One to all. Romans 9:14-24 (b) In the next section injustice on the part of God, in thus electing the objects of his mercy according to the good pleasure of his will, is repudiated. As in Romans 6:1 and Romans 7:7, a false inference from what has been said is introduced by τίοὗνἐροῦμεν, and indignantly rejected by μὴγένοιτο, followed by reasons against the inference. Romans 9:14-16 What shall we say then? Unrighteousness with God? ("Is there" supplied in the Authorized Version somewhat weakens the force of the expression.) God forbid! For to Moses he saith, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion. So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that showeth mercy. The argument (thus introduced by γὰρ) requires two understood premisses—that God cannot possibly be unrighteous, and that what he himself said to Moses must be true. These premisses assumed, the apostle reasons thus: "What I have said of God’s way of dealing with men does not imply unrighteousness in him; for it agrees with what he said of himself to Moses." The quotation is from Exodus 33:19. Moses had besought the LORD to show him his glory, as a token that he and the people had found grace in his sight (Exodus 33:16, Exodus 33:18). The LORD, in answer to his prayer, makes "all his goodness pass before him," in token that such grace had been found; but declares, in the words quoted, that all such grace accorded was not due to any claim on the part of man, but to his own good pleasure. In the verses that follow (17, 18) it is further shown, by the same kind of argument, that, as God declares himself to accept whom he will, so he also declares himself to reject whom he will; and hence, as his power is absolute, so is his justice unimpeachable, in himself determining the objects of his reprobation no less than the objects of his mercy. This appears from what he is recorded (Exodus 9:16) to have said through Moses to Pharaoh. Romans 9:17, Romans 9:18 For the Scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose (rather, for this very purpose) did I raise thee up, that I might show in thee my power, and that my Name might be declared throughout all the earth. The conclusion follows: So then he hath mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth. The passage quoted in Romans 9:17, taken (as it is intended to be) in conjunction with the whole history as given in Exodus—and especially with the passages in which God himself is said to have hardened Pharaoh’s heart, so that he would not let the children of Israel go—shows that not only the deliverance of Israel, but also the obduration of Pharaoh, was due to the determination of God that it should be so, in accordance with his own righteous purpose, which cannot be called in question by man. The particular declaration of Exo 9:16 appears to be selected for quotation because of its relevancy to the case in hand, which it is intended to illustrate; viz. the present rejection of the majority of the Jews from gospel privileges. How this is will appear below. Now, this whole passage has been used in support of Calvinistic views of the original absolute reprobation of individuals irrespectively of their deserts. Calvin himself draws this conclusion from it, very decidedly, thus: "Neque enim praevideri ruinam impiorum a Domino Paulus tradit, sed ejus consilio et voluntate ordinari; quemadmodum et Solomon docet (Proverbs 16:4) non mode praecognitum fuisse impiorum interitum, sed impios ipsos fuisse destinato creates, ut perirent" (’In Epist. Pauli ad Romans,’ on Romans 9:18). It is, therefore, important to consider carefully both the original meaning of the verse, quoted from Exodus, and the apostle’s application of it. First, with reference to Pharaoh himself, what is meant by "I raised thee up (ἐξήγειρα)"? Not "created thee;" nor excitavi te, i.e. "stirred thee up" to resist my will, that I might exhibit my power in confounding thee. Whether or not St. Paul’s ἐξήγειρα would bear this sense, it is quite inadmissible in the LXX. (from which, in this expression, he varies), and also in the Hebrew, of which the proper rendering is, "I made thee to stand." The LXX. has ἕνεκεντούτουδιετηρήθης, meaning that Pharaoh had been kept alive instead of being at once cut off, that God’s power might be displayed in him. St. Paul’s rendering, which is closer to the Hebrew than the LXX., seems to mean, "raised thee to thy present position of power and greatness" (or possibly, as Meyer explains, "caused thee to emerge," i.e. in history: "Thy whole historical appearance has been brought about by me, in order that," etc.). Thus the expression cannot mean, either that God had brought Pharaoh originally into existence for the sole purpose of destroying him, or that he had from the first irresistibly incited him to obduracy in order to condemn him, and so destroy him. The Lord says in effect to him, "Thou art now great and powerful; but it is! that made thee so, or still keep thee so: and this, not that thou mayest accomplish thine own will, but subserve mine, and that my power to work out my own purposes of mercy or of judgment may be the more notably displayed." For how is God’s purpose in so raising Pharaoh up defined? "That I might show in thee my power, and that my Name might be declared throughout all the earth;" i.e., as is evident from the history, by the deliverance of Israel in spite of Pharaoh’s opposition through the judgments sent on him and his people to that end. There is plainly nothing in the original history to imply Pharaoh’s individual reprobation with regard to his own eternal salvation, but only his discomfiture in his opposition to the Divine purpose of mercy to Israel. But still, with a view to such execution of his purposes, God himself is said to have hardened Pharaoh’s heart; and it is to this that the apostle draws special attention in conclusion, as denoting that which it is his design to show. It is thus certainly declared that this hardening was from God. But even so, it is nowhere said that God had made Pharaoh’s heart hard from the first, so that he had been all along incapable of acting otherwise than he did. The inference rather is that, after wilful resistance to appeals, final obduracy was sent on him as a judgment. And it is further to be observed that in some verses in Exodus (Exodus 8:15, Exodus 8:19, Exodus 8:32; Exodus 9:34) Pharaoh is said to have hardened his own heart, with the addition, in Exodus 9:34, of "he sinned yet more;" while in others (Exodus 7:14, Exodus 7:22; Exodus 9:7, Exodus 9:35) it is only said generally that "his heart was hardened." The two forms of expression seem to denote two aspects of final obduracy in man—according to one as being self-induced, according to the other as judicial. Thus also in I Kings 22. the Lend himself is said to have sent the lying spirit into the heart of Ahab’s prophets, in order that he might rush to his ruin, though it was obviously due to his own sins that he was thus finally doomed. A striking instance of the two aspects of human obduracy is found in Isaiah 6:9, etc., and the reference to the passage by our Lord in Matthew 13:15. In Isaiah it is, "Make the heart of this people fat," etc.; but in our Lord’s reference, "For this people’s heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes have they closed;" as if the closing had been their own doing. The following lines express a like conception of judicial blindness- "For when we in our viciousness grow hard (O misery on’t !), the wise gods seal our eyes, In our own filth drop our clear judgments, make us Adore our errors, laugh at us while we strut To our confusion." We may compare also the Latin saying, Quem Deus vult, perdere prius dementat, which by no means implies that the divinely dementated persons have not deserved destruction. Such, then, seems the view to be taken of what is said about Pharaoh himself. But the important thing to be kept in view for a proper understanding of the drift of the passage is that, though Pharaoh was himself an individual, his case is adduced in no connection with the question of individual predestination, but in illustration of the principle on which nations, or races of men, are elected to or rejected from the enjoyment of Divine favour. This is the real subject of the whole chapter; and hence to build on this part of it a doctrine of individual election or reprobation is to bring into it what is not there. The drift of the passage before us is this: Moses and the Israelites of old illustrate the position of the faithful remnant of the Jews together with all Christian believers now. Pharaoh illustrates the position of the obdurate majority of the Jewish nation now. As he, in setting himself against the Divine purpose, and relying on his own strength, was unable to thwart God’s design of mercy to his chosen, and was himself hardened and rejected, so the Jews as a nation now. And as then, so now, both the election and the rejection are to be referred entirely to the will of God, having mercy on whom he will and hardening whom he will, his justice in doing both being nevertheless unimpeachable. Romans 9:19 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who resisteth his will? Having shown that injustice cannot be imputed to God in hardening as well as having mercy on whom he will, the apostle now meets the supposed difficulty of understanding why men should be held guilty before God for but being as he wills them to be. It is immediately suggested by Pharaoh’s case, which led to the conclusion, ὅνθέλεισκληρύνει; but the apostle foresees that an objection might be raised on this ground to his finding fault with the Jews for rejecting Christ, and them he especially has in view in what follows. It may be observed here that there is undoubtedly a difficulty to the human mind in reconciling theoretically Divine omnipotence with human free-will and responsibility. (On the general question, see notes on Romans 8:1-39.) St. Paul here, after his manner, does not attempt to solve the general problem, confining himself for the present to the Divine side of it. His answer, in Romans 9:20, Romans 9:21, is simply to the effect that God has the absolute right as well as power to deal with his own creation as he pleases, and that man is in no position to "contend with the Almighty" (see Job 40:2). He brings in from the prophets the illustration of the potter’s power and right over the clay, which he fashions and deals with as he chooses. It will be seen, however, as we go on, that this illustration by no means involves, as by some it has been supposed to do, the idea of rejection and condemnation irrespectively of desert. Romans 9:20, Romans 9:21 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? (Isaiah 29:16; Isaiah 45:9). Hath not the potter power (rather, authority) over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour? (Jeremiah 18:1-10). The figure of the clay, first introduced from Isaiah, is carried out at length in the passage from Jeremiah which is referred to. It is important, for understanding St. Paul’s drift, to examine this passage. The prophet, in order that he might understand God’s way of dealing with nations, is directed to go down to the potter’s house, and watch the potter at his work. The potter is at work with a lump of clay, with the view of making a vessel of it; but it is "marred in the hand of the potter;" it does not come out into the form intended; so he rejects it, and makes anew another vessel after his mind, "as seemed good to the potter to make it." The prophet’s application of the illustration is that, "as the clay is in the potter’s hands, so are ye in mine hand, O house of Israel, saith the LORD;" meaning that if the house of Israel failed to answer to the LORD’S purpose, he could reject it at his pleasure, as the potter did the marred vessel; and in verses 7-10 the view is extended to God’s power over, and way of dealing with, all nations of mankind; and then, in verse 11, the men of Judah are warned to return from their evil ways, lest the LORD should so do unto them. Thus it is by no means implied by the illustration that Israel, or any other nation, has been formed with the primary and irresistible purpose of rejecting it as a "vessel unto dishonour," or that, when rejected, it has not had opportunity of being otherwise; but only that God has absolute power and right over it, to reject it if proved unworthy. It cannot then resist his will (βούλημα, i.e. determination or resolve; not here θέλημα. The primary Divine θέλημα is "that all men should be saved, and come to a knowledge of the truth" (1 Timothy 2:4); and this men do resist. For distinction between θέλειν and Βούλεσθαι, of. Matthew 1:19); but yet he may "find fault" with justice. It is here again evident that it is not individuals, but nations, that are in view all along. The apostle goes on next to consider whether, in God’s actual dealings with the "vessels unto dishonour," there may not be, not only great forbearance, but also a merciful purpose. Romans 9:22-24 What if (literally, but if, involving an anacoluthon) God, willing to show his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much long-suffering vessels (not, as in the Authorized Version, the vessels) of wrath fitted to destruction: and that he might make known the riches of his glory on vessels of mercy which he afore prepared unto glory; whom he also called, even us, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles. "And" at the beginning of Rom 9:23 is omitted in the uncial B, and there is considerable authority of versions and Fathers for rejecting it. Without it the sentence runs better, and its drift becomes more apparent. The purpose expressed in Romans 9:23 thus comes out distinctly as the grand ultimate Divine purpose, to which the display of wrath and power spoken of in the previous verse is but subsidiary; and this drift becomes the more apparent, if we supply in English, as we may do, "while" before "willing" in Romans 9:22. Thus the drift would be, "What If God, while willing to exhibit his wrath and manifest his power, endured with much long-suffering vessels of wrath that had become fitted for destruction, in order that he might manifest the riches of his glory," etc. The idea expressed by "endured," etc., seems suggested by Pharaoh’s case (see on Romans 9:17 with regard to the word διετηρήθης in the LXX., which the apostle appears here to retain the idea of, though he varied from it); but it is the Jewish nation of his own day that he has now in view. They were rejected from inheritance of the promises, and under Divine wrath; as he says in another place, "The wrath had come upon them to the uttermost" (1 Thessalonians 2:16). But they were still borne with; they were not finally cut off; and what if their present rejection were but subservient to the great purpose of mercy to the true Israel? The thought, hinted here, is carried out in Romans 11:1-36., where even the idea is further entertained of Israel itself as a nation, after judgment endured, coming into God’s true fold at last, according to the design of God, through ways inscrutable by us, to "have mercy upon all." The forms of expression used in the passage before us are to be noted in support of the view we have taken of St. Paul’s general meaning. "The vessels of wrath" are said to be "fitted to destruction" (κατηρτισμέναεἰςἀπώλειαν); of the "vessels of mercy" it is said that God "afore prepared" them unto glory. Predestination to salvation is certainly a doctrine of St. Paul, but he nowhere intimates predestination to reprobation. Further, "Non dicit quae προκατήρτισε, sod κατηρτισμένα: praescinditur a causa efficiente: tantum dicitur quales inveniat Deus quibus tram infert" (Bengel). Lastly, it may be observed that, though ἂπροπητοίμασενεἰςδόξαν carries with it the idea of individual salvation, yet this only comes in as the outcome and ultimate purpose of the calling of nations or races of men. The drift of the preceding argument remains still what it has been stated to be. Romans 9:25-29 (c) The inheritance of the promises by the Gentiles, with a remnant only of the Jews, shown to be in accordance with prophecy. This is really a new section of the argument, though the writer, in a way usual with him, does not mark it as such, Romans 9:25 being in logical connection with the preceding one, suggested by the concluding expression, "Not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles." So far nothing has been adduced to support the idea of Gentiles, to whom no original promises had been made, superseding the Jewish nation in the inheritance, though it had been shown generally that God may have mercy on whom he will; and in the earlier part of the argument (Romans 9:6-13) all that appeared plainly from the Old Testament was selection out of the total seed of Abraham—not the calling of a new one apart from his stock. Hence this section is necessary for completing the whole argument. Romans 9:25, Romans 9:26 As he saith also in Osee, I will call my people that which was not my people, and beloved her who was not beloved. And it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people; there shall they be called the children of the living God. The quotation in Romans 9:26 is from Hosea 1:10, and is correctly cited; that in verse 25 is from Hosea 2:23, and varies from both the Hebrew and the LXX., but not so as to affect the meaning. Both refer to the same subject. The prophet had been directed to "take unto him a wife of wheredoms." He had so taken "Gomer the daughter of Diblaim," who had borne him a daughter, to whom was given the symbolical name Lo-ruhamah ("Not beloved;" or, as it is interpreted in 1 Peter 2:10, "Hath not obtained mercy." "Love and mercy are both contained in the full meaning of the intensive form of the Hebrew word," Pusey on ’Hosea ’); and afterwards a son, who received the name Lo-ammi ("Not my people"). Both are symbols of the ten tribes of Israel as distinct from Judah; the two names denoting (as Pusey explains) successive stages of God’s repudiation of the people, and the last implying entire rejection. But in Hosea 1:10, after the naming of Lo-ammi, it is said, "Yet the number of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured nor numbered; and it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are Lo-ammi, it shall be said unto them, Ye are the children of the living God." The subject is pursued through Hosea 2:1-23., at the end of which (Hosea 2:23) comes the other passage quoted: "And I will sow her unto me in the earth; and I will have mercy on Lo-ruhamah; and I will say to Lo-ammi, Ammi [’My people’], and they shall say, My God." It might seem that these quotations are not apposite, since they referred originally, not to the Gentiles, but to the ten tribes of Israel. It is to be observed, however, that the words were spoken after these tribes had been declared to be cut off from being God’s people at all, so that a principle of Divine dealing is ex- pressed which is applicable to the Gentile world. "This, which was true of Israel in its dispersion, was much more true of the Gentiles. These, too, the descendants of righteous Noah, God had cast off for the time, that they should be no more his people, when he chose Israel out of them, to make known to them his Being, and his will, and his laws, and (although in shadow and mystery) Christ who was to come. He had threatened to Israel that he should be unpitied, and no more his people; in reversing his sentence, he embraces in the arms of his mercy all who were not his people, and says to them all, that they should be my people and beloved" (Pusey on ’Hosea,’ Hosea 2:23). In 1 Peter 2:10 the same text from Hosea is quoted as applying to those who were addressed in the Epistle, and then with more obvious applicability; for it appears to have been written, mainly at least, to Israelites of the dispersion (see Romans 1:1). Still, Gentile converts may be concluded to have been included (cf. Romans 1:14; Romans 4:3). It is to be observed that in verse 25 the feminine ἠγηπημένην has reference to the daughter of the prophet, Lo-ruhamah; and that in verse 26 "in the place where" must be understood, both in the original prophecy and the application, as meaning any region where those who were to be called my people might be. "And so St. Peter says that this Scripture, was fulfilled in them, while still scattered abroad through Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia. The place, then, where they should be called the sons of the living God is wheresoever they should believe in Christ" (Pusey). "’Tis Zion, wheresoe’er they dwell, Who, with his own true Israel, Shall own him strong to save." (’Christian Year: Fifth Sunday in Lent.’) The texts from Isaiah which follow are intended to show that, according to prophetic utterance, while those who were not God’s people, in large numbers, would be called his people, a remnant only of the Jews would be so. Romans 9:27, Romans 9:28 Esaias also crieth (κράζει, denoting loud and earnest utterance; cf. John 1:15; John 7:28, John 7:37; John 12:44; Acts 23:1-35. 6; Acts 24:21) concerning Israel, Though the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, the remnant (not, as in the Authorized Version, "a remnant." The idea seems to be, as it is in the original, that it is the remnant only that) shall be saved: for he will finish a word (not the work, as in the Authorized Version) and cut it short: because a short (rather, cut-short) word (again, not work) will the Lord make (i.e. accomplish) upon the earth. The Greek of Rom 9:28, according to the Textus Receptus, is difficult, so as to have compelled our translators to render the participles συντελῶνκαὶσυντέμνων by futures, "will finish," etc. But we have the high and early authority of the uncials à, A, B, for omitting part of the sentence, so as to make it read more intelligibly, thus: The Lord will make (i.e. accomplish) a word upon the earth, finishing it and cutting it short. The longer form, however, agrees, though not quite exactly, with the LXX., which differs itself greatly from the Hebrew, though not so as to affect the main drift of the passage as a whole. The passage is from Isaiah 10:22, which had primary reference to the remnant of the house of Israel that should "return unto the mighty God" (Isaiah 10:21) after the then predicted devastation of the nation by the Assyrian king. The series of prophecies with which this is connected begins at Isaiah 7:1-25., which gives an account of Isaiah’s memorable visit to Ahaz King of Judah, on the occasion of the combination of Pekah King of Israel, and Rezin King of Syria, against Jerusalem, in the course of which visit he predicts the birth of Immanuel. He took with him his son, who bore the symbolical name of Shear-jashub ("A remnant shall return"). Subsequently another son was born to the prophet, to whom was given the name Maher-shalal-hash-baz; the latter name having been previously written on a great roll (Isaiah 8:1). The primary drift of the prophecies in Isaiah 7:1-25. and the following chapters is that the confederacy of Pekah and Reziu against Jerusalem shall fail, that their own lands would ere long be devastated by the Assyrian king, who would sweep irresistibly over Judah too; but that God’s people may still trust in the LORD’S protection, who would preserve and bring back a remnant, though a remnant only. The three names, Maher-shalal-hash-baz, Shear-jashub, and Immanuel ("God with us"), are throughout significant of the leading ideas of the whole series of predictions; the first expressing the certainty of coming judgment, the second the return of the remnant, and the third God’s own presence with his people. Now, without pausing to consider what primary historical fulfilment of the prophecy about Immanuel there might be in the way of type, we cannot but perceive, in the language and tone of much in this series of prophecies, a distinct Messianic reference. We cannot, for instance, otherwise understand Isaiah 9:6, Isaiah 9:7; and in Isaiah 11:1-16. there succeeds an ideal picture of peace and blessing under the "rod out of the stem of Jesse," which is undoubtedly Messianic. Hence the relevance of the passage, not only as showing God’s way of dealing with his people in times of old, but also as an intimation of how it should be when the Messiah should come. Romans 9:29 And as Esaias hath said before (i.e. in an earlier chapter), Except the Lord of sabaoth had left us a seed, we should have been as Sodom, and been made like unto Gomorrah. This quotation is from Isaiah 1:9, and, though it seems to have no obvious reference to the Messianic age, it expresses the same idea as the other, of a remnant only being saved; and it is quoted suitably, occurring as it does at the beginning of the Book of Isaiah, and being a sort of key-note of the prevailing purport of his prophecies. The force of all the above quotations is much enhanced, if we remember that they are not mere isolated texts, but suggestive specimens of many prophetic utterances to the same effect. All familiar with the prophetic writings are aware that main ideas constantly recurring are: First, judgments to come upon the chosen people, painted often in many consecutive verses without relief; but secondly, after such denunciations, a dawn of hope and comfort appearing, and culminating in unutterable blessing under the Messiah’s kingdom; and thirdly, this dawn of hope being for a remnant only of the race, compared in one place to a gleaning of the grapes when the vintage is done (Isaiah 24:13); and fourthly, the association with this remnant, not only of the "outcasts of Israel" gathered from all lands, but also of a multitude of Gentiles, who should be gathered into the Messiah’s kingdom (cf. Zephaniah 3:12, etc.; Zechariah 13:9; Amos 9:9; Joe 2:32; Isaiah 6:13; Isaiah 56:6; Isaiah 60:1-22.). Verse 30- Romans 10:21 (3) The cause is in the fault of the Jews themselves. Hitherto the apostle has viewed his subject from the side of the Divine will and purpose (see note on Romans 10:19). He now views it from the side of human responsibility. The rejection of the Jews is now attributed, not to God’s purpose to reject them, but to their own fault, in that they would not accept God’s terms. "Hic expresse ponit causam reprobationis, quia scilicet nolint credere Evangelio. Ideo supra dixi, similitudinem de luto non ira accipiendam esse quasi non sit in ipsa voluntate hominis causa reprobationis" (Melancthon). Romans 9:30, Romans 9:31 What shall we say then! That the Gentiles, which followed not after righteousness, attained to righteousness, even the righteousness which is of faith. But Israel, following after a law of righteousness, attained not to (or, arrived not at, so as to distinguish ἔφθασεεἰς, used here, from κατέλαβε, previously used of the Gentiles. It expresses the idea of failing to reach what is being pursued) a law of righteousness. The Gentiles are here said to have attained righteousness (i.e. the righteousness of God, appropriated by faith, as previously explained); but Israel to have pursued, without reaching it, a law (not, as in the Authorized Version, the Law) of righteousness; because in the Law of Hoses they sought a justifying law, which in itself it could not be. The idea is resumed in Romans 10:3. The concluding δικαιοσύνης in verse 31, which may have been introduced into the text to make the meaning plain, is ill supported; but the sense requires it to be understood. So far we have a state-merit of the facts of the case. The reason follows. Romans 9:32, Romans 9:33 Wherefore? Because they sought it not of faith, but as of works of law. The genuineness of the concluding word νόμου here is doubtful. Its omission does not affect the sense. If retained, it must, according to the rule observed in this Exposition, be translated law, not the Law. For they stumbled at the stone of stumbling; as it is written, Behold, I lay in Zion a stone of stumbling and rock of offence: and he that (πᾶς before ὁπιστεύων, expressed in the Authorized Version by "whosoever," has no good support, having probably been supplied from Romans 10:11) believeth on him shall not be ashamed. Here, as throughout the Epistle, the apostle’s position is supported by an Old Testament reference. In this instance it is to two passages of Isaiah intermingled (Isaiah 28:16 and Isaiah 8:14). The way in which they are fused is illustrative of St. Paul’s way, elsewhere apparent, of referring to Scripture. As a rule, he quotes the LXX., but often varies from it, and sometimes so as to be closer to the Hebrew. Sometimes he seems to be quoting from memory, as one who is familiar with the general drift of prophecy on the subject in hand, and satisfied if the form of his quotation expresses such general drift. In the ease before us, he follows the Hebrew in Psalms 8:1-9:14, and the LXX. 2:28:16, where for the Hebrew expression rendered "shall not make haste," the LXX. has οῦμὴκαταισχυνθῆ, apparently with the same essential meaning; for "make haste" seems to signify "haste away in terror and confusion." The two texts combined express the idea of a stone being laid by the Lord in Zion, which should be the support of the faithful, but a stumbling-block to others. It is not necessary to inquire whether the texts themselves have in the original any obvious Messianic reference. Enough that they denote God’s plan of dealing with his people. But to understand the full idea in the apostle’s mind, when he speaks of "the stone of stumbling," we must take into account also Psalms 118:22, and our Lord’s language, as recorded in Matthew 21:42, Matthew 21:44 and Luke 20:17, Luke 20:18. In the Psalms we find the figure of "the stone" used thus: "The stone which the builders refused is become the head stone of the corner;" and in the Gospels our Lord refers to this text as de. noting himself, and subjoins, with reference to Isaiah, the idea of the same stone being one on which some should fall and be broken, with the additional conception of its crushing those on whom itself should fall. The same view essentially is expressed in Simeon’s words (Luke 2:34), that "this Child" should be for the fall as well as for the rising again of many in Israel; and it is repeated definitely in 1 Peter 2:7 (cf. also Acts 4:11; 1 Corinthians 1:23). Romans 9:6 The true Israel. Since one great aim of the apostle in this Epistle is to combat the view of religion which regards the external as of main interest and importance, he finds it necessary to disabuse of their prejudice and error those Israelites who not only prided themselves upon their descent from Abraham, but who relied upon that descent for their acceptance with God. He points out that it is one thing to be "of Israel," i.e. sprung from the patriarchs in the way of natural lineage, and quite another thing to be "Israel," i.e. to possess the ideal character of the true Israelite. Even some of Abraham’s posterity were not included in the covenant, but only the offspring of Isaac. This was in itself a limitation; and if God appointed a limitation of an external and racial kind, how far more obviously did it consist with Divine wisdom and justice to confine spiritual blessings to those spiritually prepared and qualified to enjoy them! I. LIGHT IS HERE CAST UPON THE AND OF GOD. 1. God is faithful to his promises, but not to men’s misunderstanding of these promises. 2. God is just, and not partial, in his treatment of the subjects of his kingdom upon earth. 3. God does not look upon men’s outward relations and position, but upon the character and heart. II. LIGHT IS CAST UPON THE MORAL AND OF MEN. 1. Men are blamable and foolish if they rely upon adventitious advantages; as e.g. upon parentage, ancestry, associations, acquired knowledge, religious privileges. 2. Men are wise if they remember, and act upon their remembrance, that it is God’s prerogative and method to search the heart. 3. Men should use diligently the opportunities they enjoy, knowing that it is not their advantages, but the use they make of them, that is all-important. 4. Men should look forward to the individual account to be rendered at the last to the supreme Judge of all. Romans 9:25, Romans 9:26 A great reversal Whether the original reference of the prophet here quoted was to the "ten tribes" or to the Gentile world is, for our purposes, immaterial, since it is unquestionable that the Apostle Paul employs the quotation to illustrate and, in a sense, to prove his contention—that it is the purpose of him, who is Eternal Wisdom and Unchanging Righteousness, to transfer privilege and blessing from those who considered themselves to possess an ancestral claim to them, unto those who had usually been regarded as aliens and reprobate—even the "sinners of the Gentiles." If this phase of Divine action has to some extent lost its interest for us, the principle which it illustrates is ever important. I. THE HIGHLY AND MAY ABUSE THEIR , AND MAY LOSE THEM. Consider the case of the Hebrews. 1. Their special prerogatives in the possession of religious knowledge and means of spiritual improvement. 2. Their rebellion and apostasy in yielding in the earlier periods of their history to temptations to idolatry. 3. Their frequent chastisement, especially in the Captivity in the East, and in their subsequent national humiliations. 4. The repetition of their insensibility and disobedience in the rejection of Jesus, the true Messiah. 5. The final catastrophe which overtook the nation, in the destruction of Jerusalem, and in the dispersion of the people throughout the earth. II. THE LESS MAY BE, IN GOD’S , EXALTED TO , AND, BY A RIGHT USE OF IT, MAY BECOME OF . Consider the case of the Gentiles. 1. The publication of the gospel to them by St. Paul upon its rejection by his own fellow-countrymen. 2. The acceptance by many of the glad tidings intended for the enlightenment and salvation of men. 3. The position taken by Gentile converts in the diffusion of Christianity. 4. The consequent conversion of the Roman empire to the faith of Jesus of Nazareth. 5. And the course of the history of Christendom, which may all be traced to the operation of this wonderful principle. . 1. They act foolishly who rely upon their privileges. 2. They are wise who, grateful for privileges, are concerned so to use them that they may not lose them, so to use them that they may become the vehicles of the highest spiritual blessing to themselves and to those associated with them, over whom their influence may extend. 3. They who are cast down because their circumstances seem unfavourable should not forget that the people who were "not God’s people" became "his people," "beloved," "children of the living God." Romans 9:32, Romans 9:33 The rock of offence. In one point of view it would seem all but incredible that the highest display of Divine wisdom and goodness should be regarded, by those for whose benefit it was provided, with indifference and even hostility. But in order to understand how this should be, it is necessary to bear in mind the distorting influence of sin upon the minds of men. True religion comes into conflict with men’s errors, prejudices, and guilty conscience; and is a stone of stumbling, and rock of offence. I. HAS NO RESPECT FOR AND PRIDE. Jew and Gentile, civilized and barbarian, stand before God, and his Law and gospel, upon the same footing. All alike are treated as guilty, as needing to repent in order to salvation. II. HAS NO RESPECT FOR RANK OR FAMILY . In the first age it was especially observed that not many great, or mighty, or noble were chosen. Such as were chosen were accepted upon the same terms as the lowly and the obscure. III. DOES NOT MAKE DEPEND UPON . Such advantages were enjoyed in abundance by the Jews; but the preachers of Christianity made no account of them. When Israelites counted themselves unworthy of everlasting life, the heralds of salvation turned to the Gentiles. No wonder that such a reversal of customary methods angered those who prided themselves upon their position of advantage. IV. MERE AND . Most religions are content with words, gestures, gifts, etc. The new faith repudiated all such observances as in themselves valueless, laying stress upon the thoughts and intents of the heart. This was a paradox which was not unnaturally encountered with resentment. V. AND AS THE OF PARDON. And this in every case—a provision which is galling to the self-righteous and self-confident, who have little conscience of sin, and little pining for forgiveness. "The natural man" stumbles at this condition, which may, he thinks, be applicable to others, but has no appropriateness to him. VI. OF AS ALONE AND IN THE SIGHT OF GOD. Christ’s own commands and counsels appeal to the heart—the inmost nature of man. A new nature, renewed dispositions, heavenly desires,—nothing less avails in his sight. "It is a hard saying," is the objection; "who can hear it?" BY C.H. IRWIN Romans 9:1-5 The sympathy of a Christian patriot. If our Christianity is genuine, it will not destroy our natural affections, but will purify and ennoble them. Domestic affection is all the stronger and the brighter under the influence of Christianity. The Christian patriot is the truest patriot. So it was with St. Paul. Because he had embraced, so to speak, a new religion, he does not turn in bitterness against his former coreligionists. Because he has become wiser than they, he does not look down upon them with scorn and contempt. I. HIS SORROW FOR THE LOST. He says that he has "great heaviness and continual sorrow" for Israel, his kinsmen according to the flesh. This sorrow is intensified by many considerations. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/pulpit-commentary/ In this chapter the view of the whole subject introduced at Romans 9:30 is continued and carried out, according to which the present rejection of the Jews as a nation is traced to no absolute and irreversible Divine decree, but to their own refusal to accept God’s plan of mercy to all mankind; testimonies being, as usual, adduced from the Old Testament in support of the argument. But, before proceeding, the apostle renews expression of his regret (cf. Romans 9:1, seq.) at the present position of his countrymen, and his earnest desire that it should be otherwise. Romans 10:1 Brethren, my heart’s desire (εὐδοκία, expressing good will) and prayer to God for them (for Israel, as in the Textus Receptus, has no good support) is, that they may be saved (literally, is unto salvation). "Non orasset Paulus, si absolute reprobati essent" (Bengel). Romans 10:2, Romans 10:3 For I bear them record that they have a zeal of God. For ζῆλονΘεοῦ, meaning zeal for God, cf. John 2:17; Acts 22:3; Galatians 1:14. The word ζῆλος was commonly used for the religious ardour of the Jews at that time (cf. Acts 21:20, Πάντεςζηλωταὶτοῦνόμουὑπάρχουσι), and there was a faction among them called distinctively Ζηλωταὶ, to which Simon Zelotes (Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13) is supposed to have belonged originally. St. Paul’s mention of the religious zeal of the Jews of his day is apposite in this place. In Romans 9:1-5, where he was about to speak of their rejection from the inheritance of the promises, he appropriately dwelt on their ancient privileges; here, where he has in view their own failure to respond to God’s purpose for them, he as appropriately refers to their undoubted zeal, which he regrets should be misdirected. But not according to knowledge. For being ignorant of (ἀγνοοῦντες, in explanation of οὐκατἐπίγνωσιν preceding) God’s righteousness, and seeking to establish their own (righteousness, repeated here, is ill supported), they have not submitted themselves to the righteousness of God. For the meaning of God’s righteousness, opposed to man’s own righteousness, see on Romans 3:19, Romans 3:20; also on Romans 1:17, and Introduction. Romans 10:4 For Christ is the end of Law unto righteousness to every one that believeth. The word "end" (τέλος) might in itself mean (1) termination, (2) fulfilment, (3) aim or purpose, which is the evident meaning of the word in 1 Timothy 1:5 and 1 Peter 1:9. This last seems best to suit the line of thought in this place. The Jews evinced ignorance, i.e. of the real meaning and purpose of Law, in resting on it for justification. This is St. Paul’s constant position in speaking of the office of Law—that it could not and was never meant to justify, but rather to convince of sin; to establish the need of, and excite a craving for, redemption; and so prepare men to appreciate and accept the righteousness of God in Christ which was its τέλος (see especially ch. 7.; and cf. Galatians 3:24, ὭστεὁνόμοςπαιδαγωγὸςἡμῶνγέγονενεἰςΧριστὸνἽναἐκπίστωςδικαιωθῶμεν). Νόμος being here anarthrous, we translate it according to the rule observed in this Commentary. The apostle has, indeed, in view the Mosaic Law; but it is the principle of law, as such, that he is speaking of. He next proceeds, as elsewhere throughout the Epistle, to quote from the Old Testament in illustration of the contrast between the two principles of justification, and this with the intention of showing that even in the Pentateuch that of justification by faith was intimated, and thus that it was all along the real τέλος of the Law. "Nam si prophetas suae sententiae testes citasset, haerebat tamen hic scrupulus, cum Lex aliam justitiae formam praescriberet. Hunc ergo optime discutit, quum ex ipsa Legis doctrina stabitit fidei justitiam" (Calvin). Romans 10:5 For Moses describeth the righteousness which is of the Law, That the man which doeth those things shall live by (literally, in) them (Leviticus 18:5). This quotation is intended to express, in the words of Moses himself, the principle of Law, viz. the requirement of entire observance of it, such as the apostle elsewhere contends is impossible (cf. Galatians 3:10-12). It may be objected that Moses himself, in the original passage, does not seem to be setting forth any such impossible requirement. He says, in the name of the Lord, "Ye shall therefore keep my statutes and my judgments, which, if a man do, he shall live in them;" implying, it would seem, that a man might so keep them as to live in them; else were the injunction delusive. In the quotation also of the same text in Ezekiel 20:11, Ezekiel 20:13, Ezekiel 20:21 and Nehemiah 9:29, only such a requirement as might have been fulfilled appears to be understood. But St. Paul (as appears from the context, and from Galatians 3:12, where the text is similarly cited) refers to it as expressing the strict principle of law, as above defined. It, then, the text, in its original connection, seems to fall short of the sense put upon it, we may understand the apostle to quote it as a well-known one, sufficiently suggestive, if taken, as he intends it to be, in connection with others, such as Deuteronomy 27:26, cited with it in Galatians 3:10, "Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the Law to do them." It is his way to refer to familiar texts, or such as most readily occur to him, as suggestive of Old Testament ideas which he expects his readers to be acquainted with. Calvin’s remarks on this whole passage deserve attention: "Lex bifariam accipitur. Nunc enim significat universam doctrinam a Mose proditam, nunc pattern illam quae ministerii ejus propria erat; quae scilicet praeceptis, praemis, et poenis continetur Quod ergo hic de justitia Legis dicitur referre convenit non ad totam Mosis functionem, sed ad partem istam quae peculiariter quodammodo ei commissa fuit." His drift is, that the passage before us intimates the strict principle of law, which it was the peculiar function of Moses to promulgate, whereas the passage which follows from Deuteronomy is significant of its universa doctrina. This distinction may help us to understand St. Paul’s drift, in referring, as he proceeds to do, to Deuteronomy 30:11-14. The determination of this drift is attended with some difficulty. First, we observe that, whereas the original passage certainly refers to the Law given to the Israelites through Moses—to the same "statutes and judgments" that were the subject of the previous quotation—St. Paul applies it to describe justification through faith in Christ; and, secondly, that, in order to apply it, he alters some parts of it, and interposes comments of his own. One view is that he is only making a free-use of the words of the passage to clothe his own thoughts. So Bengel: "Ad hunc locum quasi parodia suavissime alludit, sine expressa allegatione." But his obvious intention, here as elsewhere, to support his positions from the old Scriptures surely precludes this view. Nor can he be supposed to cite the passage as simply prophetical of the gospel which was to supersede the Law, since it evidently was not so. The proper view seems to be that he adduces it as illustrating, in the first place. what Calvin calls the universa doctrina of the Law itself, with regard to its actual application as a norma vivendi to the needs of man. Here, he would say, the very Mosaic dispensation is presented to us, not as exacting any impossible obedience to the strict behests of law, but only such as the "circumcised in heart" could render, and be accepted still; it is presented to us, not as a rigid external code, enjoining and threatening, but as a word very nigh unto us, even in our heart, that we may do it; it is, in fact, an anticipation and foreshadowing of gospel salvation. In confirmation of this view of the apostle’s meaning, it is to be observed that the passage occurs, not in the earlier books of Moses, but in Deuteronomy, which appears as an appendix to them, containing for the most part long discourses in the style of the prophets, wherein the Law is, as it were, spiritualized, and its universa doctrina opened out. In it we feel ourselves as rising out of the region of strict legal exaction into a higher and more spiritual one. Observe also that the passage before us is based on the idea of a people circumcised in heart, and loving the Lord with all the heart and all the soul (verses 6, 20); on an ideal view of a state of favour and acceptance never realized in Jewish history, but such as we find often in the prophetic writings (cf. Jeremiah 31:31-34, the famous passage referred to more than once in the New Testament as having its eventual fulfilment in Christ). Thus the passage before us is legitimately referred to by St. Paul, as an intimation in the Pentateuch itself of the "righteousness which is of faith." Romans 10:6-10 But the righteousness which is of faith speaketh on this wise, Say not in thine heart (in the original, It is not in heaven, that thou shouldest say), Who shall ascend into heaven? (that is, to bring Christ down). The parenthesis is St. Paul’s own; the original has, after "heaven," and bring it unto us, that we may hear it and do it? Or, Who shall descend into the deep? (that is, to bring up Christ again from the dead). Again the parenthesis is St. Paul’s; and he has substituted "into the deep" (εἰςτὴνἄβυσσον) for " beyond the sea." The original is, Neither is it beyond the sea, that thou shouldest say, Who shall go over the sea for us, and bring it unto us, that we may hear it, and do it? But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach; that (or, because) if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. The apostle’s purpose in varying from the original is obvious from his interposed comments, and from the application that follows. It seems to be as though he had said, "See how, with a slight alteration, the passage in Deuteronomy becomes an exact description of our Christian doctrine." The most marked alteration is the substitution of "into the deep" for "beyond the sea." The "sea" in the original, to which the term "abyss" is applicable (cf. Job 28:14; Psalms 107:26), may have suggested the word; but St. Paul here evidently means by it the regions of the dead, imagined as subterranean, equivalent to the Hebrew Sheol, and the Greek Ἅδης. For use of the word in this sense, cf. Psalms 71:20, Ἐκτῶνἀβύσσωντῆςγῆςπάλινἀνήγαγέςμε cf. also Luke 8:31 and Revelation 9:1, Revelation 9:2, Revelation 9:11; Revelation 11:7; Revelation 17:8; Revelation 20:1, Revelation 20:3; in which passages ἡἄβυσσος seems to denote the penal abode, corresponding to the Greek idea of Tartarus; but the word itself does not contain this idea, which is by no means intimated here. It may be taken to denote Hades, into which Christ "descended." Some commentators suppose the previous expression, "ascend into heaven to bring Christ down," to mean bringing him back to earth from heaven, whither he has ascended now. But the mere fact of its coming first, as well as the general sense of the passage, shows it to refer rather to the Incarnation, and what follows to the Resurrection. These were the two grand stages in the great work of redemption; both were required that "the righteousness which is of faith" might effectually be brought "nigh unto us." The impossible task of effecting either was not required of man; God has done both for us, and we have but to "believe in our hearts," that "the word" of his grace may be nigh us, in our mouth and in our heart, that we may do it. Thus all that was intimated or foreshadowed by that old passage in Deuteronomy is in its fullest sense to us fulfilled. In verse 9 the applicability of the words, "in thy mouth, and in thine heart," to the gospel dispensation is shown; the two expressions, properly understood, denoting all that is required of us. Confession of the Lord Jesus with the mouth must be taken to express generally, not only fearless avowal of the Christian faith, but also consistent life, according to the full meaning of our Lord’s words in Matthew 10:32; Mark 8:38; Luke 10:26; Luke 12:8, etc. Confession of the Lord Jesus with the mouth, too, would have a peculiar significance then, when Christians were often so sorely tempted to deny him under persecution (cf. 1 Corinthians 12:3). We may observe also how "the mouth" is elsewhere regarded as the index of the heart; as the main bodily organ whereby character is evinced and expressed (cf. Matthew 12:34, Matthew 12:37; Matthew 15:11, etc.). Further, the belief spoken of is belief in the heart—a living operative faith, not intellectual conviction only. Nor is belief that God raised the Lord Jesus from the dead to be taken as meaning belief of this one article of the Creed alone; it carries with it belief in the gospel generally, the doctrine of the Resurrection being here, as elsewhere, regarded as the central doctrine on which all the rest depends (cf. I Corinthians Luke 15:17; 1 Peter 1:21). "Haec summa Evangelii est. Nam, cum credimus Christum excitatum esse e mortuis, credimus sum pro peccatis satisfecisse, et in coelis regnare, ut nos ad imaginem suam perficiat" (Bucer). In Luke 12:10, where the offices of the heart and of the mouth are denoted in general terms, the distinction between "unto righteousness" with respect to the one, and "unto salvation" with respect to the other, is significant. By faith alone we are justified; but by confession in actual life, which is the fruit of faith, our salvation is secured. Romans 10:11-21 What follows to the end of the chapter is abruptly expressed, in such wise as to render difficult a clear exposition of the intended argument. It seems (as in other parts of the Epistle) as if St. Paul had dictated rapidly, and without pausing to consider whether readers would easily follow the thoughts of which his own mind was full. First, having done with his illustrations from the Pentateuch, he resumes the line of thought expressed at the end of Rom 10:4, by παντὶτῷπιστεύοντι. For, though Romans 10:11 is logically connected (in a way usual with St. Paul) with the preceding one—the quotation from Isaiah being adduced in proof of πιστεύεταιεἰςδικαιοσύνην in verse 10—yet what follows is really a continuation of the thought of verse 4, viz. that the "righteousness of God," spoken of in verse 3, is of faith, and also for all. In evidence of this he returns to the text from Isaiah 28:16, already cited in Romans 9:33, and himself supplies πᾶς at the beginning of it, so as to bring out its universal application. It may be that, quoting from memory, he had forgotten that this word was not in the original, or he may have purposely added it in order to express more clearly what the original—in which there is no limitation of ὁπισττεύων—really implied. The latter supposition is probable, inasmuch as (according to the best-supported readings) he had previously (Romans 9:33) quoted the text without this addition, and now follows out the idea of πᾶς by giving a reason for it, and then, in Romans 9:13, adds a text from Joel in which πᾶς does occur, so as to intimate that the "calling on the Name of the Lord," spoken of by Joel, implies the "believing" spoken of by Isaiah, and hence that the two texts must be equally universal in their application. Romans 10:11, Romans 10:12 For the Scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed (see above, on Romans 9:33). For there is no difference (rather, distinction) between the Jew and the Greek: for the same is Lord of all, being rich unto all that call upon him. Here, in Romans 10:12, the apostle comments on the text from Isaiah, so as to show the universality of its application (see previous note). It is (he would say) in itself applicable to Jew and Gentile alike, and it must needs be so, since the one God is the same to all that call upon him, even as the Prophet Joel also testified. The thought thus expressed was one deeply fixed in St. Paul’s mind. He elsewhere speaks Of the very unity of God as implying of necessity that he is the same alike to Jews and Gentiles (see above, on Romans 3:29). Romans 10:13 For whosoever shall call upon the Name of the Lord shall be saved (Joe 2:32). The text from Joel is in a passage which is distinctly Messianic; the same that is quoted by St. Peter (Acts 2:16) as fulfilled on the Day of Pentecost. Hence, and from the fact of πᾶςὃςἂν being emphatic in the original, it is well quoted by the apostle as supplementing the previous one from Isaiah, and as conclusive for his argument. Romans 10:14, Romans 10:15 How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? This question may be taken, in the first place, as serving to connect the two passages from Joel and from Isaiah (see previous note). But it is further the beginning of a sorites, suggested by a new thought, which is carried out to the end of the chapter. The course of this new thought through the rest of the chapter may be expounded as follows: It might be pleaded, in behalf of the unbelieving Jews, that they had never really heard, through preachers duly sent to them, the gospel message; and hence that they were not to be blamed for rejecting it. With this idea before him, the apostle first (verses 14, 15) allows generally, in the form of a series of questions, that, as before calling on the Lord there must be faith, so before faith there must be hearing, before hearing there must be preaching, and for preaching there must be authorizing mission; and he quotes, in illustration, a passage from Isaiah, which describes beautifully the preaching of good tidings of peace by commissioned messengers to all the world. But he is careful to add (verses 16, 17) that, according to the same prophet, such universal preaching, and consequent hearing, does not involve universal hearkening; thus showing, in view of the main purpose of his argument, that the fact of the Jews not hearkening now is no evidence that they had not heard. Then he goes on to ask whether any could plead the excuse of not having heard, so as to justify want of the faith that cometh of hearing. Nay, he replies (verse 18), the sound of the good tidings has gone forth to all the earth, even like the language of nature spoken of in Psalms 19:1-14. Then (verse 19), pressing his argument home to the Jews, who have been all along in view, he asks, "But I say, Did not Israel know?" The word ἕγνω, being different from ἤκουσααν previously used, must express some different meaning. But what St. Paul exactly meant by it is not quite clear. The quotations from the Old Testament that follow in proof of knowledge (verses 19, 20) seem to support the view that what Israel knew, or ought to have known, was the Divine design of the promulgation of the "good tidings" to all the world, which has just been spoken of. Such promulgation should have been to them no stumbling-block; for it had been told to them from Moses downwards, and they had full opportunity of knowing it. Lastly (verse 21), the apostle intimates that the present state of things, in which Gentiles accept the gospel while Israel in the main rejects it, far from being an objection to it, is but a further fulfilment of Isaiah’s prophecies, which represent God as making himself known to those who had not known him, while pleading with Israel in vain. This exposition of the supposed course of thought being borne in mind, the passage (with the further aid of some interposed comments) may become intelligible. It continues: And how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard! and how shall they hear without a preacher! and how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that [preach the gospel (or, good tidings) of peace, and] bring glad tidings of flood things! (Isaiah 3:7). The genuineness of the. words within brackets is at least doubtful. Even with them the text is not quoted in full, though sufficiently to remind of its purport. Romans 10:16-18 But not all obeyed (or, hearkened to) the gospel (or, good tidings). This means, apparently, that in the prophet’s representation of the proclamation of the good tidings all were said to hear, but not all to hearken, For Esaias saith, Lord, who Believed our report? (The Greek word here is ἀκοῇ, the same as in Romans 10:17, there rendered "hearing," and corresponding to the verb ἀκούειν in Romans 10:14,Romans 10:18.) So then faith cometh of hearing, and hearing by the Word of God (ῥήματοςΘεοῦ, God’s own Word, committed to, and spoken by, preachers duly sent). But I say, Did they not hear?. The previous aorist, ὑπήκουσαν, in Romans 10:16 having been understood as referring to the prophetic representations rather than to present known facts, the aorist ἤκουσαν here must, for consistency, be similarly understood, though with a view also to the actual universality of the gospel message. The unexpressed nominative to ἤκουσαν appears from the context to be men in general, not the Jews in particular. Israel is not specified till Romans 10:19. Yea, verily, their sound went into all the earth, and their words unto the ends of the world (Psalms 19:4). The "sound" and the "words" in the psalm are those of the heavens and the firmament. But in the second part of the psalm, beginning at Romans 10:7, the psalmist passes from God’s revelation of himself in nature to his revelation of himself in his Word. Still the psalm itself cannot well be understood as intimating the universal proclamation of the gospel. Nor is it necessary to suppose that St. Paul so understood it. Enough for him that the words he quotes express admirably what he desires to say. Romans 10:19 But I say, Did not Israel know? (see explanation given above). First, Moses saith, I will provoke you to jealousy by them that are no nation; by a foolish nation I will anger you. It may be observed that in the Greek we have the same word, ἔθνει,, in both classes of the sentence, though, in order to bring out the supposed meaning in the first clause, it is there, in the Authorized Version, rendered "people," and in the second, "nation." The passage occurs in the song attributed to Moses in Deuteronomy 32:21, and expresses the idea of God, in consequence of the defaults of Israel, favouring those who were so far, as it were, no nation at all, so as to provoke Israel to jealousy. It is therefore aptly cited as an intimation in the Pentateuch itself of the calling of the Gentiles in place of unbelieving Israel. The idea involved in "provoke you to jealousy"—in the sense of moving to emulation, so that Israel itself as a nation might, through the calling of the Gentiles, in the end be saved—is pursued, as will be seen, in the chapter that follows. Romans 10:20 But Esaias is very hold, and saith, I was found of them that sought me not; I was made manifest unto them that asked not after me. (Isaiah 65:1). The peculiar boldness of Isaiah’s utterance consists in this—that, at a time when Israel was recognized as God’s one chosen people, he is said to make himself known even to those who sought him not at all. Romans 10:21 But to Israel he saith, All day long I stretched out my hands unto a disobedient and gainsaying people. (Isaiah 65:2). Tholuck remarks, "If from this passage we once more look back upon the tenth and ninth chapters, it is manifest how little Paul ever designed to revert to a decretun, absolutum, but meant to cast all blame upon the want of will in men, resisting the gracious will of God. Romans 10:1 Solicitude and supplication for the salvation of sinners. Paul was himself a Jew, a Hebrew of the Hebrews. His first ministry was to Israelites, and, when upon his missionary tours, he made it his first business to address the frequenters of the synagogues. By his training and by his associations, and also by his evangelistic intercourse with his countrymen, he understood the Jewish mind, and how to deal with it. From the Jews he met with obstacles, opposition, and persecution; and he could not be blind to their faults and errors. This, however, did not prompt him to anger or to neglect; he loved his nation, and felt the claim of kindred and nationality. He laboured, spoke, wrote, and prayed for his Jewish kin; he sought above all things their salvation. Looking away from the special reference, let us consider the words of the apostle as supplying an example of the benevolent spirit of Christianity. I. WE MUST BE AWARE THAT THERE IS A NEED OF . Many of our neighbours need saving from debasing vice and unjustifiable, inexcusable crime; many have fallen into dangerous errors, from which they need to be delivered; many need to be awakened from the densest ignorance and carelessness with regard to spiritual realities. Some are sensible of their need; multitudes are utterly indifferent to it. Go to a hospital, and you will see many and varied forms of disease, accident, privation, affecting men’s bodily state—all want healing. So is it with sinful society: salvation, and nothing less than salvation, is the world’s great want. II. WE KNOW THAT THERE IS FOR THOSE WHO NEED IT. As Christians, we are assured that our Redeemer is a mighty, all-sufficient Saviour; we believe that he came that the world should be saved through him; we have been authoritatively told that he is "the Propitiation for the sins of the whole world;" that God is "the Saviour of all men, specially of those who believe." Further, we have ourselves experienced the grace and power of Jesus to pardon, purify, and bless; and what he has done for us he can do for others. The offers and promises of his gospel are free and valid. He saves to the uttermost all that come unto God by him. III. SHOULD BE ANXIOUS AND ON BEHALF OF SINNERS THAT THEY MAY BE SAVED. In this the apostle is an example to all who have themselves tasted and seen that the Lord is good. 1. It should be our heart’s "good pleasure" (for such is the literal rendering). A benevolent mind, in sympathy with the Saviour, who pitied, wept over, expostulated with sinners, will find pleasure in witnessing the power of the gospel to rescue and to save the lost. 2. Supplication should be offered with a view to the same end. We know that such prayer is acceptable; for Christ has said, "It is not the pleasure of my Father that one of these should perish." Supplication should not be selfish; it should be intercessory and benevolent. IV. SHOULD USE THE MEANS FOR THE OF THEIR FELLOW-MEN. Sympathy and prayer, unaccompanied by effort, would be a mockery. Certainly, Paul was not the man to grieve over his erring countrymen, and at the same time to neglect endeavours for their recovery. Some of us may preach the gospel, others may "send" the preachers, others may invite their neighbours to hear the gospel; sympathy and prayer will lead to some form of practical effort. . 1. Whilst others are concerned for your salvation, are you seeking this salvation for yourself? 2. Are you manifesting practically solicitude for the spiritual good of your neighbours and fellow-men? Romans 10:2-4 False righteousness and true. Paul’s desire for the salvation of his countrymen and kinsmen arose from his clear perception of their spiritual destitution and need. They might hide their condition from themselves, but it was clear enough to him. The measure of true light which they enjoyed made it the sadder that many of them refused to accept and to walk in the full light of the Sun of Righteousness. And the apostle’s sympathy was excited on their behalf all the more because he understood their case so well. I. ZEALOUS MAY BE BY . The apostle does not charge the Jews with neglecting, far less with despising, religion. In their own way they were very religious, and many of them were found willing to put forth great efforts and endure many sacrifices for their religion. They had "a zeal for God." They hated idolatry; they revered their Scriptures, their temple, their priesthood, their sacrifices and festivals; they prided themselves upon their ceremonial purity and their scrupulous observances. Yet, with all this, they were not commended by the apostle. Their zeal was without knowledge. We meet with similar characters in our own time. Some persons consider that if there is religiousness with sincerity, that is sufficient. It is a great mistake. We need light as well as warmth, knowledge as well as zeal. If truth has been revealed, our first duty is to learn and receive it. II. THERE IS A FALSE AND OF . The Jews are censured for seeking to establish "their own righteousness." The Law, indeed, was good in itself. For those who perfectly obeyed it, it was a means of salvation. But the Law is Condemnation to those who trust in it and yet do not conform to it. And, as a matter of fact, the Law was "weak through the flesh," was insufficient for the salvation of sinful men. It is no foundation for a sinner’s hopes. Further, the Hebrews were too much accustomed to regard their religious acts as services rendered, for which Divine recompense and payment are due. This is a notion still prevalent, but it is radically unscriptural and unreasonable. We cannot be justified by the works of the Law, and we can earn nothing as a right from God. III. THE TRUE IS THAT WHICH IS THROUGH CHRIST JESUS. Observe: 1. The relation between Christ and the Law. The word "end" may be taken literally. The Law, as a dispensation, came to an end when Christ appeared. The Law was to the Israelites a Conductor to lead them to Jesus. But the word "end" may mean more than this; it may mean the purpose and design of the Law. The Law was given in order to reveal both the righteousness of God and the sinfulness of man. It thus prepared the way for the coming of him whose obedience fulfilled the Law, and whoso redemption secured pardon and liberty for those whom the Law was powerless to save. 2. Observe the way in which the higher righteousness is secured through Christ. This is described by three several expressions in this passage—knowledge, subjection, belief. The ignorant are without the means of obtaining justification; the unsubmissive rebel against the means; the unbelieving reject the means. It is the will of God that faith should be accounted for righteousness. This is a principle as old as Abraham; yet its most mighty working is apparent in the case of those who believe in Jesus. The doctrine of justification by faith is here plainly revealed, and its superiority to all rival doctrines plainly exhibited. Romans 10:5-10 Gracious terms of salvation. The blessings of the gospel were designed for, and were offered to, Jews and Gentiles alike, with the most perfect impartiality. The descendants of Abraham, the disciples of Moses, did indeed enjoy an advantage; but, instead of profiting by it, they turned it against themselves. The apostle here teaches that if any of his kinsmen and countrymen come short of Christian privilege, the fault is their own, and cannot be laid to the Divine Author. St. Paul so presents the gospel as to exhibit— I. ITS TO THE LAW. The former dispensation promised life to those who obeyed the Law. By life is meant more than continuance of existence and national and territorial advantages; the expression conveys the promise of Divine favour and acceptance. Perfect obedience would secure life; but such obedience no Hebrew, and indeed no mortal man, has rendered. The old covenant did indeed assure to the upright and pious Jew the blessings of salvation, and enjoined obedience upon all its sons. But it was only human pride and self-righteousness which could deem the life of even the holiest such as to merit the favour and fellowship of God. Christianity, on the other hand, provides all spiritual blessings as a free gift—the gift of grace. II. ITS AND . To exhibit this, the apostle borrows language from the Book of Deuteronomy. What the Lord, by Moses, said of the commandment published to Israel, that Paul says of the gospel. The Divine righteousness speaks; and what is its message to men? 1. It is a message which gently reproaches those who complain of the difficulty of understanding and realizing the will of God. How especially does this apply to Christianity! We have not to soar to heaven, or to plunge into the abyss; for Christ, the Son of God, has condescended to come down from the celestial heights that he might dwell among us; he has risen from the dead, conquering sin and death for us, and leading us in the way to God. Thus the Lord has deigned to make the truth of God intelligible, and the grace of God real and near. 2. But the Divine righteousness, speaking, assures us of the nearness of the Word of life to the hearers of the gospel, personally and individually. How could the word which quickeneth be nearer, more accessible? It is "in the mouth, and in the heart," of every Christian. Pause to think how true this is. Your English Bible is in your hands; the gospel is preached at your own doors; the creeds, the prayers, the thanksgivings, are framed and uttered in your own familiar speech; the name of Jesus is a household word; the simplest can understand the message of the gospel, the terms of life eternal; the child, the unlearned, the feeble, the aged, appreciate the truth as it is in Jesus; Christianity gains many a convert from among the poor, the vicious, the very heathen. All this is a testimony to the Divine adaptation of the gospel to human nature; it meets our deepest wants and supplies them, it creates its own witness by its own success. III. THE TERMS IT . They are two. 1. Faith—as this whole Epistle tells, and tells again and yet again. The righteousness is of faith; "with the heart man believeth." A provision which attests the infinite wisdom of him who made it. The condition is one which can be fulfilled by men of every rank and age and culture; yet it is one profoundly affecting the moral and spiritual nature. It is profitable to man and honouring to God. 2. Confession—a condition, doubtless, very different in the apostles’ days from our own, but, as the Lord teaches us, ever indispensable. Men have not the right to say in what way confession shall be made. But it must not be withheld. IV. THE IT SECURES. These also are two. 1. Righteousness—the new, Divine, Christian righteousness, that which is the gift of God; a righteousness which is by grace, but which is real, genuine, and eternal. 2. Salvation—by which we are to understand the final and complete enjoyment of what the gospel brings and promises. The end of your faith is the salvation of your souls. It is not only deliverance from sin and danger; it is the participation in the Divine nature, and in the eternal life. . Let the hearer of the gospel think, not merely of the mysteries which belong to religion, but of the simplicity of what is most essential for him to believe. You have not to climb a lofty tree in order to pluck the fruit; the bough hangs low, and you have but to reach out your hand. You have not to climb the mountain crag, and cross the dangerous bog, in order to come at the water of life; the stream flows by your side, and you have but to stoop and drink. Romans 10:11-13 Lordship and riches. This passage exhibits the identity of the old covenant and the new. Paul quotes from the prophecies of Isaiah and Joel, in such a manner as to show, not only that he acknowledged the inspired authority of those writers, but also that he regarded words of promise uttered in the former dispensation as valid in the later. The language quoted harmonizes with the widest conceptions of the Divine benevolence, and must have been adduced with especial satisfaction by one so broad in his sympathies as was the large-hearted apostle of the Gentiles. I. THE AND WEALTH OF CHRIST. In speaking of the blessings of salvation, it was very natural that Paul should be led to refer to the glory of the Saviour, in order that it might be understood how vast was his power alike to deliver and to protect his people, and to confer upon them priceless favours. 1. As Lord of all, Christ is Possessor of all power in heaven and in earth. He is of right Ruler of all; and the application of this language, referring to Jehovah, to the Son of man, is proof that he was regarded by St. Paul as Son of God. To Christians, however, it is delightful to reflect upon Christ’s authority, exercised over them, benignantly on his part, and gratefully and practically acknowledged and submitted to by themselves. A rebel and a loyal subject think very differently of their sovereign. To us Jesus is the King, because he is the Prophet and the Priest, who has come to us with the voice of God, and has bought us with his precious blood, tie is enthroned in our hearts; he gives laws to our life. 2. Jesus is rich unto all. We are assured of "the unspeakable riches of Christ," and are counselled to buy of him "gold tried in the fire, that we may be rich." If "all things are ours," it is because we are Christ’s, and Christ is God’s. He who redeems and rules, supplies the wants of his ransomed ones. He is not, like some of the wealthy of this world, rich for himself; he is rich for us, rich boundlessly and inexhaustibly, rich benevolently and for ever. II. THE UPON WHICH THE AND THE WEALTH OF CHRIST MAY BE ENJOYED. These are stated in two modes. 1. Believing on him is essential to participating in the blessings Christ offers to men. The apostle has previously been insisting upon faith as the means of obtaining the true and Divine righteousness, as God’s way for man to come to himself and to enjoy his favour. They who have faith shall not be put to shame, shall surely and eternally be saved. 2. Calling upon him would seem to be a natural result of faith. They who believe in the heart will give their faith utterance by the lips. By this Hebrew expression we may understand both open confession and earnest prayer. By calling upon the Lord’s Name, no vain and superstitious invocations or repetitions are to be understood, but the sincere entreaty of the soul for deliverance, guidance, or help. III. FOR WHOSE BENEFIT CHRIST’S AND WEALTH ARE . 1. The limitations of nationality are abolished. The religions of heathenism are local; the deities of heathenism are national and tutelary. Under the older dispensation, Jehovah was revealed as the one God, the God of all the earth; yet the Hebrews too often regarded the Lord as their God, and theirs only. The distinction between Jew and Gentile was, to the Hebrew mind, deep and ineffaceable. To St. Paul largely belongs the honour of giving currency to the true doctrine of Christianity, that religion is one and universal; that God is the Father of mankind; that Christ is Saviour and Lord of all men; that the middle wall of partition is broken down; that in Christ there is neither Jew nor Gentile. 2. The offers of Christianity are made to all, and its terms and conditions are adapted to all. He is "rich unto all," and his riches are for "whomsoever believeth," for "whomsoever calleth upon his Name." What language could be used more fitted to encourage every hearer of the gospel to submit to the Lordship and to seek the true riches of Jesus Christ, the Son of God? Romans 10:12 Spiritual enrichment. The experience of the apostle was sufficiently large to enable him with confidence to make this sweeping assertion. And the experience of the Church of Christ, through the many centuries which have elapsed since St. Paul thus wrote, enables Christians to make the same assertion with undiminished confidence. In fact, the actual proofs at our disposal and command are overwhelming, both in number and in appropriateness; for, whilst the bestowal of Divine and spiritual wealth has been incessantly proceeding, the resources are unexhausted and inexhaustible. I. THE RICHES OF THE LORD. In Christ is wealth adapted to the enrichment of dependent, needy men. He has in himself: 1. Riches of revelation. 2. Riches of redemption. 3. Riches of replenishment, owing to the nature and perpetuity of the spiritual dispensation of grace. 4. Riches of resurrection, inasmuch as the true riches endure unto life eternal. II. THE WITH WHICH THESE RICHES ARE . 1. It is because Christ is Lord over all, that he is rich unto all. 2. The riches of redeeming love are conferred upon men of every nationality. In the apostolic age, the great distinction which Christianity transcended was that between Jew and Gentile; but, in subsequent times, it has been proved by experience that there is no nation, no class, and no condition incapable of this Divine enrichment. III. THE UPON WHICH RICHES HAVE BEEN, AND STILL MAY BE, . As throughout this chapter, the apostle here insists upon that spiritual condition of receptivity and application by which all that is good may enter the nature of man. Calling upon him is an act (1) of repentance, (2) of faith, (3) of prayer, and (4) of aspiration. As we exercise this means of communion, all things are ours. Romans 10:14, Romans 10:15 Preaching. Paul was himself brought to the Saviour by that Saviour’s immediate interposition. Doubtless he had heard much of Jesus; yet he had never truly known him during his career of unbelief and persecution. It was when Jesus met him by the way that his hostility was overcome, that his heart was melted, that his nature was changed. But this was exceptional treatment. The Lord who, by a supernatural appearance and voice, called Saul to the knowledge of himself, commissioned him to preach the gospel to his fellow-men, and made him one of the first, and perhaps the most successful, of the innumerable baud of preachers of the cross. We have here— I. A DIVINE . All good is from God. No apostle more constantly insists upon this great truth than does Paul; and in no treatise is it more prominently set before the mind of the reader than in this Epistle to the Romans. 1. We are told what the ultimate blessing is which Christianity proffers. It is salvation. Righteousness has reference rather to what is positively given; salvation, rather to the state from which men are rescued by the Redeemer. A worthy end!—worthy even of the interposition of Heaven, of the benevolence of God the Father, of the sacrifice of Christ, of the grace of the Spirit. A deliverance of the spiritual nature from condemnation and from all evil, and the provision for the saved of new associations, a new lot, a new hope—a salvation which is final and eternal. 2. We have brought before us the extent to which salvation may be enjoyed, the persons for whose benefit it is proposed. All mankind are qualified to be recipients of this boon upon compliance with the terms proscribed. There is no difference in the view of God. The comprehensive term "whosoever" is conclusive upon this point. Jews are not excluded; Gentiles are welcomed; the provision is for humanity. 3. The text sets before us the conditions upon which this blessing may be enjoyed. It is required (1) that men should call upon the Name of the Lord, i.e. Christ Jesus; and (2) that they should do this in intelligent and cordial faith: for "how shall they call on him in whom they have not believed?" The expression, "call upon the Name of the Lord," is full of meaning and beauty. It reminds us whence the blessing of salvation proceeds; and as the voice, the call, the cry, come from a heart conscious of need and longing for deliverance, it speaks of the spiritual state which prepares for receiving salvation. Thus Christians are spoken of as "all who in every place call upon the Lord." They who act thus glorify God and his promises of faithfulness. They seek what he has promised to bestow, and they seek with earnestness and confidence. "He is near to all that call upon him in truth." In order to intelligent calling upon the Lord, the apostle reasons, there must be faith. "He that cometh unto him must believe that he is, and that he is a Rewarder of them that seek after him." Faith is the first requirement of the gospel; faith in the glad tidings proclaimed; faith in that Divine Saviour to whom those tidings relate, and who, indeed, is himself the Gospel. "Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved." An arrangement this in harmony with the wisdom of God, and with the moral nature of man. Dead in unbelief and unspirituality, the sinner rises in faith into newness of life, for he lays hold of the grace of God revealed in the Saviour Christ. Consider how unspeakably rich is the provision here made, and how unspeakably gracious the conditions here proposed. Hearers of the gospel, how can you remain without such a blessing as this when it is put within your reach, and when you are invited to take it, and when the terms upon which you may enjoy it are such that you cannot cavil at them? How can you think of such a Saviour and such a gospel, and remain faithless and unmoved? How can you do other than, from your sin and danger and helplessness, call upon One who is "mighty to save"—to "save to the uttermost all that come unto God by him"? This is the day of visitation. "Today," says Christ, "if ye will hear my voice, harden not your hearts." II. A HUMAN AGENCY. The apostle brings before us two classes of agents—those who, by the publication of the gospel, are the means of leading their fellow-men to faith; and those who send forth such preachers upon such a mission. 1. God employs preachers in bringing men to salvation. They have glad tidings of peace, of good things, to communicate. As the first bands of returning exiles, bringing good news of a larger company following in their train, were welcome to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, who hailed their approach by the mountains of Judaea; so the preachers of Christianity may well have been welcomed by the spiritually captive tribes and nations whom they visited on their errands of grace and evangelization. This method of promulgating truth, though not peculiar to our religion, is very distinctive of it. Christ chose twelve apostles; he sent out other seventy also. Before he left the world he directed and sanctioned personal agency in the ministry of the gospel. Paul instructed Timothy to commit the things he had received to faithful men, who should be able to teach others also; thus arranging for a succession, not of a priesthood, but of a teaching ministry. Christ calls out, sanctifies, and blesses the ministry of man to man. Would that there were a more general disposition to listen to his voice and to respond to his summons, "Whom shall I send?" in the ancient language, "Here am I; send me." The success which attended the ministry of the apostles and first evangelists was such as to confirm faith in the Divine appointment. God was pleased by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believed. And every succeeding age has witnessed, in greater or less measure, to the efficacy of this wise provision. In our own day literature is so vigorous, and education so general, that the press has become a mighty auxiliary and ally to the ministry. Every preacher who has confidence in the Divine origin of his message, and in his own sincerity, will welcome the aids to general intelligence which are afforded by the able and varied literature of these enlightened days. Amongst a Christian community, preaching becomes naturally something more than the publication of the great fundamental facts of the gospel. But whilst there is abundant room for instruction, by which the Word of God may be expounded, and the application of religion be shown to all spheres and relationships of life, there is still a pressing need for evangelization. The young have to learn afresh "the first principles of the oracles of God;" the inattentive and careless have to be aroused by the Word which is as "a fire, and as a hammer that breaketh the rock in pieces;" the regions around have to be enlightened by the gospel, which is the true light; the world has yet to be gladdened by the good news of salvation and eternal life. 2. God employs his Church to send forth preachers of the gospel. All are not called upon to preach, but, in a sense, all are called upon to send. True, the one great Sender is the Divine Head of the Church; and they who are not commissioned by him are without authority, whatever human sanction, credentials, and approval they may enjoy. "The Lord gave the Word, and great was the company of those that published it." We have an instructive instance of the way in which the Lord inspires his people to send forth his servants upon a benevolent mission, in the narrative of the proceedings of the Church at Antioch, when that Church became the second great centre of missionary enterprise. "How shall they preach, except they be sent?"—a query little regarded by very many of the congregations named after Christ. It is thought enough to leave the matter to individual impulse, wise or unwise, or to consider it the vocation of the pastorate to call out living agencies. Yet, look at the vast demands of our own day. Clergy of all variety of gift; pastors for congregations; evangelists for our rural districts; city missionaries for our great towns; popular itinerant preachers; colonial missionaries; labourers, by voice and pen and press, among the heathen; defenders and promulgators of Christian truth in all the departments of literature;—we need all these, of the best and most varied quality, and in increased numbers. In order that Christian society may send out into the world those who shall diffuse the faith of Christ, it is first of all necessary that that society should be in such a condition that from among its members such agencies shall naturally emerge. Mechanical means are of little avail in this matter. Where there is little life there will be little movement. If love to Christ be chilled by worldliness, no place will be found for love of souls. Out of the fulness of the heart the mouth will speak; when the feeling of the Christian community is strong, its voice will not be silent. The use of any and every means will depend for efficacy upon the sound and living condition of the society in which such means may be employed. It should be habitual with Christian congregations to call out and encourage the exercise of gifts divinely imparted. There are many other gifts beside that of religious instruction and persuasion, and gifts equally precious to God and useful to man. But there are reasons why speech for Christ needs special culture, Natural timidity has to be overcome, and formidable difficulties have to be encountered. It is here that wise counsel and affectionate encouragement come in with especial appropriateness. Almost every youthful speaker has been tempted to renounce this means of usefulness; and often it has happened that a word, providentially spoken, has cheered the diffident and discouraged. It must not be forgotten that, if there are to be learners, there must be teachers. If the Christian Church is to send out preachers and instructors, it must do something more and better than fling them unfurnished on the world. Those who are to influence men must in the first place be influenced by men. That community is rich which contains a large amount of teaching, quickening power. One of our chief dangers is lest we should overestimate the power of money. There is much which cannot be purchased by material wealth. It is in the abundance of the highest type of Christian character that spiritual wealth consists. Where there are found the lofty, noble-minded, the holy and the learned, the spiritual and benevolent, among the leading spirits of a Church, there the young and ardent and devoted wilt gather by a subtle magnetism, and thence they will derive in turn, by God’s grace, the power of Divine attraction. Hence the importance of seeking a high standard of biblical knowledge and Christian intelligence among all classes in our congregations. And hence, too, the importance of seeking out, and wisely employing, all the ability and culture which are devoted to Christ and sanctified to his glory. Can they be said to be truly sent who are thrust forth and then forgotten? Or, rather, does not that Church truly send which follows its agents, whether near or far, with kindly interest, with watchful sympathy, with fervent prayer? Sympathy is invaluable to those who labour, as all Christian servants must do, amid many difficulties and much opposition. Prayer of intercession is due from every member of the universal Church, and is especially required on behalf of Christian labourers. "Brethren, pray for us, that the Word of God may have free course, and be glorified." In order that the Churches may more adequately fulfil their office as illuminators of a dark world, it is necessary that there should be a sincerer pity for the multitudes who are in darkness, and a firmer faith in the light which is from heaven. A Church which hesitates as to whether or not it possesses the truth, and has a gospel for mankind; a Church which can look with unconcern upon the prevalence of sin and misery in the world, is not likely to send forth heralds of Christ and tidings of salvation. Faith in the Redeemer, pity for those whom he died to redeem, forgetfulness and denial of self,—these are the conditions of true evangelization. It is for us, then, to look up for a renewed baptism of the Holy Spirit, as a Spirit of life and of power. How otherwise can we rise to fulfil responsibilities so sacred, to discharge duties so momentous? Hearers of the gospel, seek the Spirit of faith and prayer, that you may be not hearers of the Word only, but doers also! Preachers of the gospel, seek the Spirit of wisdom and fervour, that your words may be with demonstration of the Spirit and of power! Churches of Christ, seek the Spirit of your Master, that you may, feeling your own debt to the Divine, immortal Saviour, act in the spirit of his lesson, "Freely ye have received, freely give"! Romans 10:16-21 Israel’s unbelief. The more highly the apostle prized the gospel, the more sincerely and compassionately did he lament the folly and the guilt of those who deliberately or carelessly rejected it. Especially was his heart stirred to sorrow, when he observed how generally the glad tidings of life in Christ were rejected by his "kinsmen according to the flesh." Both upon the personal ground of relationship and association, and upon the general ground that Israel’s greater privileges involved greater responsibilities, Paul grieved over the want of faith in Christ manifested by so many of his countrymen. I. THE FACT OF ISRAEL’S . 1. It had been predicted. In that remarkable anticipation of the sufferings and the glory of the Messiah which has won for Isaiah the designation "the evangelical prophet," there occurs an intimation that the Messiah should himself be despised and rejected of men, and that the news of his salvation should be disregarded by many for whose benefit it was intended. 2. Fact agreed with prophecy. Many sons of Abraham manifested Abraham’s faith. Of the early professors and preachers of Christianity, a large proportion were Hebrews. Yet, although individuals welcomed the gospel, the nation as a whole, who by their leaders and representatives had crucified and slain the Lord Jesus, certainly turned away from the message of salvation, which, after his ascension, his apostles urgently and faithfully proclaimed. They did not all hearken to the report and obey its summons. II. THE GUILT OF ISRAEL’S . This is made apparent by several considerations. It appears: 1. From the terms of salvation. "Belief cometh of hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ." No terms could be more righteous, more reasonable, more in accordance with the character of God or the necessities of men. Compliance with them involves no mental or social eminence, and is equally possible to those of all nations among men. 2. From the general diffusion of the tidings. Like the very light of the sun, like the voiceless witness of the heavens, the good news of salvation soon penetrated into the remotest and darkest places. Even the distant "sons of the dispersion" could not complain that they had been neglected. For the disciples of Christ, so far from keeping the good news to themselves, made it a point of conscience and religion to communicate to their neighbours the tidings of the advent and the mediation of the Son of God; whilst many, devoting themselves to the work of evangelization, deemed no journey too long to undertake and no perils too formidable to endure in the fulfilment of this sacred commission. 3. Even from the fact that many of the less-favoured Gentiles came to believe. It had been foretold by Moses and by the prophet Isaiah that the privileges which the Jews would despise and refuse should be offered to and accepted by the Gentiles. This came to pass, And it cut the apostle to the heart to remark that his kinsmen were rejecting blessings which the heathen to whom he preached were eagerly welcoming and receiving. 4. From the forbearance and gracious invitations of a heavenly Father. Again the apostle has recourse to the language of prophecy. How affecting is the representation here given of the patience, long-suffering, and kindness of God! He "willeth not that any should perish." Although the people oppose themselves, he does not soon weary of his invitations. He spreads forth his arms, as willing to welcome those who will return from their wanderings and be reconciled to him. So he stands, as it were, all the day long. Still, though he has long proffered grace in vain, the hands which might have been raised to smite are extended to rescue and to bless. BY C.H. IRWIN Romans 10:1-4 Israel’s strength and weakness. The apostle returns again to the tender solicitude for the spiritual welfare of Israel which he had already expressed in the beginning of the ninth chapter. He was no blind bigot. He could recognize the good qualities even of those from whom he differed. He knew how far Israel had departed from the truth of God, and yet he is quick to perceive that, even amid their errors and sins, there is much that is commendable in their character. What an example for every Christian, and especially in these days, when ecclesiastical divisions are so numerous and so sharply defined, to recognize what is good even in those from whom we differ most widely! I. ZEAL WITHOUT . 1. Israel’s zeal was an element of strength. "I bear them record that they have a zeal of God" (Romans 10:2). The apostle does them the justice of recognizing their zeal for God. Here he could speak with sympathy, the sympathy of personal experience. He knew how, before his conversion to Christianity, he himself had been influenced by the same sincere, though mistaken, desire for God’s glory. "I am verily a man which am a Jew, born in Tarsus, a city in Cilicia, yet brought up in this city at the feet of Gamaliel, and taught according to the perfect manner of the Law of the fathers, and was zealous toward God, as ye all are this day" (Acts 22:3). Here is the same sympathetic recognition of Jewish zeal. This quality, when rightly applied, was their strength. It well fitted them to be the bearers of God’s message, and the channel of his blessings, to the world. A people without zeal will never accomplish anything permanent or great. 2. Zeal without knowledge was their weakness. They had a zeal of God, "but not according to knowledge." Zeal is not necessarily an unmixed blessing. Yet there are many who commend earnestness, utterly irrespective of the motives from which it proceeds, the methods it adopts, or the ends it has in view. On this principle the doctrines held or the character exhibited are of small importance, provided only there is earnestness and zeal. Mohammedanism and the Inquisition would therefore be both laudable, because they exhibited zeal. Zeal without knowledge may become the opened floodgate for a torrent of evil. Zeal in religion may lead to any excesses if it is not restrained and tempered by the wisdom which God’s Word imparts. II. WORKS WITHOUT FAITH. "For they being ignorant of God’s righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God" (Romans 10:3). Thus it is plain that sincerity and morality will not save the human soul or procure acceptance with God. The essential condition of salvation is faith. Faith will lead us to accept God’s plan of salvation, and to be guided by his Word in our efforts to obtain it. St. Paul’s description of the Jews here might be appropriately applied to our Roman Catholic and ritualistic brethren. They too have a zeal for God. Their zeal and earnestness cannot be questioned. But their zeal is often not according to knowledge. They too are "going about to establish their own righteousness." They substitute works for faith, and by legal observances, by rites and ceremonies, by lastings and penances, they seek to work out s righteousness for themselves. Christ and his Word are too much set aside, and Church and priest and the commandments of men are set up in their place. Let us admit their strength, let us imitate their zeal, while affectionately "speaking the truth in love" we point out and avoid their weakness.—C.H.I. Romans 10:5-13 The simplicity of the gospel. The apostle here contrasts the simplicity of God’s plan of salvation with the efforts which men have made to work out a righteousness for themselves. Salvation is gained— I. NOT BY OUR OWN GOOD WORKS. "Moses describeth the righteousness which is of the Law, That the man who doeth those things shall live by them" (Romans 10:5). If this were the condition of salvation, how hopeless would our condition be! None of us could say that we had made ourselves free from sin, or that our works were perfect and faultless, or that we had fully and faithfully kept all the commandments of God. "Not what these hands have done Could save this guilty soul; Not what this toiling flesh hath borne Could make my spirit whole." II. NOR BY . "Say not in thine heart, Who shall ascend into heaven? (that is, to bring Christ down from above:) or, Who shall descend into the deep?" (Romans 10:6, Romans 10:7). The desire which is here expressed still survives. Not content with the Word of God and the invisible, but real, spiritual presence of Jesus with his Church, and the power of the Holy Spirit, many zealous Christians think it is necessary to have a more visible manifestation of the supernatural. Hence we have the doctrine of the real presence; alleged appearances of the blessed Virgin at Lourdes and at Knock; and, on the other hand, an undue stress laid upon the second coming of the Lord Jesus Christ. "If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead." III. BUT BY THE AND OF JESUS CHRIST, This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/pulpit-commentary/ Romans 11:1-36 (4) The Jews are not finally rejected, but, through the calling of the Gentiles, will be brought into the Church at last. St. Paul, painfully recognizing the fact of the present exclusion of Israel as a nation from the inheritance of the promises made to their fathers, and having in Romans 9:1-33. and 10. accounted for and justified such exclusion, proceeds now to the question—But is Israel as a nation finally rejected after all? He answers—No; impossible! God’s ancient covenant with his people stands; the remnant of believers even now is a sign of his continued favour to his ancient people, as was, in the time of Elijah, the remnant that had not bowed the knee to Baal; nor does the fact of its being a remnant only imply now, any more than then, that the nation as such is cast off; and further, the calling of the Gentiles, far from being intended to exclude God’s ancient people, will be the means eventually of bringing it wholly in. Such is the apostle’s prophetic vision of the future, in view of which he bursts at the end of the chapter into glowing admiration of the inscrutable ways of God. In the course of it also (Romans 9:17-25) he introduces a warning to Gentile believers not to pride themselves against the Jews because of present preference to them, or to regard their own position of privilege as indefeasible. It must still be borne in mind that it is the position before God of Israel as a nation that is all along in view. Romans 11:1-6 I say then, Hath God east away his people! God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. God hath not east away his people which he foreknew (or, predetermined. See the same word, Romans 8:29). Wot ye not what the Scripture saith of (rather, in; i.e. in the passage concerning) Elias? how he maketh intercession to God against Israel saying, Lord, they have killed thy prophets, and digged down thine altars; and I am left alone, and they seek my life. But what faith the answer of God (ὁχρηματισμός, denoting a Divine communication to man; in this case by the "still small voice." Only here in the New Testament; but cf. Matthew 2:12, Χρηματισθέντεςκατὄναρ; also Luke 2:26; Acts 10:22; Hebrews 8:5; Hebrews 11:7) unto him? I have left to myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed the knee to Baal. Even so at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace. The usual interpretation of this whole passage, and notably that of the ancients, has been to take the proof of God not having cast off his people as beginning in Romans 11:1, with "for I also," etc., and all the rest to be in sequence. Chrysostom’s explanation of the argument is to the following effect: God has not rejected his ancient people; for I myself am eminently of it; and I have been selected as a chief proclaimer and expounder of the gospel to the world; this would not have been the case if the nation had been cast off. But it may be said to me," You are only one of the ancient people; you are not the people." Nay, but I do not stand alone; there are thousands of Israelite believers as well as myself; and these are God’s true people, the people whom he foreknew. And of them there may be more than we are aware of; it is as it was in the days of Elias; he had supposed himself to be left alone; but he was told that there were seven thousand with him who were God’s true people still. And so now, there is a faithful remnant, the number of which is known to God alone, which is his people still, according to the election of grace. The same Father further understands the citation of the whole of the passage from 1 Kings 19:14, though not required for the apostle’s proof, to be intended as significant. It would have sufficed, he says, to cite only what was said about a remnant being left; but the whole complaint of Elias is cited, so as to show by the way that the present rejection of Christ and persecution of the Church by the majority of the Jews had also its counterpart in ancient times; and thus the apostle, he says, λανθανόντωςτὴνκατηγορίαν (i.e. of the unbelieving Jews) αὔξει. It is to be observed that the above interpretation of the passage, which in its main points has been most generally adopted, goes on two suppositions; vie. that "for I also," in 1 Kings 19:1, is the first part of the proof that Israel is not cast off; and that "which he foreknew," in 1 Kings 19:2, is intended as a limitation of the meaning of "his people." According to another view, decidedly upheld by Meyer, "for I also" is not part of the proof, but connected with μὴγέροιτο: "I must needs say, God forbid! being myself a Hebrew of the Hebrews" Then, according to this view, comes the positive statement that God has not east off his people in the same general sense as before, after which the proof begins; the addition of ὂπροέγνω not being a limitation of τὸνλαὸναὐτοῦ, but intended to enforce the idea of the impossibility of the final rejection of the race of Israel (cf. verse 29; also Psalms 94:14 and 1 Samuel 12:22). The fact that, throughout the chapter, it is Israel as a nation that is in view, and that the coming of the whole nation into the kingdom of Christ is contemplated in the end, adds decided probability to this view of the significance of ὂνπροέγνω, though καὶγὰρἐγὼ, etc., in 1 Kings 19:1, may still be regarded as possibly part of the proof. St. Paul’s designation of himself as "of the seed of Abraham" seems meant to express that he was an Israelite of pure descent, not a proselyte or descended from proselytes. In Philippians 3:5, as well as here, he specifies his tribe as that of Benjamin, the tribe that with Judah had clung to the house of David, and had shared the privileges of Judah. The quotation from 1 Kings 19:1-21. is given freely from the LXX., varying a little, but not so as to affect the meaning. One variation is in the feminine, instead of masculine, article before Βάαλ, which has been explained by supposing εἰκόνι understood (so in the Authorized Version, "the image of Baal "), or by there having been a female Baal, or by the god having been supposed androgynous, or by the feminine being used of idols in contempt. St. Paul may possibly have found this reading in his copy of the LXX. The variation is of no importance with regard to the drift of the passage. "According to the election of grace," at the end of 1 Kings 19:5, does not seem to be directly suggested by the passage cited, but added by St. Paul so as to make plain his position—maintained throughout the Epistle, and about to be pressed in this chapter on the consideration of Gentile Christians—that the calling of all, whether Jews or Gentiles, is "of grace," and not claimable as of right by any on the ground of the merit of their own works. And in order to enforce this position, he adds, And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace; i.e. the word "grace" loses its essential meaning. [But if of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.] The preponderance of ancient authorities is against the retention of the clause within brackets, which does not seem required. It is the same as in Romans 4:4. Romans 11:7 What then? (What is the present state of things?) That which Israel seeketh for (i.e. δικαιοσύνην; of. Romans 9:30, Romans 9:31) he hath not obtained; but the election (i.e. the elect of the Gentiles, with a remnant only of the Jews—ἡἐκλογὴ being abstr, pro concret., like ἡπεριτομὴἡἀκροβυστία, elsewhere) hath obtained it, and the rest were hardened (ἐπωρώθησαν). The verb denotes callousness rather than blindness, usually in the New Testament referring to the heart (cf. especially John 12:40, Τετύφλωκεναὐτῶντοὺςὀφθαλμοὺςκαὶπεπώρωκεναὐτῶντὴνκαρδίαν). And such hardening is no new and strange thing, or to be taken as implying failure of God’s promises to his people; for it is but what Scripture tells us of. Romans 11:8-10 According as it is written, God gave them a spirit of slumber (rather, stupor. The word is κατανύξις, cited from Isaiah 29:10 in the LXX. Cf. Psalms 60:3, where the LXX. has οἷνονκατανύξεως. It is from the verb which means κατανύσσειν, properly "to prick" (see Acts 2:37, κατενύγησαντῇκαρδίᾳ). The noun seems to have got its sense as above from the idea of a pricking shock, causing stupefaction), eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear, unto this day. And David saith, Let their table be made a snare, and a trap, and a stumbling-block, and a recompense unto them. Let their eyes be darkened, that they may not see, and bow down their back alway. The references in Psalms 60:8 are a combination of Deu 29:3 and Isaiah 29:10, quoted freely from the LXX.; that in Isaiah 29:9 is to Psalms 69:23, Psalms 69:24, also quoted freely. (For similar combination and free quotation of texts, so as to bring out Old Testament ideas, cf. Romans 3:10-19; Romans 9:32, Romans 9:33.) It is not necessary that the passages here referred to should be regarded as directly prophetic of the time of Christ. It is enough for the purpose of the argument that God’s people should be shown to be liable to the state of stupefaction described, without ceasing to be his people. And so the thought, which has been in view all along, is now taken up, of the present hardening of Israel as a nation not being intended to be permanent. Romans 11:11, Romans 11:12 I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? i.e. in such wise as to fall, rightly given in the Vulgate as sic ut caderent. There is no need here to press the telic use of ἵνα in ἵναπέσωσι, so as to require the translation, "that they might fall." It is rather the use of contemplated result. £ God forbid. But by their fall (rather, trip, or false step). The word is παράπτωμα, suitably used here in view of the figure of stumbling. The idea is that they had stumbled over the "stumbling-block" above spoken of, but not so as to lie hopelessly prostrate. Calvin translates well, "Num impegerunt ut corruerent?" and "eoram lapsu." Alford adopts "lapse" for παράπτωμα. But the word, as used in English, is not equivalent. If we retain the rendering "fall," we must understand a partial or temporary fall, not prostration from which there is no recovery. Salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy. (The word παραζηλῶσαι with the idea conveyed by it, is from Deuteronomy 32:21, which see.) Now if the fall (πράπτωμα, as above) of them be the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them the riches of the Gentiles, how much more their fulness? The words ἥττημα and πλήρωμα, rendered in tile Authorized Version "diminishing" and "fulness," have been variously understood. They are in contrast with each other, and must evidently be understood with reference to the same idea. Now, πλήρωμα, as used afterwards in Romans 11:25 ἄχριςοὖτὸπλήρωματῶνἐθνῶνἐσέλθῃ), seems plainly to mean the full complement of the Gentiles; and so here must surely be meant the full complement of the Jews, pointing to the same idea as ,as Ἰσραὴλ in Romans 11:26. If so, ἥττημα must mean the defect from such full complement—not. indeed (as some have explained), the small number (i.e. of believers) now opposed to the full number in the future, but abstractedly, defect, or fewness, as opposed to fulness. This interpretation agrees with the meaning of ἥττημα in the only other place where it occurs in the New Testament, viz. 1 Corinthians 6:7, where it seems to signify "defect," though used in that passage with a moral reference. The reason why the present ἥττημα of the Jews is the riches of the Gentiles is that the refusal of the Jews to accept the gospel had been the occasion of its being offered to the Gentiles (cf. Acts 13:46; Acts 28:28; also Matthew 15:24; Matthew 22:9). It is not, of course, meant that the gospel was not originally intended for all the world, but only that the present and immediate promulgation of it to the Gentiles had been due to the Jews’ refusal. Otherwise, we may conceive, it would have been after the fulness of the Jews had come in that it would have been extended through them to the Gentiles (el. Romans 15:8, Romans 15:9). Cf. Isaiah 60:1-22, where, as in other prophetic passages, the vision presented is that of the scattered sons of Israel being first brought into the glorified holy city, and the Gentiles gathering round them through the ever-open gates. Romans 11:13, Romans 11:14 But (δὲ is better supported than γὰρ) I speak to you the Gentiles. Inasmuch (or, so far) then (οὖν, which is not in the Textus Receptus, being read, and so connecting this clause with what follows) as I am an apostle of the Gentiles, I glorify my ministry, if by any means I may provoke to jealousy (in the Authorized Version, emulation, but it is the same word as in Romans 11:11) my flesh (i.e. my kindred), and may save some of them. To the Gentiles, whom he now directly addresses, he thus intimates that, though he is especially their apostle, yet beyond them he has his own countrymen still in view, whose conversion, through theirs, he has ever close to his heart. I glorify (δοξάζω) my ministry—i.e, my apostleship to the Gentiles—may mean that I add glory to it, if I may, through it, attain that further purpose. Romans 11:15 For if the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead? The vivid force of this concluding expression is weakened by attempts to define what is exactly meant by it; as, for instance (as some interpret), that the general resurrection will come when the fulness of the Jews as well as the Gentiles has come in. It is best to leave the grandeur of the conception to be felt rather than explained. Romans 11:16 And if the firstfruit be holy, so also is the lump; and if the root be holy, so also are the branches. By the firstfruit and the root is signified the original stock of Israel, the patriarchs; by the lump and the branches, the subsequent nation through all time. The word ἀπαρχή, being here connected with φύραμα, may be understood as referring to Numbers 15:19-22. The people are there enjoined to take of the first dough (φύραμα) kneaded after harvest a cake for a heave offering, called ἀπαρχήφυράματος (LXX.). This consecrated ἀπαρχή sanctified the whole φύραμα. Romans 11:17, Romans 11:18 But if some of the branches were broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree (i.e. of the stock of a wild olive tree; cf. Romans 5:1-21:34) wast grafted in among them, and wast made partaker with them of the root and the fatness of the olive tree, boast not against the branches. But if thou boastest, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee. In thus addressing the Gentile in the second person singular, the apostle brings his warning home to any individual Gentile Christian who might be inclined to boast; though regarding him still as representing Gentile believers generally. They are compared to slips of the wild olive tree (ἡἀγριέλαιος, oleaster), which was unproductive (cf. "Infelix superat foliis oleaster amaris"), acquiring richness and fertility by being grafted into the cultivated tree (ἡκαλλιέλαιος, oleo). Whether or not such a reversal of the usual system of grafting would have the imagined effect does not matter, as long as the illustration serves St. Paul’s purpose well, and helps us to grasp, his conception. The common process is— "... to marry A gentle scion to the wildest stock, And make conceive a bark of baser kind, By bud of nobler race." In the illustration before us a scion of wildest stock is supposed to be made to conceive through the stock of nobler race to which it is united. The selecting the olive tree for illustration is happy, inasmuch as it was not only a characteristic produce of Palestine, but also regarded as symbolical of a plant of grace; cf. Psalms 52:8, "I am a green olive tree in the house of God;" also Jeremiah 11:16; Hosea 14:6. See also the parable of Jotham (Judges 9:8, Judges 9:9), where the trees apply first to the olive tree to be their king; and observe also there the word "fatness," used here also by St. Paul: ΜὴἀπολείψασαατὴνπιότηταμουἐνᾗδοξάσουσιτὸνΘεὸνἄνδρεςπορεύσομαικινεῖσθαιἐπὶτῶνξύλων; (LXX.). The "branches" against which the ingrafted scion is warned not to beast are not exclusively either the broken-off or the remaining ones, but, as the sequel shows, the natural branches of the tree generally. The Gentile Christian is not to contemn the race of Israel because so large a portion of it is at present apart from the Church and under judgment; for it is, after all, from the stock of Israel, into which he has been engrafted, that he derives all his own fertility. As to the Christian Church being ever regarded as derived from that of Israel, the fulfilment and outcome of the ancient covenant, see note on Romans 1:2; and cf. John 4:22, "For salvation is of the Jews." Romans 11:19 Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be grafted in. Though I might not beast against the original branches that remain, and among whom I have been grafted, yet I may against those which, for their unworthiness, have been broken off to make room for me: though not boasting against the faithful Jews, I surely may against the unfaithful and rejected ones. Romans 11:20, Romans 11:21 Well—the fact of the case is as you say; but why?—because of unbelief they were broken off; and thou standest by faith. Be not high-minded, but fear: for if God spared not the natural branches, neither will he spare thee. (So, rather than as in the Authorized Version, according to the best-supported readings.) Thou art on thy trial, as they were, and alike liable to be broken off for the like cause; their present rejection should inspire in thee, not boast-fullness, but fear. The question has been raised whether St. Paul (using, as he does, the terms σὺ and τινεςτῶςκλάδων) has now the election and final salvation of individuals in view, or still only the calling to a state of salvation of races or communities of men—of the Jewish race on the one hand, and Gentile Churches on the other. The whole purport of this section of the Epistle (Romans 9:1-33; Romans 10:1-21; Romans 11:1-36.) seems to demand the latter view. (As to σὺ, see on Romans 11:17.) Besides, if by the broken-off branches were meant simply individual unbelievers, how could we explain their being "grafted in again" (Romans 11:23, Romans 11:24), seeing that the contemplated restoration is regarded in Romans 11:25, Romans 11:26 as something that is to take place in the possibly distant future, after "the fulness of the Gentiles" has come in? Thus this passage is really irrelevant to any doctrines about individual election and salvation that may have been built upon it. It is, however, important as confirming the general view of Divine election not being irrespective of the conditions of human faith and perseverance. Romans 11:22, Romans 11:23 Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: toward them that fell, severity (to be a warning to thee); but toward thee, God’s goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off. And they, if they abide not still in their unbelief, shall be grafted in: for God is able to graft them in again. The reference here to God’s power to graft them in again may be suggested by the apparent impossibility, from a human point of view, of the Jews as a nation, having rejected Christ in person, and being so inveterately set against the gospel as they were, ever coming into the Church. But "with God all things are possible". Nay—so the thought goes on—it would seem in itself more likely, and according to the nature of things, that the Jews should be brought into the Church, which is really their own, and the true fulfilment of their own oracles, than that Gentiles, who had had no similar preparation, should have been so. Romans 11:24 For if thou wast cut out of that which was by nature a wild olive tree (ἀγριελαίου), and wast grafted contrary to nature into a good olive tree (καλλιελαίου): how much rather shall these, which be branches by nature, be grafted into their own olive tree? In what follows next the eventual coming of the Jewish nation into the Church is not only anticipated as possible or probable, but foretold prophetically. St. Paul announces it as a "mystery," which his readers may be ignorant of, but which he wishes them to know. By the word μυστήριον, as used by St. Paul, is meant something hidden from man in the Divine counsels till made known by revelation (see 1 Corinthians 2:7, 1 Corinthians 2:10; 1 Corinthians 15:51; and, in this Epistle, Romans 16:25, Romans 16:26—a passage which expresses clearly the apostle’s meaning in his use of the word). In the LXX. it denotes any Divine secret, which may or may not be made known to man (cf. Daniel 2:18, Daniel 2:19, etc.; Job 11:6; Wis. 2:22; Ecclesiasticus 22:22; 27:16). So also in the Gospels it is said to be given to the disciples to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to others in parables. In classical Greek μυστήρια were Divine secrets (as in the Eleusinian Mysteries) which were revealed to the initiated alone. St. Paul uses the word with the same essential meaning; only he speaks of mysteries which had already been revealed to himself and others by the Spirit, and has ever in view the Divine purposes, previously unknown, for the salvation of mankind. Thus in Ephesians 1:9, seq.; and Ephesians 3:3, seq., he speaks of the Divine purpose to "gather in one all things in Christ," and that "the Gentiles should be fellow-heirs," etc., as a mystery, "not made known in other ages unto the sons of men," but now revealed to the "holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit." (The other passages in which St. Paul uses the word are 1 Corinthians 4:1; 1 Corinthians 13:2; Ephesians 5:32; Ephesians 6:19; Colossians 1:26, Colossians 1:27; Colossians 2:2; Colossians 4:3; 1 Timothy 3:9, 1 Timothy 3:16; 2 Thessalonians 2:7.) Here he announces the Divine purpose to save "all Israel" at last through the calling of the Gentiles as a mystery which has been revealed to himself and others, and which he desires the Gentile Christians to be aware of, lest they should be "wise in their own conceits," i.e. presume on their present position of privilege through ignorance of what is in store for Israel. Romans 11:25-27 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that hardness (πώρωσις; see Romans 11:8) in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles he come in. And so all Israel shall be saved. ΠᾶςΙσραὴλ here must mean the whole nation; not, as Calvin explains, "complebitur salus totius Israel Dei [i.e. of the spiritual Israel, as in Galatians 6:16] quam ex utrisque [i.e. with Jews and Gentiles] colligi oportet;" for "Israel" must surely be understood in the same sense as in the preceding verse, where it denotes the Jewish nation as opposed to the Gentiles. Σωθήσεται, as seems required by the whole context, means coming into the Church (cf. Acts 2:47, Ὁδὲκύριοςπροσετίθειτοὺςσωζομένουςκαθἡμέραντῇἐκκλησίᾳ). As it is written, There shall come out of Zion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob: and this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins. Referring, as throughout the Epistle, to the Old Testament for confirmation, St. Paul here, as in former instances, combines passages, and quotes freely, perhaps from memory. The main citation is from Isaiah 59:20, Isaiah 59:21, with an addition from Isaiah 17:9, the LXX. being followed. The citations are relevant, being specimens of many others that might have been adduced, predicting the final pardon and restitution of the house of Israel itself, notwithstanding judgments, through the Redeemer who was to come. What follows, to verse 33, is in the way of summary and further comment. Romans 11:28, Romans 11:29 As touching the gospel indeed (with regard to acceptance of the gospel now) they are enemies for your sakes (for their having become God’s enemies by rejecting and opposing it has been the occasion of your having been now called in): but as touching the election (God’s original choice of Israel to be his people. Ἐκλογὴ here cannot well have a concrete sense, as in Romans 11:7), they are beloved for the fathers’ sakes. For the gifts (χαρίσματα, meaning "free gifts," or "gifts of grace;" the word used to denote the special gifts of the Holy Ghost showered after Pentecost in the apostolic Church; but expressing generally, as here, whatever God, of his own good will, grants freely) and the calling of God are without repentance (i.e. unrepented of by him and irrevocable; cf. Numbers 23:1-30. 19, 20; also 1 Samuel 15:29). This denial of anthropopathy in God is asserted as a general truth, to be applied to his calling of "the fathers," i.e. the patriarchs, and their seed after them, to be his people. It is true that, as is shown in Romans 4:1-25., there is a spiritual seed of Abraham, not necessarily of the house of Israel, to whom the promises in their ultimate scope were to be fulfilled; but the apostle regards it as impossible that the promises made primarily to the chosen people themselves should be revoked or fail of eventual fulfilment to them. Romans 11:30, Romans 11:31 For as ye in times past believed not God,but now have obtained mercy through their unbelief (or, disobedience): even so have these also now not believed (or, obeyed), that through your mercy (i.e. the mercy shown to you) they also may obtain mercy. The position of ἵνα after τῷὑμετέρῳἐλέει has led commentators, ancient and modem, to connect τῷὑμετέρῳἐλέει with the preceding ἠπείθησαν, and to try to hit upon a meaning in this connection. But the sense of the passage, as well as the parallalism of the preceding clause, favours the connection of the Authorized Version, as given above. (For a similar position of ἵνα, cf. 2 Corinthians 12:7.) Romans 11:32 For God hath concluded them all in (literally, shut them all up into) unbelief (or, disobedience), that he might have mercy upon them all. Chrysostom and other Greek Fathers understood συνέκλεισε to mean only declared them to be unbelieving (or, disobedient), or convicted them of being so. Thus Chrysostom, τουτέστινἤλεγξεν, ἔπεδειξενἀπειθοῦντας. So, it may be said, must the verb he understood where St. Paul elsewhere uses it with a similar reference in Galatians 3:22, ἡγραφὴ being there the nominative to the verb. But ὁΘεὸς being the nominative here, the more obvious meaning seems to be that the shutting up was God’s doing. Some, understanding it so, would soften the expression by explaining that God allowed them to become so shut up. Τὸσυνέκλεισενοητέονὅτιτοὺςβουληθένταςἀπειθεῖνεἴασενἀπειθεῖν (Diodorus), But we need not shrink from the plain meaning of the expression, viz. that it was God’s own act. He is not thus represented as plunging men into inevitable infidelity, having given them no choice. As in the case of the hardening spoken of’ above, his dealings are judicial; the state into which. they are now by him shut up has not been undeserved. And, further, his ultimate purpose is here distinctly declared to be one of mercy. The way in which the apostle regards such present judicial dealing as conducive to final mercy appears to be such as this. It is the doctrine of the whole Epistle that salvation is to be attained by man’s renouncing his own imagined righteousness, and submitting himself to the righteousness of God. It conduces to this end that his ἀπειθεία should have its course and consequences; so that, conscience being at length awakened, he may long for deliverance from his hopeless state, and appreciate the offered salvation (see ch. 7.). So the Gentile world was long shut up in its self-induced, but also judicial, ἀπειθεία (Romans 1:18, seq.); that, "the wrath of God" being at length revealed to it from heaven, the "righteousness of God" might also be revealed to it and laid hold of. In like manner God deals now with the Jews, who still persist in going about to establish their own righteousness instead of submitting themselves to the righteousness of God. He shuts them up for the present in their ἀπειθεία, to the end that at length, after their long judgment, and stirred up by the fulness of the Gentiles coming in, they may feel their need, and accept salvation. Τοὺςπάντας in the concluding clause seems to mean generally all mankind, Jews as well as Gentiles; and ἵνατοὺςπάνταςἐλεήσῃ (as σωθήσεται was understood above with respect to "all Israel," as suggested by the context and the general drift of the chapter) God’s embracing all races of mankind at last in the arms of his mercy by calling them into the Church. Thus the latter expression is not in itself adducible in support of the doctrine of universalism. Certainly the prospect of a universal triumph of the gospel before the end rises here before the apostle in prophetic vision; and it may be that it carries with it to his mind further glories of eternal salvation for all, casting their rays backward over all past ages, so as to inspire an unbounded hope. Such a hope, which seems elsewhere intimated (cf. 1 Corinthians 15:24-29; Ephesians 1:9, Ephesians 1:10, Ephesians 1:20-23; Colossians 1:15-20, would justify the glowing rhapsody of admiration and thanksgiving that follows more fully than if we supposed the apostle to contemplate still the eternal perdition of the multitudes who in all the ages have not on earth found mercy. Romans 11:33-35 O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge (or, of the riches and wisdom and knowledge) of God! By γνώσεως is signified God’s omniscience; by σοφίας, his wisdom in ordering events; by πλούτου, if it be taken as a co-ordinate substantive, the abundance of his goodness. How unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding (rather, tracing) out! (cf. Psalms 26:6; Job 9:10; Job 11:7). For who hath known the mind of the Lord? or who hath been his counsellor? (Isaiah 40:13, quoted accurately from the LXX.). Or who hath first given to him, and it shall be recompensed unto him again? (cf. Job 41:11, where the Hebrew has (Revised Version), "Who hath first given unto me, that I should repay him?" The LXX. (Job 41:2) gives an entirely different sense of the passage; and it would thus appear, as may be seen also in other eases, that St. Paul, though usually quoting more or less freely from the LXX., was familiar also with the Hebrew text, and exercised judgment in his citations. Romans 11:36 For of him; and through him, and unto him, are all things. The view advanced by some, that we have here an intimation of the doctrine of the Holy Trinity, cannot fairly be maintained. But it is strikingly significant of the apostle’s view of the essential Deity of Christ, that in 1 Corinthians 8:6 and Colossians 1:16, Colossians 1:17, similar language is applied to him. In the first of these texts it is said of the Father, ἐξοὗτὰπάντα, and of the "Lord Jesus Christ," δι) οὗτὰπάντα; and in the second, of "the Son of the Father’s love," ἐναὐτῷἐκτίσθητὰπάντα, and τὰπάνταδἰαὐτοῦκαὶεἰςαὐτὸνἔκτισται and also τὰπάνταἐναὐτῷσυνέστηκεν. To him be the glory for ever. Amen. Romans 11:15 "Life from the dead." The new wine of Christianity burst the old, worn skin of Judaism. Israelites were indeed the first preachers of the faith, and its first adherents were largely recruited from the synagogues. Still, as years passed on, it became apparent that, as a whole, the favoured nation was unprepared for a religion so spiritual, so universal, as Christianity. The rejection of the gospel by the Jews was the occasion of the progress of the gospel in the larger, the Gentile world. And the apostle, himself a Hebrew, yet the apostle of the Gentiles, recognizing this fact as included in the plans of Providence, yet looked beyond the present into the future, and saw, in the predicted ingathering of the sons of Abraham, the destined revival of true religion throughout the world. When an event so remarkable, so unlikely, yet so clearly foretold, shall occur, its effect shall be prodigious; it shall be nothing less than "life from the dead." These words contain a principle truly and emphatically Christian. Let them be regarded in this light. I. THE OF THIS IS LAID IN THE DEATH AND OF OUR SAVIOR. From the throne of his glory Christ describes himself as the Being who "was dead, and is alive again." He must needs suffer, and taste death for every man; but it was not possible that he should be holden of it. His rising was more than a sign of his authority and of his acceptance with the Father. He rose as the Mediator and the Representative and the Forerunner of his people. II. THE OF THIS IS SECURED BY THE OF THIS HOLY SPIRIT. The Church professes, in the ancient Creed, to "believe in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and Giver of life." Without the influences of the Divine Spirit, the moral results secured by Christianity could not have been realized. Like the sunshine and the showers of spring, the Holy Spirit, by his descent and by his shining, fertilizes the barren soil of humanity. Like the breath which came from the four winds, and breathed upon the slain so that they lived, is the influence which awakens the dead. bones of the valley, and makes of them an exceeding great army. All spiritual life is evoked and sustained by the living Spirit of God. III. THE REVEALS ITSELF IN THE NEWNESS OF LIFE WHICH IS THE . The transforming power of the new faith was at once revealed, and has ever continued to be revealed, in the heart and life of the individuals who have received Christ. The former state, the state of heathenism and irreligiousness, the state of sensuality, or worldliness, or unbelief, may well be designated, and by the inspired writers was designated, "death." And the contrast between that and the state of fellowship with God and of obedience to Christ could not be more strikingly described than in the language of the text, "Life from the dead." It is nothing less than this that Christianity is intended to effect—a change moral, radical, extensive, and enduring. IV. THE IS ON A LARGER, A SOCIAL SCALE. It is thus that it is represented in the text as operating; it effects a transformation in human society. To many cities and communities in the primitive times, the religion of the Lord Jesus proved an impulse of regeneration. And by it ancient society seems to have been saved from threatening corruption and dissolution. When death was to all appearance imminent, the gospel entered into the heart of humanity as a new vital principle, renewing that which was old, healing that which was sick, and reviving that which was dead. It is still the one, the only, hope for a race "dead in trespasses and sins." V. THE WILL BE IN THE ETERNAL LIFE OF CHRIST’S PEOPLE. Both the resurrection of Christ from the dead, and that transformation of spiritual character which is called "the first resurrection," are the pledge and earnest of the immortal life of the Lord’s people. It is distinctive of our religion that it holds out a definite and assured prospect of a life beyond the present—a life holy, imperishable, and Divine. The prospect of bright and blessed immortality has strengthened the arms of every true Christian labourer, and has cheered the heart of every Christian sufferer. It has been the joy of the living and the hope of the dying. . 1. The words are a summons to the spiritually dead. There is life in Christ even for such. 2. They are an encouragement to Christian toil. Those who in their service of benevolence are oppressed by the deadness which encounters them, should recur to first principles, and consider the purposes of infinite grace and power, and the promises of spiritual revival. 3. They are a consolation and inspiration to Christians when drawing near to the death of the body. BY C.H. IRWIN Romans 11:1-10 Israel not utterly rejected. Here the apostle, reflecting on the disobedience of the great majority of the Jewish people, and their consequent rejection, returns to the thought already expressed (Romans 9:27), that "a remnant shall be saved." He himself is a living proof, he says, that God hath not utterly cast away his people. "For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin" (Romans 11:1). But those who have been rejected have suffered the just and natural punishment of their own unbelief. Two practical lessons are here taught. I. A WARNING TO THE . Even in the most corrupt Churches there may be true believers. This lesson is practically illustrated by Elijah’s mistaken or exaggerated view of the state of Israel in his time. "Lord, they have killed thy prophets, and digged down thine altars; and I am left alone, and they seek my life. But what saith the answer of God unto him? I have reserved to myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed the knee to the image of Baal" (Romans 11:3, Romans 11:4). How little Elijah knew of the true state of affairs! There is always a great danger, even amongst those who are most zealous for the truth, of depreciating or under-estimating the good that is in others. Want of charity to others may sometimes be found even in good men. Their very zeal leads them to depreciate others. If others do not come up to our standard of Christian doctrine, or Christian character, or Christian work, we are apt to imagine that they are not Christians at all. No doubt these other seven thousand servants of God were to blame for not having declared themselves more openly on the Lord’s side. Had they taken their proper place, and done their duty, they would have encouraged Elijah’s heart and sustained his hands; they would have made him feel that he was not alone in his efforts for the true and right; and they might even have prevented his flight. But there was no excuse for Elijah’s wholesale condemnation of every one in Israel except himself. "Man looketh on the outward appearance, but God looketh on the heart." Especially in these latter days, when there are so many divisions amongst Christians, we need to cultivate that charity "which thinketh no evil," which "beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things." II. A WARNING TO THE . One of the great dangers of our time is indifference. Many who regularly attend our churches do so as a mere matter of custom or respectability. They hear the Word of God, but it has no power on their hearts, no influence upon their lives. The fate of rejected Israel is a solemn warning to the careless and indifferent (Romans 11:7-10). If we do not use our privileges, they will one day be taken from us. The neglect of talents or opportunities is as much a sin as the abuse of them. Men very soon become gospel-hardened. Hence the "more convenient season" to which they look forward never comes. They cease to think seriously about their souls; they cease to have any desire for salvation. The spirit of slumber comes upon them—that fatal sleep of spiritual indifference. Their eyes are darkened, and they do not see how fast they are hurrying to their own destruction. Oh, how it becomes us to urge upon men the present acceptance of the present offer of salvation, the present performance of the duties that lie at their door!—C.H.I. Romans 11:11-32 The Jewish people: their past history and their future prospects. The Jew is the greatest modern miracle. He is an absolutely unique figure in the history of the world. In every nation you find him, an exile and a fugitive, a stranger and a foreigner. Whence came he? how came he hither? He claims our respect, our attention, our pity, our Christian sympathy. These verses are a strong enforcement of the lessons of Israel’s history and a stirring appeal on Israel’s behalf. I. THEIR PAST HISTORY. 1. They were the chosen people of God. This is an absolutely unique distinction so far as races of men are concerned. All who are believers on the Lord Jesus Christ, of whatever nation they may be, are in that sense the chosen people of God. But no single nation can ever claim to be the chosen people of God, except the Jews. 2. They were chosen to be a blessing to the world. The promise to Abraham was, "In thee shall all families of the earth be blessed." Wherever they went they carried with them the knowledge of the one true God; they have been a testimony to the nations of God’s faithfulness and justice; and at the same time they executed God’s judgments upon the nations for the preserving and purifying of the world. The Jews have been the historians of the world. A Jewish hand wrote the history of the creation. Jewish hands wrote the history of Israel’s connection with Egypt and Assyria and other great nations, which modern discoveries of ancient monuments and relics are confirming more strongly every day. When the Greek historian Herodotus, who has been called "the father of history," was only beginning to write, Nehemiah, the last of the Old Testament historians, was already beginning to write. The Jews have been the teachers of the world. Unto them were committed the oracles of God. They prepared the way, too, for the coming of the Saviour. 3. Even in their humiliation and dispersion they have brought blessing to the world. "The fall of them" has been "the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them the riches of the Gentiles" (verse 12). "Through their fall salvation has came "to the Gentiles" (verse 11). "God hath not cast away his people whom he foreknew. He is still the God of Israel. The Jews may be despised, they may be hated by men, they may be neglected even by Christians who owe so much to them; but they are still the chosen people of God, bringing blessings even in their fall to those that despise them. II. THEIR FUTURE . 1. There is hope for Israel in the promises of God. As surely as God predicted the dispersion of the Jews, and that came to pass, so surely has he predicted a restoration of the Jews, and this also will come to pass. Many eminent Christians believe that there will be a literal restoration of the Jews to Palestine. It is remarkable that the late Mr. Lawrence Oliphant, in his book ’The Land of Gilead,’ advocates, not for Christian reasons at all, but as a mercantile man, the colonization of Palestine by Jews, on the ground that they are the natural cultivators of the land, and that the country has never prospered except under Jewish proprietorship. But we are more specially concerned with the promises of their spiritual restoration. The Old Testament prophecies are full of these. "But Zion said, The Lord hath forsaken me, and my Lord hath forgotten me. Can a woman forget her sucking child, that she should not have compassion on the son of her womb? yea, they may forget, yet will I not forget thee. Behold, I have graven thee upon the palms of my hands; thy walls are continually before me" (Isaiah 49:14-16). Again, we are told that it is but for a moment that God’s face is hidden from his people; and that in Israel’s restoration "all flesh shall know that I the Lord am thy Saviour and thy Redeemer, the Mighty One of Jacob" (Isaiah 49:26). And here in the New Testament, even after Israel’s rejection of the Messiah, St. Paul emphatically reasserts the certainty of Israel’s restoration. Though they, the natural branches, were broken off for a time, "God is able to graft them in again" (verse 23). "Blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in" (verse 25). But when that time comes "all Israel shall be saved" (verse 26). God will yet be as the dew unto Israel. 2. In the present position of the Jews there are many things that point to a bright future for God’s ancient people. Though scattered among the nations, they still preserve their identity and individuality. They have not been absorbed or assimilated by the larger and stronger races among whom they are placed. This in itself would seem to point to a great future in store for them. Not only so, but it points to a great blessing in store for the nations by means of them. "If the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead?" (verse 15). When M’Cheyne returned from Palestine, he preached a sermon from the words, "To the Jew first," advocating Christian missions to the Jews on the ground that judgment will begin with the Jews, on the ground of God’s special love for the Jews, on the ground of peculiar access to the Jews, and on the ground that the Jews, if converted, will give life to the whole world. This last is a point which deserves more attention than it receives. From their peculiar position, scattered throughout the nations, and being of an industrious and commercial disposition, the Jews are specially fitted to do missionary work. Reach the Jews as a people, bring them under the influence of the gospel, and through them you reach the whole world. Many writers who have given careful attention to this subject are of opinion that the success of missions to the heathen will be comparatively small until the Holy Spirit will enable the Jews to acknowledge Jesus as their Messiah, until he employs them as his instrument in the proclamation of the gospel among the nations. The Prophet Zechariah seems to favour that view when he says, "In those days it shall come to pass, that ten men shall take hold out of all languages of the nations, even shall take hold of the skirt of him that is a Jew, saying, We will go with you: for we have heard that God is with you" (Zechariah 8:23). III. LESSONS BY THIS SUBJECT. 1. The necessity of personal faith. While we consider God’s dealings with Israel for their unbelief and disobedience, let us consider our own relationship to God. "Be not highminded, but fear: for if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee" (verses 20, 21). Christian profession and Christian privileges will not save us, unless we have a personal and living union with Jesus Christ the Saviour. 2. The duty of sympathetic efforts on behalf of Israel. "For as ye in times past have not believed God, yet have now obtained mercy through their unbelief: even so have these also now not believed, that through your mercy they also may obtain mercy" (verses 30, 31). God will fulfil his promises of the conversion of Israel just as he fulfils all his promises—by the use of means; by the missionary efforts of the Christian Church.—C.H.I. Romans 11:33-36 The unsearchable things of God. These words may be taken as a fitting conclusion to the doctrinal or argumentative part of the Epistle. As we see how the apostle shows first of all, in the condition of both the heathen and the Jewish world, that all have sinned, and that all needed a Divine Saviour; and how he then unfolds the great doctrine of justification by faith and its results; as we see also the great privileges for time and eternity which are bestowed upon the Children of God; may we not also exclaim, "Oh the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out!" I. HIS WISDOM. "Oh the depth of the riches of the wisdom of God!" says the apostle (Romans 11:33); and again he asks, "Who hath been his counsellor?" (Romans 11:34). Beyond all human wisdom is the wisdom of God—a wisdom self-sufficient; derived from no other source; a wisdom of which, indeed, all human wisdom is but the faint reflection, the outcome and the overflow. Take the very wisest of men—men like Socrates, Plato, Seneca, or Bacon: how foolish were some of their thoughts, their proposals, or their actions! Take the very wisest man whom you know, and he will be glad sometimes to take counsel of some one else. Indeed, in this the wise man shows his wisdom. It is fools who despise reproof, and who will not take advice. But God needs no advice. He makes no mistakes. This thought of the unsearchable wisdom of God teaches us a lesson of faith and trust. God’s dealings are often mysterious to us, but there is an infinite wisdom behind them all. He doeth all things well. It teaches us also a lesson of obedience. God’s way is always wisest, safest, best, happiest. It might be said to us as Moses said to the children of Israel, "Behold, I have taught you statutes and judgments, even as the Lord my God commanded me. Keep therefore and do them, for this is your wisdom and your understanding in the sight of the nations, which shall hear all these statutes, and say, Surely this great nation is a wise and understanding people." II. HIS . We have made much progress in scientific knowledge in this nineteenth century, and yet how very limited, after all, is human knowledge! How many things in chemistry, in geology, in astronomy, are still unrevealed! Even of a single science no man can say that he knows all about it, though he may have given a lifetime to the study of it. And then few men are masters of more than one branch of knowledge. Life is too short to do more than touch the surface of things. But the knowledge of God is unsearchable. "Oh the depth of the riches of the knowledge of God!… Who hath known the mind of the Lord?" (Romans 11:33, Romans 11:34). Nothing is hidden from him. Every part and path of the universe is known to him. Every nation is known to him—its national history, its national sins. Every family is known to him. The joys and sorrows of every home, he knows them all. The secret thoughts, the secret motives, the secret plans of every life, he knows them all. This thought carries with it great comfort. "Your heavenly Father knoweth what things ye have need of, before ye ask him." He knows all our difficulties and all our wants. And as we look forward to the future, to the judgment-seat, is there not a comfort in feeling that God’s judgment upon us will be a perfectly fair one, because it will be based upon a complete and accurate and perfect knowledge of our lives? Our motives may be misunderstood by men; but God knows all about them. "Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father." It carries with it also solemn warning. If God knows all about me, how careful I should be to live as in his sight! How careful I should be to live as in the presence of the judgment-seat! "For there is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed; nor hid, that shall not be known." III. HIS MERCY. "For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all. Oh the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God!" Here God’s unsearchable wisdom and knowledge are represented as co-operating in his plan of universal mercy. Here again what depths there are that we cannot fathom! How very unmerciful men are at the best! How harsh the judgments even of professing Christians! and how limited and narrow are sometimes their views as to the possibility of the salvation of others! But the mercy of God is wider than all our creeds, and broader than the judgments of individual Christians. What a depth, what a breadth of mercy is revealed in those words of Christ, "God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on him should not perish, but have everlasting life"! Whosoever! In that word there is hope for the guiltiest of sinners who will repent of his sin, and believe on the Lord Jesus Christ. So, while we speak of the unsearchable things of God, we do not take the agnostic position. We do not say that God is unknown and unknowable. We do not know the depth of his wisdom and knowledge and mercy; but we do know that he possesses and manifests all these sublime qualities in his dealings with men. There are mysteries in God’s providences, but there is one great truth which will bring peace to every soul that acts upon it; which will bring every soul that acts upon it into the eternal presence and fellowship of God: "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved." There are thoughts that are unsearchable about God, and yet they are thoughts that we can feel within our spirits as the very power of God unto salvation, even as we can feel the warm sunshine on our faces though we cannot walk along the bright pathway by which it comes. Jesus Christ is God’s "unspeakable Gift;" yet many can say of him," I know whom I have believed, and am persuaded that he is able to keep that which I have committed unto him against that day." The love of God is called "the love of God, that passeth knowledge;" and yet many have experienced its power in their hearts. The peace of God is a peace "that passeth all understanding;" yet many have known how, in a time of disquietude or trial, that peace, like a sentinel, has kept our hearts and minds in quiet confidence and calm security. "Now we know in part; but then shall we know even as also we are known."—C.H.I. BY T.F. LOCKYER Romans 11:1-10 Grace and unbelief. The apostle has shown (Romans 9:1-29) that God has the right, in his governance of human affairs, to take an instrument or lay it aside as he will; and (Romans 9:30 - Romans 10:21) that, in using this right, he acts, not arbitrarily, but according to reasons which approve themselves to his infinite wisdom. He will now show that even the unbelief of the elect people, and their consequent rejection by God, shall be made to contribute to the consummation of his purposes in the salvation of the Gentiles and the final salvation of the Jews themselves. But are the Jews even now wholly rejected? No, in truth, but only partially. As a people they are, though this only for the present, but not indiscriminately and totally. For the apostle himself is an Israelite; there is also a remnant of Christian Jews, as in the ancient days a remnant were true to God; and as for the majority, they are blinded in their unbelief, and hence self-excluded from the election of grace. I. THE OF GRACE. 1. There had been times of national reprobation in the past, but in the darkest day there had been gleams of light. For example, the times of Ahab: Elijah’s despair, and the seven thousand. So at intervals, more or less, throughout their history, from Moses onwards. And yet in the worst times some were true to God. 2. So it was even now. Truly the Jewish people had forfeited the privilege of its election, viz. its mission to the Gentiles as heralding the gospel of Christ. But while the people was "cast off," as it might seem, in its collective capacity, it was not reprobated in its totality as consisting of individuals. Still there was the remnant. And in these latter days of Christian history have not individual Israelites played a distinguished part? e.g. Neander. 3. Yea, even the apostle of the Gentiles himself was an Israelite, of the purest blood; and the very fact that he, an Israelite, was "a chosen vessel" was sufficient to show that God had not "cast off" his people. And in him the Jewish people might almost be said to be fulfilling its office of heralding to the Gentiles the gospel of Christ. He did their work, and right well. II. THE OF . While the election, then, was very true, and never withheld from Israelites as such—how could God deal so with them?—yet there was a very terrible reprobation of Israelites alongside the election. 1. Had it not been so in the past? The wilderness-history; the monarchy; the captivities. Yes, truly, reprobation was no new thing. 2. And now: priests, people. Yes, alas! "He came unto his own, and his own received him not." But this gives us the secret of the reprobation; it was their unbelief. It had been so from the beginning: "An evil heart of unbelief, in departing from the living God" (Hebrews 3:12). And this unbelief had blinded them, and hardened them; it had been as a stupor. And the very things in which they boasted themselves, their spiritual privileges, these had been to them a snare. "Now ye say, We see; therefore your sin remaineth." Let us remember that we may frustrate by our unbelief God’s best purposes concerning us. And also that we do not merely lose the blessing which our privileges are designed to give, but they themselves are perverted to our blindness and spiritual ruin. Our "table" is "made a snare, and a trap."—T.F.L. Romans 11:11-16 How much more! Blindness and hardness have come upon Israel, so that they have rejected their Christ, and consequently God has rejected them. They have stumbled, and have missed the way of life. But have they stumbled that they might permanently fall? Can God not work to some other, some better end than this? Shall not even their evil be overruled for good? Such is the question propounded by the apostle here; and in the following verses, glancing with prophetic insight into the promise of the future, he sees and declares the answer. Israel may still be the elect people; its very reprobation works for the world’s salvation; how much more shall its re-election! I. Israel may still be the elect people. God chose them from the first, doubtless for some special fitness of spiritual temperament, to be his chief workers in the world. In Abraham he called them forth; in Isaac, in Jacob, he blessed them. The fathers of the race had worked for him, responding to his election: they were thus holy unto the Lord. But they were only the firstfruits; they were the root. The whole portion of the human race represented by them were to be similarly set apart for God’s proposes; the branches springing from that root were to blossom and bear fruit likewise. And so, even in the future, this now unbelieving people might fulfil their primal mission, turning unto the Lord. II. Israel’s reprobation works for the world’s salvation. So close is the connection in which Israel stands to the world’s salvation, that even now, reprobate people as they are, salvation springs from them, and from the very facts which occasioned their own stumbling. The cross—oh, how has that symbol of shame become the object towards which all the nations turn! "To the Jews a stumbling-block:" nevertheless, Christ crucified draws all men unto him! Their very fall, then, is the riches of the world; their loss the riches of the Gentiles. Out of them, even in their ruin, must the world’s deliverance come; for "salvation is of the Jews." III. What sort of salvation, then, shall be for the world when all Israel shall be saved? This is the final outlook of the apostle’s prophecy. And for this he does so glory in his apostleship. For the very salvation of the Gentiles now, without the Jews, must in time provoke the Jews to jealousy; they must one day look on with hungry, wistful eyes as they see the multitudes that have come from the east and west, and north and south, sitting down at the table of God. And when they turn unto their own Christ, and receive the new life of his gospel, oh, what an electric thrill shall pass through the whole world! It shall be, even to the converted Gentile nations, as life from the dead. "The light which converted Jews bring to the Church, and the power of life which they have sometimes awakened in it, are the pledge of that spiritual renovation which will be produced in Gentile Christendom by their entrance en masse." Think, ibr example, again, of the labours of such men as Neander (see Godet, in loc.). The future is full of glorious hope. But meanwhile how much loss is occasioned by their continued unbelief! Let us beware that the purposes of God through us are not in like manner frustrated; that, being designed to some high mission for the world’s good, we do not make void the election of God.—T.F.L. Romans 11:17-24 The solemn warning. It may be difficult, in such a passage as this, to keep the matters of individual salvation and election to privileges and responsibilities in the kingdom of God distinct. They do naturally bear an intimate relation the one to the other. But we shall be on safer ground in following the tenor of the entire argument here also, and seeing both the Jews of whom he speaks and the Gentiles to whom he speaks as related to God’s great world-purposes of salvation. For though it is true that the Jews who believed not forfeited their individual part in the kingdom of God, as well as the honour of extending that kingdom in the world; and that the Gentiles who believed became first partakers of a personal salvation, and then agents in disseminating God’s truth in Christ; yet it is the objective kingdom of Christ, and its extension, to which the apostle looks, and to which he would have them look. They, his readers, were now, in place, as it were, of the unbelieving Israelites, entrusted with the living power; it was for them, in conjunction with the believing Jews, to make known salvation to the world. We have here—their position in the kingdom of God, their danger, and the ultimate aspect of the kingdom. I. First, the position of these Gentiles in the kingdom of God. "Grafted in among them." They had been "without God in the world;" but now, what a glory was theirs! made "partakers of the Divine nature"! And, being saved, charged as the heralds of God to carry this salvation to the ends of the earth] Truly, they had become "partaker of the fatness of the olive tree." And so they seemed to be in the place of the broken-off branches; they were "built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets." Out of the very ruin of the Israelites had come their salvation; in the very room of the rejected Israelites they stood. Here was a transfer of blessing. II. But this very position was fraught with danger. "Glory not;" "Thou standest by thy faith." The danger of false pride was not an imaginary one; Gentiles probably did glory over the Jews. Nay, do they not glory still over these "unbelievers"? Do they not sometimes persecute them even to death? But how false was the pride! They were only grafted branches, borne by the ancient root of Israel. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/pulpit-commentary/ Ver. 1–ch. 14:23 III. . It is St. Paul’s way to supplement his doctrinal treatises with detailed practical directions as to the conduct that should of necessity ensue on belief in the doctrines propounded. So also in Ephesians 4:1, etc., where, as here, he connects his exhortations with what has gone before by the initiatory παρακαλῶοὖν. Beyond his exposition of the truth for its own sake, he has always a further practical aim. Saving faith is ever with him a living faith, to be shown by its fruits. Nor, according to him, will these fruits follow, unless the believer himself does his part in cultivating them: else were these earnest and particular exhortations needless. If, on the one hand, he is the great assertor of our salvation being through faith and all of grace, he is no less distinct for the necessity of works following, and of the power of man’s free-will to use or resist grace; cf. 1 Corinthians 15:10, where, speaking of himself, he does not mean to say that grace had made him what he was in spite of himself, but that grace had not been in vain, because he himself had worked with grace. All was of grace, but he himself had laboured, assisted by grace working with him. It will be observed how comprehensive is the survey of Christian duty that here follows, reaching to all the relations of life, as well as to internal disposition. Romans 13:1-14 E. Various practical duties enforced. Romans 12:1 I beseech you therefore, brethren (he does not command, as did Moses in the Law; he beseeches; he is but a fellow-servant, with his brethren, of Christ; he does not "lord it over God’s heritage" (cf. 1 Peter 5:3), but trusts that they will of their own accord respond to "the mercies of God" in Christ, which he has set before them), by the mercies of God ("Qui misericordia Dei recte movetur in omnem Dei voluntatem ingreditur. At anima irae obnoxia vix quiddam juvatur adhortationibus," Bengel), that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service. The verb παραστῆσαι is the usual one for the presenting of sacrificial animals at the altar (Xen., ’Anab.,’ 6.1.22; Lucian, ’De Sacrif.,’ 13. The LXX in Le Romans 16:7, Romans 16:10, has στήσει. Cf. Luke 2:22: Colossians 1:22, Colossians 1:28, and supra, 6.13). Our bodies are here specified, with probable reference to the bodies of victims which were offered in the old ritual. But our offering differs from them in being "a living sacrifice," replete with life and energy to do God’s will (cf. Psalms 40:6, Psalms 40:7, Psalms 40:8, and Hebrews 10:5, Hebrews 10:6, Hebrews 10:7), yea, and oven inspired with a new life—a life from the dead (Romans 6:13). Further, the thought is suggested of the abuse of the body to uncleanness prevalent in heathen society (cf. Romans 1:24). The bodies of Christians are "members of Christ," "temples of the Holy Ghost," consecrated to God, and to be devoted to his service (cf. 1 Corinthians 6:15, etc.); and not in heart only, but in actual life, of which the body is the agent, we are to offer ourselves, after the example of Christ. Your reasonable service (τὴνλογικὴνλατρείανὑμῶν) must be taken in apposition to "present your bodies, rather than to "sacrifice," it being the act of offering, and not the thing offered. that constitutes the λατρεία. This word is especially used for the ceremonial worship of the Old Testament (cf. Exodus 12:25, Exodus 12:26; Exodus 13:5; Romans 9:4; Hebrews 8:5; Hebrews 9:1, Hebrews 9:6, Hebrews 9:9; Hebrews 10:2; Hebrews 13:10), the counterpart of which in Christians is, according to St. Paul, not ceremonial service, but rather that of a devoted life (cf. Acts 27:23; Romans 1:9; Philippians 3:3; 2 Timothy 1:3; Hebrews 41:28). The epithet λογικὴν has been variously understood. It probably means rational, denoting a moral and spiritual serving of God, in implied opposition to mechanical acts of outward worship. "Respectu intellectus et voluntatis" (Bengel). It may be taken to express the same idea as οἱΠνεῦματιΘεῷλατρεύοντες (Philippians 3:3), and πνευματικὴνθυσίαν (1 Peter 2:7; of. John 4:24). Though the offering of the body is being spoken of, yet "bodily self-sacrifice is an ethical act" (Meyer). Cf. 1 Corinthians 6:20. The word itself occurs in the New Testament only here and in 1 Peter 2:2, where its meaning, though obscure, may be similar. Romans 12:2 And be not conformed to (rather, fashioned after; the verb is συσχηματίζεσθαι this world; but be ye transformed (the verb here is μεταμορφοῦσθαι) by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove (or, discern) what is the will of God, that which is good and acceptable and perfect. (So, rather than as in the Authorized Version; the epithets acceptable and perfect not being properly applicable to the will of God; and the translation given above being close to the original.) It is a matter of no importance for exegesis that ancient authorities leave it uncertain whether the verbs at the beginning of this verse should be read as imperatives (συσχηματίζεσθε and μεταμορφοῦσθε) or as infinitives (συσχηματίζεσθαι and μεταμορφοῦσθαι). In the latter case they depend, with παραστῆσαι in Romans 12:1, on παρακαλῶ. The meaning remains unaffected. As to the words themselves, Meyer’s assertion that they stand in contrast only through the prepositions, without any difference of sense in the stem-words, is surely wrong. St. Paul is not in the habit of varying his expressions without a meaning; and he might have written μετασχηματίζεσθε (cf. 1 Corinthians 4:6; 2 Corinthians 11:13, 2 Corinthians 11:14; Philippians 3:21) instead of μεταμορφοῦσθε or συμμορφοῦσθε (cf. Philippians 3:10) instead of συσχηματίζεσθε. And there is an essential difference between the senses in which σχῆμα and μορφή may be used. The former denotes outward fashion, which may be fleeting, and belonging to accident and circumstance; the latter is used to express essential form, in virtue of which a thing is what it is; of. Philippians 3:21, and also (though Meyer denies any distinction here) Philippians 2:6, Philippians 2:7. The apostle warns his readers not to follow in their ways of life the fashions of this present world, which are both false and fleeting (cf. 1 Corinthians 7:31, Παράγειγὰρτὸσχῆματοῦκόσμουτούτου), but to undergo such a change of essential form as to preclude their doing so. If they become συμμόρφοι with Christ (cf. Romans 8:29), the world’s fashions will not affect them. The phrase, "this world" or "age". The transformation here spoken of consists in the renewal of the mind (τοῦνοὸς), which denotes the Understanding, or thinking power, regarded as to its moral activity. And Christian renewal imparts not only the will and power to do God’s will, but also intelligence to discern it. Hence follows εἰςτὸδοκιμάζεινὑμᾶς, etc.. It is to be observed, lastly, that the present tenses of the verbs συσχηματίζεσθε and μεταμορφοῦσθε, unlike the previous aorist παραστῆσαι, intimate progressive habits. The perfect Christian character is not formed all at once on conversion (of Philippians 3:12, seq.; see also previous note on Romans 6:13, with reference to παριστάνετε and παραστιήσατε). So far the exhortation has been general. The apostle now passes to particular directions; and first (Philippians 2:3-9) as to the use of gifts. Romans 12:3 For I say, through the grace given unto me (the grace of apostleship to the Gentiles (cf. Romans 1:5; Romans 15:15). He is about to warn against either neglecting or exceeding the special graces given to each person; and he may, perhaps, mean to imply here that he himself, in giving these admonitions, is exercising, without exceeding, his own special grace) to every man that is among you (this is emphatic. The pretensions to superiority of some at Corinth who possessed more showy gifts than others had shown how the admonition might need to be pressed on all; and in a community like that of the Romans there might well be a special tendency to assumption on the part of some), not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think; but to think soberly (rather, as in the Revised Version so to think as to think soberly, or, more literally, to be minded so as to be sober-minded), according as God hath dealt to every man the measure of faith. Why of faith? One might have expected the expression to be, "of grace," as in Romans 12:6, "according to the grace that is given to us;" or as in Ephesians 4:7, "according to the measure [μέτρον, as here] of the gift of Christ." It seems to be because by faith we become receptive of the grace given to each of us. Hence the faith assigned by God to each is regarded as "the regulative standard; the subjective condition" (Meyer)of the several gifts or graces. Cf. also Matthew 17:20 and 1 Corinthians 13:2, where miraculous powers are spoken of as dependent on the amount of faith. Tholuck explains thus: "Faith in an unseen Christ brings man into connection with a world unseen, in which he moves without distinctly apprehending it; and in proportion as he learns to look with faith to that world, the more is the measure of his spiritual powers elevated." Romans 12:4, Romans 12:5 For as in one body we have many members, but all the members have not the same office; so we, the many, are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another. The illustration of the body with its members to set forth the mutual dependence on each other of the several members of the Church with their several gifts and functions, and the importance of all for the well-being of the whole, is further carried out in 1 Corinthians 12:12, seq. In Ephesians 1:22 and Ephesians 4:15, Ephesians 4:16, Christ is regarded, somewhat differently, as the exalted Head over the Church which is his body. Here and in 1 Corinthians 12:1-31., the head is not thus distinguished from the rest of the body (see 1 Corinthians 12:21); the whole is "one body in Christ," who is the living Person who unites and animates it. Romans 12:6-8 Having then gifts differing according to the grace that is given to us, whether prophecy, according to the proportion of our faith; or ministry, in our ministry; or he that teacheth, in his teaching; or he that exhorteth, in his exhortation; he that giveth, in simplicity; he that ruleth, with (literally, in) diligence; he that showeth mercy, with (literally, in) cheerfulness. The elliptical form of the original has been retained in the above translation, without the words interposed for elucidation in the Authorized Version. There are two ways in which the construction of the passage might possibly be understood. (1) Taking ἔχοντεςδὲ in Romans 12:6 as dependent on ἐσμεν in Romans 12:5, and κατὰτὴνἀναλογίαντῆςπίστεως, not as hortatory, but as parallel to κατὰτὴνχάριντὴνδοθεῖσανἡμῖν, and understanding in a like sense the clauses that follow. Thus the general meaning would be—we are all one body, etc., but having our several gifts, to be used in accordance with the purpose for which they are severally given. (2) As in the Authorized Version, which is decidedly preferable, hortation being evidently intended from the beginning of Rom 12:6. The drift is that the various members of the body having various gifts, each is to be content to exercise his own gift in the line of usefulness it fits him for, and to do so well. The references are not to distinct orders of ministry, in the Church, but rather to gifts and consequent capacities of all Christians. The gift of prophecy, which is mentioned first, being of especial value and importance (cf. 1 Corinthians 14:1, seq.), was the gift of inspired utterance, not of necessity in the way of prediction, but also, and especially, for "edification, and exhortation, and comfort" (1 Corinthians 14:3), for "convincing," and for "making manifest the secrets of the heart" (1 Corinthians 14:24, 1 Corinthians 14:25). tie that has this special gift is to use it "according to the proportion of his faith;" for the meaning of which expression see on μέτρονπίστεως above (Romans 12:3). According to the prophet’s power of faith to be receptive of this special gift, and to apprehend it if granted to him, would be the intensity and truth of its manifestation. It would seem that prophets might be in danger of mistaking their own ideas for a true Divine revelation (cf. Jeremiah 23:28); and also that they might speak hastily and with a view to self-display (see 1 Corinthians 14:29-33), and that there was a further gift of διάκρισιςπνευμάτων required for distinguishing between true and imagined inspiration (see 1 Corinthians 12:10; 1 Corinthians 14:29). Further, the spirits of the prophets were subject to the prophets (1 Corinthians 14:32); they were not carried away, as the heathen μάντις was supposed to be, by an irresistible Divine impulse; they retained their reason and consciousness, and were responsible for rightly estimating and faithfully rendering any revelation (ἀποκάλυψις, 1 Corinthians 5:1-13:30) granted to them. Delusion, inconsiderate utterance, extravagance, as well as repression of any real inspiration may be meant to be forbidden in the phrase. (The view of τῆςπίστεως being meant objectively of the general Christian doctrine, from which the prophecy was not to deviate—whence the common use of the expression, analogia fidei—is precluded by the whole drift of the passage. It is not found in the Greek Fathers, having been apparently suggested first by Thomas Aquinas.) The gift of ministry (διακονία) must be understood in a general sense, and not as having exclusive reference to the order of deacons (Acts 6:1-6; Philippians 1:1; 1 Timothy 3:8; Romans 16:1), who were so called specifically because their office was one of διακονία. The words διακονεῖνδιακονίαδιάκονος, though sometimes denoting any kind of ministry, even of the highest kind, were used and understood in a more specific sense with reference to subordinate ministrations, especially in temporal matters (cf. Acts 6:2, "It is not reason that we should leave the Word of God, and serve tables (διακονεῖντραπέζως)"). If any had a gift for any such kind of administrative work under others, they were to devote themselves to it, and be content if they could do it well. Teaching (διδασκαλία) may denote a gift for mere instruction in facts or doctrines, catechetical or otherwise, different from that of the inspired eloquence of prophecy. Exhortation (as παράκλησις, which bears also the sense of consolation, seems here to be rightly rendered) may be understood with reference to admonitory addresses, in the congregation or in private, less inspired and rousing than prophetic utterances. In Acts 13:15 the word παράκλησις denotes the exhortation which any person in the synagogue might be called upon by the rulers to address to the people after the reading (ἀνάγνωσιν) of the Law and the prophets; cf. 1 Timothy 4:13, where Timothy is told to give attendance to reading (ἀνάγνωσιν), to exhortation (παράκλησιν), and to teaching (διδασκαλίαν). He that giveth (οὁμεταδιδοὺς) points to the gift of liberality, to the endowment with which both means supplied by Providence and a spirit of generosity might contribute. The almsgivers of the Church had their special gift and function; and they must exercise them in simplicity (ἐνἀπλότητι), which may perhaps mean singleness of heart, without partiality, or ostentation, or secondary aims. But in 2 Corinthians 8:2; 2 Corinthians 9:11, 2 Corinthians 9:13, the word seems to have the sense of liberality, and this may be the meaning here. "Uti Deus dat, Jac. 2 Corinthians 1:5" (Bengel). In the ’Shepherd of Hermas’ (written, it is supposed, not later than the first half of the second century) ἁπλῶς is explained thus: Πᾶσινὑστερουμένοιςδίδουἁπλῶςμὴδιστάζωντίνιδῷςἠτίνιμὴδῷςπᾶσιδίδου (’Hermae Pastor,’ mandatum 2.). Possibly this gives the true original conception, from which that of general liberality would follow. [The idea that the almoners of the Church, rather than the almsgivers, are intended, viz. the deacons (Acts 6:3, seq.), is inconsistent with the general purport of the passage, as explained above. Besides, μεταδιδόναι means elsewhere to give up what is one’s own, not to distribute the funds of others. Ὁδιαδιδούς might rather have been expected in the latter case (cf. Acts 4:35).] He that ruleth (ὁπροιστάμενος) means, according to our view all along, any one in a leading position, with authority over others; and not, as some have thought, exclusively the presbyters. Such are not to presume on their position of superiority so as to relax in zealous attention to its duties. He that showeth mercy (ὁἐλεῶν) is one who is moved by the Spirit to devote himself especially to works of mercy, such as visiting the sick and succouring the distressed. Such a one is to allow no austerity or gloominess of demeanour to mar the sweetness of his charity. On the general subject of these gifts for various administrations (cf. 1 Corinthians 12:1-31., seq.; 1 Corinthians 14:1-40.; Ephesians 4:11, seq.) it is to be observed that in the apostolic period, though presbyters and deacons, under the general superintendence of the apostles, seem to have been appointed in all organized Churches for ordinary ministrations (Acts 11:30; Acts 14:23; Acts 15:2, seq.; Acts 16:4; Acts 20:17; Acts 21:18; Philippians 1:1; 1 Timothy 3:1-16. l, 8; 1 Timothy 5:17; Titus 1:5), yet there were other spiritual agencies in activity, recognized as divinely empowered. The "prophets and teachers" at Antioch (Acts 13:1) who, moved by the Holy Ghost, separated and ordained Barnabas and Saul for apostolic ministry, do not appear to have been what we should now call the regular clergy of the place, but persons, whether in any definite office or not, divinely inspired with the gifts of προφητεία and διδασκαλία. In like manner, the appointment of Timothy to the office he was commissioned to fill, though he was formally ordained by the laying on of hands of St. Paul himself (2 Timothy 1:6) and of the presbyters (1 Timothy 4:14), appears to have been accompanied—perhaps sanctioned—by prophecy (1 Timothy 4:14). Persons thus divinely inspired, or supposed to be so, appear, as time went on, to have visited the various Churches, claiming authority—some, it would seem, even the authority of apostles; the term "apostle" not being then confined exclusively to the original twelve; else Barnabas could not have been called one, as he is (Acts 14:14), or indeed even Paul himself. But such claims to inspiration were not always genuine; and against false prophets we find various warnings (cf. 2 Corinthians 11:3, seq.; Galatians 1:6, seq.; Galatians 3:1; 1 John 4:1, seq.; 2 John 1:10; Revelation 2:2). Still, these extraordinary agencies and ministrations, in addition to the ordinary ministry of the presbyters and deacons, were recognized as part of the Divine order for the edification of the Church as long as the special charismata of the apostolic age continued. Afterwards, as is well known, the episcopate, in the later sense of the word as denoting an order above the general presbytery, succeeded the apostolate, though how soon this system of Church government became universal is still a subject of controversy. It appears, however, from ’The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles’ (ΔιδαχὴτῶνΔώδεκαἉποστόλων), recently brought to light by Archbishop Bryennius (the date of which appears to have been towards the end of the first century or the beginning of the second), that the earlier and less regular system continued, in some regions at least (it does not follow that it was so everywhere), after the original apostles had passed away. For in this early and interesting document, while directions are given for the ordination (or election; the word is χειροτονήσατε, the same as in Acts 14:23) of bishops and deacons in the several Churches, there is no allusion to an episcopate of a higher order above them, but marked mention of teachers, apostles, and prophets (especially the last two, apostles being also spoken of as prophets), who appear to have been itinerant, visiting the various Churches from time to time, and claiming authority as "speaking in the Spirit." To these prophets great deference is to be paid; they are to be maintained during their sojourn; they are to be allowed to celebrate the Eucharist in such words as they will (cf. 1 Corinthians 14:16); while speaking in the Spirit they are not to be tried or proved (οὐδὲδιακρινεῖτε; cf. διακρίσειςπνευμάτων, 1 Corinthians 14:10; and οἱἄλλοιδιακρινέτωσαν, Romans 14:1-23:29), lest risk be run of blasphemy against the Holy Ghost. Still, among these itinerants there might often be false prophets, and the Churches are to exercise judgment in testing them. If they taught anything contrary to the received doctrine; if they remained for the sake of maintenance without working for mere than two days; if they asked in the Spirit for worldly goods for themselves; if their manner of life was not what it should be;—they were false prophets, and to be rejected, Similarly, in the ’Shepherd of Hermas’ like directions are given for distinguishing between true and false prophets, between those who had τὸΠνεῦ,ατὸΘεῖον and those whose πνεῦμα was ἐπίγειον (mandatum 11.). And even in the ’Apostolical Constitutions’ (a compilation supposed to date from the middle of the third to the middle of the fourth century) there is a passage corresponding to what is said in the Teaching about distinguishing between true and false prophets or teachers who might visit Churches (Romans 7:1-25:28). The Teaching seems to denote a state of things, after the apostolic period, in which the special charismata of that period were believed to be still in activity, though with growing doubts as to their genuineness in all cases. As has been said above, it does not follow that this order of things continued everywhere at the time of the compilation of the Teaching; but that it was so, at any rate in some parts, seems evident; and hence some light is thrown on the system of things alluded to in the apostolical Epistles. It is quite consistent with the evidence of the Teaching to suppose that in Churches which had been organized by St. Paul or other true apostles, the more settled order of government which soon afterwards became universal, and the transition to which seems to be plainly marked in the pastoral Epistles, already prevailed. Romans 12:9-21 Various admonitions, applicable to all; headed by inculcation of the all-pervading principle of love. Romans 12:9 Let love be unfeigned (so is rendered elsewhere ἀνυπόκριτος in the Authorized Version, cf. 2 Corinthians 6:6; 1 Timothy 1:5; 2 Timothy 1:5; 1 Peter 1:22). Abhor (literally, abhorring) that which is evil; cleave (literally, cleaving) to that which is good. The participles ἀποστυγοῦντες, etc., here and afterwards, may be understood as mildly imperative. Or perhaps the apostle connected them in thought with ἡἀγάπηἀνυπόκριτος, as if he had said, Love ye unfeignedly. Romans 12:10 In brotherly love (φιλαδελφίᾳ) be kindly affectioned (φιλόστοργοι) one to another (φιλαδελφία, expressing the love of Christians for each other, is a special form or manifestation of general ἀάπη. In it there should be ever the warmth of family affection, στοργή); in honour preferring one another; literally, according to the proper sense of προηγούμενοι, taking the lead of each other in honour—i.e., in showing honour, rather than equivalent to ἀλλήλουςἡγούμενοιὑπερέχονταςἑαυτῶν in Philippians 2:3. Romans 12:11 In business (rather, diligence) not slothful; in spirit fervent (we are to do with our might whatever our hand finds to do; yea, with fervent zeal); serving the Lord. For τῷΚυρίῳ, (the Lord), some manuscripts have τῷκαιρῷ (the time, or the opportunity), which reading is preferred by some commentators on the ground that it is less likely to have been instituted for the familiar τῷΚυρίῳ than vice versa. But τῷΚυρίῳ is best supported, and has an obvious meaning, vie. that in the zealous performance of all our duties we are to feel that we are serving the Lord. Romans 12:12-14 In hope rejoicing; in tribulation enduring; in prayer continuing instant; communicating to the necessities of the saints (i.e. Christians); given to (literally, pursuing) hospitality. Bless them which persecute you: bless, and curse not. In Romans 12:14 the form of the admonition passes from participles to direct imperatives, a positive command of Christ being adduced. In Romans 12:15 the gentler admonitory form of in the infinitive is taken up, passing to participles, as before in Romans 12:16. Romans 12:15-17 Rejoice with them that do rejoice, and weep with them that weep. Be of the same mind one toward another (denoting mutual good feeling and unanimity of sentiment; not, of course, agreement in opinion on all subjects). Mind not high things, but condescend to (literally, being led away with) men of low estate. It is a question whether τοῖςταπεινοῖς should not be understood as neuter, so as to correspond with τὰὐψηλὰ; the meaning thus being that, instead of being ambitious, we should let ourselves be drawn willingly to the lowlier spheres of usefulness to which we may be called. The main objection to this view is that the adjective ταπεινὸς is not elsewhere applied to things, but to persons. Be not wise in your own conceits. Recompense to no man evil for evil. Provide (in the sense of take forethought for) things honest (or fair, or honourable) in the sight of all men. This is a citation from Proverbs 3:4, where the LXX. has, ΠρονοοῦκαλὰἀνώπιονΚυριόυκαὶἀνθρώπων. We are not only to do what we know to be right in the sight of God, but also to have regard to the view that will be taken of our conduct by other men; we must not give any just cause for our good being evil spoken of (cf. Proverbs 3:16 and 1 Peter 2:12). Romans 12:18-21 If it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men. Avenge not yourselves, beloved, but give place unto wrath. The thought in Romans 12:19 seems to follow from what precedes. It may sometimes be impossible to he at peace with all; but at any rate, do not increase bitterness by avenging yourselves. Give place unto wrath (τῇὀργῇ), has been taken by some to mean that we are to give scope to the wrath of our enemy, instead of being exasperated to resist it (cf. Matthew 5:39, etc.). But there has been no particular reference to a wrathful adversary. Another view is that our own wrath is intended, to which we are to allow time to expend itself before following its impulse; δότετόπον being taken as equivalent to data spatium in Latin; and this interpretation suits the usual sense of δότετόπον. It is not thus implied that the falling of Divine vengeance on our enemy should be our desire and purpose, but only this—that, if punishment is due, we must leave it to the righteous God to inflict it; it is not for us to do so. And this interpretation suits what immediately follows. For it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord (Deuteronomy 32:35, quoted freely from the Hebrew, but with the words ἐκδίκησις and ἀνταποδώσω as found in the LXX. The fact that the same form of quotation occurs also in Hebrews 10:30 seems to show that it was one in current use). But (so rather than wherefore, as in the Authorized Version) if thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink; for in so doing thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head. This whole verse is from Proverbs 25:21, Proverbs 25:22, where is added, "and the Lord shall reward thee." What is meant by the "coals of fire," both in the original and in St. Paul’s citation, has been much discussed. Undoubtedly, the expression in itself, in view of its usual significance in the Old Testament, suggests only the idea of Divine vengeance (see Psalms 18:12; Psalms 120:4; Psalms 140:10; and especially 2 Esdras 16:53. Cf. also Psalms 11:6; Habakkuk 3:5); and this especially as it occurs here almost immediately after "Vengeance is mine." Hence Chrysostom and other Fathers, as well as some moderns, have taken it to mean that by heaping benefits on our enemy we shall aggravate his guilt, and expose him to severer punishment from God. But it is surely incredible that the apostle should have meant to suggest such a motive for beneficence; and the whole tone of the context is against it, including that of Pro 25:21, which follows. Jerome saw this, writing," Carbones igitur congregabis super caput ejus, non in maledictum et condemnationem, ut plerique existimant, sed in correctionem et poenitudinem." But if the "coals of fire" mean the Divine judgment on our enemy, there is nothing to suggest a corrective purpose. The view, held by some, that the softening effect of fire on metals is intended, is hardly tenable. Heaping coals of fire on a person’s head would be an unnatural way of denoting the softening of his heart. More likely is the view which retains the idea of coals of fire carrying with it, as elsewhere, that of punishment and the infliction of pain, but regards the pain as that of shame and compunction, which may induce penitence. This appears to be the most generally received view. It is, however, a question whether any such effect is definitely in the writer’s view. He may mean simply this: Men in general desire vengeance on their enemies, expressed proverbially by heaping coals of fire on the head. Hast thou an enemy? Do him good. This is the only vengeance, the only coals of fire, allowed to a Christian. Then follows naturally, Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good. Romans 12:1 Christian sacrifice and worship. In commencing the practical part of this Epistle, St. Paul adopts a tone of gentle and affectionate persuasion. He might have addressed his readers as disciples, and have used towards them the language of authority and command. But, on the contrary, he calls them his "brethren," and he "beseeches," entreats them, as employing the appeals of love to enforce the precepts of duty. At the same time, his language implies that compliance with his admonitions is not a matter optional and indifferent. He beseeches them because they are brethren, and because he has a right to expect that they will not only listen with respect, but obey with alacrity. Before entering upon the specific duties of the Christian life, and depicting in detail the Christian character, the apostle exhibits in this verse the general ,and comprehensive principle of practical Christianity. As religious men, these Roman Christians must, as a matter of course, offer a sacrifice and a service of worship. And they are here told that the presentation to God of themselves is the one great act in which all specific acts of obedience are summed up and involved. Let them enter into the temple of God, and bring with them a living sacrifice; let them join in offering to Heaven a reasonable, a spiritual worship; for with such the Father will be well pleased. I. Consider THE MOTIVE WHICH THE APOSTLE URGES in order to induce to consecration. "By the mercies of God." To every sensitive and appreciative mind this is a cogent motive. The mercies of God have been, and are, so many, so varied, so suited to our case, so unfailing, that we cannot meditate upon them without acknowledging the claim they constitute upon us. The word used here is peculiar; the apostle speaks of the pity, the compassions, of the Lord. Language this which brings out our condition as one of dependence, helplessness, and even misery, and which brings out also the condescension and loving-kindness of our heavenly Father. There is, no doubt, an especial reference to the spiritual favours which have been so fully and powerfully described in the earlier portion of the Epistle. The mercies of God are nowhere so apparent as in redemption; and human sin requires a great salvation. In exhibiting the marvellous interposition of Divine grace on behalf of sinful humanity, in explaining the reconciling work of Christ, in depicting the immunities, privileges, and hopes of those who receive the gospel, the apostle has laid a good foundation for the appeal of the text. Mercies may well excite gratitude, for they are undeserved, sovereign, and free; and gratitude in the mind of the Christian, who is under the influence of the Holy Spirit, is a motive of no mean order. And gratitude to such a God, and for such gifts, can only be a motive to virtue and holiness. II. Consider WHAT THE APOSTLE ENJOINS US TO PRESENT TO GOD. "Your bodies." The vigorous understanding of St. Paul preserved him from that sentimental form of religion which many, professing to be his followers, have adopted and advocated. It will not do to treat men, to regard ourselves, as possessing only a spiritual nature. We have body as well as soul. The most ethereal and ecstatic spiritual experiences do not prove a man to be a true Christian. God requires that body, soul, and spirit should be consecrated to him. For the bodily nature is intended to express and manifest the character, the spiritual life, the true man. If the spirit be renewed and purified, the effect of this Divine work within will be apparent in the outer life. Thus it is that the new creation, which is the work of the Holy Spirit, extends to the whole nature and life. The body, therefore, shares in the death unto sin, and in the new life unto righteousness and holiness. The body is consecrated to him who has redeemed the body as well as the soul; and its members are employed as weapons or instruments, not of sin, but of righteousness. It cannot be supposed that the apostle intends us to understand that bodily service alone is sufficient. Nothing would have been more alien from his whole teaching, or from the spirit of the New Testament, than such a doctrine. Christ has taught us that worship, in order to being acceptable, must be in spirit and in truth; and St. Paul himself has assured us that bodily exercise profiteth nothing, that circumcision avalleth nothing, but a new creation. In presenting our bodies unto God, we offer the praises of our lips and the service of our hands. The body is the instrument of toil. The Christian’s daily activity is consecrated to his redeeming God; and this is so, whatever be the employment to which Providence has called him. The body is also the agent of spiritual ministry. Accordingly, the Christian’s special efforts to do good, his teaching and preaching, his ministering to the wants of his fellow-men and relieving them from their sufferings, his evangelistic journeys in order to seek the lost and to proclaim the gospel,—all are instances of his consecration of the body as well as of the soul to his redeeming Lord. III. Remark that such ON THE PART OF THE IS AS . From a study of the religions of mankind, we learn that the sacrifices, alike of the heathen and of the Jews, may be regarded as (1) offering, and (2) propitiation. Now, as far as expiation, propitiation, is concerned, we, as Christians, know that there has been one, and only one, real and acceptable sacrifice of this kind—the sacrifice of himself offered to the Father by our Lord Jesus Christ. This was the substance of which all that went before was merely the shadow, and which can neither be repeated nor imitated. But as far as the tribute of thanksgiving, adoration, and obedience is concerned, we are taught that this is to be offered to God continually (Hebrews 13:15, Hebrews 13:16). It is in this respect that all Christians are priests unto God; all, irrespective of the position they hold in the Church, or the special services they render in the congregations of the Lord Jesus Christ. The Jewish sacrifice, which this perpetual offering most closely resembles, is the burnt offering, which the Hebrew worshipper brought to Jehovah as the expression of his personal devotion and consecration to Heaven, as the public declaration that he owed everything to the Lord, and that he withheld from him nothing which he possessed. In like manner Christians present their bodies—their whole nature and life—to him who gave himself for them. "Ye are not your own; ye are bought with a price; therefore glorify God with your bodies, which are his." Of this sacrifice, in which all Christians unite, the apostle reminds us that it possesses three qualities. 1. It is living. The sacrifices which the Jews offered were either living creatures, or substances which by their nature ministered to life; and in offering such gifts the worshipping was presenting a symbol of his own life. But ordinary sacrifices were slain; the life was consumed in the offering. The Christian’s life is not forfeited in being presented to God. Yet in the presentation there is both death and life. It has been said, "There is in every sacrifice a death, and in this sacrifice a death unto sin, out of which there arises a new life of righteousness unto God. Thus the living sacrifice is that in which, though the natural life is not lost, a new life of holiness is gained." What a privilege is ours, who are expected to bring unto God, not the bodies of brute animals, not the blood of bulls and goats, but our own bodies—our very selves, our living nature—and gratefully and willingly to lay this sacrifice upon the altar of God! 2. It is holy. The animals which were presented under the Mosaic economy were, according to the prescribed regulations, to be free from blemish. This was doubtless an ordinance intended to impress upon the mind of the worshipper a sense of the holiness of the Being who was approached. All who officiated were to be ceremonially clean. The substance, of which these symbols were the shadow, was holiness, spiritual purity, freedom from iniquity. There is nothing upon which greater stress is laid than the requirement that every offering to God shall be such as a Being of perfect purity can accept. A sprinkled body is not sufficient; a pure heart is the demand of him who is himself the all-holy Lord. 3. And such an offering is well pleasing to God. This, indeed, may be inferred from a consideration of God’s moral character as a truth-loving and holy Governor, who cannot endure dissimulation and hypocrisy. The enlightened among the ancient Hebrews saw clearly enough that ceremonial purity and ritual correctness were not enough to secure Divine acceptance and favour. And none who enters into the teaching of our Saviour, and sympathizes with the spirit of his religion, can fail to discern the necessity of a living and holy sacrifice in order to please the Searcher of hearts, and satisfy the requirements of Christ. IV. The offering of the Christian is further represented as A SERVICE OR WORSHIP. The Revisers have, in the margin, "spiritual." It is a service rendered by the intelligent, reasonable, spiritual part of our nature. Though the body is presented, he presentation of the body is the expression of inner, spiritual worship. For the word means "worship"—"an outward act of religious worship." Worship is a universal expression of the religious nature of man. The heathen practised their ritual of ceremony, sacrifice, prayer, adoration; and the Jewish religion imposed an elaborate system of public worship. The superiority of Christian worship is marked. Obedience is the highest and most acceptable form of worship which can be offered to God. This "reasonable worship" is distinguished from worship that is merely mechanical and formal. It is similarly distinguished from all substitutionary worship. It is personal, not representative; not by a priest who worships for the congregation, and professes to offer sacrifice as their representative, but by each individual Christian who has his own tribute to offer, his own service to render. . The language of the text appeals to those who neglect or withhold this sacrifice, this service, and reproaches them as unreasonable, ungrateful, indefensible, disobedient, self-destructive. It urges them to yield what God asks, through Christ, who makes obedience and praise acceptable offerings to God. Romans 12:2 Spiritual transformation. The Apostle Paul was great both in theoretical and in practical thought. Truth and duty were equally his themes. He could introduce new ideas into men’s minds, and that with a force which made the ideas part of the minds into which they were introduced. And, at the same time, he could show the bearing of the grandest ideas upon the commonest actions and the homeliest life. This is a combination of qualities not always found even in the greatest of men. It was found in Paul; and accordingly we go to him for the loftiest representations of Christian truth, for the most elaborate expositions of Christian doctrine, and also for the counsel we need in circumstances of difficulty, and the instructions we need in the development of social and individual life. It was a grand conception, that with which the apostle beans the practical part of this treatise. What devout heart does not, upon having this conception brought before it, burn with an ardent desire to realize it—to present the body, the self, the all, a living and holy sacrifice unto God? But then comes the question—How is it to be done? And, indeed, what is it, precisely and actually, which is to be done? The apostle proceeds to show us. And in translating the noble idea of the first verse into the language of practical life, he proceeds wisely and carefully, first giving us the general rule and law, and then drawing out from it the special applications in detailed duties of Christian morality. In studying this chapter we must ever and anon revert to the great principles contained in the first and second verses. The principle is barren without the precepts; the precepts are lifeless, flavourless, and impossible without the principle. The verse contains— I. A ; i.e. from conformity to the world. Human character and life are treated as something to be formed and fashioned by the personal will. We are dealt with as beings responsible for the form and fashion we impart to character and life. The apostle does not take it for granted that those living in a Christian community must, as a matter of course and necessity, attain to the Divine ideal. There is a temptation, a danger, against which it is prudent to be warned. It was, no doubt, easier to understand this dissuasion in the earliest days of Christianity than it is now. "This world!" "this age!"—what a fulness, an awful fulness of meaning this expression must have had for a Christian of the first century! Not the material world, of course, but the world of human society, of pagan idolatry, and sensuality, and cruelty, and scepticism, and despair, was the world present to the apostle’s mind. Satan is termed in the New Testament "the prince of this world;" the unbelieving, unchristian population are designated "the children of this world." "The disputer of this world," "the wisdom of this world," apply to what is unspiritual and godless. The distinction between the heathen world and the Church of Christ must then have been sharp indeed. And no reader could be at a loss to understand Paul’s advice to the Roman Christians not to be fashioned according to this world. For in Rome, perhaps above all other places, this world was the acknowledged mistress and sovereign of human society. And, as a matter of fact, the Christian community in this and in other cities of the empire did live a life in utter, manifest, obtrusive contrast to that lived by the multitude of ambitious, pleasure-loving, superstitious, cynical citizens, by whom they were surrounded. To make this a practical matter, let us ask—How does this dissuasion apply to us? What is the world of which we are to beware? Is there such a world in our England today? We meet with narrow and prejudiced opinion on these questions. Some people think it worldly to have anything to do with politics—especially on one side; others, to mix with general society; others, to take an interest in painting, architecture, music, and even literature. To such objections it is enough to answer that, in becoming a Christian, one does not cease to be a man, but rather learns to bring to bear upon human interests and occupations the principles of the highest life and calling. We must beware of narrow and merely technical definitions of "the world." In truth, to be "fashioned according to the world" is to conform to sinful and prevalent practices. What is worldliness? It is injustice, untruthfulness, impurity, avarice, slander. Some of these vices and sins are to be found amongst those who are very scrupulous in preserving what they call the line between the Church and the world. But bear in mind that a life devoted to selfish aggrandizement or pleasure, a life lacking in love and sympathy, is a worldly life. The same idea is dwelt upon with urgency by the other apostles. John admonishes, "Love not the world;" and Peter requires Christians "not to be fashioned according to their former lusts in their ignorance." II. A ; i.e. to spiritual renewal. That the followers of Christ might present themselves "a living sacrifice" to God, they were taught that they must become something very different from what they had been in their unbelieving, unregenerate days. The admonition of the apostle is very full and strong. 1. It is to a change. "Repent!" was the first Divine message to men—alike from the forerunner and from the Messiah. Christians they could not be, whether Jews or Gentiles, until changed. Religion cannot flatter, though priests may. 2. It is to renewal. How characteristic of the religion of the Lord Jesus is this counsel! We have a new covenant, and we need a new nature; we need to become a new creation, that we may live in newness of life, and so prepare to dwell in the new heavens and to join in the new song. Christianity is a gospel of renewal. The fact implies the abandonment and death and crucifixion of the old—the old nature, "the old man," as Paul calls it. Christ takes the individual, the society, in hand, and moulds all afresh from the beginning; implants new principles, new laws, new aims, new hopes. He makes one new man, one new humanity. What a gospel it is! It invites men to turn their back upon their old and sinful ways, to abjure their old and sinful self; to enter upon a new course—to become a new creation. Here, surely, is hope and promise for the downcast. Amendment may be impossible, but not renewal and regeneration; for the Spirit of God is the mightiest of all powers to transform. 3. It is to a mental, a spiritual renewal. We are invited to a renovation, which shall be not merely outward and bodily, but shall commence with the very centre and spring and root of our being. There is wisdom in this provision. It originates in the Author and Framer of our being, who knew what was in man. Let the heart be renewed, and, the fountain being cleansed, sweet water shall flow from it; and, the tree being made good, fruit ripe and wholesome shall be borne. Our Lord asks for the heart, and the heart only will he accept. "Be renewed," says the apostle elsewhere, "in the spirit of your mind." The Holy Spirit imparts new affections, new principles, new desires; encourages to new associations, and inspires with new aims and hopes. III. AN ; viz. by following the apostolic instructions the Christian will prove what God’s will is. It seems a somewhat singular motive to present. Yet, to a believer in God, it must be a very powerful motive. The great question which interests men’s minds today is just this—Are there in the universe signs of the presence, and energy, the moral character, and conscious purpose of Deity? Is there, in a word, such a thing as God’s will? and, if so, what is it? According to the apostle, the consecrated and obedient Christian is in the way to settle this question in his own experience. It seems almost presumptuous to propose the testing of God’s will. The boy proves the calculation he has made with figures; the armourer proves the temper of the gun or sword; the steel-maker, the strength of the spring; the machinist, the resisting power of his boiler. The vessel is sent upon a trial trip; the electrician tries his principle practically in the working of a railway. So in the moral realm. The apostle bids us "prove all things." Still, to speak of proving God’s will does seem marvellous, and scarcely reverent. But it must be borne in mind that Paul speaks of that will, not so much as the action of the Divine mind, as the Divine law of the human life, of that will to be done on earth as it is in heaven. Now, it is one thing to look at the Divine will as something to be admired and reverenced, and another thing to regard it as something to be done. And by doing it, we, as Christians, prove it; we discover for ourselves what it is, what are its qualities. It is good. The old Greek idea of what, in moral life, is to be sought, was summed up in this word—the good, the truly good, the highest good. This is equivalent to the nature, expressed in the will, of the Supreme. It is acceptable, or well-pleasing. That is to say, the performance of the Divine will by man is well-pleasing to him who has revealed the law of human life, and who is gratified when his own idea is taken up, and wrought out into practice with vigour and sympathy. It is perfect, admitting of no amendment, no censure, no improvement. To attain to it is to reach a moral height above which nothing towers. The connection between the will of God and the consecration and sacrifice commended in the previous verse is obvious. As the apostle elsewhere says, "This is the will of God, even your sanctification." Walking as children of the light, we "prove what is acceptable unto the Lord." It is only thus that we show ourselves to "understand what the will of the Lord is." To understand it as a mere matter of theory is valueless and vain. . 1. The motive to this new life is to be found in the love and sacrifice of the Redeemer. 2. The power for this new life is to be found in the gracious influences of the Holy Spirit of God. Let this motive have force and sway in your nature; let this power be sought, to control, transform, and renew your life. Romans 12:3-5 Membership in Christ. The great principles laid down at the outset of this chapter have to be followed out into practice. Paul shows how consecration and renewal are to manifest themselves in actual life, and how the will of God is to be practically proved. In so doing—perhaps because he is writing to a Church, and not to an individual—he first treats of the obligations of social Christianity, and shows how members of a brotherhood ought to act in their association with one another, in their Church-life. Yet he does not lose sight of the fact that a congregation, a community, is composed of individuals; accordingly, the message he delivers he delivers expressly to "every man that is among you." His first caution is against self-exaltation and self-praise; his first counsel is to unity and mutual consideration. This is very natural; for the early Christians were but few in number, and, being so decidedly distinguished from the world around, they were thrown very much into one another’s society, and their Christian life had both the advantages and dangers attaching to its social character. I. PRIDE IS AND OF . 1. This was a necessary caution and admonition. It is a besetting temptation of human nature to think too highly of ourselves. Men are prone to exaggerate their own abilities and merits, and to extenuate their own faults; and, at the same time, alas! to depreciate the gifts and deserts of their neighbours, and to magnify their failings. It is the infirmity of selfishness, of self-importance, of self-glorification. In old times, the Christian moralists reckoned pride among the seven deadly sins. There was an additional reason for this apostolic caution in the case of the early Christians. There were imparted to many of them very remarkable and striking gifts, in some instances of a miraculous character. Within the boundary of these societies, these gifts were held in high esteem, and were often unduly prized and even coveted. The possessors of supernatural powers, gifts of tongues or of healing, may have been persons of no more than average Christian character, and may have been specially in danger of being puffed up by spiritual pride. Let it be remembered that there is scarcely any possession or endowment which may not furnish occasion for sinful pride. 2. There is a special propriety in modesty, in sobriety of judgment concerning ourselves. What we have we received from the Giver of every good gift, and every perfect boon. Our "measure of faith" he bestowed. Who, then, made us to differ? In fact, what are we, the best of us, but poor helpless sinners, saved by sovereign grace? The more we reflect, the more we shall see how unreasonable, indefensible, and absurd it is to indulge sentiments of self-importance and self-esteem. Humiliation and contrition are far more appropriate to all. 3. This is an admonition easy to misconstrue. Insincere professions of humility are repugnant to the Searcher of hearts; yet there is reason to believe that they are frequent. There is a "pride that apes humility" And there are those who need to be put upon their guard against undue depreciation of themselves and their abilities; such persons do little good, because they have a rooted conviction that they have no power for service. It is desirable, neither to neglect the one talent, nor to beast of the five. 4. We have an example of the virtue of sobriety in Paul’s own case. Even here, instead of commanding or dictating, he words his counsel modestly: "I say, through the grace given to me" Not that he doubted his apostolic authority, but that he disclaimed any personal merit or claim. For he could sincerely speak of himself as "the least of the apostles;" "not worthy to be called an apostle;" "less than the least of all saints." He, therefore, may justly be said to have enforced his precepts by his own personal, living example. II. IN CHRIST IS SHOWN TO BE THE ROOT OF AND MUTUAL . How can we enough admire in the apostle his habit of laying the foundation of every duty and virtue in Christ? In order to think modestly of ourselves, and kindly and respectfully of our Christian brethren, we should bear in mind our common dependence upon the same Saviour, and our mutual relation one to another. The principle here stated was one very familiar to Paul’s mind; for it is propounded in several of his Epistles, and enforced with great beauty, and at some length, in the First Epistle to the Corinthians. 1. Christians are in common members of the Lord Christ. He is the Head; the Divine Personality, revealing himself through the body. He himself had taught this great and precious doctrine. "Abide in me," said Christ, "and I in you." He dwells in and inspires his body, the Church, by his own gracious and mighty Spirit. It is his presence that gives life and guidance, energy and blessing, to the body. Now, if this be so, surely it is obvious that to exalt ourselves and to despise others is inconsistent with such a relation. Can we regard with neglect, or with scorn, those whom the Lord terms members of his own mystical body? 2. There is diversity among the members of the spiritual body. As in the human frame, so in the Church, every member has its own office. In subsequent verses Paul explains what some of these offices are. It is an instructive thought, impressing lessons of modesty and mutual esteem, that Christ has a use for every one of us. Instead of fretting that you have not your neighbour’s gift, rather rejoice that he has it. Instead of thinking so much of your own work as to fill up the whole horizon of your vision with what is yours, turn an interested and kindly eye upon the ministry of your neighbour. Almost all men are prone to be one-sided. Receive inspired counsel: "Look every man also upon the things of others." There is room in the Church for the Christian scholar, the Christian philosopher, the Christian preacher, the Christian man of business, the Christian man of science, the Christian workman; for those who give themselves to healing, to education, to domestic life, to civil government, to social amelioration; in fact, there is room for all whom Christ has called and qualified for his own service. The great Maker has fashioned no two alike; let each be content to be himself—to be just what the Lord of the body intended him to be. 3. There is unity and harmony among the members of Christ’s body. The inspired view is this: We cannot be all Christ’s without coming into relation with one another, very close and vital. Common dependence upon the Head creates mutual affections, and calls for mutual services. How destructive is this teaching of that pride, from which the apostle dissuades! The health of each member, and his efficiency for service, depends upon the condition of the other members of the spiritual organism and structure. It is not uniformity which is to be cultivated and expected; it is organic unity, which implies unity in diversity. Subordination to the one Head, the indwelling of the one Spirit, will produce this happy result. Thus are secured the growth of the body and the glory of Christ. Romans 12:6-8 Grace and gifts. It is presumed that every member not only refrains from disparaging or envying the offices of fellow-members, but fulfils his own office. And it is also presumed that, as there is no member in the human body without a function, so, in Christian society, the Creator and Lord has assigned to every individual a place to fill, a work to do, and service to render as well as to receive. In this comprehensive passage several great principles are explicitly or implicitly presented. I. GOD’S GRACE FOR HUMAN GIFTS. We speak of our fellow-creatures’ "gifts," and say of some that they are "gifted," that they "have talents;" but what is involved in this language does not always come before our minds. Yet, if from the Father of lights cometh down every good gift and every perfect boon, surely the gifts of intellect and heart, the gifts of sympathy and ministration, are as truly and really from above, as are those we term the gifts of Providence. The risen and glorified Redeemer bestows gifts upon men. The Holy Spirit is given, and that Spirit’s presence imparts moral power and adaptation and influence. Freely, and not of constraint, or because of our desert, is the Spirit given. It is ours to receive with gratitude, and to use with fidelity; but our receiving and employing are only possible through Divine grace and liberality. II. GOD’S SUPPLY MAN’S NEED. We may well admire the goodness of our Father in heaven, in the bestowal of his gifts; his bounty, manifest in the universal diffusion of those gifts; and his wisdom, conspicuous in their endless variety. God has created man with many wants, and has so constituted human society that "no man liveth unto himself;" that we are mutually dependent one upon another for all our knowledge, happiness, and means of usefulness. Every congregation of Christians may be regarded as a collection of spiritual, as well as of more obvious and physical, necessities. The young need to be taught and trained; the misled need to be recovered; the feeble need to be confirmed; the sorrowful need to be comforted; the presumptuous need to be repressed; the petulant and quarrelsome need to be corrected; the inexperienced need to be advised. These, and other cases, can only be met by a provision inexhaustible in quantity and exquisitely adapted in character. In this and parallel passages the apostle takes pleasure in dwelling upon the vastness and variety of the resources which the Lord of all places at the disposal of his people. It is indeed a delightful thought: "All things are yours," etc. III. THE WORK OF IN THIS WORLD IS THE A TRUST FROM GOD. We live, not certainly to seek our own pleasure, not certainly to respond to every passing social impulse, not even merely to develop our own nature and cultivate our own powers. We are summoned to take a higher view of life and its opportunities. As St. Peter expresses it, "According as each hath received a gift, ministering it among yourselves, as good stewards of the manifold grace of God." It is good for the young and unformed to come under the control of a superior human mind and will, and so to shape life as to secure approval and commendation from a master, a leader. How much better for us all to live as those whose fidelity the Master in heaven is testing, and who are held responsible to him! When we read of God’s gifts, we are not to infer that we possess them absolutely, in such a sense that it is in our option either to use or neglect them, that we are at liberty to treat them otherwise than as a sacred trust. On the contrary, "every one of us must give an account of himself to God." The talents the Lord has entrusted to his servants are for them so to employ that, when he comes in judgment, they may give in their account with joy and not with IV. EVERY IS CALLED TO USE HIS GIFTS FOR THE BENEFIT OF HIS FELLOWS. It is observable that every several admonition in this passage has reference to benefits to be conferred upon others. The Christian is called to look, not upon his own things, but also upon the things of others. This is the lesson which Christianity has from the beginning been inculcating; and modern society is for it under a debt, which is not always frankly and fully acknowledged. Some modern systems of morality and schemes of human life, as positivism, make the whole of religion consist in living for others (altruism). But it is vain to rear a superstructure without first laying the foundation. To induce and sustain an unselfish life, it is needful to begin with the counsels of God; to feel the one, sacred motive of the cross of Christ, to seek the guidance and aid of the Spirit of God. At the same time, unselfishness and self-denying benevolence are one great evidence of a renewed nature, and of the action of Christian principle. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/pulpit-commentary/ Romans 13:1-8 From admonitions to keep peace, if possible, with all men, whether or not within the Christian circle, and to act honourably and benevolently towards all, the apostle now passes to the duty of Christians towards the civil government and the laws of the country in which they lived. It is well known that the Jews were impatient of the Roman dominion, and that some held it to be unlawful, on religious grounds, to pay tribute to Caesar (Matthew 22:17). Insurrections against the government had consequently been frequent. There had been the notable one under Judas the Gaulonite of Gamala (called ὁΓαλιλαῖος, Acts 5:37), who left followers behind him, called Gaulonites, and to whose tenets Josephus attributes all subsequent insurrections of the Jews (’Ant.,’ 18.1. § 1). Recently one had broken out in Rome, which had caused Claudius to order the expulsion of all Jews from the city (Acts 17:2; cf. Suetonius, ’Claud.,’ 25; Din Cassius, 60.6). The Christians, being regarded as a Jewish sect, and known for their acknowledgment of a Messiah and their refusal to comply with heathen usages, were not unnaturally confounded with such disturbers of the peace (cf. Acts 17:6, Acts 17:7; Acts 21:37). It was, therefore, peculiarly needful that the Christian communities should be cautioned to disprove such accusations by showing themselves in all respects good, law-abiding subjects. They might easily be under a temptation to be otherwise. Feeling themselves already subjects of Christ’s new kingdom, and regarding the second advent as probably near at hand, they might seem to themselves above the powers and institutions of the unbelieving world, which were so soon to pass away. St. Paul himself condemned resort to heathen tribunals in matters which Christians might settle among themselves (1 Corinthians 6:1, etc.); and many might go so far as to ignore the authority of such tribunals over the saints at all. Peter and John had at the first defied the authority even of the Sanhedrin in matters touching conscience (Acts 4:19); and many might be slow to distinguish between temporal and spiritual spheres of jurisdiction. St. Paul, therefore, lays down the rule that the civil government, in whatsoever hands it might be, was, no less than the Church, a Divine institution for the maintenance of order in the world, to be submitted to and obeyed by Christians within the whole sphere of its legitimate authority. He does not refer to cases in which it might become necessary to obey God rather than man: his purpose hero does not call on him to do so; nor were the circumstances so far such as to bring such cases into prominence; for he was writing in the earlier part of Nero’s reign, before any general persecution of Christians had begun. Nor does he touch on the question whether it may be right in some cases for subjects to resist usurped power or tyranny, or to take part in political revolutions, and even fight for freedom. Such a question was apart from his subject, which is the general duty of obedience to the law and government under which we are placed by Providence. This is the only passage in which he treats the subject at length and definitely. In a doctrinal and practical treatise like this Epistle, addressed as an apologia pro fide sua to the metropolis of the world and the seat of government, it was fitting that he should express clearly the attitude of the Church with regard to the civil order. But his teaching in other Epistles is in accordance with this; as where (1 Corinthians 7:21) he bids slaves acquiesce in the existing law of slavery, and (1 Timothy 2:1, etc.) he desires especially prayers to be made in behalf of kings and rulers. And he himself notably carried out his principles in this regard (cf. Acts 23:1-35. 5; Acts 25:8-11). There is a closely similar passage in the First Epistle of St. Peter (1 Peter 2:12-18). Romans 13:1 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of (rather, from) God: the powers that be are ordained of God. It is of God’s ordering that there should be human governments and human laws. Without them there could be no order, security, or progress among mankind. Imperfect as they may often be, and in some instances oppressive and unjust, still they exist for a purpose of good, and form part of the Divine order for the government of the world. In this sense all are from God, and ordained of God; and in submitting to them we are submitting to God. Romans 13:2-5 Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, withstandeth the ordinance of God: and they which withstand shall receive to themselves condemnation (i.e. really God’s, operating through the human "power;" not meaning damnation in the common sense of the word). For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same. It is the theory of the laws of all civilized governments to uphold justice, and only to punish what is wrong; and in the main they do so. The principles of the Roman law were just, and Paul himself found protection from its officers and tribunals, whose fairness he had, and had reason to have, more confidence in than in the tender mercy of either Gentile or Jewish zealots (cf. Acts 19:35, seq.; Acts 21:31, seq.; Acts 22:30; Acts 24:10; Acts 25:10, Acts 25:11; Acts 26:30, seq.). As has been observed already, the Neronian persecutions had not yet begun. For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, an avenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. Wrath here expresses the familiar idea of the Divine wrath against evil-doing, for the execution of which, in the sphere of human law, the magistrate is the appointed instrument (see note on Romans 12:19). Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience’ sake. Not only for fear of penal consequences, but because it is your duty, whatever might ensue, to submit to the ordinance of God. Similarly, in 1 Peter 2:13, submission to every ordinance of man is enjoined "for the Lord’s sake (διὰτὸνΚύριον)." Romans 13:6 For for this cause ye pay. And what the apostle means may be that the same principle on which they paid their taxes extended to all legal requirements) tribute also: for they (i.e. the officers who exact tribute) are God’s ministers (not, as in Romans 13:4, διακόνοι, but λειτουργοὶ. This word, with its correlatives, is used in the New Testament especially with reference to the ceremonial services of the temple, and to their counterpart in Christian devotion; but not exclusively so (see Romans 15:27; Philippians 2:25). In classical Greek it denotes peculiarly persons performing public duties, or works of public use. This well-known use of the word may have suggested it here, the apostle meaning to say that such as in any such way served the state were in fact serving God), attending continually upon this very thing; i.e. on λειτουργία for God. Romans 13:7 Render to all their dues; tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour. Whatever, either by law or by the constituted order of society, may be due to any, in the way of deference and honour, as well as payments, Christians, as members of society, are bound to render. Romans 13:8-10 From specific admonitions on this subject, the apostle passes naturally to the principle which, in these regards as well as others, should inspire all our dealings with our fellow-men. Owe no man anything, but to love one another: for he that loveth another (literally, the other, meaning the same as his neighbour) hath fulfilled law. Νόμον here is anarthrous, denoting law in general, not the Mosaic Law in particular, though the instances of transgression that follow are from the Decalogue. The idea of the passage is but a carrying out of our Lord’s saying, Matthew 22:39, Matthew 22:40. We find it also in Galatians 5:14 more shortly expressed. For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended (or, summed up) in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. Love worketh no ill to his neighbour; therefore love is the fulfilling of law. Romans 13:11-14 There is now interposed among the particular admonitions a call to watchfulness, with a view to holiness in all relations of life, on the ground that the day is at hand. There can be little, if any, doubt that the apostle had in view the second coming of Christ, which he with others supposed might be close at hand, Our Lord had said that of that day none knew but the Father, and that it would come unexpectedly. Further, in the same addresses to the disciples before his death in which these things were said, he seems to have disclosed a vista of the future, after the manner of the ancient prophets, in which more immediate and more distant fulfilments of the prophetic vision were not clearly distinguished; so that words which we now perceive to have pointed to the destruction of Jerusalem, which was typical of the final judgments, might easily have been understood as referring to the latter. Such are, "This generation shall not pass till all these things be fulfilled". Hence it was natural that the apostolic Church should regard the second advent as probably imminent. We find in the apostolic Epistles several intimations of this expectation (cf. 1 Thessalonians 4:13, seq.; 2 Corinthians 5:2-5; Philippians 4:5; Hebrews 10:25; 1 Peter 4:7; 1 John 2:18, 1 John 2:28; Revelation 22:20); and though it was not realized in the event, the authority of the apostles as inspired teachers is not thus disparaged, this being the very thing which Christ had said must remain unknown to all. Nor does their teaching, enforced by this expectation, lose its force to us; for, though "the Lord delayeth his coming," and may still delay it, yet to each of us at least this present world is fast passing away, and the Lord may be close at hand to call us out of it. The duty of watchfulness and preparedness remains unchanged. The Parousia or, as it is called in the pastoral Epistles, the Epiphany (in 2 Thessalonians 2:8, ἐπιφανείατῆςπαρουσίας) of Christ is here, as elsewhere, presented under the figure of the day appearing (cf. 1 Corinthians 3:13; Ephesians 5:14; l Thessalonians Ephesians 5:4; Hebrews 10:25; 2 Peter 1:19), the previous ages of the world being regarded as the time of night. The figure is found in the prophets with reference to that day—the coming day of the Lord (cf. e.g. Isaiah 9:2; Isaiah 60:1-3; Malachi 4:2), But though the day has not yet come, Christians are viewed as already in the radiance of its dawn, in which they can walk as children of the day, and be on the watch, and not be surprised asleep, or doing the deeds of darkness, when the full daylight bursts upon them. For in the first advent of Christ the day dawned, though, to those who loved darkness rather than light, but as a light that shineth in darkness, and the darkness comprehended it not (John 1:5, seq.; John 3:19, seq.; cf. 2 Peter 1:19; 1 John 2:8; and also Luke 1:78, seq.; Luke 2:32). Romans 13:11, Romans 13:12 And that (for a similar use of καὶτοῦτο, or καὶταῦτα, cf. 1 Corinthians 6:8; Ephesians 2:8; Philippians 1:28; Hebrews 10:25; Hebrews 11:12), knowing that it is high time for you to awake out of sleep (more literally, that it is the hour for you to be already roused out of sleep); for now is our salvation nearer (or, now is salvation nearer to us. The salvation here meant is "the restitution of all things" (Acts 3:21), the "manifestation of the sons of God" (Romans 8:19), "the regeneration" (Matthew 19:28), the "gathering together in one of all things in Christ," (Ephesians 1:10), which is yet to come) than when we believed (i.e. than when we first became believers; cf. Acts 19:2; 1 Corinthians 3:5; 1 Corinthians 15:2; Galatians 2:16. Time has been gradually advancing since then, bringing the consummation we look for ever nearer). The night is far spent, the day is at hand: let us therefore put off the works of darkness, and let us put on the armour of light. Former habits of life are here, as elsewhere, regarded as clothing once worn—a man’s habitual investment, though not part of his real self—which is to be put off (cf. Ephesians 4:22; Colossians 3:8, Colossians 3:9); instead whereof are to he put on, as a new investment, the graces and virtues, supplied to us from the region of light, which constitute the Christian character (cf. 1 Thessalonians 5:8; 2 Corinthians 6:7; Ephesians 6:11, seq.). In all these passages the new clothing to be put on is designated as armour, the idea being carried out in detail in Ephesians 6:11, etc.; and thus the further conception is introduced of Christians being as soldiers on the watch during the watches of the night, awaiting daybreak, equipped with arms of heavenly proof, careful not to sleep on their post, or to allow themselves in revelry or any deeds of shame, such as are done in the night under the cover of darkness. Romans 13:13, Romans 13:14 As in the day, let us walk honestly, and of the things done in secret of which it is a shame to speak; cf. Ephesians 5:11, Ephesians 5:12); not in rioting and drunkenness, not in chambering and wantonness, not in strife and envying (rather, jealousy, denoting jealous wrath, cf. Acts 13:45). But put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ. The figure of a new investment being renewed from Ephesians 5:12, it is here Christ himself who is to be put on. So also Galatians 3:27. For the idea implied, of. Ephesians 4:23, Ephesians 4:24; Colossians 3:12; ch. 8:9, 10; 1 Corinthians 6:15, 1 Corinthians 6:17. "Induere autem Christum hic significat virtute Spiritus ejus undique nos muniri, qua idonei ad omnes sanctitatis partes reddamur. Sic enim instauratur in nobis imago Dei, quae unicum est animae ornamentum" (Calvin). It may be observed that in Galatians 3:27 Christians are said to have already put on Christ in their baptism; here they are exhorted still to do so. There is no real contradiction; they are but exhorted to realize in actual life the meaning of their baptism. And make not provision for the flesh, to fulfil the lusts thereof (literally, unto lusts). Romans 13:1-7 Loyalty, There was danger, in the first age of Christianity, lest the nature of the kingdom of the Lord Jesus should be misunderstood even by its subjects, and misrepresented by those without. A spiritual empire was a new conception, and carnal minds were prone to confound the dominion over souls with civil and political authority. Hence the importance and appropriateness of the admonitions so emphatically addressed by the apostle to the Christians of Rome. I. THE OF CIVIL . By this the apostle understood the actually constituted power of the state. The Roman emperor was the head and chief of the greater part of the population of the then known world, and Rome was the centre of political rule and authority. The proconsuls and propraetors represented in the provinces the imperial majesty and sway of senate and of emperor. But it is evident that the view of civil power taken by the apostle was equally applicable to monarchies and to republics. Whatever the form of government, whatever the designation of the ruler, whatever the rank of the administrator of the law, authority was recognized as of Divine origin and right. It has sometimes been deemed a reproach to the apostle that he should have written thus when Nero was on the throne. But this fact rather emphasizes the principle that the authority is Divine, although the person or persons who wield it may be unworthy of the trust. Nero was at this time under the influence of the wise and moderate counsels of Seneca and of Burrhus, yet this language which Paul employed would probably have been unaltered had the apostle been writing during the subsequent and infamous period of the tyrant’s sway. It would be straining this passage to deduce from it "The right Divine of kings to govern wrong," and it would be unjust to argue from it that it is always unlawful to resist and to dethrone a tyrant. But we may learn to regard subordination, rule, subjection, loyalty, as all part of a Divine order imposed upon human society by the Lord of all. II. THE SCOPE OF LOYALTY. 1. Respect and honour are due from the governed to the governor. Even where there is a lack of those qualities which command personal respect, honour may be rendered to the office which is held, and the duties of which are faithfully fulfilled. 2. The payment of taxes and tributes is required. In this precept Paul followed the teaching of his Master, "Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s." Subjects are not responsible for the use made of the money which is exacted from them by just authority. When a king who has no constitutional right to levy taxes without the consent of a parliament demands money upon his own authority, such a demand may be refused without disobedience to the injunction of the text. 3. Obedience and subjection are enjoined. The extent and range of this injunction are very large. "Every soul"—every intelligent member of society—is under an obligation to obey; and resistance to the ruler is resistance to God, and entails just punishment and retribution. 4. Virtue generally is commended as contributive to the well-being of society. Good works are to evince the sincerity of the Christian’s faith. The Roman law was the highest expression the ancient world attained of justice in the relations subsisting between man and man. It has been the foundation of the codes of many civilized Christian nations in modern times. Obedience to the law was the duty of every good citizen, every well-wisher of society, every true member of the human family. For the law was the sanction of virtue and righteousness. Doubtless there have been and are unjust laws; yet it is the duty of the citizen to obey them when obedience does not come into conflict with the higher duty to God. III. THE GROUNDS OF LOYALTY. These, as adduced by St. Paul, are two. 1. Personal considerations are advanced. The wrath of the magistrate is to be feared; rulers are a terror to the evil; they that resist shall receive retribution; the ruler bears not the sword in vain. Such motives are almost the only motives to which the coarse and vicious are accessible. They are motives to which none are altogether superior. The consequences of injustice have to be borne in mind by those who are liable to the passions of cupidity or of revenge 2. Religious motives are presented. Government is an ordinance of God, and rulers are the ministers of God. A had subject, then, cannot be a good Christian. In our own days, individualism is carried to such an extent that authority is often disdained and defied, even by those who are by no means the dregs of society, who make pretensions to intelligence and virtue. It is well, therefore, that the inspired teaching should be pondered which attaches importance so great to order, patriotism, and loyalty. Romans 13:8-10 Love and law. To the unthinking, and at first sight, there seems a contradiction between law, which expresses authority, and is sanctioned by force, and love, which is spontaneous, and is of the heart. Christ himself, however, brought the two into harmony when he said, "If ye love me, keep my commandments;" and the apostle, in this passage, shows that, really and essentially, the two are one. I. THE TRUE OF SOCIAL LIFE IS LOVE. The new commandment which Christ gave was, "Love one another;" and his peculiar canon of conduct was, "Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself." Of this principle we may remark that: 1. It is in harmony with our own constitution. Our true nature is to live in mutual affection and confidence; it is the depraved nature that develops hatred, malice, and uncharitableness. 2. It is imposed and sanctioned by the Divine Head of the new humanity, the Lawgiver of the spiritual kingdom. 3. It provides the radical cure for human ills. 4. It has not only a negative, it has also a positive virtue; it is the proper and natural origin of the several virtues, supplying their motive, prompting to their exercise. II. THE OF THIS IN . The apostle, whose mind was as thoroughly ethical and practical as it was theological and doctrinal, traced the working of this principle of love, in preserving human nature and protecting human society from the vices, crimes, and sins which have cursed the world. In this passage he teaches us that love must act in keeping Christians from wronging their neighbours. He whose heart is filled with true love will neither covet nor steal his neighbour’s goods, nor take his neighbour’s life, nor make inroads upon his neighbour’s domestic happiness, nor in any way inflict injury upon his neighbour’s interests, or deprive him of his rights. For to love our fellow-men is to count their welfare our own, and to do go them as we would they should do to us. III. THE OF THIS . It may be argued that the counsels of the apostle are unpractical; that whilst love is a cure for human ills, it is not shown how love may be acquired, any more than it is how sin may be avoided. But the fact is that revelation links together the love of man and the love of God, and teaches us that the one way to the cherishing of Divine love is the reception of the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ, who is the Manifestation of Divine love to human hearts. "We love him, because he first loved us;" "He that loveth God loveth his brother also." Romans 13:11-14 A startling summons. The admonition of this passage is especially addressed to Christians; yet to Christians who stand peculiarly in need of a rousing appeal and summons, to call them to a more spiritual and a more watchful life. I. THE CRISIS OF LIFE. 1. The night is well-nigh gone. Between our Lord’s first and second comings stretches the dawn of the world. Behind his first coming lay the night of humanity. Beyond his second advent the daylight beams, with the brightness of knowledge, of holiness, of happiness, of glory. 2. Salvation is nearer than ever. In one sense, indeed, salvation is a present blessing; for we are delivered from condemnation if we are in Christ Jesus. In another sense it is future; for we shall hereafter receive the end of our faith, even the salvation of our souls. It is something to be looked forward to with keenest joy of hope, something the prospect of which may well inspire us to endurance and to toil. II. THE SUMMONS OF GOD. 1. To spiritual energy. To such a period, drowsy, slumberous inactivity is utterly inappropriate. 2. To the renunciation of all that interferes with the fulfilment of our calling and the realization of our hope. 3. To a spiritual warfare and campaign. 4. To purity of body and of mind, as those who are in their whole nature redeemed, that in their whole nature they may be consecrated. Romans 13:11-14 Night and day. Christian motives are brought forward to incite to moral duties. We are called upon to do right, not only by the voices of expediency and of authority, but by the voice of revelation. Christians are addressed as those who know the seasons, who discern the signs of the times, who regard the present as a period of probation, of discipline, of education, and whose gaze is ever forwards, whose hope is in their Lord’s return to judge and to save. I. THE OF THE PAST. "The night is far spent." 1. The spiritual night of the world is passing away. The true Light is shining, and the radiance of his beams is illumining the darkest and most distant shores. 2. The night of time is departing, and eternity, resurrection, the new heavens and the new earth, are about to dawn. 3. The night of life is nearly spent, and the day of immortality approaches. If this is the case with all, how manifestly is it so with the aged! II. THE OF THE FUTURE. 1. "The day is at hand." So far as the opportunity for labour is concerned, we may admit that the night cometh, when no man can work." But, in another sense, it is a welcome truth that "the day dawns, and the shadows flee away." Full light shall soon be shed upon our intellectual and spiritual darkness. The fears, the ignorance, the doubts of the present shall cease to be; we shall see Christ as he is, and we shall know even as we are known. 2. "Salvation is nearer to us than when we first believed" A fortress is beleaguered by the forces of the foe. The garrison, long besieged, is feeble, weary, and all but exhausted, ill supplied with provisions and ammunition, and in great straits. But relief is planned, and is approaching. At night the prospect seemed dark. But now, when the morning breaks, the besieged, looking from their walls, behold the banners of the deliverer drawing near, and hear the welcome music of his march. Salvation is at hand! It is in this light that we are encouraged to look at life, at time. Now we are besieged by our spiritual foe, and our condition is often apparently desperate. But our redemption draweth nigh, and our salvation is nearer. The perfection of our salvation, the fulfilment of the promise of victory,—this is in the future. III. THE DUTY OF THE PRESENT. This is not the time to indulge mere sentiment, whether of retrospect or of anticipation. The living present demands all our energy. 1. "It is time to awake out of sleep;" to arouse ourselves from indifference to concern, from half-belief to earnest faith, from inactivity to zeal. 2. To "cast off the works of darkness." By the clothing, the impediments thus designated, we understand the negligences, the sins, which are inconsistent with true spirituality. 3. To "put on the armour of light." Holiness and diligence, patience and devotedness,—these are the spiritual exercises appropriate to those who have a hope so glorious and promises so sure as ours. Let the soldier see to his weapons, the servant to his work, the steward to his trust! . Every crisis of human life, of Church history; every day which tells of the flight of time; every instance of human mortality,—speaks loudly to us, summoning us, as children of the day, to live as in anticipation of the Divine Deliverer’s speedy and welcome approach. Romans 13:11-14 Awake and arm! It is strange that, at the very commencement of a new dispensation, the prospect of its close should be so often presented to the view. No sooner had Christ’s first coming ended, than his people were taught to anticipate his second coming. Thus the thoughts and affections of Christians are clustered around their Lord, and the revelation of the past suggests the approaching epiphany. The contrasts of this passage are very striking. When carefully analyzed, they appear— I. As applied to . 1. The night of danger is nearly over. This applies to the individual, to any community, to the whole Church. 2. The morning of deliverance is dawning. An inspiration and comfort to the pilgrims, the soldiers, who are often oppressed by the gloom of the present perils. II. As applied to . 1. The works of night are to be abandoned. These belong to the era which now lies in the remote distance, and from which Christ has emancipated his people. 2. The life of the spiritual day is to be adopted. If the flesh and its lusts are to be crucified, what is to be crowned? The Lord Jesus is to be "put on," the armour of light is to be taken and worn; and the Christian soldier is to go forth to meet the coming day, with his face towards the rising sun, with his heart bounding with delight at his great Captain’s long-expected appearance. BY C.H. IRWIN Romans 13:1-7 The Christian as citizen. The duty of Christians as citizens is in our day not sufficiently recognized. Many Christians keep aloof from public life and the duties of citizenship because of the political corruption and party strife which are so common. Others, again, enter into public duties, but seem to leave their religion behind them. The result is a sad want of Christian statesmanship and of Christian legislation. I. THE THE OF . "There is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God" (Romans 13:1). This is not to be understood as meaning that every individual ruler is ordained of God. That would make the Divine Being responsible for many acts of despotism and oppression. We might as well say that every minister of religion who had received the form of ordination was therefore chosen of God, no matter what his personal character might be. The meaning rather is that government is an ordinance of God—that God has ordained or appointed it, that there should be authority and rulers. Government is necessary: 1. For the protection of life and property. 2. For the repression of crime. "Rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil" (Romans 13:3). Governors, says St. Peter, are appointed "for the punishment of evil-doers" (1 Peter 2:14). 3. For the rewarding and encouraging of virtue. "Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same" (Romans 13:3). So St. Peter also speaks of governors as "a praise to them that do well." Wise rulers will not only repress crime, but they will seek to encourage well-doing. They will show special favour to those who, by their own character and efforts, promote morality and temperance and honesty, and thus help to make government easy. How often do rulers forget this! How often the Christian people of a nation are ignored or even discouraged, while the godless and the immoral are high in place and favour! II. THE THE OF RULERS. Rulers are here called "ministers of God" (Romans 13:4, Romans 13:6). Our sovereign entitles herself "Victoria, by the grace of God." All who are concerned in government have a solemn responsibility, whether they be kings or queens, ministers of state, members of the legislature, judges, magistrates, or jurymen. All must appear one day before a higher tribunal. Then the judge will be asked, "Have you done justice as between man and man?" The juryman will be asked, "Have you rendered a verdict according to the evidence?" The sovereign will be asked. "Have you been faithful to your coronation vows?" Therefore the Christian should pray for rulers. "For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty" (1 Timothy 2:2). The Christian should do all he can to secure good rulers. What we need in our day is less of party politics, and more of Christian polities. Christian people, Christian Churches, should band themselves together, laying aside all political and all ecclesiastical differences, to secure Christian representatives, Christian law- makers for our professedly Christian nation. III. THE HIS OWN . There are two duties distinctly specified here for the Christian citizen. 1. Obedience. "Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers" (Romans 13:1); "Whosoever resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God" (Romans 13:2); "Wherefore ye must needs be subject" (Romans 13:5). If the law is to be upheld, there must be an obedient and submissive spirit on the part of every good citizen. Yet there are limits to all this. We are to interpret this passage in the light of other Bible teaching and the examples which it sets before us. The Bible does not teach the doctrine of passive obedience or non-resistance. At Babylon, Daniel resisted the reigning power. The royal mandate was issued, but Daniel did not obey it. "He kneeled upon his knees three times a day, and prayed, and gave thanks before his God, as he did aforetime." The Apostles Peter and John declined to obey the Jewish council at Jerusalem when they were commanded to speak no more in the Name of Jesus. They boldly answered, "Whether it be right in the sight of God to hearken unto you more than unto God, judge ye. For we cannot, but speak the things which we have seen and hear. Where the law of a nation or the command of an earthly ruler conflicts with the law of God, then it is clearly the Christian’s duty to obey God rather than men. The English people in their past history have acted upon this principle. Twice under the reign of the Stuart sovereigns the subjects of the realm asserted, on conscientious grounds, their right of revolution and resistance. So also did the Covenanters of Scotland. Yet resistance to constituted authority should ever be a last resort, and is only to be resorted to when all more peaceful means have utterly failed to obtain justice and redress of wrongs. 2. Taxation. "For this cause pay ye tribute also" (verse 6). This also was the teaching of Christ. No government can be maintained without expense. National defences, public institutions, all of which have for their object the protection and the well-being of all the citizens, require to be kept up. Every citizen is responsible for bearing his share in meeting expenditure for the common good. He may not approve of every item of expenditure, but that is no valid reason for refusing to contribute his share of taxation, where the representatives of the nation have decreed that the expenditure is wise and necessary. This rule, of course, has its exception also in the case of any expenditure which would do violence to the individual conscience. 3. There are other practical duties. The Christian will ever cooperate with rulers in securing and promoting peace and temperance, morality and honesty, truthfulness and justice. All these virtues are necessary to national well-being. Government would be easy if every citizen was a Christian, and if every Christian would realize his duties as a citizen. The words of Sir Arthur Helps (’Friends in Council’) may be fittingly quoted here: "He who does not bring into government, whether as governor or subject, some religious feeling, some higher motive than expediency, is likely to make but an indifferent governor or an indifferent subject Without piety there will be no good government."—C.H.I. Romans 13:11-14 The Christian’s duty in the present age. The Christian is not to be insensible to the movements of the world. "Knowing the time," says the apostle (Romans 13:11). Mr. Spurgeon says he reads the newspapers to see how God is governing the world. It is well for us to know what are the current beliefs and motives of our fellow-men. I. THE ’S . 1. "The night is far spent." (1) The forces of evil are far spent. Some Christians are always looking on the dark side of things. They see no traces of the breaking day. With them it is always night. They would have us believe, with Canon Taylor, that missions are a failure. They would have us believe, with Lord Wemyss, that prohibition of the liquor traffic is a failure. They would have us believe that Sunday closing is a failure. But it is those who want such movements to fail that usually originate such a cry. There is no failure in the forces of right. Failure is written on the forces of sin. Its night is far spent. (2) The clouds of mystery will soon be lifted. There are difficulties in reconciling religion and science. Yet the. difficulties are only apparent. They are only temporary clouds. There are difficulties in God’s providence that we cannot understand. But by-and-by they will all be made plain. Every mystery will be solved. "Now we know in part; but then shall we know even as also we are known." (3) The dark hours of pain and sorrow will soon be over. How dark is the hour of sickness! how dark the hour of bereavement! What shadows disappointment causes to pass over our lives! But the night is far spent. "Weeping may endure for a night, but joy cometh in the morning." 2. "The day is at hand." The day of our Saviour’s coming is rapidly drawing nearer. Already we may hear the sound of his chariot-wheels. Gradually his kingdom has been making progress in the earth, his truth has been gaining the victory over error. The Reformation shook off the dust of centuries from the Word of God. The discovery of printing had already prepared the way for the spread of the emancipated Bible. Old kingdoms that encouraged error and fostered ecclesiastical despotism have been falling. New nations have arisen to sway the destinies of the world—the nations of the Bible-loving, liberty-loving, Anglo-Saxon race. Old wrongs have been redressed. Our King is coming. "The day is at hand." II. THE ’S CALL. 1. A call to activity. "Now it is high time to awake out of sleep" (Romans 13:11). It is plain that this exhortation is addressed to Christians, for the writer adds, "for now is our salvation nearer than when we believed." Many Christians are asleep. They are inactive and idle, and are doing nothing to prepare the way of the Lord. It may be addressed also to the unconverted. This very passage, the closing part of this thirteenth chapter, was the means of converting St. Augustine. 2. A call to amendment. "Let us cast off the works of darkness" (Romans 13:12). Some works are literally works of darkness, as for example those specified in the thirteenth verse. Drunkenness and impurity are most practised in the night. "They that be drunken are drunken in the night." But "works of darkness" may be regarded as including all sinful works. Sin loves concealment. The Christian is to cast off everything that will not bear the light, to have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness. "The day is at hand." How shall we abide the day of our Lord’s coming if we do not, by Divine help, separate ourselves from sin? 3. A call to conflict. "Let us put on the armour of light" (Romans 13:12). We are to wage war with our own temptations, and with the evil that is in the world. Let our armour be the armour of light. Let us not fight the world with its own weapons—with hatred, or bitterness, or deceit. Let our weapons be good weapons—the weapons of truth, justice, love. They will conquer. Let us never do evil that good may come. 4. A call to Christ-likeness. "Put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ" (Romans 13:14). That is to say, "Be clothed with his spirit." This is the secret of strength. Like Sir Galahad, whose strength was as the strength of ten because his heart was pure, the man who is Christ-like in spirit will overcome all temptations, and will grapple victoriously with all difficulties. This is emphatically a call which the Christian needs to hear in the present age, when there is so much in the Church as well as in the world that is contrary to the spirit of Christ. Let us, then, hear the trumpet-call of duty, and, as we go forth, let us brace up our spirits with the inspiring thought that "the night is far spent, and the day is at hand."—C.H.I. BY T.F. LOCKYER Romans 13:1-7 Christian submission. We now pass from ecclesiastical to civil relations. Because the Christian has entered upon a new brotherhood in Christ, he does not cease to belong to the old brotherhood of natural society. And as in the spiritual brotherhood humility and love are the twin principles that should regulate all our conduct, so in the natural commonwealth of the state there should be, analogously, submission towards the powers, and a love-inspired justice towards private members of the same. In these verses is inculcated the duty of conscientious submission to state authorities. I. THE OF . The submission to authority is spoken of as of a twofold nature—obedience to law generally, and payment of all dues. And the spirit in which such obedient and loyal conduct should be exercised is the spirit of reverence and honour. For even in state duties the heart should be concerned equally with the life. 1. It is reasonable, then, that we: (1) Obey the laws in general well-doing. For viewed merely as a human institution of a utilitarian nature, the authority of law is for our good, if we obey. "Do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise from the same." (2) And is it not equally reasonable that we pay the dues to constituted authorities?—tribute, custom. For here again we are only contributing towards the expenses of our own protection. 2. But our obedience and payment of dues will only be properly rendered by us, and will only tend to the proper rendering of the same by others, if our heart go with our deed. Let there then, as is reasonable, be fear, let there be honour, towards those to whom fear, to whom honour is due. I. THE OF . The natural man, on the grounds of mere reason, then, should submit to authority, with deed and with heart. But surely the Christian man should submit on some higher ground than this? It is not only reasonable, it is divinely right, that such submission be rendered to the powers. 1. It is right that we: (1) Obey law. For the authority which gives the law is not arbitrarily instituted by man; it is of God’s appointment. Generally: for "there is no power but of God;" i.e. whenever the exigencies of society demand that one shall exercise power over others, these very exigencies show that the exercise of some such power is divinely purposed. Specially: for in his providential governance of the world he has foreseen and ordained the exercise of the power by these very individuals who for the time have authority committed to them. And can a Christian resist God’s’ ordinance? In so doing he will not merely be punished by man, but judged by God. The sword is God’s sword; the wrath, God’s wrath. (2) And so of tribute and custom. This is not merely a payment because of personal interest accruing, but in recognition of their high office as "ministers of God’s service." They fulfil a Divine vocation, and, like the priests in the temple, must be supported as servants of God. 2. So the spirit in which we obey and pay tribute is to be one of reverence and honour, not only on the lower ground of the reasonableness of the same, but because in these human powers we discern God. Here, then, as in the whole of life, the religious penetrates and sanctifies the natural. There is to be a perpetual transfiguration, in our eyes, of the human with the Divine. This is but an application of the injunction, "Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God."—T.F.L. Romans 13:8-10 Christian righteousness. We here pass from public to private relations. Still in the civic sphere, viewing men as men, not as Christian brethren. And reminded by thought just advanced, the thought of tribute, custom, etc., as being "due" to those in power, that there are dues also which we owe each one to his neighbour. And it is of the very essence of justice that we "render to all their dues;" or, in the words of the eighth verse, that we "owe no man anything." Here, then, we may consider the justice which binds together human society; and the love by which the justice is fulfilled. I. JUSTICE. Justice is the bond of human society. To do to others as we may reasonably expect them to do to us is indeed the golden rule which conserves all security and peace among men. To be just towards them is to respect their rights, And what are the rights of man? God has set them forth strongly, in their essentials, in that Decalogue which was the Divine code of justice for a barbarous nation. Think of them—rights without which life amongst others would be intolerable. 1. The right of life. "Thou shalt not kill." Sacredness of existence; but frailty. So precious, and yet so easily destroyed. And in wantonness, or in malice, man may destroy his brother-man. But the "Thou shalt not kill" sounds in his ears, a spoken law of God: the right of life must be conserved. 2. The right of sacred relationship, dearer than the right of life. "Thou shalt not commit adultery." Organic union of men. Relationships interwoven into human nature husband and wife, parent and child, brother and brother. The conjugal relation the foundation of the rest. Any tampering with this relation is, in its degree, adultery, and loosens the whole relational fabric; any violation of the sacrament of this relation, "They twain shall be one flesh," is in the highest degree adultery, and goes far to destroy the whole relational fabric. But the "Thou shalt not commit adultery" sounds in our ears, a spoken law of God: the rights of sacred relationship must be conserved. 3. The right of property. "Thou shalt not steal." An instinctive acquisitiveness in man; he lords it over the world. This acquisitiveness sanctioned by God: "have dominion." Same acquisitiveness, perverted from its proper use, may lead us to acquire that to which we have no right, to "steal" the property of our brother. But the "Thou shalt not steal" sounds in our ears: God utters his sanction of the sacredness of property. 4. Fundamental to all these main rights of man is the right to be secure from even the unlawful desire of a brother. "Thou shalt not covet." For "out of the heart proceed," etc. (Matthew 15:19). So to covet another’s life, or wife, or property, even in the first faint beginning of desire, is to allow the lust from which all evil flows; and, as against "sin in its beginning," the "Thou shalt not covet" of God is uttered with solemn emphasis as the last commandment. II. LOVE. The last commandment? Nay, for Christ has said, "A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another." We have seen how this is the bond of the new brotherhood in Christ; it is set forth here as the Christian’s own safeguard of the rights of man. As a man amongst men you must respect the rights of men, i.e. you must fulfil the law; as a Christian amongst men you must love them for the Lord’s sake, and so you assure your respect for all their rights, for "love is the fulfilment of the Law." Need this be proved? Law says sternly, "No ill to one’s neighbour;" love says, "Give all good." Ah! here is a yet Diviner impulse, and covering a broader ground. And the Christian will be content with nothing less than this Diviner impulse and broader ground. But if there be the higher impulse, the lower shall be secure; if there be the wider range, the narrower shall be covered. Yes; love men, and you will work no ill. The importance of justice amongst men demands that, as good citizens, we see to it that justice is everywhere advanced; hence our parliaments, our courts. But that justice may be advanced, to say nothing of yet higher ends, let us, as Christians, cherish this principle which constitutes the second great commandment, "Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself."—T.F.L. Romans 13:11-14 The day breaketh! "And this"—the work of progressive sanctification, in all its aspects and relations—this surely claims our strong attention now, when the day of God is nigh unto dawning! For, visibly to us, the shadows pass and the morning breaks. It is the night-watch still, but the day is at hand. We have here to consider—the nearness of the day of God; our full awaking. I. THE DAY OF GOD. In and through all the declarations of the Scriptures there mingles this warning note—the day of God will come! Men seem to have their day, and work their will; God will have his day, and will work his will. We must not narrow the meaning of this presentment of the Scriptures: whenever God interferes amid the doings of men to show forth his power, his day has come. In our individual life-histories, in the histories of nations, as well as in the larger history of the race, God has come, does come, many times and in many ways. For mercy? Yes; to deliver those who trust in him and seek to work his will. And for judgment: for "wheresoever the carcase is, there will the eagles be gathered together." But amid these many manifestations of God’s power, there are some which stand out conspicuously, like the mountain-peaks among the lower hills. Such was the advent of the Christ, looming large before the vision of Old Testament seers. Such is the second advent of the Christ, looming large to the view of the apostles and to us. For mercy and for judgment was the former; for mercy and for judgment shall be the latter. To the Christian believer, for fall salvation! Oh, what a hope is this! It has glowed before us as we have traced God’s purposes declared in foregoing chapters; Paul would have it burn as our beacon-light, ever brighter and more near! A beacon-light? Nay, rather it is the dawn of the new day, when the shining of God’s full-orbed love shall scatter for ever all the lingering shades of night. II. OUR FULL AWAKING. But what shall be our attitude in view of such a daybreak? We must surely be watchers for the morning, children of light! The very regeneration of those to whom he writes was truly an awaking out of sleep; but there might be need still for a more thorough arousal and readiness. Nay, is there not, in each one, this need? The works of darkness will cling to us, if we do not ever resolutely cast them off. We may forget that the day is shining, and sink back into our sleep. 1. The works of darkness? Yes, such works as pertain to the corruption of the night-time of the world—base revelry, impure pleasures, passion, and strife. The works of the flesh, which are manifest (Galatians 5:19-21). And oh, what a night-time the world has had! what a night-time has been ours! We have loved the darkness, because our deeds were evil. 2. But we, as children of light, are to put on the armour of light, to walk honestly, as in the day. The gleam of that dayspring has already caught our vision and lit up our brow; it is to irradiate all our path. We are to walk as though the cloudless eternity were about us now. Your citizenship is in heaven! So then, while the children of the darkness "make provision for the flesh, to fulfil the lusts thereof," seek ever to gratify their low desires, and make their whole life subservient to this, we are to "put on the Lord Jesus Christ." He is to be our clothing and adornment; the pure, spiritual nature which he showed to the world is to be our arraying for the new sunrise, bringing the world’s new year! And that glorious goal of our best hopes, "salvation" in its fullest scope and working, is "nearer to us than when we first believed." Let us gladden our hearts and rekindle all our longings. We are not to be ever battling, weary, sad; but he whom we look for shall come; yes, "the second time, unto salvation!"—T.F.L. BY S.R. Romans 13:1-6 Submission to constituted authority. The reception of a new truth requires its adjustment to previously accepted truths. The introduction of a new system like Christianity necessitated an examination of its relationship to existing systems of government. There was a danger of Jewish fanaticism being fanned into heated sedition in Jewish converts to the gospel by the very joy of finding the Messiah and of hopes concerning a literal temporal kingdom. And the novelty of the views opened up before Gentile converts might easily beget in them a feeling of freedom from and superiority to all law and custom. Yet the advice to such, in order to be practical and effective, must be simple and concise. The apostle, therefore, enunciates a principle, and leaves its limitations to be afterwards discovered. I. THE DIVINE FOUNT OF . Government is traced to its source in God. "Order is Heaven’s first law." Where no order reigns, there is no security, no progress to better things. Absolute equality is impossible amongst men; society has no safeguards, no cohesion, without a recognized tribunal of authority. Whether this authority is taken and exercised as a matter of course by the wisest or strongest, or is the acknowledged result of station conferred by the community, the necessity for such leadership and oversight manifests the will of God, and authority as such is seen to emanate from him. The Creator controls the works of his hands. The camp of Israel maintained a certain disposition of tents and tribes at rest and on the march, because of a Divine ordinance. Disorder would ill have befitted the presence of the Monarch Jehovah. Whatever the forms which government assumes, we are compelled to ascend in thought by rising steps and hierarchies up to him who sitteth on the great white throne, the mighty Arbiter of all events, the Judge of quick and dead. Recall the majestic passage from Hooker: "Of Law there can be no less acknowledged than that her seat is the bosom of God, her voice the harmony of the world: all things in heaven and earth do her homage, the very least as feeling her care, and the greatest as not exempted from her power: both angels and men and creatures of what condition soever, though each in different sort and manner, yet all with uniform consent, admiring her as the mother of their peace and joy." II. THE HUMAN OF JUSTICE. "The powers that be are ordained of God." Not that he has placed each ruler in office or assents to each judicial function. But the leaders of human society represent the authority of God on earth. They are the "ministers" of God, acting in subordination to him; at least this is the fundamental idea of their position, however overlooked in practice. "They bear the sword" for God, are his vicegerents, and herein lies the honour and accountability of their decisions. Let them recollect that "One higher than the highest regardeth." "He that ruleth over men righteously, ruling in the fear of God, he shall be as the sunny light of a cloudless morning." Cf. Samuel’s account of his judgeship, that he had defrauded none, oppressed none, nor taken a ransom from any. As families are governed by their natural head, the father, so is the universal family named after and ruled by the great Father in heaven, whom earthly parents are to copy. The fact that parents use delegated authority lends weight and responsibility to their behaviour. For the superintendence of Israel the seventy elders received a special donation of the spirit of Moses. How needful that rulers in Church and state, in households and in municipalities, should seek wisdom from him that giveth to all men liberally! Many a riotous subject has become a thoughtful, self-restrained governor when realizing the momentous grandeur and obligations of his office. III. THE GENERAL RULE OF . Submission follows the recognition of the Divine authority at the back of magistrates. To rebel, to disobey, is to cast off allegiance to God. Even the apostle, smarting under the illegal order of Ananias, regretted his strong language when informed that he had reviled the high priest. To refuse due honour to rulers and parents is to demoralize society. The Saviour resisted not the officers of justice, though he was unjustly condemned to death. The apostle urged slaves to be quiet, and subject to their froward masters, that by well-doing they might silence malicious accusers of Christianity. This did not signify that the gospel sanctioned slavery and despotism when the time arrived for their peaceful overthrow. Submission to persecution has been mightier, more lasting in its effects than an armed resistance, for it enlightens public opinion without kindling strife, and prepares for a change that shall be virtually unanimous. The two sanctions of the magistrate’s authority are mentioned in Romans 13:5, viz. "wrath," that is, punishment, and "conscience," that is, the assurance which the peaceable subject has that he has acted in accordance with the mind of God. IV. . No public edict has a right to coerce any man’s conscience. Let the ruler attempt to promulgate a law that sins against morality, and obedience must be refused at all hazards. When Caesar steps out of his province into the realm of religion, no regard for the "powers that be" can for a moment be suffered to suspend compliance with the felt dictates of the Almighty. The proclamations of Nebuchadnezzar commanding to worship the golden image, and of Darius prohibiting prayer to any save the king, were rightly unheeded by God-fearing men. But let each protester take great care to have his conscience illumined, lest he erect his individual judgment into a law of God. Again, when a government has shown itself incapable of protecting the good and punishing the transgressors, and is notorious for its reversal of the true principles which should guide its action and for its forgetfulness of the intent of its functions, it has put itself outside the pale of respect and submission; it may lawfully be overthrown and another substituted. Allowance must, however, be made for the human infirmities even of kings and councillors. In modern states agitation can effect needed reforms in public administration. It behoves each citizen to think, speak, and vote as he deems will best promote the interests of the state. Indifference, on whatever spiritual grounds, to evils which he can remedy, carelessness respecting the general welfare,—this is a crime. It is a refusal to employ a talent which Providence has committed to his care. Modern legislation does not hesitate to withdraw children from the custody of parents who act with cruelty or surround their offspring with deleterious influences.—S.R.A. Romans 13:8-10 Love, the fulfilment of the Law. The Lord’s Prayer speaks of forgiving "our debtors." But it is the bounden duty of every man to strive to discharge his pecuniary obligations, otherwise he is guilty of living contentedly on stolen goods. The command, "Owe no man anything," if obeyed, would hinder many a bankruptcy and prevent many a business scandal. The apostle proceeds, with one of his skilful turns of thought, to speak of that debt which never can be entirely liquidated—a debt under which we must be content to rest, paying portions of it as opportunity occurs; only to discover, and that with gladness, that the obligation magnifies with every attention to it. Could a man by love so serve his neighbour as not to owe him any more love, then might he feel free to disregard in future the interests of his neighbour, and he would thus sin against the second table of the Law. Love alone fulfils the Law, yet never exhausts the Law’s requirements. I. AGAINST OUR ARE OF THE LAW OF LOVE. The ten commandments are mainly prohibitory. The Levitical statutes, however, enjoined many kindly and beneficent acts, these positive precepts filling up the outline thundered forth from the mount. The Saviour educed from the lawyer the statement that the Mosaic Law clearly enunciated the one principle underlying every regulation of social conduct, "Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself." God has committed to each man specially the care of himself, to preserve and develop his various faculties. And just as no sane man voluntarily injures himself, so must he guard against damaging the well-being of his fellows. Cynicism, greed, tyranny, cannot survive the entrance of this humanizing agent, love, which evokes compassion, benevolence, philanthropy, as set forth so beautifully in 1 Corinthians 13:1-13. Adultery, murder, coveteousness, in all degrees of desire and behaviour, imply that men are careless of another’s happiness if they can secure some additional gratification for themselves. II. LOVE AS A MOTIVE WITH A SENSE OF DUTY. The only answer to the question, "Why should altruism be a regulating principle in my life?" is that God has made us "members one of another;" that he has implanted in our nature, together with the instinct of self-preservation, certain affections towards others; that God’s intention is thus plainly indicated in our constitution; and that experience shows that to make self the sole factor in our consideration is to rend the ties of society, and ultimately to ruin our own welfare and enjoyment. Congregation, not segregation, is the law of human life. Nevertheless, even this conviction, "I ought to pay respect to my neighbour’s interests and needs," may stop far short of that proper care for others which the perfect law expects. The house of duty is a dark temple if unlit by the Shechinah of love. Obligation may lead some citizens to pay the taxes claimed; it never suggests willing offers of further help to the body politic to which they belong. Duty draws rigid lines, examines each article of a bond for fear of excess. Love delights in all extra occasions of service. Duty is cool and calculating; love rises to boiling pitch, and its energy longs for work, like the pressure of steam. Duty moves with measured tread; love runs upon its errands, takes pleasure in obedience, whereas duty is glad when the business is accomplished. The law of obligation is a huge skeleton; love clothes it with flesh and sinew, endues it with life and beauty. III. THE WHICH JESUS CHRIST HAS GIVEN TO THE LAW OF LOVE. He has furnished a unique example of love in his incarnate condescension, in his words and deeds of grace, helping and healing men, and like a good Shepherd yielding up his own life to save his flock. His miracle of love sheds love abroad—love to God and man, in the hearts of his disciples. Gratitude to Christ fills the soul with generous emotion. A spark of Divine generosity is sufficient to kindle the inflammable material in the human heart, diffusing light and warmth. Christ has emphasized the worth of humanity. He came to redeem not a particular race or sect, but men. He despised none, taught the salvability of all except wilful rejectors. How can we treat contemptuously the "brother for whom Christ died"? Under the dark skin of the negro, under the barbarous superstition of the African, under the stolid impassiveness of the Chinaman, under the rags of the English beggar, love discerns a possible regenerated member of the Christian family, a child of God, a jewel in the Saviour’s crown. Christ has exalted self-sacrifice into a heroism that charms the beholder, as he realizes the true glory of an intelligent will, that wins life by losing it, and imparts instead of egoistic happiness a Divine blessedness.—S.R.A. Romans 13:11-14 The approach of day. Sin has been defined as "an act or state inconsistent with the relations" in which we stand. To act as our position demands is to act rightly. The apostle appeals to Christians as reasonable individuals desiring to behave as befits their condition. Incongruities excite ridicule, as when the sailor walks on land as if he had to steady himself against the tossing of his ship. Who has not dreamed of being found in daylight in the street attired in the garments of sleep, and felt the peculiar shame of such an incident? How different the decorations that look well enough by gaslight appear when the scene is surveyed in sunshine! the tinsel and gaudy brilliancy disgust a healthy eye. I. A SEASON. The daybreak is at hand, when the labourer should be found at work, the soldier engaged in conflict, and the traveller started on his journey. Night is the time in which Christianity has to struggle for existence, its adherents sometimes forced to resort to obscurity for fear of persecution. Christ’s departure was the setting as his advent shall be the rising again of the sun; the interval is summer night. Our salvation is nearer than when we began to believe. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/pulpit-commentary/ Romans 14:1-23 F. The duty of enlightened Christians towards weak brethren. From moral duties in general of Christians towards each other and towards all the apostle now passes to such as they owe peculiarly to each other as members of a religious community, united by a common faith. He has already (Romans 12:16) admonished his readers to be "of the same mind one toward another;" but, as was remarked under that verse, this did not imply agreement of view on all subjects, such as is impossible where there are many minds. In this chapter he recognizes the impossibility, having immediately before him what was then patent, the inability of some, through prejudice or slowness of conception, to enter into views of the meaning of the gospel which to himself and the more enlightened were apparent. He by no means departs from what he says elsewhere (cf. Galatians 1:6-10) about no denial of fundamental doctrine being allowable in the communion of the Church; but in matters not touching the foundation he does here inculcate a large and generous tolerance. In these, as in all other relations between men on the earth together, the all-inspiring principle of charity is to rule. Who the "weak brethren" were whose scruples he especially inculcates tolerance of in this chapter cannot be decided positively. It will he seen that they were persons who thought it their duty to abstain from animal food, and perhaps also from wine (Romans 14:2, Romans 14:21); and there is allusion also to observance of certain days (Romans 14:5). The views that have been taken are as follows:— (1) That they were the same class of Jewish Christians as are spoken of in 1 Corinthians 8:1-13. as over-scrupulous about eating of things that had been offered in sacrifice to idols. (2) That they were such as were scrupulous in avoiding unclean meats, forbidden in the Mosaic Law. (Or, as Erasmus and others suggest, views (1) and (2) may be combined.) (3) That they were ascetics. In favour of view (1) is the fact that the drift and tone of the exhortation is exactly the same here as in 1 Corinthians 8:1-13., with similarity also of expressions, such as ὁἀσθενῶν, ὁἐσθίωνβρῶσις, βρῶμα, ἀπολύεινπρόσκομμα, σκανδαλίζειν. Against it are the facts (a) that in the chapter before us there is no allusion whatever to idol-meats, as there is throughout so markedly in 1 Corinthians 8:1-13.; and (b) that abstinence from all animal food whatever (and apparently from wine too) is spoken of in this chapter. Objection (a) has been met by saying that the ground of the scrupulosity referred to might be so well known that St. Paul did not think it necessary to mention it when he wrote to the Romans. To objection (b) it is replied that there might be some who, in order to guard against the risk of buying at the shambles, or partaking in general society of viands connected with heathen sacrifices, made a point of abstaining from meat altogether, and (it has been suggested) from wine too, which might have been used in libations. This is the view of Clement of Alexandria, Ambrosiastor, and Augustine, among the ancients. View (2) is that of Origen, Chrysostom, Theodoret, Jerome, and others, among whom Chrysostom accounts for the total abstinence from meat as follows: "There were many of the Jews that believed, who, being still bound in conscience to the Law, even after believing still observed the ordinances about meats, not as yet venturing to depart from the Law; and then, in order not to be conspicuous in abstaining from swine’s flesh only, they abstained from all flesh, and ate herbs only, that their practice might seem to be rather fasting, and not observance of the Law" (so also OEcumenius and Theophylact). But this seems to be a conjecture only, and hardly a likely one. And further, it fails to account for abstinence from wine, which seems to be implied; on the part of tome at least, in verse 21. If the weak brethren were ascetics, according to view (3), it is most probable that they were Jewish Christians who had imbibed the principles of the Essenes. These were a Jewish sect, spoken of especially by josephus, who aimed at scrupulous observance of the Law of Moses, and strict personal purity. With this view they lived in communities under rule, partaking of the simplest fare, and some abstaining from marriage. It does not appear that they were strict vegetarians when living in community; but we are told that they might only eat such meat as had been prepared by their own members, so as to be secure against any pollution, and that, if excommunicated, they were consequently compelled to eat herbs. (For what is known of them, see Josephus, ’Bell. Jud.,’ 2.; 8.2-5; ’Ant.,’ 13.5. 9; 15.10. 4, 5; 18.1. 2, etc.; Philo, ’Quod Omnis Probus Liber,’ see. 12., etc.; Pliny, ’Hist. Nat.,’ 5.16, 17.) It is far from unlikely that some of these would be attracted to Christianity; and this especially as some of their principles, as described by Josephus, seem to have been endorsed by Christ himself; and, if so, they would be likely to carry their prejudices with them into the Church, and, when living outside their original communities, they might abstain entirely from flesh as well as wine. Or it might be that other Jews, Essenic in principle and feeling, had sought admission into the Church. Philo, in Eusebius, ’Praep. Evan.,’ 8. fin., and Josephus, ’Vit.,’ 2. 3, intimate that supra-legal asceticism, under the influence of Essenic principles, was not uncommon in Judaism in their time. The latter (c. 3) speaks of certain priests, his friends, who were so God-fearing that they subsisted on figs and nuts, and (c. 2) of one Banns, who had been his master, who ate no food but vegetables. What is still more to our purpose is that we find evidence of pious ascetics of the same type subsequently among Christians. Origen (’Contra Cels.,’ 5.49) speaks of some as living in his time; and even the apostle St. Matthew, and James the Lord’s brother, were afterwards credited with a corresponding mode of life. Clement of Alexandria (’Paedag.’ 2.1) says of the former, "Matthew the apostle partook of seeds and acorns and herbs, without flesh." Hegesippus, quoted by Eusebius (Matthew 2:23), says of the latter that "he drank not wine or strong drinks, nor did he eat animal food; a razor came not upon his head; he did not anoint himself with oil; he did not use the bath." It is to be observed that abstinence from ointments was one of the practices of the Essenes (Josephus, ’Bell. Jud.,’ 8.2. 3). Augustine (’Ad Faust.,’ 22.3) transmits the same tradition as to the abstinence of James from flesh and wine. Whatever foundation them might be for these traditions, they at any rate show that in the second century, when Hegesippus wrote, abstinence such as is intimated in this chapter was regarded as a mark of superior sanctity by some Christians. Farther, in the ’Apostolical Canons’ (Canon 51.), Christians who abstained from marriage, or flesh, or wine, are allowed to be retained in the communion of the Church as long as they did so by way of religious restraint only. Against the above view of the weak brethren of the chapter before us having been ascetics of the Essenic type, is alleged the strong condemnation of persons supposed to have been of the same sort in Colossians 2:8, Colossians 2:16, seq., and 1 Timothy 4:1-5, which is said to be inconsistent with the tender tolerance recommended here. But the teachers referred to in the later Epistles, though inculcating practices similar to those of the "weak brethren," appear to have been heretical theosophists, the germ probably of later Gnosticism. Their tenets may indeed, in part at least, have been developed from Esseuism; but it was no longer mere conscientious scrupulosity, but principles subversive of the faith, that St. Paul set his face against in writing to the Colossians and to Timothy. Canon 51. in the ’Apostolical Canons’ above referred to may be adduced as distinguishing between the principles on which asceticism might be practised allowably or otherwise; it being therein laid down that any who abstained from marriage, flesh, or’ wine, not by way of religious restraint, but as abhorring them, forgetting that God made all things very good, and that he made man male and female, and blaspheming the work of creation, should be cast out of the Church. It remains to be observed that there was diffused among the Gentiles also, through the influence of the Neo-Pythagorean philosophy, an asceticism similar to the Essenic, which Eichhoru supposes the "weak brethren" of this chapter to have been affected by, regarding them as mostly Gentile Christians. But Jewish influences are much more probable; the scruples referred to in 1 Corinthians 8:1-13. were certainly due to them; and observe 1 Corinthians 8:5 in this chapter, which cannot but refer to Jewish observances. Further, Origen, in the treatise above referred to, expressly distinguishes between Christian and Pythagorean asceticism. His words are, "But see also the difference of the cause of the abstinence from creatures having life as practised by the Pythagoreans and by the ascetics among ourselves. For they abstain because of the fable concerning the transmigration of souls;… but we, though we may practise the like, do it when we keep under the flesh and bring it into subjection" (’Contra Cels.,’ 4). Romans 14:1 Him that is weak in the faith (rather, in faith, or in his faith). The article before πίστει does not denote the faith objectively. Cf. Romans 4:19, μὴἀσθενήσαςτῆπίστει. In 1 Corinthians 8:12 it is the conscience that is spoken of as weak, τὴνσυνείδησινἀσθενοῦσαν. Persons are meant whose faith is not sufficiently strong and enlightened for entering fully into the true spirit of the gospel so as to distinguish between essentials and non-essentials. Receive ye, but not to doubtful disputations; rather, unto—i.e., so as to result in—judgments of thoughts. The Authorized Version has in margin, "to judge his doubtful thoughts," which is probably nearer the true meaning than the text. Διαρίσις means elsewhere dijudicartio (1 Corinthians 12:10; Hebrews 5:14), not "disputation" or "doubt" (as has been supposed from the verb διακρίνεσθαι, meaning "to doubt"). "Non dijudicemus cogitationes infirmorum, quasi ferre audeamus sententiam de alieno corde, quod non videtur". Romans 14:2, Romans 14:3 One believeth that he may eat all things (literally, believeth to—or, hath faith to—eat all things), but he that is weak eateth herbs. Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not; and let not him which eateth not judge him that eateth: for God hath received him. "He that eateth" is the one that has faith to eat all things; and it is against contempt on his part of the weak in faith that the admonition is mainly directed throughout the chapter (cf. also Romans 15:1). But the weak require an admonition too. Their temptation was to judge those who indulged in freedom which to themselves appeared unlawful; and here, in Romans 14:5, the apostle gives such as did so a sharp reproof. There is a tone of indignation in his σὺτίςεἷὁκρίνων; reminding us of his tone towards the Judaists in Galatia, who would have crippled Christian liberty. "God hath received him" refers evidently, as appears from its position and from the following verse, to him that eateth. God hath received him to himself in Christ, whosoever may sit in judgment on him. We observe that the verb προσελάβετο is the same as in Romans 14:1 and in Romans 15:7. Romans 14:4 Who art thou that judgest another man’s servant? (observe the emphatic position of σὺ) to his own lord he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be made to stand: for the Lord (better supported than God, as in the Textus Receptus) is able (or, has power) to make him stand. The standing or falling here spoken of may be taken to mean standing firm in, or falling from, a state of grace (cf. Romans 11:20, Romans 11:22), rather than acceptance or rejection at the last judgment. "For God is able," etc., seems to require this meaning. The non-abstainer’s freedom does not endanger his position; for God is powerful to sustain him, and to God alone he is accountable. Romans 14:5 One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike in his own mind. To St. Paul himself the observance or non-observance of the days referred to was a matter in itself of no importance. He was content that each person should act up to his own conscientious convictions on the subject. Romans 14:6 He that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord (omit, as ill-supported, as well as unnecessary, and he that regardeth not, etc.); he that eateth, eateth unto the Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not, to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks. Both parties are supposed to be equally desirous of serving God. The eater of whatsoever is set before him is so, as is shown by his thanking God for it—observe "for he giveth," etc.—and no creature of God can be polluting "if received with thanksgiving" (1 Timothy 4:5); the abstainer gives thanks too; and so his dinner of herbs is also hallowed to him. (Though it is not necessary to confine the thought to the practice of saying grace before meat, this is doubtless in view as expressing the asserted thankfulness. For proof of the custom, cf. Matthew 15:36; Acts 27:35; 1 Corinthians 10:30; 1 Corinthians 11:24; 1 Timothy 4:4, 1 Timothy 4:5.) The general principle on which, in eating and drinking, as in all beside, Christians are of necessity supposed to act, and which both parties are to be credited with desiring to carry out, is set forth in Romans 14:7, Romans 14:8, Romans 14:9, which follow. Romans 14:7, Romans 14:8 For none of us liveth to himself, and none dieth to himself. For whether we live, we live unto the Lord; and whether we die, we die unto the Lord: whether we live therefore, or die, we are the Lord’s. The mention of dying as well as living unto the Lord, though it does not seem needed by the context, makes complete the view of the entire devotion of redeemed Christians to him; and introduces the thought, which follows, of their union with him in his own death as well as in his life. Romans 14:9 For to this end Christ both died and lived (so certainly, rather than, as in the Textus Receptus, died, and rose, and revived. His living means here his entering on the heavenly life after the human death), that he might be Lord both of the dead and living. "Nam mortem pro salute nostra obeundo dominium sibi acquisivit quod nec morte solveretur; resurgendo autem totam vitam nostram in peculium accepit; morte igitur et resurrectione sua promeritus est ut tam in morte quam in vita gloriae nominis ejus serviamus" (Calvin). For the idea of this whole passage (Romans 14:7-9), cf. 1 Corinthians 6:20; 1 Corinthians 7:23; 2 Corinthians 5:15. The apostle now returns to his immediate subject, warning (as in 2 Corinthians 5:3) the one party against judging and the other against despising, on the ground of all alike having to abide hereafter the Divine judgment (cf. Matthew 7:1, seq.; 1 Corinthians 4:3, 1 Corinthians 4:5). The distinction in 2 Corinthians 5:10 between the two parties, marked in the original by the initial Σὺδὲ and the following ἢκαὶσὺ, is somewhat lost in our Authorized Version. Romans 14:10-13 But thou, why judgest thou thy brother? or thou too, why settest thou at nought thy brother? For we shall all stand before the judgment-seat of God (so, rather than of Christ, as in the Textus Receptus). For it is written, As I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God (Isaiah 45:23, quoted very freely from the LXX.). So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God. Let us therefore no longer judge one another. This concluding appeal is addressed to both parties. In all that follows St. Paul returns exclusively to the more enlightened ones, whose feelings were in accordance with his own; and he now presses a further thought upon them, namely of the harm they might be doing to the very souls of the weak ones by tempting them, either by word or example, to disobey their own consciences. But judge ye this rather, that no man put a stumbling-block in his brother’s way, or an occasion of falling (σκάνδαλον). For the meaning of the word, cf. Luke 17:1; Romans:33; Romans 16:17; 1 Corinthians 1:23; Revelation 2:14. Romans 14:14 I know, and am persuaded in the Lord Jesus that there is nothing unclean of itself; save that to him who accounteth anything to be unclean, to him it is unclean. To him it becomes defiling, because partaking of it defiles his conscience (cf. 1 Corinthians 8:7). Romans 14:15 For (γὰρ here certainly, rather than δὲ as in the Textus Receptus. It introduces a reason for the general admonition beginning at Romans 14:13) if on account of meat (not here, thy meat, as in the Authorized Version) thy brother is grieved, thou no longer walkest charitably (literally, according to love, or charity; i.e. in continuing to set at naught his conscientious scruples). With thy meat destroy not him, for whom Christ died (cf. 1 Corinthians 8:11, Καὶἀπολεῖταιὁἀσθενῶνἀδελφὸς … δἰὃνΧριστὸςἀπέθανεν). "Destroy" seems to denote causing his moral and religious ruin by shaking his conscientiousness, and perhaps upsetting altogether the faith he has, which, though weak, is real. Romans 14:16 Let not then your good be evil spoken of. "Your good" is your enlightenment, which is in itself a good thing; but it will be "evil spoken of" as a bad thing, if it leads to superciliousness and uncharitableness. Romans 14:17, Romans 14:18 For the kingdom of God is not eating and drinking, but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Ghost. For he that in these things serveth Christ is acceptable to God, and approved of men. The concluding clause here has reference to "let not your good," etc., preceding. It is the practical fruits of faith that commend it to men, as well as being the test of its genuineness before God. Romans 14:19-21 Let us therefore follow after the things that make for (literally, the things of) peace, and the things wherewith one may edify another (literally, the things of the edification of one another). For meat’s sake destroy not the work of God. "Destroy," or rather, overthrow—the word is κατάλυε, not ἀππόλλυε as in Romans 14:15—is connected in thought with the edification, or building up (οἰκοδομήν) before spoken of. "The work of God" is that of his grace in the weak Christian’s soul, growing, it may be, to full assurance of faith (cf. 1 Corinthians 3:9," ye are God’s building"). Upset not the rising structure, which is God’s own, as ye may do by putting a stumbling-block in the weak brother’s way. All things indeed are pure (i.e. in themselves all God’s gifts given for man’s service are so); but it is evil to that man who eateth with offence (i.e. if the eating be to himself a stumbling-block. The idea is the same as in Romans 14:14). It is good (καλὸν, not of indispensable obligation, but a right and noble thing to do) neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor anything whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak. The concluding words in italics are of doubtful authority: they are not required for the sense. For St. Paul’s expression of his own readiness to deny himself lawful things, if he might so avoid offence to weak brethren, cf. 1 Corinthians 8:13. Romans 14:22 Hast thou faith? have it to thyself before God. Hast thou an enlightened faith, showing thee the unimportance of these observances? Do not parade it needlessly before men. Θέλειςμαιδεῖξαιὄτιτέλειοςεἶκαὶἀπηρτισμένοςμὴἐμοὶδείκνοεἀλλἀρκείτωτὸσυνειδός (Chrysostom). Happy is he that judgeth not himself in that thing which he alloweth. Thy weak brother, if he abstains conscientiously, is thus happy; take care that thou art equally so in the exercise of thy freedom; for he that alloweth himself in anything that he is not fully convinced is lawful passes, ipso facto, judgment on himself. Romans 14:23 But he that doubteth (or, wavereth) is condemned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith: for whatsoever is not of faith is sin. For sense of διακρίνεσθαι, cf. Romans 4:20; Matthew 21:21; Mark 11:23; James 1:6. Faith here denotes an assured belief that what one does is right; nor is it necessary to give the word a wider or different sense in the concluding clause (ΤαῦταδὲπάνταπερὶτῆςπροκειμένηςὑποθεσεωςεἴρηταιτῷΠαῦλῳοὔπερὶπάντων, Chrysostom). Hence to see in it (as has been done) the doctrine of the sinfulness of all works done apart from faith in Christ is to introduce an idea that is not there. Romans 14:1-6 Ceremonial and spiritual religion. This passage is one of many instances occurring in St. Paul’s writings in which circumstances of local and temporary interest suggest the statement of great moral truths and principles, applicable over a far wider area. To us these questions—as to whether certain food should be eaten, and certain days should be observed—seem trifling enough; yet to how grand and comprehensive a law of Christian action do these considerations lead the mind of the deep thinking and far-seeing apostle! I. THE . Our actions should be with a view to the Lord Christ. The motive of Christian conduct is the love of Christ; its aim is the glory of Christ. The personal relation between the Saviour and his people is not such as to lose anything of its dignity and sacredness, when introduced as a motive into the ordinary activity of Christian people. And this principle, so lofty on its Divine side, is most practical upon the human side. Love to Christ, and sympathy with his self-denial, leads his followers to regard the welfare of their brethren, for whom Christ died. Thus Christ’s sacrifice becomes the inspiration and the model of ours. II. THE OF THE . Two special illustrations are mentioned in this passage, from which we may learn how to apply the great Christian law to the varying circumstances of human life. 1. Eating and drinking are necessary acts; but the manner of eating and drinking have often been regarded as associated with religion. Some of the early Christians were so scrupulous that they would eat no flesh, lest they should inadvertently eat what had been offered to idols; others never troubled themselves to inquire about their food. The apostle decides that neither flesh-eater nor herb-eater must despise the other. If each is animated by a regard to God’s glory and to Christ’s kingdom, each deserves respect and esteem. 2. The observance of sacred days has usually been an outward mark of the religious. Of the primitive Christians some regarded and others disregarded such days. The apostle blamed neither party; if they did what they did conscientiously, and unto the Lord, this was enough. It is not in such observances that true religion consists; but in the spirit that governs actions, and the intention with which they are undertaken. III. THE OF THE . Occasions are continually arising for remembering the wise counsel of St. Paul. Zealous religionists are wont to push their own views, and zealous controversialists are given to attacking the doctrines and practices of others. Men substitute human dogmas, human fancies, and human remedies for moral and social ills, for the great principles of Christianity. But we shall do well to be guided by liberty for one’s self, by consideration for one’s neighbours, and by charity with reference to the conduct of our fellow-Christians. Romans 14:7 Life a trust. Our life is not a possession to do as we like with. Yet many act as if it were; as if they were at liberty to be idle or to work, to employ their time and their powers in one way or in another, without giving account to any. Christians are summoned to take a different and a nobler view of this earthly existence. I. WHAT IS BY THE CREATOR. 1. Life itself; the successive years and stages of which it is composed. 2. Its advantages; both the capacities and endowments which are natural, and the education and associations which Providence has secured to us. 3. Its opportunities; both of acquiring good and of doing good. It is to be remembered that, strictly speaking, it is not for these, but for the use we make of them, that we are responsible. We are to bear in mind that, though we live, we do not live unto ourselves. II. HOW THE TRUST SHOULD BE . 1. The motive and law of this discharge and fulfilment of trust we are to find in Christ. Our life will be lived aright, if its principle be grateful love to him who loved us; if his Spirit and example be our inspiration, if his glory and approval be our aim and hope. 2. The range within which this trust should be fulfilled is a wide one, including our fellow-men, for whom Christ died. In the household, in professional and business life, in the Church, in the nation, the Christian finds a sphere for consistent and unselfish service. The lessons of the parable of the talents may be appropriately studied in this connection. III. THAT THE TRUST . Christ is a Judge as well as a Lord. Our life must be tested by his scrutinizing, searching eye, his just and faithful judgment. Fidelity will be rewarded, unfaithfulness will be condemned, by him. For the faithful, the unselfish, the benevolent, the serviceable, there is secured the blessed prospect of sharing "the joy of their Lord." Romans 14:7-9 Life unto the Lord. This is language which is doubtless deemed by some the language of extravagance and enthusiasm. But, in fact, it is sober enough. Nothing inferior to the law and principle here enounced can be accepted by the Lord Christ as the law and principle of his people’s life. And that the standard is one which may be attained is undeniable; St. Paul himself was a living exemplification of its practicability. What he taught that others should be, he was himself. I. THE OF THE LIFE. We "live unto the Lord." This personal relation between the Saviour and those who are saved by him is a distinctive feature of the new and Christian life. When we consider this expression, what do we find it to involve? 1. We live as in the Lord’s sight, with his wise, observant, just, and yet friendly eye upon us. 2. We live under the motive and inspiration of the Lord’s love and sacrifice. He has lived and died for us; we live and die unto him. 3. We live in obedience to his will; as the scholar lives to his master, the soldier to his general, the statesman to his country or his king. 4. We live with the help of his Spirit. 5. We live to our Lord’s glory; losing sight of all that concerns ourselves, and become absorbed in and devoted to the extension of Christ’s kingdom, and the honour of Christ’s name. Even thus we do not exhaust the fulness of this noble utterance, "We live unto the Lord." II. THE RANGE OF THE . 1. Life, in all its varied experiences, in all its successive stages, is to the Christian life unto the Lord. No aspect, no period, no interest, is exempt; it is the joy of Christ’s servant to devote all energies, and to consecrate all influence, that life confers, unto him who redeemed life and made it a new and blessed thing. 2. Death is embraced within the wide range of this principle. An uninspired writer would not have ventured upon so sublime a representation as this. But Paul, who said, "To me to live is Christ," was constrained to add, "To die is gain." So here he says, "We die unto the Lord." This was obviously and beautifully true of those who perished in the discharge of offices suggested by Christian benevolence, and of those who "resisted unto blood, striving against sin," who died as martyrs, as witnesses to the truth. Yet none of any age or condition of life, who died in the discharge of duty however ordinary, were exempt from this privilege of dying unto Christ. It was doubtless often asked concerning a departed brother, "By what death did he glorify God?" III. THE DIVINE POWER THIS . A principle so contrary to selfish human nature can only be accounted for by a Divine interposition and provision. The apostle traces this: 1. In Christ’s death, and: 2. In his resurrection, in virtue of which he has become to man not only the universal Saviour, but the universal Lord. Romans 14:12 Individual responsibility. Men are prone to pass judgment one upon another. It is a tendency against which we have all occasion to watch. For our habit is to be lenient to ourselves and severe towards others. A corrective to this tendency is to be found in the great fact that all are accountable to God. Remembering this, we shall not, except where the authoritative society, the ordinance of Heaven, requires it, be willing to pass sentence upon our fellow-men. I. THE FACT OF . It is a fact to which conscience, and the constitution of human nature and human society, undeviatingly testify. Men sometimes strive to forget it, but seldom venture to deny it. 1. Judgment involves a Divine Judge. God will judge the world by Jesus Christ, a Judge qualified, both by his Divine knowledge and his human sympathy, for fulfilling this awful office. 2. Judgment involves an accountable moral nature on the part of those who are subjected to it. Man is so fashioned that it is just that he should be judged, He has knowledge of right and wrong, power of independent action arising from his voluntary nature, and the capacity to appreciate inducements to righteousness. 3. Judgment, always a fact, will in the future be explicit, pronounced, and manifested. Doubtless the Judge observes, approves, and censures every day; but there will be a period in which this shall be apparent. "The day will declare it!" II. THE OF . Wherever is a moral nature, amenable to law, there responsibility exists, and there the judicial exercise of Divine authority shall take place. Babes, idiots, madmen, are not subject to moral accountability; but all beside—according to light and privilege—must appear for retribution before the bar of God. None is so high in this world as to be superior to justice; none is so low as to escape it. The omniscience of Deity cannot be deceived; the justice of Deity cannot be evaded. III. THE OF . 1. Each shall stand alone at the bar; every one shall give account of himself. In this sense, "every man shall bear his own burden." For his own character, and for his own acts, shall each separate person be held responsible. 2. None shall escape responsibility by casting blame upon Providence, by pleading that he was not favourably circumstanced, that he was not one of "the elect." 3. Nor can any evade judgment by throwing the blame of his sin upon society. The influence of others makes human life a discipline, but it does not reduce it to irresponsible mechanism. 4. Nor can any escape by casting censure upon the Church. Whether or not professing Christians have done their duty by one another, the fact of individual responsibility remains unaffected. . 1. TO all hearers of the gospel this fact is a reason for accepting the good tidings of reconciliation. 2. To all Christians it supplies a motive to watchfulness and diligence. Romans 14:17, Romans 14:18 The kingdom of God. Christianity furnishes a moral perspective. It throws all things into their proper relations to one another, and elevates those things which are of supreme importance to the loftiest position of eminence. Instead of occupying themselves about outward actions, ceremonial observances, and ritual distinctions, Christians are in this passage recommended to aspire to those virtues which are of highest importance in the sight of God, and which bear the most powerfully upon the welfare of human society. I. CREATES A KINGDOM. It is not, like many human religions, a system of regulations as to conduct or observances. It is not "eating and drinking." It is a kingdom conceived in the Divine mind, and worthy of its Divine Author; a kingdom established upon the mediation of a Divine Saviour; a kingdom consisting in the rule of spiritual powers and principles. It is a kingdom over spiritual natures, acting by spiritual agencies, and issuing in spiritual subjection and obedience. At the same time, it is a kingdom whose subjects are governed in their whole life by the power it introduces and applies to the inner nature. It is a kingdom in a measure realized in human society, and destined to be perfected in the glorious future. III. THE SPECIAL OF THIS KINGDOM. 1. In relation to God—righteousness. His law of justice is obeyed. Introduced into right and harmonious relations with the supreme Ruler, the subject of the kingdom practises righteousness in human relationships. Righteousness is what man was made for, or is what the Christian attains to. 2. In relation to men—peace. Strife and hatred are the curse of human society. Christianity alone has discovered and applied the principle which remedies this evil. True peace is based on righteousness, on the prevalence of those principles which are in harmony with the nature of God and the constitution of human society. 3. In the heart of the subject—joy. Cheerfulness, serenity, happiness,—these are the portion of the sincere believer in Christ, the loyal subject of Christ. "Rejoice evermore!" is the Christian admonition; "alway rejoicing!" is the Christian motto. The power of the Holy Spirit accounts for this change from the forced gaiety of the worldling, and the cold gloom of the sceptic, to the gladness of him who is at peace with God, and who cherishes a good hope of eternal life. III. THE RESULTS OF THIS KINGDOM. These are very fully stated in Romans 14:18. 1. Christ is served. If he is the Lord and Head of the kingdom, this must be so. His Name is honoured and his cause promoted where truly Christian virtues prevail. 2. God is pleased. For the purposes of his holy benevolence are fulfilled, and his Son is glorified and his creatures blessed. 3. The approval of men is secured. It cannot be otherwise when dispositions and practices prevail which are corrective of human ills and promotive of human rectitude, concord, and happiness. Romans 14:18 The double aspect of Christian service. The apostle’s mind was as powerful and active in a practical as in a speculative direction. Christ’s law had been, "By their fruits ye shall know them." And in this verse, Paul, reiterating his Master’s principles, vindicates the principles of the new faith by appealing to the excellence of the fruits of the Spirit. I. WHAT SERVICE IS. 1. It involves a personal relation between Master and servant. 2. It involves an acknowledgment of Divine authority. 3. It involves a powerful motive to a consecrated life. 4. It involves the inclusion of all activities and relationships within its sphere. II. SUCH SERVICE IS WELL TO GOD. 1. For it resembles that of Christ himself, who came to do the will of him who sent him, and who "pleased the Father alway," in whom the Father was "well pleased." 2. It is in conformity to the Divine will. It is the prerogative of the spiritual nature of man that it is capable of apprehending and voluntarily accepting and obeying the perfect will of God. 3. It tends to the Divine glory. This is by no other means so effectively promoted as by the willing consecration to the Lord of all intelligent and moral natures. III. SUCH SERVICE IS OF MEN. 1. Even those who do not render it themselves, approve it in others. 2. Even those who verbally censure, in their inner conscience commend it. 3. Legislators and rulers approve it, as contributive to the harmony and just development of human society at large. BY C.H. IRWIN Romans 14:1-9 The Christian’s dependence and the Christian’s independence. The composite character of the Christian community at Rome—the Jewish origin of many of its members on the one hand, and contact with heathenism on the other—had doubtless given rise to differences of opinion. Some there were who still retained their Jewish prejudices and ideas. They abstained from meats. They observed special days. They were inclined to judge harshly and even to look down upon those who did not think and act as they did (Romans 14:3). And, on the other hand, those who partook of all meats, and regarded all days as alike, were disposed to find fault with those who attached a religious significance to the partaking of food and the observing of days. The apostle here lays down some general principles which are of use in all such cases where differences of opinion arise about non-essentials. I. THE ’S . "None of us liveth to himself, and no man dieth to himself. For whether we live, we live unto the Lord; and whether we die, we die unto the Lord: whether we live therefore, or die, we are the Lord’s. For to this end Christ both died, and rose, and revived, that he might be Lord both of the dead and living" (Romans 14:7-9). There is no such thing as absolute independence. The relation of each individual to Christ, dependence on him and responsibility to him, is here asserted. 1. We depend upon the Lord’s death. In the cross is our hope of forgiveness, pardon, cleansing. 2. We depend upon the Lord’s resurrection. In his resurrection is our hope and assurance of the life and immortality beyond. "Because I live, ye shall live also." 3. We depend upon the Lord’s continual intercession. In his intercession is our hope and assurance of answered prayer. 4. We depend upon the Lord’s continued gifts to us. The Lord’s day; the Word of the Lord; the Lord’s house; the Lord’s Supper;—how much our spiritual life is dependent upon these precious blessings provided for us by our Lord and Master! "Whether we live therefore, or die, we are the Lord’s." 5. This dependence upon Christ brings with it corresponding obligations. "Ye are not your own, for ye are bedight with a price; therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God’s" (1 Corinthians 6:20). II. THE ’S . The independence of the Christian is the correlative of his dependence. He is dependent upon Christ, and therefore he is: 1. Independent of external circumstances. "I have learned, in whatsoever state I am, therewith to be content." And again, "We are troubled on every side, yet not distressed; we are perplexed, but not in despair; persecuted, but not forsaken; cast down, but not destroyed." Even death can bring no alarm to those who can say, "We are the Lord’s;" for Christ is the Conqueror of death. 2. Independent of human criticism. "Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not; and let not him which eateth not judge him that eateth: for God hath received him" (Romans 14:3); "Who art thou that judgest another man’s servant? to his own master he standeth or faileth" (Romans 14:4); "Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind" (Romans 14:5). Here the apostle asserts the great principle of liberty of conscience, and inculcates the great duty of charity and toleration. Alas! how often the principle and the duty have been forgotten in the Christian Church! Christian men have excommunicated one another and treated one another as enemies because they differed on some minor detail of doctrine, of government, or of worship.. Even the Protestant Churches, and Protestant Christians, one of whose distinctive principles is liberty of conscience, have sometimes failed to extend to others that toleration which they claim for themselves. "God alone is Lord of the conscience," says the Westminster Confession of Faith, "and hath left it free from the doctrines and commandments of men."—C.H.I. Romans 14:7 The influence of our lives upon others. "None of us liveth to himself." The apostle, as we have seen, was here enforcing certain Christian duties, and he strengthened his exhortation by reminding his readers that they were not their own, but Christ’s. But the words are capable of a wider application. I. THE WHICH ONE MAN MAY FOR GOOD. Many who would like to do good are sometimes disposed to say, "What use can I be in the world? What influence can my life have upon others? What good can I do to others? I am too young. I am too humble. I have no intellectual gifts. I have no opportunities such as some people have of exercising influence upon others." This is to underestimate the influence of the individual life. Whether we are conscious of it or not, the life of each of us, whether we are rich or poor, learned or unlearned, young or old, is exercising some influence upon others. It is not necessary that we should know another in order to exercise an influence upon him. Thousands of men are influenced by persons whom they never saw. The Reformation began at Cambridge University very early in the sixteenth century by Bilney, a solitary student, reading a Greek Testament with Latin translation and notes, which Erasmus had published. Bilney had never seen Erasmus, but the quiet work of Erasmus was the means of bringing Bilney to the knowledge of the truth as it is in Jesus. Bilney, again, influenced Latimer, who was one of the fathers of the English Reformation, and who suffered martyrdom for the truth. Thus the Reformation in England may be largely traced to the quiet work of Erasmus as he sat at his desk, and used his vast learning and intellect to make the Word of God more familiar to the people of his time. A young American student, more than seventy years ago, happened to read a printed sermon which had fallen into his hands. The sermon was entitled "The Star in the East," by Dr. Claudius Buchanan, and described the progress of the gospel in India, and the evidence there afforded of its Divine power. That sermon, by a man whom he had never seen, fell into the young student’s soul like a spark into tinder, and in six months Adoniram Judson resolved to become a missionary to the heathen. That little printed sermon, preached in England, perhaps, with no apparent fruit, became, through God’s blessing, the beginning of the great work of American foreign missions. You may not be an Erasmus or a Claudius Buchanan. But God may have as great a work for you to do as he had for them. What an influence for good Christian parents may exercise upon their children, with far-reaching results to the world! The faithful sabbath-school teacher may leaven with gospel truth young minds that may yet control the destinies of a nation. Young women, by the power of their own Christian character, may change for the better the muddy current of many a godless life. The great matter is for every one of us to live near to God, to cultivate a Christ-like character, and then our life is sure to be a blessing. You must walk with God if you would have weight with men. Personal holiness is the key to personal influence for good. II. THE WHICH ONE MAN MAY FOR EVIL, The wise man says, "One sinner destroyeth much good." Everyday experience will supply many illustrations of this truth. One bad man, one bad woman, will be a centre of corruption to the whole circle in which they move. One bad boy often corrupts a whole school. How terrible is the power of evil to propagate itself! How terrible is the guilt of those who have become the corrupters of others! The evil that we do has consequences far beyond the injury that we may do to ourselves. Unto a loving mother oft We all have sent, without a doubt, Full many a hard and careless word, That now we never can rub out; For cruel words cut deeper far Than diamond on the window-pane; And, oft recalled in after-years, They wound her o’er and o’er again. "So, in our daily walk and life, We write and do and say the thing We never can undo nor stay With any future sorrowing. We carve ourselves on beating hearts! Ah! then, how wise to pause and doubt, To blend with love and thought our words, Because we cannot rub them out!" The great poet of Scotland, Robert Burns, on his dying bed wished that he could have recalled some of the foolish things that he had written. But it was too late. Better far to leave the wrong undone than afterwards to regret the doing of it. "None of us liveth to himself," should be constantly before our minds as a restraining memory to keep us from evil, and an inspiring memory that will cheer us on to make the world better than we have found it.—C.H.I. Romans 14:10-23 (with Romans 15:1-3) Three laws of Christian life. In these closing verses of the fourteenth chapter and the opening verses of the fifteenth, three principles are laid down, one or other or all of which would cover almost every case of difference between fellow-Christians. These are— I. THE LAW OF CHARITY. Where we differ from our fellow-Christians in details of doctrine, worship, or practice, we are very prone to be uncharitable in our judgments. We are inclined to doubt their Christianity because they do not just see as we do on such matters. One great fact the apostle would have us remember when we are tempted to condemn our brethren. It is the fact of the judgement to come. "Why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all stand before the judgment-seat of Christ" (Romans 14:10). "So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God. Let us not therefore judge one another any more" (Romans 14:12, Romans 14:13). It is not we who are to be the judges of our fellow-Christians, but God. We should not like that they would be our judges: then why should we judge them? The thought that we ourselves must stand before a higher judgment-seat, where all our sins and secret thoughts and unchristian motives shall be known, should make us more cautious in our condemnation of others. And, as regards our fellow-Christians, is it not enough for us that God will judge them? Surely we may leave their trial with confidence in his hands. II. THE LAW OF SELF-DENIAL. There is a gradual progress in the principles here laid down. First of all, it is shown that we ought not to judge our brethren. This is a purely negative command. The next command is somewhat more positive. "But judge this rather, that no man put a stumbling-block or an occasion to fall in his brother’s way" (Romans 14:13). The apostle enforces the exhortation to Christian self-denial by three special reasons. 1. The Christian should not injure those whom Christ has died to save. "Destroy not him with thy meat, for whom Christ died" (Romans 14:15). This is the true basis of total abstinence. "It is good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor anything whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak" (Romans 14:21). 2. The Christian has higher enjoyments than those of selfish indulgence. "For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost" (Romans 14:17). The giving up of a merely bodily comfort or enjoyment should not be a great hardship to the Christian. God is able to give us much more than this. 3. The example of Christ is an example of self-denial. "For even Christ pleased not himself" (Romans 15:3). Self-denial is an essential part of truly following Christ. "If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow me." This law of Christian self-denial covers a wide field. Not merely abstinence from meats and drinks, from bodily indulgences which do harm to others; but also to put a bridle on our tongues, lest by our words we should give offence to others; to abstain from gratifying even lawful desires and wishes where the attainment of our purpose would cause pain or injury to others;—this is self-denial, this is to follow the example of Christ. Self-pleasing is a besetting sin with most of us. III. THE LAW OF . Here the apostle takes another forward step. Here he states a still higher principle. "Let us therefore follow after the things which make for peace, and things wherewith one may edify another" (Romans 14:19); "Let every one of us please his neighbour for his good to edification" (Romans 15:2). Here is the truly positive principle of Christian life. The Christian life should not be merely an abstinence from evil, but a positive doing of what is good. We should not merely refrain from injuring our neighbours, but we should be actively engaged, as Christians, in rendering them all the spiritual help we can. As a rule, our Christianity is negative rather than positive. It is too selfish. Many Christians are perfectly content with attaining the salvation of their own souls, and going through the world as harmlessly as possible. This, after all, is but a low type of Christianity True Christianity, the Christianity of the sermon on the mount, is as the salt, the light, the leaven; an active, helpful, beneficent influence upon those around us.—C.H.I. BY T.F. LOCKYER Romans 14:1-23 Christian liberty. The general treatment of the ethics of the gospel is concluded, and now the apostle deals with a particular application which the condition of the Church at Rome required. There were some there, a minority probably, who were more or less in subjection to the spirit of the old Judaic economy, making distinctions of meats and of days. And when they came together for the Christian love-feasts, the differences were of awkward consequence. The stronger ones doubted whether they should admit these, so weak in the faith, as they deemed them; the weaker ones were scandalized at the unscrupulousness, as they thought it, of the strong, or perhaps, overborne by the weight of their example, against their own convictions they joined in the common meal. Was there not grievous wrong in this? The stronger ones despising the weak, and overbearing their scruples, by disputations, perhaps by ridicule; the weaker ones, grieved in their hearts, and judging the strong, or otherwise, to their own condemnation, sinking their scruples and joining in the feast? But surely the Divine ethics of the gospel can meet this case: the apostle applies them. He will espouse, not the scruples of the weak, but their weakness, as against the Overbearing ridicule of the strong; but first, to guard himself and them, he will defend the liberty of the strong as against the censorious judgments of the weak. I. THE DUTY OF THE WEAK. The weaker man had his scruples; his strong judgments as to this or that mode of outward living being right, and this or that wrong. And he was quick to condemn the man whose opinions and practices were unlike his own. Not so, says the apostle. 1. He has another Master. Certainly he has yielded himself to Christ, and Christ, not another, must measure the fidelity of his service. If faithful, he abides his servant; if unfaithful, he falls. But he shall not fall. The heart is right, and even if the freedom of outward observance were a mistaken freedom, Christ is not such a Master as to cast him off for a mistake. No; "he shall be made to stand." Is not this the determining principle of the Christian life? Not the minute observance, right or wrong, but the motive, makes the Christian man. It matters nothing comparatively whether we eat or do not eat, whether we observe days or observe them not, whether we live or die: "none of us liveth to himself, and none dieth to himself." The aim of the whole life is Christ-wards, and the aim, not the details, determines the life. 2. He has another Judge. This follows from the former. If Christ be the Master now, he shall judge the service itself at the last. And if we may not measure the fidelity of another’s servant, neither may we pass sentence on his deeds. No; "the day shall declare it, and the fire shall try every man’s work of what sort it is" (1 Corinthians 3:13). For it is true that the details of the life will be taken into account, but not by our brethren: "Each one of us shall give account of himself to God." II. THE DUTY OF THE STRONG. So, then, the weak are warned not to judge the men of liberty; and the men of liberty, men of strength as they thought themselves, are to show their strength by gentleness, and their liberty by self-sacrifice. For the conscience of the weak, if erring, was to be respected, and neither were they to be grieved by a needless exhibition of the liberty of the strong, nor above all led to sin against their convictions by the example or ridicule of the preponderant party. 1. They were not to be grieved. Could the stronger ones ruthlessly cause pain to the scrupulous ones by their own seeming unscrupulousness? That was not walking in love. And for the sake of showing that they could eat meat! Away the thought: this was not God’s kingdom. Let them rather know that, eating or not eating, to respect the rights of others, to have peace with all, and to rejoice with a common joy in God,—this was God’s kingdom. So also would their spirit commend itself to men and to God. Christians then indeed; as Christ died for the weaker ones, so they sacrificing their liberty for them. 2. They were not to be made to fall. Let them know that, innocent as their eating of flesh might be, it was not innocent to the doubting man, and each one’s conscience must approve his own deeds, or he is condemned. Nay, he falls! Oh, surely they were not prepared for that? For this was, not merely to destroy the weak brother’s peace and charity of heart, but to overthrow the work of God in him! And all for the sake of meat! Better sacrifice all your liberty than this. Have your faith to yourself; have all tender solicitude for your weak brother’s conscience. Then receive the brother, care for him, sacrifice your freedom for him. For while faith, liberty, strength, are good, the best of all is love!—T.F.L. BY S.R. Romans 14:5 Individual decision. Questions concerning conduct greatly interest and occupy the minds of the majority. They involve the translation of abstract principle into concrete rules, and the visible concrete stirs us more deeply than abstractions. Yet it is these matters of application and detail which have often rent and grievously damaged the fellowship of the saints. The wise, magnanimous prudence of the apostle lays down one duty in relation to these vexed questions, which crop up today in modem forms. For instance, many are perplexed as to the rigid obligatoriness of sabbath observance, as to what is implied in keeping a day of rest as "the Lord’s day." Others moot the topic of contributions for religious purposes, whether a tithe is the scriptural proportion, and how far this is compulsory. Other subjects coming under the same category are amusements, abstinence from spirituous liquors, business policy, and politics. I. EACH HAS TO SETTLE SUCH FOR HIMSELF. "Let each be assured in his own mind." Others cannot do our part in investigation and decision. No one is authorized to come between us and God in such matters; even the apostle does not intrude on the province of several judgement. We must decide what our conscience prescribes, and where our conception of Christian service requires us to draw the line. Only let each see to it that he be not satisfied with giving the least amount or rendering the slightest obedience possible. He is wrong and condemns himself who asks, "How near the dangerous cliff can I walk without peril?" or, "What is the minimum religious work I can undertake as a servant of Christ?’ We need to study Scripture, to prayerfully ponder on its law of life, its principles, and the illustrations afforded by the lives and acts of the noblest heroes. Nor are we precluded from seeking the help and enlightenment which other books and companions may furnish. Yet the conclusion come to must be felt to be our own, in harmony with the dictates of our conscience, and ratified by our independent judgment. Then we may go fearlessly forward. Men differ in the conclusions they reach honestly enough, according to their breadth of intellect, their natural temperament, their surroundings, and their education, mental and experimental. II. WE CANNOT BE ARGUING THESE . He who is ever debating with himself settles nothing. He wastes his brief moments in deciding what to think and do, instead of beginning at once the discharge of his duties and the exercise of his gifts. Much in Christian doctrine and practice is unambiguous. To cultivate love, peace, godliness, to bring forth the fruits of the Spirit in activity, benevolence, holiness,—the rightness of this needs no process of reasoning. The man possessed by an idea is the man who influences his fellows; not he who is sure of nothing, who has only conundrums to propound instead of a way of salvation to proclaim and suggestions for usefulness to enforce. The ring of conviction in the voice begets assent and confidence in the hearers. "We believe, and therefore we speak," this is the preaching which is mighty unto conversion. A dainty scepticism has but negative chilling power. Doubters can hardly be fruit-bearers. Once a decision has been arrived at, the reasons on which it was founded may not be always present to the mind, but the impression remains. This does not forbid a growth of opinion, the gaining of a wider outlook and clearer penetration modifying previous conclusions. Time and experience confirm or alter views by imperceptible degrees, without the ferment that attends constant restlessness of debate. III. WE HAVE NO RIGHT TO IMPOSE OUR AND EXAMPLE AS OF FAITH ON OUR FELLOW-MEMBERS. There must be mutual concessions. Let not the strong contemn the weak as narrow-minded, nor the scrupulous censure the liberty of others as an infraction of Christian morals. Teetotallers err when they pass strictures on non-abstainers, and the latter are equally guilty when they ridicule the former’s self-denial. The good of the society, though best secured by the welfare of each unit composing the alliance, is yet of greater worth than the satisfaction and triumph of any separate section. "Follow after the things which make for peace." Divine charity, which bears long with all sorts and conditions of men, is reflected in the membership which knows how to be tolerant without laxity, and comprehensive without indefiniteness. The building up of the temple of God will take long if we are always deliberating on the right of individual stones to a place in the structure. Is the mark of the Master-mason on the stone? Has God received such? Then it is not for us to question or exclude.—S.R.A. Romans 14:9 The dominion of Christ. It is characteristic of apostolic ethics to turn from details of conduct to the main principles which should permeate every Christian life. The central truth governing all religious behaviour is our relationship to God, as manifested and actualized in Christ Jesus. Thus the historical facts of Christ’s death and resurrection necessarily give rise to doctrine, and they cannot be separated from our belief without tending to overthrow the whole edifice of Christian living based on Christ as its Foundation. It matters comparatively little whether a man eats meat or abstains from it, observes certain days or disregards their special sanctity, provided that the scruple alleged or the freedom enjoyed is conscientious, springing out of his conception of the nature of the religion Jesus Christ has revealed. It is not for others to despise the punctilious or to blame the informal. Each will be judged by his Master. That Master is Lord of both quick and dead; he presides not only over our earthly life, but over our departure to the larger life. Christians may differ in point of intellectual attainment and particular opinion, but every face believingly turned to the Sun of Righteousness reflects some of its glory; every worshipper is brought near to every other as he gathers at the feet of the Infinite Object of adoration and praise. I. THE OF CHRIST. 1. Christian freedom is not unconditional liberty. "Ye are not your own" is the watchword of grateful service. The emancipation of a slave does not set him free from all law; he is released from degrading servitude to be useful to his country and king. Modern civilization teaches the compatibility of numerous statutes with true essential freedom. The rule of Christ is recognized and illustrated in the Acts of the Apostles, "Thou, Lord, show which of these two thou hast chosen;" "The Lord added to them daily." "Lord, what wilt thou have me to do?" is the first question of the new life. There would be no difficulty in any department of Church-fellowship if the authority of Christ were fully recognized. "One is your Master, even Christ, and all ye are brethren." Finances, activity, brotherly regard, all flourish where hearts are surrendered in entirety to the sway of Christ. 2. This Lordship means protection as well as government. As under Roman law’ each noble patrician had his clients, whose wrongs he redressed and whose interests he promoted, so the Saviour throws the aegis of his love over his subjects, directing them by his wisdom, shielding them by his interposition. "Fear not; no man shall set on thee to harm thee." The very end of government is the welfare of the governed. Old ideas that the monarch has no duties and the people no rights have passed for ever; and we are warranted in seizing nobler conceptions of the sovereignty of God than prevailed when despotism reigned unquestioned. Let men beware lest they lop off limbs from the body of Christ, and by their divisions and excommunications rend his seamless garment. 3. The dominion of Christ may well console us as we think of the dead. He is the Lord of all worlds, has "all authority in heaven and earth." His voice comforts the bereaved, sounding amid the stillness of the sepulchre, "Fear not: I have the keys of death and of Hades." "He is not the Lord of the dead, but of the living.’ The dead pass not into a dreary unillumined state; they "depart to be with Christ." And where mournful reflections on wasted lives, sudden departures, check hopeful sorrow, and memory emits little fragrance from the past; yet we may leave all in his hands who, as the supreme Architect of humanity, rejoices in restoration rather than destruction. "Shall not the Judge … do right?" II. THE MANNER IS WHICH THIS WAS WON. 1. By stooping to the condition of his subjects. He is Lord by creation, but still more by virtue of his redemptive work. Well has he earned his title who entered into our humbling nature, tasted our sorrows, and drank the cup of bitterness as our Sin Offering. He himself passed through the gloomy portals of death, and in rising again revealed both the love and the might of God. Only he can be a true Master who first subordinated himself to service. For the suffering of death is he crowned with glory and honour. He can declare, "I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore." "Because I live, ye shall live also." This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/pulpit-commentary/ Romans 16:1-24 IV. . Questions have been raised and much discussed as to the connection of the last two chapters, 15. and 16., with the rest of the Epistle. The facts and the opinions founded on them may be summarized as follows. (1) There is sufficient proof that in early times copies of the Epistle existed without these two chapters. The evidence is this— (a) Origen (on Romans 16:25-27) speaks of some copies in his time being without the concluding doxology, and also without any part of these two chapters, attributing the omission to Marcion, for his own purposes, having mutilated the Epistle. His words are, "Caput hoc (i.e. Romans 16:25-27) Marcion, a quo scripturae evangelicae et apostolicae interpolatae sunt, de hac Epistola penitus abstulit; et non solum hoe, sod ab hoc loco ubi scriptum est, Omne autem quod non ex fide est peccatum est (i.e. Romans 14:23) usque ad finem cuncta dissecuit." Tertullian also speaks of Marcion having mutilated this Epistle, though not specifying these two chapters. (b) In Codex Amiatinus (a manuscript of the Latin Bible of the sixth century) there is a prefixed table of contents, referring by numbers to the sections into which the Epistle was divided, and describing the subject of each section. In this table the fiftieth section is thus described: "On the peril of one who grieves his brother by his meat," plainly denoting Romans 14:15-23; and the next and concluding section is described thus: "On the mystery of the Lord kept secret before his Passion, but after his Passion revealed," which description can only refer to the doxology of Rom 16:25-27. Hence it would seem that in some Latin copy of the Epistle to which the table of contents referred, the doxology followed Romans 14:23 with nothing between. (c) Tertullian, Irenaeus, and Cyprian. who quote largely from the Epistle, have no references to Romans 15:1-33. and 16. It may be observed, however, that mere omission to quote is not in itself conclusive, though it may be corroborative of other evidence. (2) The concluding doxology (Romans 16:25-27), though placed, as in the Textus Receptus, at the end of Rom 16:1-27. in the uncials generally and by the Latin Fathers, is found at the end of Rom 14:1-23. in the uncial L, in most cursives, in the Greek Lectionaries, and is so referred to by the Greek commentators. Some few manuscripts have it in both places, and some few omit it altogether. Origen also (loc. cit.) says that in some copies of the Epistle which contained Romans 15:1-33. and 16., the doxology was placed at the end of Rom 16:1-27., and in others at the end of Rom 14:1-23. (3) In one manuscript (G) all mention of Rome in the Epistle is omitted; and in one cursive (47) there is a marginal note to the effect that "some one" (i.e. probably, some commentator) makes no mention of the words ἐνΡώμῃ either in the interpretation or the text. In view of these facts, it may be held that the Epistle, as first written, ended at Romans 14:1-23. with the doxology appended, Romans 15:1-33. and 16. (ending at Romans 15:24 with the usual concluding benediction, "The grace," etc.) having been an addition. Baur, after his manner—and this partly on supposed internal evidence—disputes the two last chapters having been written by St. Paul at all, regarding them as an addition by a later hand. But his reasons are too arbitrary to stand against the authority of existing manuscripts, to say nothing of the internal evidence itself, which really appears to us to tell the other way. Such internal evidence will appear in the course of the Exposition. One view, put forth by Ruckert, and recently supported by Bishop Lightfoot, is that St. Paul, having originally written the whole Epistle, including the two chapters, but without the doxology, reissued it at a later period of his life in a shortened form for general circulation, having then appended the doxology. This theory, however, is but a conjecture, put forward as best accounting for all the facts of the case, including that of all mention of Rome having been apparently absent from some copies. This, however, might be accounted for by the Epistle having been issued, after St. Paul’s time, in a form suited for general circulation. On the whole, we may take it as probable that the apostle, having first concluded his Epistle with Romans 14:1-23. and the doxology, felt himself urged to resume a subject which lay so near his heart, and so appended Romans 15:1-33., and then the salutations, etc., in Romans 16:1-27., before the letter was sent. This supposition would in itself account for copies of the Epistle having got into circulation without the additions to it. Possibly Marcion took advantage of finding some such copies to deny the genuineness of the two final chapters altogether; and his doing so would be likely to promote circulation of the shorter copies. It will be observed that the Epistle, as a doctrinal treatise practically applied, is complete without the last two chapters; and also that Romans 15:1-33., though connected in thought with the end of Rom 14:1-23., might be, and indeed reads like, a resumption and further enforce-merit of its ideas. It seems, indeed, as if three appendices, or postscripts, had been added by the apostle; the first ending with the benediction of Rom 15:33; the second (commending Phoebe, who was to be the bearer of the letter, and sending salutations to persons at Rome) with the benediction of Rom 16:20; and the third (which might be added at the last moment) with that of Rom 16:24. All the benedictions are thus accounted for, being the apostle’s usual concluding authentications (cf. 2 Thessalonians 3:17; Colossians 4:18). As to the proper position of the doxology, if the view last given be correct, its original one would be most naturally at the end of Rom 14:1-23.; since otherwise the Epistle, as first completed, would have nothing answering to the usual benedictions in conclusion. And though this is not a benediction, but a doxology, embodying in solemn terms the main idea of the preceding treatise, such a conclusion is in keeping with the peculiar character of the Epistle to the Romans. Finally, though uncial authority is decidedly in favour of the position of the doxology at the end of Rom 16:1-27., this does not seem to be a sufficient reason for con-eluding it to have been originally there. If there existed anciently two editions, one with, and the other without, the two chapters appended, transcribers of the longer edition would be likely to place the doxology at the end of what they believed to be the true conclusion of the original Epistle. After all, the question cannot be considered as settled. It has been deemed sufficient here to state the main arguments for or against the various views that have been taken. Romans 15:1-13 H. Renewed admonition to bear with the weak, enforced by Scripture and the example of Christ. Romans 15:1-3 We then (rather, but we, or now we. The δὲ here certainly seems to link this chapter to the preceding section; but it is not inconsistent with the chapter being an addition to a completed letter, of which it takes up the concluding thought) that are strong (St. Paul, here as elsewhere, identifies himself with the more enlightened party) ought (ὀφείλομεν expresses obligation of duty) to bear the infirmities of the weak (cf. Galatians 6:2), and not to please ourselves. Let every one of us please his neighbour for his good (rather, for that which is good) to edification. For Christ also pleased not himself; but, as it is written, The reproaches of them that reproached thee fell on me. The quotation is from Psalms 69:9; one in which a righteous sufferer under persecution calls on God for deliverance, and to some parts of which even the details of Christ’s Passion strikingly correspond. The first part of the verse here quoted, "The zeal of thine house," etc., is applied to him in John 2:17. Romans 15:4 For whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning (in the old sense of teaching, or instruction), that we through patience and comfort of the Scriptures (or, as the form of the Greek rather suggests, and as is confirmed by the repetition of the words conjoined in Romans 15:5, through the patience and the comfort of the Scriptures) might have hope. This verse, introduced by γὰρ, gives the reason why the words of the ancient psalmist are adduced for the instruction of Christians. Christ, it is said, exemplified the principle of it, and it is for us to do so too. By bearing the infirmities of the weak, and submitting, if need be, to reproach, we exhibit Christ-like endurance (ὑπομονὴ), such as Scripture inculcates; and therewith will come comfort, such as Scripture contains and gives, and so a strengthening of our hope beyond these present troubles. The psalm quoted was peculiarly one of endurance and comfort under vexations and reproaches, and of hope beyond them. It was written afore-time for our instruction, that so it may be with us, as it was with Christ. In the next verse the apostle returns definitely to the subject in hand. Romans 15:5-7 Now the God of patience and comfort (the same word as before, though here in the Authorized Version rendered consolation) grant you to be like-minded (see on Romans 12:16), one with another according to Christ Jesus: that ye may with one accord with one mouth glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ (so certainly, rather than, as in the Authorized Version, "God, even the Father of," etc.). Wherefore receive ye one another (cf. Romans 14:1, and note), even as Christ also received us (or you, which is better supported, and, for a reason to be given below, more likely) to the glory of God. As in Romans 15:3, the example of Christ is again adduced. The connection of thought becomes plain if we take the admonition, "Receive ye one another," to be mainly addressed to "the strong," and these to consist principally of Gentile believers, the "weak brethren" being (as above supposed) prejudiced Jewish Christians. To the former the apostle says, "Receive to yourselves with full sympathy those Jewish weak ones, even as Christ, though sent primarily to fulfil the ancient promises to the house of Israel only (see Romans 15:8), embraced you Gentiles (ὑμᾶς) also within the arms of mercy" Thus the sequence of thought in Romans 15:8, seq., appears. "Unto the glory of God" means "so as to redound to his glory." Christ’s receiving the Gentiles was unto his glory; and it is implied that the mutual receiving of each other by believers would be so too. The idea of God’s glory being the end of all runs through the whole passage (cf. Romans 15:6, Romans 15:9, Romans 15:11). Romans 15:8, Romans 15:9 For (the reading γὰρ is much better supported than δὲ. The essential meaning, however, of λέγωγὰρ is the same as of λέγωδὲ) I say (i.e. what I mean to say is this; cf. 1 Corinthians 1:12; Galatians 4:1: Galatians 5:16) that Jesus Christ was (rather, has been made, γεγενῆσθαι being the more probable reading than γενέσθαι) a minister of the circumcision (i.e. of the Jews) for the truth of God, to confirm the promises made unto the fathers (literally, the promises of the fathers): and that the Gentiles might glorify God for his mercy. Observe the expressions, ὑπὲρἀληθείαςΘεοῦ, etc., and ὑπὲρἐλέους, with reference respectively to the Jews and Gentiles. Christ’s primary ministry was to "the house of Israel" (cf. Matthew 15:24), in vindication of God’s truth, or faithfulness to his promises made through the patriarchs to the chosen race: his taking in of the Gentiles was an extension of the Divine mercy, to his greater glory. The infinitive δοξάσαι, in Romans 15:9, seems best taken in the same construction with βεβαιῶσαι in Romans 15:8, both being dependent on εἰςτὸ. As it is written, For this cause I will confess to thee among the Gentiles, and sing unto thy Name. This quotation from Psalms 18:49 or 2 Samuel 22:50, with those that follow, are for scriptural confirmation of God’s purpose, which has just been spoken of, to include the Gentiles in his covenanted mercies to Israel, so that they too might glorify him. St. Paul, after a manner usual with him; follows cut a thought suggested in the course of his argument, so as to interrupt the latter for a while, but to return to it in 2 Samuel 22:13. All, in fact, from the beginning of 2 Samuel 22:8 to the end of 2 Samuel 22:12, is parenthetical, suggested by "even as Christ received you,." at the end of 2 Samuel 22:7. All this, it may be observed, is confirmatory of Pauline authorship. The first quotation introduces David, the theocratic king, confessing and praising God, not apart from the Gentiles, but among them. The second, from Deuteronomy 32:43, calls on the Gentiles themselves to join in Israel’s rejoicing; the third, from Psalms 117:1, does the same; the last, from Isaiah 11:10, foretells definitely the reign of the Messiah over Gentiles as well as Jews, and the hope also of the Gentiles in him. Romans 15:10-13 And again he saith, Rejoice, ye Gentiles, with his people. And again, Praise the Lord, all ye Gentiles; and laud him, all ye peoples. And again, Esaias saith, There shall be a root of Jesse, and he that shall rise to reign over the Gentiles; in him shall the Gentiles trust (rather, hope—ἐλπιοῦσι—which is the word in the LXX.; thus brining back the thought of the hope spoken of in Romans 15:4, with a prayer for the abundance of which to his readers, as the result of peace in the faith among each other, the apostle now concludes his exhortation). Now the God of hope fill you with all joy and peace in believing, that ye my abound in hope, through the power of the Holy Ghost. Romans 15:14-33 I. Expression of confidence in the general disposition of the Roman Christians, and of the writer’s desire to visit them, and his intentions in accordance with that desire. Romans 15:14 And I myself also am persuaded of you, my brethren, that ye yourselves also are full of goodness, filled with all knowledge, able also to admonish one another. It is St. Paul’s courteous as well as kindly way to compliment those to whom he writes on what he believes to be good in them, and to cling to a good opinion of them, even where he has some misgivings, or has had reason to find fault (cf. 1 Corinthians 1:4, seq.; 2 Corinthians 1:7; 2 Corinthians 3:1, seq.; 2 Corinthians 7:3, seq.). Here "I myself also" (καὶαὐτὸςἐγὼ) may have tacit reference to the general good report of the Roman Church (cf. Romans 1:8 and Romans 16:19), which he means to say he himself by no means doubts the truth of, notwithstanding his previous warnings. "Ye yourselves also" (καὶαὐτοὶ) implies his trust that even without such warnings they would of themselves be as he would wish them to be; "full of goodness" (ἀγαθωσύνης), so as to be kind to one another, as they were enlightened and replete with knowledge (γνώσεως). Romans 15:15 But I have written unto you the more boldly, brethren, in some measure (so, as in the Revised Version, or, in part (ἀπὸμέρονς), rather than in some sort, as in the Authorized Version. The allusion seems to be to the passages in the Epistle in which he has been bold to admonish urgently; such as Romans 11:17, seq.; Romans 12:3; and especially Romans 14:1-23.), as putting yon in mind (reminding you only of what you doubtless know), because of the grace given me of God; i.e., as appears from what follows, of apostleship to the Gentries (cf. Romans 1:5, Romans 1:14; also Acts 22:21: Galatians 2:9). Though the Church of Rome was not one of his own foundation, and he had no desire, there or elsewhere, to build on another man’s foundation (Romans 14:20), yet his peculiar mission as apostle to the Gentiles gave him a claim to admonish them. The reason thus given is, it will be observed, a confirmation of the view, otherwise apparent, that the Roman Church consisted principally of Gentile believers. Romans 15:16 That I should be the minister (λειτουργὸν) of Jesus Christ unto the Gentiles, ministering (λειτουργοῦντα) the gospel of God, that the offering up of the Gentiles might be acceptable, being sanctified in the Holy Ghost. As to the words λειτουργὸς and λευτουργεῖν, see on Romans 13:6; and on λατρεύω, λατρεία on Romans 1:9 and Romans 12:1. Here they are evidently used in their sacrificial meaning, but applied metaphorically; the "acceptable offering" which Paul offers to God is that of the Gentiles whom he brings to the faith. "The preaching of the gospel he calls a sacrificial service (ἱερουργιάν), and genuine faith an acceptable offering" (Theodoret). "This is my priesthood, to preach and to proclaim" (Chrysostom); cf Philippians 2:17. Romans 15:17 I have therefore whereof I may glory through (rather, I have my boasting in) Christ Jesus in the things that pertain unto God (τὰπρὸςΘεόν—the same phrase as is used in Hebrews 5:1 with reference to priestly service). St. Paul’s purpose in this and the four following verses is to allege proof of his being a true apostle with a right to speak with authority to the Gentiles. It is evident, he says, from the extent and success of my apostolic labours, and the power of God that has accompanied them. So also, still more earnestly and at length, in 2 Corinthians 11:1-33. and 12. As to his reason for frequently thus insisting on his true apostleship, and for asserting it in writing to the Romans, see note on Romans 1:1. Romans 15:18, Romans 15:19 For I will not dare to speak of any of those things which Christ hath not wrought through me unto the obedience of the Gentiles (meaning, I will not dare to speak, of any mere doings of my own, but only of those in which the power of Christ working through my ministry has been displayed) by word and deed, by the power of signs and wonders (i.e. displays of miraculous power. It is noteworthy how St. Paul alludes incidentally in his letters to such "signs and wonders" having accompanied his ministry, as to something familiar and acknowledged, so as to suggest the idea of their having been more frequent than we might gather from the Acts of the Apostles. Had the alleged "signs and wonders" been unreal, we might have expected them to be made more of in the subsequent narrative of an admirer than in contemporary letters), by the power of the Spirit of God; so that from Jerusalem, and round about as far as Illyricum, I have fully preached (literally, I have fulfilled) the gospel of Christ. In thus designating the sphere of his ministry the apostle is denoting its local extent, rather than the course he had taken. He had, in fact, preached first at Damascus (Acts 9:20), and afterwards at Jerusalem (Acts 9:29); but he mentions Jerusalem first, as being the original home of the gospel in the East, and, indeed, the first scene of his own preaching in fellowship with the original apostles. Thence he had extended it in various quarters, and carried it into Europe, Illyricum being the western limit so far reached. It is true that there is no mention in the Acts of his having actually visited Illyria. In the journey of Act 17:1-34. he plainly got no further west than Betted, which is, however, not far off; and he might possibly mean here only to say that he had extended the gospel to the borders of Illyricum, but for the word πεπληρωκέναι, and his seeming to imply afterwards (Acts 17:23) that he had gone as far as he could in those regions, and consequently contemplated a journey to Spain. Hence, the narrative of Acts not being an exhaustive history, it may be supposed that he had on some occasion extended his operations from Macedonia to Illyricum, as he may well have done on his visit to the latter mentioned in Acts 20:1-38. 1-3, where διελθὼντὰμέρηἐκεῖνα allows for a visit into Illyricum. Romans 15:20 Yea (or, but), so striving (or, earnestly desiring, or making it my aim. The word is φιλοτιμούμενον, cf. 2 Corinthians 5:1-21. 9; 1 Thessalonians 4:11) to preach the gospel, not where Christ was named, lest I should build upon another man’s foundation. In the compact between St. Paul and the apostles of the circumcision referred to in Galatians 2:1-7, it was agreed that he should confine his apostolic ministry to the Gentiles. Consequently, we find him selecting as centres of his work the principal cities of the heathen world. But he was further careful to avoid places, wherever they might be, in which Churches were already founded. It was the function of an apostle to extend the gospel by founding new Churches, rather than to invade the provinces of others. Those founded by himself, and thus under his immediate jurisdiction, as e.g. the Corinthian Church, he visited as need arose, and addressed them in authoritative letters, commanding as well as exhorting. But his rule in this respect did not preclude his writing also letters of general encouragement and admonition to any whom his peculiar commission as apostle of the Gen- tiles gave him a claim to be heard by. Thus he wrote to the Colossians, though he had never seen them (Colossians 1:4; Colossians 2:1); and thus also to the Romans, at the same time (as we have seen, Romans 15:15, seq.) almost apologizing for doing so; and, though he proposes visiting them, it is nor with the view of staying among them long, so as to take up the superintendence of them, but only on his way to Spain for mutual comfort and edification (see Romans 1:11, Romans 1:12; Romans 15:24). Romans 15:21-24 But as it is written, To whom he was not spoken of, they shall see: and they that have not heard shall understand (Isaiah 52:15, as in the LXX. The passage is Messianic; but St. Paul need be understood to be quoting it as predictive or directive of the rule he follows. Enough if it expresses his meaning well). For which cause also I have been much hindered (or, was for the most part, or many times hindered) from coming to you. The hindrance had been, mainly at least, as is evident from Δὼ (Romans 15:22), the obligation he was under of completing his ministry in the first place in other quarters (see on Romans 1:13). But now having no longer place in these regions (i.e., according to the context, there being no additional sphere for my activity there. He had now planted the gospel in all the principal centres, leaving disciples and converts, and probably an ordained ministry, to carry on the work and extend it in the regions round. In this his proper apostolic work consisted; cf. 1 Corinthians 1:14-17), and having a great desire these many years to come unto you; whensoever I take my journey into Spain, I will come to you: for I hope to see you on my journey, and to be brought on my way thitherward by you, if first I be somewhat filled with your company. The sense of this verse is no way affected by the omission of "I will come unto you," which authorities are against retaining. If "for," after this omission, be retained, the sentence is incomplete, as St. Paul’s sometimes are. The omission of "for" (for which there is some little authority) leaves the sentence improved. The apostle’s selection of Spain as his next intended sphere of labour might be due to the notoriety of that Roman province, and the facility of communication with it by sea. His omission of Italy, except for a passing visit, is accounted for by his principle, already enunciated, of not building on other men’s foundation, there being already a flourishing Church at any rate at Rome. He hoped, as appears from this verse, that some of the members of it might join him in his mission to Spain. For the word προπεμφθῆναι would imply their going all the way in the ease of a sea-voyage. For the use of the word, cf. Acts 15:3; Acts 20:38; Acts 21:5; 1 Corinthians 16:6; 2 Corinthians 1:16. Observe the characteristic courtesy of the concluding clause, which is literally, "should I be first in part" (i.e. not as much as I should wish, but to such extent as my short stay with you will allow) "filled with you," i.e. enjoy you. Romans 15:25-27 But now I go to Jerusalem ministering unto the saints. For it hath pleased (εὐδόκησανα, implying good will) Achaia and Macedonia to make a certain contribution (κοινωνίαν, intimating the communion of Christians with each other, evinced by making others partakers of their own blessings; of Romans 12:13; 2 Corinthians 9:13; 1 Timothy 6:18; Hebrews 13:16) to the poor of the saints which are at Jerusalem. As to this collection for the poor Christians at Jerusalem, which St. Paul seems to have been intent on during his journeys, and which he was now on the point of carrying to its destination, of. Acts 19:21; Acts 24:17; 2 Corinthians 8:1-9:15. It hath pleased them verily; and their debtors they are. For if the Gentiles have been made partakers of their spiritual things, their duty is also to minister (λειουργῆσαι; here in the general sense of ministry; see on Romans 13:6) to them in carnal things. Here we have the same idea of salvation being derived to the Gentiles from the Jews as is prominent in Romans 11:17, Romans 11:18, and apparent in Romans 15:7, seq. Romans 15:28, Romans 15:29 When therefore I have accomplished this, and sealed to them (i.e. ratified and assured to them) this fruit, I will come away by you into Spain. And I know that when I come to you (ὑμᾶς here is intended emphatically) I shall come in the fulness of the blessing of Christ. How different from his anticipations were the circumstances of his first visit to Rome we know from the Acts. So man proposes, but God disposes, and all for final good (cf. Philippians 1:12, seq.). That he afterwards carried out his intention of visiting Spain cannot be alleged with certainty, though there is distinct evidence of an early tradition that he did so (Canon Muratori, Eusebius, Jerome, Theodoret. Cf. Clem. Romans, Ephesians 1:1-23, who speaks of St. Paul having gone to "the boundaries of the West"). Certainly before the end of his detention at Rome he had given up any idea he might have had of going thence at once to Spain; for cf. Philippians 2:19; Philemon 1:22; which Epistles are believed, on good grounds, to have been written during that detention. Still, he may have gone during the interval between his release and his final captivity at Rome, during which the pastoral Epistles were probably written. In what follows (verses 30-32) some apprehension of dangers attending his visit to Jerusalem, which might possibly thwart his intentions, already appears; sounding like an undertone allaying the confidence of the hope previously expressed. In the course of his progress to Jerusalem this apprehension appears to have grown upon him; for see Acts 20:22, Acts 20:23, Acts 20:28; Acts 21:4, Acts 21:11-14). It may be here observed that such signs, evidently unintentional, of conflicting feelings in the letter, and such consistency between the letter and the narrative, are strong confirmations of the genuineness of both. Romans 15:30-33 Now I beseech you, brethren, by our Lord Jesus Christ, and by the love of the Spirit, that ye strive together with me in your prayers to God for me; that I may be delivered from them that do not believe in Judaea; and that my service which I have for Jerusalem may be acceptable to the saints. Here he seems to imply a possibility of even the Jewish Christians not receiving him, with the alms he brought them, kindly. In 2 Oct. Romans 8:18, seq., he had shown signs of being anxious to avoid any possible suspicion of malversation with regard to the contribution. The danger probably arose from the suspicions against himself, his authority, and his motives, entertained by the Judaistic faction. That this faction was then strong at Jerusalem appears from the precautions he was advised to take on his arrival there (see Acts 21:20-24). That I may come unto you with joy by the will of God, and may with you be refreshed. Now the God of peace be with you all Amen. Romans 15:1-3 Self-pleasing and self-denial. The controversy which gave rise to this statement of Christian principle was local and temporary, and seems to us somewhat trivial. It was, however, the occasion for an inspired publication of important, practical moral truths and precepts, of world-wide and lasting application. When a difference arises between two parties, who are accustomed to think and act together, there is danger of each party becoming bitter and overbearing, and resolving to thrust its own convictions and preferences upon the other. Paul teaches us that the true remedy for this evil is unselfishness, and that the true motive to unselfishness is to be found in the cross of Christ. I. THE MORAL PRECEPT. The authoritative counsel of the apostle is both negative and positive, dissuasive and persuasive. 1. Selfishness is forbidden. It need scarcely be said that undue opinion of self, an undue confidence in one’s own judgment, an undue regard to one’s own interest, are common faults. We are all naturally prone to please self, even when to do so is injurious to others and displeasing to God. The unrenewed man is in the habit of following the lead of his own appetites, tastes, and inclinations, though these be worldly and sinful. This is not to be wondered at. Of the wandering sheep it is said, "They have turned every one to his own way." Few are the sins, vices, crimes, which cannot be traced to the action of this powerful principle, which induces men to prefer their own gratification to all beside. But it must not be supposed that this is a fault from which the disciples of Christ are universally or generally free. They are not only tempted to please themselves in worldly pursuits; they are in danger of carrying selfishness into their very religion. How often do we find Christians trying to thrust their own views, their own tastes, their own practices, upon their neighbours, whether these are willing or unwilling! There may be a want of consideration and forbearance within Christian societies, and in the relation of such societies to one another. And there are too many whose one idea of religion is this—how they may themselves be saved and made happy. Let it be remembered that the admonition of the text was addressed to Christians. If these Romans needed it, perhaps we may likewise. 2. Unselfishness is enjoined. This passage reminds us that this self-denying posture of mind is to be maintained with regard to a special class. Suppose that you are strong; yet it must not be lost sight of that some are weak. Are their infirmities to be despised? The apostle enjoins us to consider them, and to bear with them. There may be those whose infirmity is owing to youth and inexperience, and those whose infirmity is that of age. There are some who are weak physically, and who perhaps are therefore irritable Many are weak mentally; their ability is small, their education has been neglected. And some are weak spiritually—babes in Christ, though perhaps men in years. Such are not to be despised or derided by such as are strong. Deal patiently, tenderly, forbearingly with such as these. The admonition is more general. We are to please our neighbour, i.e. every one we have to do with, whether weak or strong. This does not mean that we are to gratify all his foolish whims and caprices—to try, as some do, to please everybody, at all costs; to flatter the vain, and cajole the ignorant, and humour the petulant. By "pleasing here we may understand benefiting and serving. If there be any doubt about this, the limitation here introduced by the apostle solves such doubt; it is "for that which is good," and "unto edifying." As regards our fellow-Christians, our service will naturally take the form of helpfulness to them in their need, and spiritual ministrations according to our capacity and opportunity, with effort for their elevation and happiness. As regards our irreligious neighbours, our unselfish service will be mainly effort for their enlightenment and salvation. Probably such effort will displease, rather than please, the careless and self-indulgent, whom we seek to awaken to a better life. Yet the time may come when even such will look back with thankfulness and delight upon benevolent effort and earnest prayer, by which they have received imperishable good. Selfishness, then, is the curse of the world and the bane of the Church; whilst, on the other hand, they obey their Lord, and promote their own welfare and that of society, who are considerate and forbearing towards the weak, and who aim at pleasing and benefiting all who come within the range of their influence. II. THE GROUND FOR THE PRECEPT. Christianity bases every duty. upon a Divine foundation. 1. The virtue of unselfishness is for Christians a virtue springing from their relation to their Lord. Sympathy is in its rudiments a natural principle; but this stands a poor chance when it comes into conflict with natural self-love. Both these principles are good, and virtue lies in their proper adjustment. It is the sacrifice, the spirit, the example of our Divine Saviour, which assure victory to unselfish benevolence. 2. In Christ we observe the sublimest illustration of self-denial and self-sacrifice. We cannot fail to see these qualities in his giving up his own ease and pleasure, and accepting a life of poverty and homelessness. He would not accept an earthly kingdom or worldly honours. In carrying out the purposes of his mission, he set himself against the powerful and the influential among his countrymen. There was no day and no act of his public ministry which was not a proof of the assertion, "Even Christ pleased not himself." 3. We remark in the Lord Jesus perfect obedience to the Father. Prophecy put into his lips the language, "Lo, I come to do thy will, O my God." He himself declared that he came to do the will of him that sent him, and he was conscious that this purpose was carried out. "I do always those things that please him." He even shaped this principle into the remarkable prayer, "Not my will, but thine, be done." Consider that the only way to make sure that life is not self-seeking and self-pleasing is to consecrate it to the high end of pleasing God. 4. Our Saviour endured reproaches and wrongs in the procuring of human salvation. These revilings and injuries were inflicted by sinners, and they came upon the innocent. He "endured the contradiction of sinners against himself;" he endured the cross, despising the shame." And this he did willingly and without a murmur. For "with his stripes we are healed." The "joy that was set before him" reconciled him to hardship and privation, to insult and mocking, to anguish and death. Thus the pleasing of self was utterly absent; the mortification and crucifixion of self were conspicuously present; reproaches were welcomed, that the reproachers might be redeemed. 5. The passage presumes the action of the distinctively Christian principle in such a way as to influence the conduct of Christ’s people. Not only. have we, in our Lord’s spirit and conduct, the one perfect example of self-denial and of devotion to the cause of human welfare. We have a provision for securing that Christ’s people shall resemble their Lord. His love, personally apprehended and experienced, becomes the motive to their gratitude, affection, and consecration; and is the seed of its own reproduction and growth in their renewed nature. His Spirit is the Agent by whose energy men’s natural selfishness is vanquished, and the new life is fostered and sustained. LESSONS. 1. Admire the Divine wisdom in the provision made for overcoming the natural selfishness Of mankind. What inferior agency could suffice for such a task? 2. If unhappy, consider whether self-seeking is not at the root of restlessness and dissatisfaction; and fall in with the Divine plan, by seeking earnestly the welfare of your neighbours. And you shall find such action will bring its own reward. 3. Cherish the divinely justified hope for the world’s future welfare. Neither interest nor philosophy can effect what Christianity is capable of doing. The prospects of humanity are bound up with the rule and the grace of him of whom we read, "Even Christ pleased not himself." 4. Let the strong please, and bear with the infirmities of, the weak, by supporting such institutions as are designed to relieve suffering and to supply need. Romans 15:4 The Scriptures. In many ways the New Testament lends its support and sanction to the Old. Our Lord himself bade his auditors and disciples "search the Scriptures." The evangelists support the Divine authority of Christ’s ministry, by exhibiting many of its incidents as the fulfilment of Old Testament prophecy. And the Epistles abound with quotations from the ancient Hebrew writings which they approve as of inspired authority. In this passage, Paul records in explicit language his own view of the character and purposes of Old Testament Scripture. I. THE THAT THE SHOULD BE OF USE. "These things were written for our learning," i.e. for our instruction and improvement. This may be shown to be the case with the historical lessons, the biographical examples and warnings, the moral precepts, the prophetic promises, of the Word of God. Nothing is purposeless or valueless. II. THE METHOD IN WHICH THE PROVE . They are not like an amulet, a charm, the mere possession of which is supposed to be advantageous. They are to be used in conformity with our intellectual and moral nature. Only by entering into the soul, and acting upon its passions, principles, and powers, can the teachings of inspiration profit and help us. The apostle mentions two ways in which the Scriptures thus act. 1. By patience. That is to say, the Scriptures represent our human nature and life as exposed to suffering, temptation, and many evils, against which the power of religion alone can fortify, and from which it alone can deliver. The Scriptures contain representations of God himself which are fitted to sustain his people to endure, and to inspire them to persevere. They contain actual illustrations of the power of patience exhibited in the life of many of the saints of God. 2. By comfort. If patience is exercised by man, consolation is afforded by God. The strengthening and consolatory power of Divine grace is exhibited both in the declarations and doctrines, and also in the practical and living exhibitions and manifestations of piety, which abound in Holy Scripture. III. THE AND EXACT PURPOSE FOR WHICH THE HAVE BEEN GIVEN. That is, that we may have hope. 1. Why is this needed? Because in this life, and in our experience, there is very much to occasion depression and despondency. Our own weakness and liability to error and to sin, and the ills of human society, are such as to account for frequent discouragement. 2. How is hope awakened and fostered by the Scriptures? By their express declarations of Divine mercy, and their explicit promises of succour and guidance and blessing. 3. Whither are our hopes directed? Primarily to God: "Hope thou in God." And then also to earthly deliverance and to heavenly rest. 4. What is the moral power of hope? It both cheers and sustains the soul, and makes it brighter and more confident in fulfilling Christian service. Romans 15:5, Romans 15:6 Unity. Mutual forbearance and considerateness tend to true spiritual unity. In the presence of a hostile world, it was evidently of the highest practical importance that the early Christians should exhibit the power of the truth and the Spirit of God to draw them together, and to make them one. How dear this aim was to the heart of Christ, is evident alike from his frequent admonitions and from art urgent petition in his great intercessory prayer. I. THE DIVINE SOURCE OF UNITY. That true unity is from God appears: 1. From the nature and character of God, as "the God of patience and of comfort." 2. From the apostolic prayer, "grant you to be like-minded," etc., from which it is apparent that, in the view of the inspired apostle, the true fountain of concord and brotherly love is in heaven, in the heart of the infinite Father. 3. From the mediation of Jesus Christ, whose design in redemption was first to "make peace" between a righteous Ruler and rebellious subjects; and then to break down every wall of partition that divided man from man, and to constitute one new, unbroken humanity in himself—the glorious Head. II. THE OF UNITY. 1. Where this grace exists, there is one mind, with mutual love. By "the same mind" the apostle does not mean "of the same opinion." This is not possible where men think freely and independently. But he means "of similar disposition towards Christ," "of like sentiments of brotherly love one towards another." This is pleasing to the God of peace and love. 2. Where this grace exists there is "one mouth," with common praise. There is a sacrifice in which all devout souls, all holy assemblies, constantly unite—it is the sacrifice of gratitude and praise. The several voices in this offering to Heaven blend in sweetest concord, and form a Divine and exquisite harmony. The more the notes, the vaster the variety, the more marvellous and beautiful is the spiritual concert. As with one only mouth, the living Church offers to the "God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ" the anthem of spiritual, acceptable, and unending praise—the Church on earth herein preparing for the eternal song of heaven. . Unity must be, not merely in word or in outward association, but in the spirit of love and in the tribute of grateful adoration. Romans 15:13 The office of the Holy Spirit. Paul was not one of those upon whom the Spirit fell on the Day of Pentecost. He was at that time a scholar; living probably in Jerusalem, and certainly studying the Law and the traditions of his nation, with all the energy of an ardent, zealous, and persevering mind. He may have known at the time of the remarkable events which occurred; but if he did, they made no great impression on him. For only two or three years afterwards, when Stephen was stoned, Saul was one of those who "consented to his death." And, as we read, he "made havoc of the Church," and "breathed out threatenings and slaughter" against the disciples of the Lord. But if for a while neither the crucifixion of Christ nor the descent of the Holy Spirit had any effect upon the Pharisee who boasted himself to be of the school of Gamaliel, the time came when the faith which he despised and persecuted laid hold upon his great heart, and assumed the lordship over his active life. And now observe two things very noticeable in Saul’s history. First, when Anauias was sent to the smitten and blinded persecutor, to release him, in the name of Jesus, from his privation and doubt, and, in the same name, to commission him as the apostle to the Gentiles, the servant of the Lord declared the purport of his visit to be that, Saul might be "filled with the Holy Ghost!" And secondly, when, at Antioch, the Holy Ghost called Barnabas and Saul to a missionary enterprise, they are said by the inspired historian to have been "sent forth by the Holy Ghost." So, although Paul was not present when Peter and the rest of the brethren were made partakers of the spiritual outpouring by which the new dispensation was inaugurated, it is clear that he received, and that he knew that he received, the Holy Ghost as well as they. In his conversion, his whole nature was influenced by the Divine enlightenment and quickening; in his commission, the impulse and the authority of his missionary life were conferred by the living Spirit of God. It is not to be wondered at, then, that the apostle of the Gentiles, in his preaching and his writings, laid stress upon the office of the Divine Comforter. He could not have exalted the Spirit more constantly and gratefully even if he had listened to the Master’s discourses in which the Paraclete was promised; even if he had been amongst the favoured company on the Day of Pentecost, when cloven tongues of fire sat upon the heads of the disciples of the Lord. In fact, just as the mediatorial work of Christ is at least as fully stated and explained by Paul as by the other apostles, so is he not behind them in the exposition of the offices of the Comforter, and the results of his perpetual indwelling in Christian hearts, in Christian society. It needs not be said that the offices of the Holy Spirit are not only precious, but manifold. Paul was well aware of this fact. But attention is asked especially to one result of the dispensation of the Spirit; to one valuable fruit which all Christians growingly appreciate. The Divine Spirit is set before us in the text as the Author and Inspirer of a cheerful and hopeful disposition of the mind: "Now the God of hope fill you with all joy and peace in believing, that ye may abound in hope, through the power of the Holy Ghost." It is often observed that, in a cultivated and reflective state of society, there is a tendency to a mournful and even desponding disposition. When people have much leisure to think, and large knowledge of human life and history, they often cherish gloomy and hopeless forebodings. Unable to resolve their own difficulties, disappointed with efforts made to improve society, they are prone to abandon themselves to scepticism, and to ask whether all things do not exist in vain, and whether the philosophy of the royal sage is not sound and just: "Vanity of vanities," saith the preacher; "all is vanity!" The Holy Spirit was given to banish such a temper of mind, and to inspire us with cheerfulness and with hope. He is the Spirit of life, quickening the spiritually dead; the Spirit of truth, revealing the realities of the Divine character and government; the Spirit of holiness, fostering in the soul of man all pure thoughts and purposes. And our text brings before us the welcome truth that the Spirit of God has power to fill us with "joy and peace in believing," and to cause us to "abound in hope." There is no broader and more obvious distinction between Christians and unbelievers than that which is suggested by our text. The Christian, speaking generally, is the man who hopes; the infidel is the man who is hopeless. The preacher has known in the course of his life, and has conversed with, many unbelievers—some of them honourable, virtuous, and, within limits, benevolent men. But they have been, without exception, neither happy nor hopeful. Their view of human life is invariably melancholy, and their forebodings for humanity’s future are usually dark and despondent. At the time when our Divine faith was first preached in the world, observant and thoughtful men were under a cloud of depression. Dissatisfied with the superstitions of their fathers, disgusted with the corruptions of society, they were without any faith that could sustain and cherish a lofty hope for the race. It did not enter into their minds that any moral power could be introduced into the world capable of even attempting, far less achieving, the regeneration of society—of raising the uncivilized, and redeeming those who were civilized and cultivated, but corrupt and cynical and selfish. What a revelation must Christians—not merely Christianity, but Christians—have brought to the ancient society! Here was a sect of men, distinguished, indeed, by their beliefs and practices, their pure and beneficent life, from those around them, but in nothing more distinguished than in this—they were the men in the world who hoped! Whilst the multitude, and even many of the philosophers, were saying, "Let us eat and drink; for to-morrow we die;" whilst the thoughtful and high-minded mourned the corruptions of the times, and despised their degraded fellow-creatures, and saw no prospect of the salvation of society; the followers of Christ appeared, each one with a hope which death could not tear from him, for himself; each one with a yet sublimer hope, that no disappointment could quench, for the unhappy but not forsaken race of which he was a member. You remember the honour which was bestowed upon a patriot—that, in days of darkness and of threatening, he did not despair of his country. Of every lowly Christian the yet more remarkable eulogy would have been true, that he did not despair of his race. And this, in days when Christianity had yet its triumphs to win, its great renown to achieve! The Holy Spirit was given to reveal to the disciples of Christ a "God of hope." Men’s dejection and despair arise from their want of faith in God. And nothing but a sound and rational belief in God can bring them to a better mind. What so fitted to inspire with cheerfulness as the conviction that a God of righteousness and of grace lives and reigns, takes the deepest interest in men, and provides for their true well-being? Now, when the Holy Ghost was given, on the Day of Pentecost, he was given as "the promise of the Father," as the bestowal of a gracious God. Let the truth be recognized that a good hope must begin in God. The counsel of the ancient psalmist was sound as well as pious: "Hope thou in God." Fix your hopes, as many do, upon human beings, upon human institutions, upon human plans, and their failure will involve you in cruel disappointment. But if for you the Lord liveth and reigneth, if he be the God of man, the God of salvation, then there is a sound basis for your hopes—a basis which no power on earth, and no power from hell, can overturn or even shake. It was the power of the Spirit that ratified the words and sealed the authority and authenticated the mission of Christ. Jesus had promised that, if he went away, he would" send the Comforter." He knew that the approach of his departure filled their hearts with sorrow, and he bade them rather rejoice, inasmuch as this was the condition of the gift of the Comforter. And when, in fulfilment of his assurance, he shed forth the gifts they needed for their spiritual quickening and for their qualification for apostolic service, the friends of Christ must have felt the encouraging and inspiring influence of the faithfulness and grace of their Lord. After his resurrection, the disciples were "glad when they saw the Lord" After his ascension, "they returned to Jerusalem with great joy" And when the Spirit was poured out, their confidence in their Saviour was naturally confirmed; and their habitual demeanour was that of happy and hopeful spirits. They "ate their meat with gladness and singleness of heart, praising God;" and, when persecuted, they retraced that they were counted worthy to suffer shame for his Name." It was Jesus Christ who brought hope, even as he brought every other blessing, to this benighted and unhappy world. That he cherished hope, is known full well. His parables regarding the progress of his kingdom, his assurance that when lifted up he would draw all men unto him, his prediction of his reign and his return—all show an unwavering confidence and a calm expectation regarding the future. And in order that this attitude might be shared by his disciples, he provided for the descent of his Spirit, by whose influences they should be brought into living sympathy with himself. Our hope may be said to have three main outlooks: (1) towards our personal future; (2) towards the prospects of Christianity and Christ’s Church; and (3) towards the progress and destiny of humanity. In all these respects is apparent the power of the Holy Ghost to inspire us with, and to cause us to rejoice in, hope. I. HOPE ONE’S SELF—concerning one’s own future—is generally supposed to be matter of temperament. There are persons of a sanguine temperament, who always expect the best possible, and sometimes are confident in hope, though on the slightest ground. And others are given rather to foreboding, and their forecasts are of evil. Now, Christianity does not destroy temperament; but it gives a just bent to the outlook of the hopeful, and instils into the despondent a different spirit. Based, as the Christian life is, upon faith, it must proceed to hope. The God who has loved us With an everlasting love will never leave and never forsake us. The Saviour who has "loved his own" will "love them unto the end." The Word in which we trust is a "Word which liveth and abideth for ever." It is the office of the Spirit of God to bring these great and inspiriting truths home to the minds of Christians, to make them a power real and effective. If hope were based upon confidence in chance and good fortune, or if it were based upon the character and promises of fallible fellow-men, it would in such cases need rather to be checked and sobered than to be encouraged. But just as faith depends for its value upon the person on whom it rests, so is hope justifiable and wise only when based upon the promises of the Being whose character is unchanging, and whose word is never broken. The Christian’s hope extends beyond this earthly life. There have been cases in which the followers of Jesus have been tempted to exclaim, "If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable." But nothing is more distinctive of the Christian revelation than the clearness with which it speaks of a life to come. By the resurrection of our Lord Jesus from the dead, we are begotten "unto a living hope, of an inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fadeth not away." And the hope which we have is "an anchor of the soul, sure and steadfast, that entereth into that within the veil." By the power of the Holy Spirit, this blessed hope is awakened and fostered. His gracious influences counteract the earthly and depressing powers by which we are all beset, and make the mediation and the promises of our Saviour effective and helpful to us; so that we are led to abound in hope. The text reminds us that faith, and the joy and peace which faith brings, and these in Divine fulness, are the antecedents of the abundant hope of the Christian. And this is so. The heart that knows nothing of the cheerful gladness which religion imparts to the present can know nothing of the glowing anticipations which religion inspires with reference to the future. If we are to judge the future merely by what we see now, our outlook might be dim and cheerless. But the present is beheld by the medium of faith; and the same glass, when turned towards the coming ages, affords to us the blessed prospect of Christian hope. It is instructive to observe the close connection between the joy and peace which Christians now have in believing, and the hope to which they are introduced by the gospel. The cheerful mind is likely to be the hopeful mind. The rule and the love of God have reference alike to the present and to the future. Our earthly privileges are the earnest of our immortal prospects. And these, in turn, cast something of their inspiring radiance upon the difficulties and the sorrows of the present. "Oh, who. in such a world as this, Could bear his lot of pain, Did not one radiant hope of bliss Unclouded yet remain? That hope the Sovereign Lord has given, Who reigns above the skies; Hope that unites the soul to heaven By faith’s endearing ties." II. But HOPE, THAT IS WORTHY OF THE NAME, WILL OUR . We are united, by innumerable bonds, to our fellow-Christians and to our fellow-men; and our hopes must include others within their scope and range. Nothing was further from the generous heart and expansive charity of the apostle than any thought of limiting within narrow bounds the prospects and the hopes born of Christianity. Our religion is emphatically unselfish. And being so, those who come under its sway and share its spirit are constrained to take a wide, expansive view. They are members of a mystical body, and are concerned for the health and well-being of the whole. It is not enough to have a good hope of our own salvation; if the mind of Christ is in us, we shall desire "the edification of the body," as St. Paul phrases it. Enlightened and large-hearted Christians are more interested in the spread of Christianity than in anything beside on earth. It is their hope and prayer that the holy leaven may penetrate and vivify the whole mass of human society; that the tree of life may grow and spread, until all nations shall sit with delight beneath its shadow. Taught by the Spirit of truth, they rely upon the faithful word of Christ, who has unfolded before humanity hopes so bright and glorious. Error may seem to prevail, and we may tremble for the truth. Superstition may encroach upon the simplicity of the gospel, and we may ask—Is the old paganism to revive? Lukewarmness may seem to steal over nominal Christians, and to paralyze the activities of the Churches. Yet the Christian is not daunted by these "signs of the times," distressing though they be. He can join in the triumphant chant, "We will not lear, though the earth be removed, and though the mountains be carried into the midst of the sea. The Lord of hosts is with us; the God of Jacob is our Refuge!" When the infidel rejoices over what seem to him tokens of the decrepitude of the Church of Christ; when the atheist foretells the destruction of all religion, and the approach of the millennium of animalism; Christ’s followers do not yield to fear. They remember that their Divine Lord has promised that "the gates of Hades shall not prevail against" his Church. Its dead branches may be lopped off, and its living branches may be pruned; but life shall only be the more vigorous, and fruit the more abundant. The gold may be cast into the furnace, and the dross be consumed; but the precious metal shall only be refined and purified, and shall shine with brighter lustre, and be fitter for the Master’s use. III. Is there HOPE FOR ? Is this race of man destined to deteriorate; is it doomed to remain for ever a prey to strife, to vice, to sin; or is it appointed to sure progress and to final happiness? Questions these which have disturbed many a sensitive and philanthropic mind; clouded many a generous, disinterested life with sorrow and with gloom. The pessimism which is a sort of fashion in some circles refuses to take any comfort in looking forward to the future of mankind. As the individual is of necessity unhappy, as life is of necessity a calamity, a disaster, and death the only alleviation, annihilation the only thing worth looking forward to; so for the race, composed of units thus unhappy, no destiny that is desirable can be in reserve. Progress is an illusion, and the general happiness a baseless dream. The Spirit of God—the God of hope—has taught the Christian a very different lesson from this. That Spirit encouraged Hebrew prophets of old to anticipate a universal reign of righteousness, knowledge, and peace. That Spirit directed evangelists and apostles to base, upon the incarnation and sacrifice of the Son of God, the broadest of all beliefs and the brightest of all hopes. That Spirit has sustained the faith and inspired the energy of Christ’s people, amid the darkness of human ignorance, the din of human conflict, and the desolation of human despair. The omen of the birth of Christ and Christianity has not been falsified. The progress of the truth has been slow, the hindrances have been many, the corruptions and distortions have been serious. War, cruelty, slavery, vice, ignorance, brutality, are still scourging this human race. But no candid observer can say that the religion of Christ has attacked these evils in vain. And no Christian, convinced of the supernatural powers of his religion, can do other than bravely hope in the progress of enlightenment, the victory of righteousness, the reign of Christ. "Yet with the woes of sin and strife The world has suffered long; Beneath the angel-strain have rolled Two thousand years of wrong; And man at war with man, hears not The love-song which they bring! Oh hush the noise, ye men of strife, And hear the angels sing! "The promised time is hastening on, By prophet-bards foretold, When with the ever-circling years Comes round the age of gold; When peace shall over all the earth Its undimmed splendours fling, And the whole world send back the song Which now the angels sing!" Observe the richness and fulness of the apostle’s prayer: "That ye may abound in hope." This is an emotion which admits of many degrees. There are cases in which men say, "There is no hope!" and melancholy indeed was the inscription which the poet read over the infernal portals: "Leave every hope behind, all ye who enter here." Sometimes there is a little hope, a faint glimmer, as it were, to relieve the darkness. Hope can grow, as the dawn brightens into the morning. And hope can become a strong, happy, unhesitating persuasion, with no shade of anxiety, fear, or doubt. When the wish is uttered that we may "abound in hope," it is implied that hope is good, and so good that there is no possibility of our having too strong a hope. Abundance is "more than enough;" and what is besought for Christ’s people is the "full assurance of hope." This is a "living hope," a hope whose life is vigorous and vital; a "hope which maketh not ashamed," which is confident, and which produces happiness and peace. The Christian should be the possessor of such a hope. Let the unbeliever walk, if he will, in the twilight; it is for us to come out into the fulness of the noonday light. This we may enjoy, not through the power of reason, or of fancy, or of public opinion; but through the power of the Holy Ghost. It is the Divine Spirit, and not a spirit of error or illusion, that prompts our hope. Hope is of God, and is in God; and such a hope may well be abundant. For there is no hope which he inspires which he cannot and will not satisfy; and when Divine fulness meets with human hope, our vessel is filled, and filled to overflowing, from the heavenly, the perennial spring. Romans 15:13 Hope. Perhaps ordinary and even Christian moralists would not assign to hope the place which it occupies in the teaching of the apostle. But Paul had good reason for extolling and enjoining this beautiful and most inspiring and influential virtue. In this verse he sets forth— I. THE SOURCE OF HOPE. His language is a prayer, and the prayer is addressed to "the God of hope." He is so called because there can be no true, well-founded, far-reaching hope which is not fixed on God, on his providential rule, on his gracious purposes, on his consolatory promises. He suggests and inspires hope; he justifies and expects hope; he approves and rewards hope. All true and worthy hope for ourselves and for others is fixed on God, centres in God. II. THE POWER OF HOPE. The Holy Spirit is represented as the Agent by whose aid hope is experienced and enjoyed. When the spirit is downcast and sad, when the prospect is gloomy and dark, when human help seems far and feeble, then the Comforter brings near the grace of God, unveils a glorious prospect, and inspires a blessed confidence. III. THE MEANS OF HOPE. If any one is bidden to cherish hope, he will reply, "Where is the ground upon which I may hope? By what means can I arise from the Slough of Despair?" The steps by which rational hope can be fostered are here described. 1. Believing; i.e. in Christ as the true Object of hope—"Christ our Hope." This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/pulpit-commentary/ Romans 16:1-20 K. Commendation of Phoebe, and salutations to Christians at Rome. Romans 16:1, Romans 16:2 I commend unto you Phoebe our sister (i.e. fellow-Christian), who is a servant of the Church that is in Cenchrea: that ye receive her in the Lord, worthily of the saints, and assist her (παραστῆτε, literally, stand by her) in whatsoever business she hath need of you: for she too hath been a succourer (προστάτις, corresponding to παραστῆτε) of many, and of mine own self. This Phoebe was probably the bearer of the Epistle. She appears to have had business, perhaps of a legal kind, that took her to Rome; and St. Paul took advantage of her going to send the letter by her, desiring also to enlist the aid of her fellow-Christians at Rome in furtherance of her business, whatever it might be. Her having business at Rome, and her having been "a succourer of many," suggests the idea of her being a lady of means. Her designation as διάκονος of the Church at Cenchrea probably implies that she held an office there corresponding to that of deaconess, though there is no reason to suppose the distinguishing term διακόνισσα to have been as yet in use. Her function, and that of others (as perhaps of Tryphena and Tryphosa, mentioned in Romans 16:12 as "labouring much in the Lord"), might be to minister to the sick and poor, and to fulfil such charitable offices as women could best discharge. Cf. 1 Timothy 3:11, where γυναῖκας, mentioned in the midst of directions as to the qualifications of men for the office of deacons, probably denotes women who fulfilled similar duties. Cf. also Pliny’s celebrated letter to Trajan, in which he says that he had extorted information as to the doings of Christians, "ex duabus ancillis, quae ministrae dicebantur." The Latin ministra answers exactly to the Greek διάκονος. Cenchrea was the port of Corinth on the Saronic Gulf; and it appears from this passage that there was a Church or congregation there, as well as one or more in Corinth itself. It is an interesting conjecture that St. Paul, in speaking of Phoebe having been a succourer of himself as well as of others, may refer to an illness of his own at Cenchrea, during which she had ministered to him, and that his shaving his head at Cenchrea because he had a vow (Acts 18:18) may have been during, or on his recovery from, that illness. Romans 16:3-5 Greet Priscilla (al. Prisca, which is but another form of the same name) and Aquila my fellow-workers in Christ Jesus: who have for my life laid down their own neck: unto whom not only I give thanks, but also all the Churches of the Gentiles. And greet the Church that is in their house. For other notices of them, cf. Acts 18:2,Acts 18:18, Acts 18:26; 1 Corinthians 16:19; 2 Timothy 4:19; whence we learn that Aquila was a Jew of Pontus, who, with his wife Priscilla, had been settled at Rome, whence, when the Jews were expelled by Claudius, they had gone to Corinth, where St. Paul found them on his first visit to that city; that St. Paul abode with them there, working with Aquila at tent-making, which was the craft of both; that they left Corinth with St. Paul for Syria, and were for a time left by him at Ephesus, where they instructed Apollos on his arrival there; that, when St. Paul wrote from Ephesus his First Epistle to the Corinthians, they sent greetings by it, having then a congregation of Christians which assembled at their house; that, having returned to Rome when the Epistle to the Romans was written, their house there also was made available for the same purpose; and that, when St. Paul was for the last time a prisoner at Rome before his martyrdom, they were once more living at Ephesus. They were probably in good circumstances, having had both at Rome and Ephesus houses large enough to be used as churches; and they were evidently leading and active members of the Christian community. It would seem that Priscilla, the wife, was especially so, and she may have been, like Phoebe, officially employed; for though, when they are first mentioned (Acts 18:2) as having lately come to Corinth, and when they themselves send greetings to Corinth (1 Corinthians 16:19), Aquila’s name naturally comes first, yet St. Paul in all other mention of them reverses the order. The occasion of their having apparently risked their own lives in defence of St. Paul is unknown. It may have been at Corinth at the time of the Jewish insurrection against him (Acts 18:12), or at Ephesus at the time of the tumult raised by Demetrius the silversmith (Acts 19:23, etc.), when St. Paul had been in imminent danger. The phrase, "laid down their neck" (not, as in the Authorized Version, "necks"), seems only to denote, figuratively, "exposed their lives to danger." It appears, from the large number of greetings which follow, that there were now many Christians at Rome known to, or any rate known of by, the apostle. It does not follow that he was acquainted with all of them personally. He may have heard of them in the frequent inquiries he had doubtless made about the Roman Church (cf. Romans 1:8). Many of them, however, he evidently knew, and with some had been associated. It was likely that many known to him in various quarters might have had occasion to resort to Rome. There are in all twenty-six individuals to whom greetings are sent, together with two households of slaves, and probably three congregations, as will appear below. Salute (or, as before, greet. The verb is the same as before, and so throughout the chapter) my beloved Epaenetus, who is the firstfruits of Asia (certainly so, rather than Achaia, probably introduced into the text from 1 Corinthians 16:15) unto Christ. Asia means the proconsular province so called, being the western part of Asia Minor, of which the capital was Ephesus. Epaenetus may have been St. Paul’s own first convert there during his second missionary journey (cf. Acts 16:6). The fact of the apostle having been then "forbidden of the Holy Ghost to preach the Word in Asia" does not preclude there having been converts thence. Romans 16:6, Romans 16:7 Greet Mary, who bestowed much labour on you (ὑμᾶς, rather than, as in the Textus Receptus, ἡμᾶς). Salute Andrenicus and Junia, my kinsmen, and my fellow-prisoners, who are of note among the apostles who also were in Christ before me. It is a question whether by "my kinsmen" (τοὺςσυγγενεῖςμου) here and afterwards St. Paul means that the persons so called were his relations, or only that they were Jews (cf. Romans 9:3, where he speaks of the Jews generally as τῶνσυγγενῶνμουκατὰσάρκα. There are in all five persons so designated in this chapter. The designation "fellow-prisoners" implies that these two had been, like himself, at some time imprisoned for the faith, but it does not fellow that he and they had been in prison together. If, in speaking of them as "of note among the apostles (ἐπὶσημοιἐντοῖςἀποστόλοις)," he means to designate them as themselves apostles, this is an instance of a wider use of the term "apostle" than is generally understood (see note under Romans 12:6, etc.). The phrase, however, will bear the interpretation that they were persons held in honour in the circle of the original twelve. The term, οἱἀποστόλοι, is certainly often used distinctively of them, as in Acts 9:27 and in Galatians 1:19, by St. Paul himself, the reference in both texts being to his own relations to them; and so here, speaking of two persons, who he also says had been in Christ before himself, he may only mean to point to their having been, as they still were, distinguished in association with the original apostles even before his own conversion. Romans 16:8-10 Greet Amplias (or, Ampliatus) my beloved in the Lord. Salute Urban (i.e. Urbanus) our fellow-worker in Christ, and Stachys my beloved. Salute Apellos approved in Christ. Salute them which are of Aristobulus’ household. As to who Aristobulus might be (viz. a grandson of Herod the Great, mentioned by Josephus, ’Ant.,’ 20. l, 2, as being at Rome in a private station), see Lightfoot on ’Philippians,’ p. 172, and ’Dict. of Gr. and Romans Biog.,’ under "Aristobulus," 5. "Those of Aristobulus" (τῶνΑριστοβούλου) would probably be his familia of slaves (cf. τῶνΧλόης, 1 Corinthians 1:11, and below, τῶνΝαρκίσσου). The salutation is not to the whole household, but to the Christians among them, as intimated by τοὺςἐκτῶν, and more definitely expressed below in the ease of the household of Narcissus. Romans 16:11 Salute Herodion my kinsman. Greet them of the household of Narcissus that are in the Lord. This Narcissus may possibly have been the powerful freedman of Claudius, mentioned by Tacitus, ’Ann.,’ 11.29, seq.; 12.57; and by Suetonius, ’Claud.,’ 28. The fact that he appears from ’Ann.,’ Romans 13:1, to have been put to death on the accession of Nero, A.D. 54, is not inconsistent with the supposition. For his human chattels would be likely to pass into the possession of Nero, and so become part of Caeasar’s household, and might still be called by their late master’s name. This may also have been the case with the household of Aristobulus above referred to. It is observable that, at a later period, the apostle, writing from Rome to the Philippians, sends special greetings from them "that are of Caesar’s household" (Philippians 4:23). Romans 16:12 Salute Tryphena and Tryphosa who labour in the Lord. Salute the beloved Persia, which laboured much in the Lord. All these seem to have been Church workers; and the last at least, from the way St. Paul speaks of her, must have been known by him personally, and done work of which he was cognizant. It is to be observed how, in calling her "the beloved," he avoids, with delicate propriety, adding "my," as he does in speaking of his male friends. Romans 16:13 Salute Rufus chosen in the Lord, and his mother and mine. Observe the graceful way in which St. Paul intimates his obligation to the mother of Rufus, who at some time (though when and where we know not) had been as a mother to himself. Similar delicate courtesy of language is especially observable in the Epistle to Philemon. Romans 16:14, Romans 16:15 Salute Asyncritus, Phlegon, Hermes (not, surely, as Origen supposed, the author of ’The Shepherd of Hermes,’ which is said in ’Canon Mumtori’ to have been written by a brother of Pius I., and cannot well have been of earlier date than the second century), Patrobas, Hermes, and the brethren that are with them. Salute Philologus, and Julia, Nereus, and his sister, and Olympas, and all the saints which are with them. The "brethren" in Romans 16:14, and the "saints" in Romans 16:15, saluted in connection with the groups of persons named, may possibly mean the congregations that assembled under the leadership, or perhaps at the houses, of those persons. If so, there would appear to have been three congregations in Rome known of by St. Paul; for see Romans 16:5, which, indeed, seems in itself to imply that the Church that was in the house of Priscilla and Aquila was not the only one. Romans 16:16 Salute one another with an holy hiss. All the Churches of Christ salute you. For allusions to the kiss of peace among Christians, cf. 1 Thessalonians 5:26; 1 Corinthians 16:20; 2 Corinthians 13:12; 1 Peter 5:14. Justin Martyr (’Apol.,’ 85) speaks of it as exchanged before the Eucharist, and it is alluded to by many Fathers, directed in the ’Apostolical Constitutions,’ and has its place in ancient liturgies (see Bingham, 15. 3.3). St. Paul, of course, in enjoining it here and in other Epistles, has in view the concord which it expressed. In sending salutations from "all the Churches of Christ", he may be understood as conveying to the Roman Christians the feeling towards them that had been expressed generally by the Churches he had visited. He may have spoken wherever he went of his intention of visiting Rome, and perhaps of meanwhile sending a letter thither; and the several Churches may have charged him with kind messages. Before authenticating these salutations with his usual autographic benediction, he feels bound to add one additional warning. The thought occurs to him, and he cannot but give expression to it. The warning is against a class of persons whose mischievous activity he had had experience of elsewhere, and attempts by some of whom to disturb the peace of the Roman Church he may possibly have heard of. They may have been Judaists, or others who taught views contrary to the received faith, and so caused divisions and offences in the Churches. For allusions to such elsewhere, cf. Galatians 1:6, seq.; Galatians 3:1, seq.; Colossians 2:8, seq.; 2 Corinthians 11:13, seq. For proof of such having been at work afterwards at Rome, cf. Philippians 1:15, seq.; Philippians 3:2, Philippians 3:17, seq. Romans 16:17 Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause the divisions and offences (τὰσκάνδαλα, meaning "causes of stumbling." Both the words have the article, so as to denote things known of) contrary to the doctrine which ye learned; and avoid them; rather, turn away from them; i.e. shun them; have nothing to do with them. The allusion seems to be, not to persons within the Church, but rather to outsiders, who come with new notions to disturb its peace. Romans 16:18-20 For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly (cf. Philippians 3:18, Philippians 3:19). Had St. Paul thought these people sincere though mistaken, he would doubtless have treated them with the tenderness he shows towards the weak brethren. But he regards them as self-interested, and of the flesh; and against such disturbers of the Church’s peace he is, here as elsewhere, indignant (el. Galatians 1:7, Galatians 1:8; Galatians 2:4; Galatians 3:1; Galatians 5:11. 12). In speaking of them as serving, or being slaves to, their own belly, it cannot be concluded certainly that he attributed to them habits of sensuality. He may only mean that it is the gratification of the lower part of their nature that they have in view; and there may be allusion to the motive of such persons being the desire of eating and drinking at the cost of the Churches. In ’The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles’ (alluded to under Romans 12:6, seq.) the desire to live without working at the cost of the Church is set down as one of the marks of a false apostle or a false prophet. And by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple (rather, innocent, or harmless. So the word ἄκακος is translated in Hebrews 7:26. It is different from ἀκέραιος in Hebrews 7:19, though the Authorized Version makes no difference). For your obedience is come abroad unto all men. This is apparently adduced as a reason for his exhorting them to beware of those seducers, with a confidence that they will not be seduced by them, Romans 16:19 being thus dependent on Romans 16:17. I am glad therefore on your behalf: but yet I would have you wise unto that which is good, but simple (ἀκεραίους) concerning evil. And the God of peace shall bruise Satan under your feet shortly. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen. Romans 16:21-24 L. Greetings from Corinth. Romans 16:21, Romans 16:22 Timotheus my workfellow, and Lucius (not to be identified with St. Luke), and Jason, and Sosipater, my kinsmen, salute you, I Tertius, who wrote this Epistle, salute you in the Lord. It was St. Paul’s habit to dictate his letters to an amanuensis (cf. Galatians 6:11; Colossians 4:18; 2 Thessalonians 3:17). Here the amanuensis interposes his own greeting in his own person. Romans 16:23, Romans 16:24 Gaius mine host, and of the whole Church, saluteth you. Probably the person mentioned in 1 Corinthians 1:14 as baptized by St. Paul himself at Corinth. There is no reason for identifying him with those of the same name mentioned in Acts 19:29; Acts 20:4; 3 John 1:1. Gaius was a common name. He appears to have been one who exercised extensive hospitality to Christians, which the apostle was enjoying at the time of writing. Erastus the chamberlain (rather, treasurer) of the city (not to be identified with the Erastus of Act 19:22 and 2 Timothy 4:20), and Quartus the brother. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ he with you all. Amen. Romans 16:25-27 G. Doxology. (For its original position, see above.) It may have been written by the apostle with his own hand. It differs, indeed, in form as well as fulness, from other autographic conclusions of his Epistles; but it is a suitable and grand ending of an Epistle of the peculiar character of this; summing up pregnantly in the form of a glowing thanksgiving the essential ideas of the whole Epistle, which had been more or less intimated in its preface. Romans 16:25, Romans 16:26 Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel (i.e. the gospel committed unto me to preach; cf. Romans 2:16; 1 Timothy 1:11; 2 Timothy 2:8), and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery (on the meaning of μυστηρίον, see note on Romans 11:25), which was kept secret (literally, kept in silence) since the world began (literally, in times eternal), but is now made manifest, and through the Scriptures of the prophets (literally, prophetic Scriptures), according to the command. meat of the eternal God, made known unto all the nations unto the obedience of faith. We have seen throughout the Epistle how the Scriptures of the Old Testament are referred to as foretelling the revelation in Christ of the long-hidden mystery (cf. also Romans 1:2); and it was through showing them to be fulfilled that, in all the apostolic preaching, the mystery, now manifested, was made known to all the nations; and this according to the commandment or appoint-merit of God, that the mystery should thus be now at last made known. Romans 16:27 To God only wise, through Jesus Christ, be glory for ever. Amen. The great preponderance of ancient authorities, including all uncials but B, have "to God only wise." But the intended sense is not affected by the insertion, the ascription of glory being still to the only wise God, and not to Jesus Christ. Otherwise there would be no sequence to τῷδυναμένῳ and μόνῷσοφῷΘεῷ. "In the lively pressure of the great intermediate thoughts connected with the mention of the gospel, Romans 16:25, Romans 16:26, the syntactic connection has escaped the apostle" (Meyer) Romans 16:1, Romans 16:2 A ministering woman. Although we know of Phoebe no more than is recorded here, we know enough to feel an interest in her; for she was a friend and helper of the Apostle Paul, and she was probably the bearer of this Epistle to the Roman Church. Observe— I. THE OF PHOEBE, BY PAUL, TO THE OF ROME. She is described in this passage by three several designations, which could not but favourably introduce her to the notice and regard of the Christian community in the great metropolis of the world. 1. She is described as "a sister." Christianity taught mankind that a true relationship might exist amongst those widely sundered by time and space, and widely severed by education and social position. The followers of Jesus learned to regard one another as brothers and sisters and the great spiritual family, of which God is the Father and Christ the elder Brother and Savior. Coming from afar, even in the vast and populous city of Rome, this, godly matron would and brethren in Christ, would be recognized as a sister. 2. ’A servant of the Church at Cenchrea." Literally, a deacon, or deaconess. This shows us how, from the beginning of Christianity, woman’s position was recogmzed and honoured. Christ has taught humanity the dignity of service; and as when on earth he accepted the ministrations of devout and attached women, so now he delights in their labours and self-sacrifice in his cause on earth. 3. The form of her service is mentioned; she was "a succourer of many." Probably a matron of means and social consideration, she had, and used, the opportunity to show kindness to her kindred in the faith, and to others in necessity. She may have shown hospitality to Christian ministers, have visited and relieved the sick poor, have rescued the fallen and neglected. "Of myself also," says the apostle, gratefully and gracefully acknowledging gentle and kindly ministrations, Possibly he had been sick at Cenchrea, upon the occasion when he is recorded to have made a vow, and Phoebe may have entertained and nursed him. II. THE REQUEST MADE BY PAUL TO THE ROMANS ON HER BEHALF. 1. The footing is described upon which they were enjoined to receive her—"in the Lord," i.e. in the Lord’s Name, and for the Lord’s sake. This was the light in which Jesus himself had taught his disciples to regard one another. In receiving any in Christ’s Name, we receive Christ himself. The Romans were to consider that the Divine Lord did, in a sense, in the person of his faithful disciples, come amongst them. 2. The law of treatment is laid down—"as saints." That is to say, it was to be berne in mind, in their social and religious intercourse, that they were not as the heathen around, that they were a select and consecrated people. Going into this great sinful city, this Cenchrean matron might look for treatment and conversation becoming to saints; she might expect religious privileges, and something more than courtesy—even Christian cordiality and kindness. 3. Such being the sentiments enjoined, it is interesting to see that Paul expected such feelings to prompt to corresponding action. The Roman Christians are desired to assist Phoebe in her business. Whether this was domestic, commercial, or legal, we do not know. In any case, she might well be grateful for an introduction which would secure for her the countenance, counsel, sympathy, and aid of men of wisdom and experience, of character and position. Scripture constantly warns us against allowing good feeling to pass away without leading to suitable expression in action. It is a lesson which even religious and well-meaning people need to have inculcated and repeated. . 1. Let Christian communities aim at realizing the fellowship which such passages as this imply and commend. 2. Let Christian women seek, according to their station, opportunity, and ability, to live as servants of Christ and of Christ’s Church. 3. Let all Christian people hold in honour those godly women who devote themselves to the succouring of the needy, the neglected, and the sinful Romans 16:3-5 Fellowship in toil and suffering. Paul had a marvellous power of drawing around him like-minded natures, to whom, by God’s grace, he imparted much of his own spirit, and whose assistance vastly increased the effect of his benevolent ministry. Among these were Aquila and his wife Prisca, or Priscilla, whom he first met at Corinth, and to whom he was drawn by their common occupation as tent-makers. If not at that time Christians, they evidently became so through his instruction and influence. They laboured with Paul in the gospel, first at Corinth and then at Ephesus. They returned, at a later period, to Rome, whence, in common with the Jews generally, they had been expelled by Claudius. And they were at Rome, carrying on the same work of evangelization and promoting Christian fellowship, when Patti wrote this Epistle to the Romans. Hence the salutation which occurs in this place. I. EXAMINE THE , MERITS, AND CLAIMS, OF THIS COUPLE. They are commended for: 1. Their fellowship with Paul in wore. The Christian life, and emphatically the life of the Christian evangelist, is a life of labour. Not mere activity or business-like effort and assiduity; but labour "in Christ Jesus;" which means, for the sake of Christ, upon the model of Christ, in the Name of Christ, with a view to the approval of Christ. The Lord is himself the bond binding true workers in one. 2. They had endangered life for his safety. Whether in Corinth, or amidst the tumult at Ephesus, these two faithful friends had shielded the apostle from the wrath and violence of the enemies of the faith, and this at the risk of their own life. This was a practical exemplification of the duty and excellence of brotherly love. Thus Paul learned to say, "For a good man some would even dare to die." Thus St. John could teach, knowing that the advice was not impracticable, "We also ought to lay down our life for the brethren." 3. They had cultivated social religion. Wherever they went, these devoted Christians consecrated part of their dwelling to Christian assembly and worship. Being tent-makers, needing large premises, and probably employing many work-people, they had accommodation for such gatherings. Often in the New Testament we read of the "Church in the house." The expression not only reminds us of the duty and privilege of family religion, and household worship; it also teaches us that all our possessions and circumstances should be turned to account in the service of Christ, and especially that we should bring neighbours together to hear the gospel, and fellow-Christians to realize Christian fellowship and to cultivate brotherly love. II. OBSERVE THE BY THE APOSTLE OF THESE AND CLAIMS. "Honour to whom honour"—a maxim nowhere better justified than in cases like this before us. 1. Paul shows gratitude. Although their ministrations and self-sacrifice were now events of the past, the recollection of them was fresh in the apostle’s mind. There are those who think it unwise to express gratitude and admiration; the apostle was not one of these. He gave thanks. And he tendered the thanks, not only of his own heart, but of "all the Churches of the Gentiles"—an expression this, all the more graceful, in that Aquila and his wife were themselves Jews. But they had laboured largely among the Gentiles, who were very sensible of their services. And they had probably saved the life of "the apostle of the Gentiles," on which account those for whom Paul especially laboured owed them a special measure of gratitude. 2. Paul sends greeting. Among the worthies of the Christian community at Rome, the names of these natives of Pontus were included, and amongst them have come down to posterity. Paul obeyed the gospel admonition, "Be courteous," and often set an example of that kind and sympathetic consideration which goes far to ease the working and promote the happiness of human life. LESSONS. 1. Be devoted in Christian labour. 2. Delight in Christian fellowship. 3. Employ social influence for Christ’s glory. 4. In Christian intercourse display Christian courtesy. Romans 16:5 The twofold bond. Some men are known and remembered for what they have done; others for the position they have occupied in some great movement, or the friendships they have formed with some great characters. Paul’s was a name which overshadowed most of his contemporary fellow-labourers in the cause of Christian evangelization; yet there were those, e.g. Timothy and Aquila, among those mentioned in this chapter who had no mean title to an independent position and memorial. On the other hand, some, like Epaenetus, would never have been remembered except through association with the apostle of the Gentiles. It is a beautiful trait in Paul’s character that his heart cherished warm, affectionate recollections of some persons, who, by reason of the obscurity of their position and the slenderness of their abilities, could add no lustre to the apostle’s fame, and perhaps little efficacy to his mission. From this verse we learn that a twofold bond united Paul to Epaenetus. I. THE BOND OF AND LOVE. The Lord Jesus had himself, by his example and by his precepts, constituted Christianity a religion of love. Speaking to his disciples, he said, "Love one another, even as I have loved you." "Having loved his own, he loved them unto the end." He even countenanced a tender, personal, and special friendship; for St. John is often described as "the disciple whom Jesus loved. Now, the Apostle Paul inculcated, with frequency and urgency, the Divine lesson, saying, "Let brotherly love continue;" and eulogizing, especially in his Epistle to the Corinthians, the grace of charity. And he also exemplified the virtue of Christian love in his own spirit, and in the many friendships which he formed. His attachment to Epaenetus was undoubtedly sincere and unfeigned; and what more natural than that, when his friend was at so great a distance from him, Paul, in writing to the Romans, should send a greeting of affection to the beloved associate of bygone days? Christianity sanctifies and elevates human affection. II. THE BOND OF . Epaenetus was the firstfruits of Asia’s offering unto Christ. This being the case, it is somewhat singular that we know nothing more regarding him. Paul has spoken of himself as ministering the gospel of God, that the offering up of the Gentiles might be acceptable. The conversion of the Gentiles was a harvest, a sacrifice; and the firstfruits accordingly must have been to the apostle’s mind peculiarly precious. The expression is very suggestive. 1. Of what toil and sowing was this conversion the result! There is no crop without foregoing labour; and the Book of the Acts of the Apostles shows us at what expenditure of labour and suffering the harvest was secured. When the parent instils into the mind of his children from infancy the doctrines and precepts of religion; when the teacher endeavours to bring the youthful mind, otherwise perhaps uncultivated and uncared-for, under Christian training and influence; when the pastor faithfully and continuously scatters the seed of the kingdom in men’s hearts, sowing beside all waters; when the evangelist and missionary toil, in uncongenial circumstances and amidst many discouragements, for the salvation of human souls;—all such effort is seed-sowing, of which sometimes only the springing blade may be discerned by the labourer, who is happy indeed if he be suffered to see here and there the firstfruits of his endeavours. 2. How rich, ripe, and promising were these firstfruits! It is proof enough of the Christian character of Epaenetus, that the apostle regarded him as a beloved friend. In this case Paul’s labours had proved manifestly not in vain. Here was doubtless a renewed and holy person, adorning the Christian profession, and by ripeness and beauty and serviceableness of character fitted to be regarded as the firstfruits of a province. Now, the firstfruits may be as good in quality as the harvest which follows. In fact, Christian ministers are justified in looking for such results to follow their patient and prayerful toil. Nothing else can reward them; spiritual results, and these only, are the desired recompense. 3. Of a harvest how wealthy and glorious was this individual Christian the earnest and promise! Genius and faith can see in the firstfruits, insignificant, it may be, in themselves, the promise of vast results, extending throughout spacious regions and enduring throughout long ages. So, doubtless, it was in this ease; the Apostle Paul felt the image of Epaenetus revived in his memory, nay, his very name awakened in his mind a glorious vision of the future evangelization of a vast and populous province, of the formation of large and flourishing Churches, of the final salvation of a multitude of precious souls. Such associations, such expectations, would naturally lend an additional interest and sweetness to this warm-hearted greeting communicated from afar. . 1. Remark the beauty of Christian courtesy. It is right to remember and to greet ancient comrades in Christian toil, and all who are bound to us by ties of former fellowship. 2. Learn the lesson of Christian love—love unfeigned. Love should be not only of a general, a sentimental kind; it should be personal and faithful, love to individual souls with whom Providence may have brought you into contact. 3. Cultivate the disposition of hope. Regard in every convert to the faith of Christ the proof of Divine power and grace; and see in such the happy omen of a recovered and regenerated world. Romans 16:6 A woman’s labours for Christ. During our Saviour’s earthly ministry, many devout and grateful women devoted their time, their substance, and their personal ministrations to the Lord. And Christ’s apostles, as we may judge from the record in the Acts, were also frequently indebted to the hospitality, the zealous co-operation, and the sympathizing and generous spirit, of consecrated Christian women. From this chapter it appears that the early Churches were, in some cases, assisted in their benevolent and evangelistic work by feminine ministrations. Of Mary we know nothing but what is recorded to her honour and remembrance in this passage, that she bestowed much labour upon the Christians of the imperial city. If she be taken as a representative of pious and benevolent and laborious Christian women, the record concerning her may suggest reflections regarding the vocation of such persons in the Church of Christ. I. THE NATURE OF WOMAN’S WORK FOR THE SAVIOUR. This is very varied. It may be more public, or more private; it may be domestic, or official. Some are called to nurse in homes or hospitals; some to teach in classes or schools; some to visit the neglected, the dying, the bereaved; some to restore the lapsed to the paths of industry and virtue; some to show hospitality. II. THE QUALITY OF WOMAN’S WORK FOR THE SAVIOUR. It is often found to be characterized by tenderness and sympathy, by constancy and patience, by sobriety and diligence, by fervour and self-denial. III. THE MEASURE OF WOMAN’S WORK FOR CHRIST. Mary laboured much; and many resemble her—directing their energies into various channels, spending strength of body and mind in holy service, continuing even amidst many interruptions, and misrepresentation and ingratitude, and labouring even to old age. IV. THE MOTIVE TO WOMAN’S WORK FOR CHRIST. The Lord Jesus has done much for the elevation and happiness of the female sex, and gratitude for mercy received is in many women’s hearts a powerful motive to zealous services. Means are sought by which the thankful may show the sincerity of their love. V. THE OF WOMAN’S WORK FOR THE SAVIOUR. This should be spontaneous and ungrudging, generous and expressed. Paul acknowledged the merits of this excellent woman, and by his written salutations admonished the Roman Christians to hold her in honour, and display their gratitude. Yet the best and most desired recognition valued by devout women is the approval and the recompense promised by the Lord himself to every good and faithful servant. Romans 16:7 A special salutation. It is somewhat singular that, the description of these brothers, Andronicus and Juntas, being so full and detailed, we should not meet with any other mention of them, either in the Acts or in St. Paul’s Epistles. The connection between them and the apostle was close and manifold, and their claims to consideration were remarkably high. I. There was IN BLOOD between these brothers and St. Paul. Whether this was a close kindred, or simply consanguinity of race, the term does not make certain. In either case there is a recognition of the claims of kindred. Our blood-relationships, and even our ties of nationality and race, are of Divine appointment, and should not be disparaged or overlooked. When our kindred have a spiritual as well as a natural affinity with us, they should be doubly dear, and should be treated with special distinction and affection. II. There was IN FOR CHRIST. Paul was often in prison, and sometimes in companionship with those engaged in the same service, and therefore knowingly exposed to the same risks. It must have been a happy and honourable experience to be associated with such a man, even in bonds and imprisonment. Silas had joined him in his midnight hymns in the Philippian jail; Luke shared his imprisonment both on land and by sea; Aristarchus, Audronicus, and Juntas had in some place unknown to us, been his fellow-prisoners. Such community was not to be forgotten. It is a distinction to suffer for Christ, and with Christ’s people. "If we suffer with Christ"—and this we do when we suffer with his people, and for his sake—"we shall also reign with him." III. These men were in THE AND ESTEEM OF THE . Some have inferred from the language used that Andronicus and Juntas were numbered among the apostles, in the wider sense of that term. But it is more probable that they are mentioned as held in high respect and honour among the apostles generally. It is sufficient commendation for a man to be known as the trusted friend of the great and good. It is well to ask concerning any Christian—Who are his friends? Not—How is he regarded by the titled and the opulent? but—Is he in the confidence of those who are venerated and trusted servants of the Lord? "He that walketh with wise men shall be wise." IV. There was AND LONG- OF . The Apostle Paul, when writing to the Romans, had himself been "in Christ" for very many years. But these brothers are mentioned by him as having been Christians before he himself had been brought to subjection to the Lord. As "old disciples," whose witness to Christ had been long and faithful, and who remained what they had been, Andronicus and Junias deserved greeting and commendation- ’’ Time tries all;" and time sets an approving seal upon those who for a lifetime have adorned the doctrine of God our Saviour. Respect is due to our seniors in the spiritual life. "Better is the end of a thing than the beginning." . 1. Learn a generous appreciation of the character and services of brethren in Christ. 2. Forget not the ties of Christian fellowship dating from distant years. 3. Admire the power of Christianity to sanctify the social nature; and seek to afford in social intercourse a living example of this benign influence. Romans 16:8-15 Grounds, for greeting. Salutations are often empty forms. Yet the original meaning is often very deep and beautiful and appropriate. Our "God bless you!" and "Good-bye!" and "Adieu!" are instances If we sincerely send "respects" and "kind regards," it is well. Salutations are not to be neglected or despised because they are often meaningless or insincere. See in this passage how Paul greeted his friends in Christ. Even as Christ himself, coming to his own disciples, addressed them thus, "Peace be with you!" so the apostle, even in this important Epistle, did not think it beneath him to salute his friends. I. IS A BOND WHICH UNITES PERSONS OF MOST VARIOUS AND . Of the persons greeted, some were Jews and some were Gentiles. Some were persons who had, to some extent, the command of their own time; for they are mentioned as having laboured much with the apostle, or as having entertained him with hospitality. Some undoubtedly were slaves. From the Epistle to the Philippians, written a very few years after this, it appears that members of Caesar’s household were numbered among the Christian community at Rome. Recent explorations near the old metropolis of the world have brought to light tomb- inscriptions, including many of the names mentioned in this chapter, in memory of persons in the imperial household. It is all but certain that some of these friends of Paul held such positions, it may be honourable and important, but probably of an ordinary kind. They may have been artificers and craftsmen and household attendants. Two other households are mentioned here—those of Aristobulus and of Narcissus. There seems no reason to suppose that the heads of these households were Christians. They may themselves have been dead at this time, and their bondmen may have passed over by bequest to the emperor. The list includes some Christian Jews, now permitted to return to Rome—persons whom, in their wanderings, Paul had met in various cities of Asia and of Europe, and whose memory he retained in his capacious and affectionate heart. II. CONFERS HONOUR UPON THOSE WHO ABE LITTLE IN THE WORLD. The names mentioned in these verses are all, and utterly, unknown to fame. They here glint across our vision, like meteors in the midnight sky, which appear for a moment, only to vanish for ever. Yet Paul esteemed and loved them, and put their names upon this imperishable roll—more glorious and more lasting than the blazoned records of heraldry or the splendid memorials of the historian. It is better to be enrolled among the friends of Christ than to occupy the highest station in the regard of worldly minded men. To be his when he makes up his jewels, this will be honour and happiness indeed. III. PUTS ITS OWN MARKS UPON ITS . For example, in this passage, one is described as "in the Lord," implying spiritual union with the Saviour. Another is said to be "chosen in the Lord," and yet another "approved in the Lord"—language which denotes those congenial in character, and obedient in life, to the Lord Jesus Christ, and which points on to a coming and glorious reward. Again, some are described as "brethren" and others as "saints," implying their incorporation into the spiritual family of God, and their holy character and devotion to the Lord’s service. Such language assures us that, amidst many faulty and some unworthy Christians, there were not a few amongst the primitive believers who, by their principles and life, must have commended the gospel, and have yielded the truest satisfaction to the apostle’s pure and benevolent heart. IV. Observe, further, sundry or SERVICE. One is commended for his "labour in the Lord," and another as having "laboured much in the Lord," whilst a third is described as a "fellow-worker." That Paul laboured more abundantly than all his brethren, he himself has recorded; and such being the habit of his spiritual ministry, he was able and disposed to appreciate the work of his diligent and effective colleagues. There is great discrimination in his language of approbation, and, at the same time, great generosity. We should learn the wholesome lesson, that it is right to appreciate the services of our fellow-Christians, and gratefully to recognize and remember their co-operation. V. It must strike every reader of this passage that we have here illustrations of the way in which IS BY AND FEELING. One member of the Roman Church he designates "my beloved." In another he recognizes a "kinsman." A third—an aged Christian matron—he designates his own "mother," referring, no doubt, to her tender and hospitable ministrations in former days. Beautiful indeed is natural feeling when thus sanctified by true piety. The Christian family, and the friendly circle, penetrated by Christian principle and sentiment, are nothing less than an earnest of the sacred fellowship of heaven. The Church below thus resembles and prepares for the Church of the Firstborn above. . 1. The strongest of all social bonds are those of our common Christianity, which, binding hearts to Christ, binds hearts to hearts. Cultivate these bonds. 2. Christian labourers should never forget those who in former days have shared their toils and sacrifices. 3. Courtesy is a Christian grace, and its exercise smooths the path of social life. 4. Sympathy and brotherliness on earth will prepare for the sweet and immortal fellowship of heaven. Romans 16:20 Victory assured. In viewing our human life, we are tempted into one or other of two extremes. To the worldly and the careless, especially when young and prosperous, life seems easy. They are conscious of no temptation, for they yield at once to each congenial suggestion. They are ignorant of struggles, for to them life has never shaped itself as a moral warfare. But there are those who are ever oppressed by a constant sense of the solemnity of life. To such the conflict is a daily and inevitable fact. They cannot drift adown the current; yet, strike out as bravely as they will, they feel as though they made no headway against the waters, as though they could never reach the shore. Struggle they must, they do; yet with many failures and with faint hope of final success. Now, Christianity rebukes the first of these classes for frivolity, the second for faithlessness. The Scriptures ever represent our life as a spiritual conflict; yet they ever summon us to fight the good fight of faith with hopeful hearts; the battle is fierce, but to the brave the victory is sure. I. THE AND THE FOE. There is a power of evil, a personal and mighty power. Satan seeks to carry captive human souls; and in the effort employs every resource—the fiercest assaults, and the most unscrupulous, insidious wiles. In this Satan deals with men according to their circumstances, their character, their temperament. Over multitudes he triumphs openly. Yet there are those who resist him, who regard him as their deadly foe. Well is it for you if you are aware of your position, your danger, the attempts of the adversary, and your own weakness and insufficiency for a struggle so unequal. Faithful, consistent, experienced Christian! you have not yet finished the campaign; you are not yet beyond the reach of the fiery darts. Young and ardent Christian! dare not to indulge in boasting or to serf-satisfaction. Just where and when you least expect it, then and there the attack may be made. "Resist the devil;" "Watch and pray, lest ye enter into temptation;" "Take to you the whole armour of God." II. THE HELPER AND . In a conflict such as human life, how can we be blind to our own helplessness and need? Whither shall the assaulted and imperilled turn? Upon whom shall they call? The Christian cannot answer these questions amiss; for he has already sought and experienced the saving strength of God’s right hand. Yet he may well need to be reminded of his only hope and refuge. Let us lift up our eyes unto the hills, whence cometh our help. The God of peace is, in the text, set before us as our Saviour. Does it strike you as strange that the Most High should be so described in such a connection? Do you ask—Why is the God of peace invoked, to oppose and to vanquish the foe of souls? The answer is plain. God’s nature is peace; his aim is peace; his rule is peace. But his is not the peace of compromise with sin His is the peace which comes with righteousness and with the reign of holy law. Such peace presupposes conflict. War with evil, until evil is vanquished, dethroned, and silent; and then peace, and only then;—such is the principle of the gospel, such is the purpose of God, such is the law of the Christian’s life. Divine peace is pure and sincere and lasting. Remember that word of our Lord Jesus, "I am not come to send peace, but a sword." III. THE AND THE VICTORY. Here we are, as Christians, members of the Church militant. But Christ is the Captain of our salvation; and the language of the apostle implies that, through the might and grace of our Leader, we shall conquer in the holy war. Christ is the Victor, who has conquered for us. The history of our Saviour’s earthly career is a history of conflict. The ministry of the Redeemer was a struggle with the prince of darkness. Witness his temptation, in which he encountered the foe in various guises, and ever vanquished his adversary and ours by the "sword of the Spirit, which is the Word of God." Witness the crisis of his humiliation and suffering: "This is your hour, and the power of darkness." Yet in that crisis the Lord Jesus beheld Satan as lightning cast from heaven, and he spoiled principalities and powers, making a show of them openly. Then was fulfilled the promise, "The seed of the woman shall bruise the serpent’s head." Christ is the Victor, who conquers in us. For it is in our own hearts that the real conflict is waged, that the true victory must be won. By the cross of Christ, through the presence and strengthening of the Spirit of Christ, the soldier who follows his Captain must come to share the Captain’s triumph. He himself has promised that it shall be so. In his humiliation he encouraged his disciples, saying, "Be of good cheer; I have overcome the world." From his glory he cheers them on, saying, "He that overcometh shall sit down with me in my throne." The individual Christian shall, by Divine grace, be victorious over the tempter who is the foe of his soul. He shall not yield to the blandishments or fall before the onsets of Satan; he shall learn submission to God’s will without murmuring; he shall serve without fainting; he shall rebuke without harshness; he shall trust without doubting. The world shall have less hold upon his affections, and heaven shall have more power to attract and charm. "We are more than conquerors through him that loved us." The Church, too, shall go, with the Lord himself, from conquest to conquest. It shall shake off dependence upon earthly and carnal weapons; it shall learn the hard lesson of charity; its pity shall be practical, and its purity shall be glorious; and it shall realize the picture painted by the glowing imagination of the inspired artist. IV. THE AND THE TYPE OF TRIUMPH. On these points the text is especially explicit. God shall "bruise Satan under your feet." From this it appears that the victory shall be complete. Human wisdom is prone to pronounce this impossible, and represents the moral conflict as one most uncertain in its issues, in which the advantage seems now to be with this party, and anon with that. And so far as this life is concerned, we have no reason to believe that we shall reach a position from which we look down and back upon the battle-field, as those superior to Satan’s assaults, delivered altogether from danger and from fear. Yet here we have an assurance of complete and lasting victory. If Satan is to be bruised beneath our feet, that implies that he shall be crushed. The figurative language depicts a conqueror, with his foe at his mercy, possessing no further power for resistance and mischief. "Is it possible," you ask, who have wrestled long and hard with the foe of souls—"is it possible that, over such an adversary, so feeble a soldier of righteousness as I shall ever triumph?" Here is the answer: "They overcame the accuser of the brethren by the blood of the Lamb." Nor have you long to wait; for this shall happen "shortly." The strife is fierce, but it shall not be protracted. When your fidelity is tried and proved, the power of the enemy shall be crippled, and he himself shall be thrust down, and you shall have the crown of life. "’Tis but a little while, And he shall come again, Who died that we might live, who lives That we with him may reign!" Romans 16:25-27 A comprehensive doxology. It has often been noticed that the thoughts of the Apostle Paul rushed with such swiftness through his mind that they could scarcely find coherent expression; one seems to follow and to efface that which precedes; and the unity of the whole is with difficulty discernible because of the pressure upon the attention of the several parts. It is so with these closing verses of the Epistle to the Romans; they introduce to the reader’s mind so very many subjects, and they contain so many memorable observations, that he is likely to forget that they constitute a doxology. But to the mind of the writer the intention to utter closing words of praise was present and powerful; and the reasons and motives for praise crowded in upon his mind with such rapidity and force that he could hardly bring his Epistle to its conclusion. Let us endeavour to appreciate the comprehensiveness of this great doxology. I. THIS A OF DIVINE , Three are brought forward, two of them explicitly, and one implicitly, in such a manner as to enhance our conception of God’s character, and to summon the Church of Christ to the congenial exercise of lowly and adoring praise. 1. Power. 2. Wisdom. 3. Benevolence. All these attributes are connected with the gospel which Christians have received, and which is intended for the illumination and salvation of all men. Though benevolence is not mentioned, it is implied in the statements of God’s designs of mercy towards all nations, made at the close of verse 26. II. THIS A OF . 1. The substance of Christian truth is Contained in the Person and ministry of Jesus Christ. 2. This is represented as a gospel, or glad tidings from God to men. 3. And as a revealed mystery, something which existed in the mind and counsels of God from eternity, which was treated throughout the earlier ages of human history as a secret, concealed beneath promises and types and sacrifices, but only made manifest upon the institution of the new and spiritual kingdom of truth and righteousness. III. THIS A PROMISE OF WORLD-WIDE TO MAN. The large heart of the great apostle of the Gentiles was in perfect sympathy with the love of God revealed in Christ, and with the vast scheme of human redemption. It is like himself—the unselfish, compassionate, truly heroic nature that he was—that, in closing this Epistle, which has sometimes been misrepresented as teaching the limitation of Divine mercy and the substitution of arbitrariness for pity, St. Paul should thus refer to the glorious future of the kingdom of the Saviour upon earth. He glorified God that the glorious gospel of the blessed God should be published to all nations, that this should be by Divine prediction and by Divine command, and that the purpose of such publication was, not the condemnation of the sons of men, but salvation, as explained in that elevated and truly Christian phrase, "the obedience of faith." IV. THIS IMPLIES A WISH AND PRAYER FOR THE IN FAITH AND OF THOSE TO WHOM AND FOR WHOSE BENEFIT THE EPISTLE WAS WRITTEN. V. THIS THE EPISTLE WITH AN OF PRAISE AND HONOUR TO THE ClOD OF ALL GRACE AND , The whole treatise is inspired by a reverent and grateful spirit, and is evidently an effort to represent the true moral glory of the Lord of all; and it is appropriate that it should close as it does with ascribing glory, through Jesus Christ, to God the only wise. BY C.H. IRWIN Romans 16:1 "Phoebe our sister:" a sermon to young women. The Rev. W. S. Swanson, speaking some time ago at Manchester, showed that the religions of the East were powerless to regenerate the heart and purify the life, and that, however excellent some of them may appear in theory, they utterly failed in practice. Among other things he said, "I ask what adaptation have we found in these religions to meet the wants, to heal the wounds of woman, and to give her her proper and rightful position? What have they done to free her from the oppression that imprisons, degrades, and brutalizes her? What has ’the light of Asia’ done to brighten her lot? What ray of comfort have these religions shed into the shambles where she is bought and sold? What have they done to sweeten and purify life for her? Why! her place in the so-called paradises of some of them, in the way in which it is painted, only burns the brand of shame more deeply on her brow." Christianity alone has given woman her rightful place. Woman occupies an honourable position in the Bible, and every wise provision is made for her, especially for the widow in her helplessness and loneliness. In the Old Testament we have such noble women as Deborah and Hannah, Ruth and Esther. In the New Testament we have Mary the mother of our Saviour, Mary of Bethany, Lydia, Dorcas, and many others. Women occupied an important place in the early Christian Church. At Philippi, for example, when St. Paul went to the place "where prayer was wont to be made," he found that little prayer-meeting entirely composed of women. In the Epistles of St. Paul we find him sending many messages to the Christian women of various Churches, and commending many of them for their faithfulness and devotion to the cause of Christ. Among those whom he thus mentions is Phoebe. We know nothing of Phoebe’s history beyond what is stated here, and the additional fact mentioned in a note at the end of this Epistle that she was the bearer of this letter to the Christians at Rome. I. PHOEBE WAS A SERVANT. It would appear that she was a lady of some means. She devoted her means and her time to assisting the poor and the helpless. She had been "a succourer of many" (verse 2). But whatever position she occupied, she bears the name of servant. Now, there is nothing to be ashamed of in the name of servant. Every one who is worth anything is a servant in some sense. The less service any one renders, the more useless he or she is in the world. The sovereign upon the throne, the judges and magistrates, lawyers, medical men, men of business, ministers of the gospel, all are the servants of others. Be faithful in your service. The maxim of many in our time seems to be to take all the pay they can and render as little service as possible. That is not honest. Nor is it honest to work only when the eyes of your employer are upon you. "Servants, be obedient to your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in singleness of your heart, as unto Christ; not with eye-service, as men-pleasers; but as the servants of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart; with good will doing service, as to the Lord and not to men." Be trustworthy. Regard what belongs to your master or your mistress with as much care as if it were your own. If your employer’s children are committed to your care, how scrupulous you should be regarding them! Never let them hear from your lips a profane or evil word. If you are teaching them, seek to communicate to their youthful minds all the good principles that you can. Your work may be a quiet work, but if it is done faithfully it is a lasting work. You may not receive much notice or much thanks from your employer, but he that seeth in secret himself shall reward you openly. II. PHOEBE WAS A SERVANT OF GOD. That was the secret of her useful and honoured life. It is the highest thing that could be said of any one. Employers are beginning to find out that God-fearing men and God-fearing women are not the worst servants. 1. A servant of God will not be the servant of this world. Many young ladies who call themselves Christians seem to spend their life altogether in the service of selfish pleasure and worldly amusement. 2. A servant of God will not, keep the company of the godless. There is no subject on which young women in our towns and cities need to be more plainly warned than the choice of their companions of both sexes. How many happy and promising young lives have been blighted, how many hearts have been broken, by foolish companionships and too hasty intimacy! The casual knowledge obtained of any one at an evening party or a pleasure excursion is no basis on which to form an engagement on which depends the happiness of a lifetime. "Thrice blest whose lives are faithful prayers, Whose loves in higher love endure. What souls possess themselves so pure? Or is there blessedness like theirs?" III. PHOEBE WAS A SERVANT OF THE CHURCH. That is to say, she was a helper of God’s people. She was a helper in Christian work. There are many young women whose lives are absolutely wasted, who are utterly wretched and miserable, for want of something to do. How many forms of useful service there are in which a young woman may engage I She may teach in the Sunday school; visit the aged and the sick, and minister unto them in spiritual things, and perhaps also to their bodily comfort and relief; she may invite the careless to the house of God. And a woman’s influence is often powerful for good where even a Christian man would utterly fail to reach the hardened heart.—C.H.I. Romans 16:1-19 Words of counsel for a Christian Church. The practical exhortations given in most of these closing chapters of this Epistle have reference mainly to the duties of individual Christians. The exhortations of this last chapter refer specially to the duty of the local Church in its corporate capacity. I. TO . Consideration for strangers was constantly impressed upon the Jewish people in ancient times. "Oppress not the stranger" (Exodus 22:21; Exodus 23:1-33. 9, etc.); "The stranger that dwelleth among you shall be unto you as one born among you, and thou shalt love him as thyself" (Leviticus 19:34). And Malachi denounces judgments upon those "that turn aside the stranger from his right" (Malachi 3:5). So here Paul enjoins it upon the Church at Rome. "I commend unto you Phoebe our sister … that ye receive her in the Lord, as becometh saints, and that ye assist her in whatsoever business she hath need of you" (verses 1, 2). There is much need for such an exhortation in the Christian Churches of today. Strangers go in and out of our Churches unnoticed and uncared for. False modesty or excessive etiquette prevents the members of the Church from speaking to them. Consider the possible effects of such neglect. A young man, far from home, exposed to many temptations and godless surroundings, enters a church. No one speaks to him. He drifts away. He knows that in the drinking-saloon, perhaps, he will find a welcome and a friendly shake of the hand. "The children of this world are wiser in their generation than the children of light." Why should not Christians be as anxious to welcome the stranger to the house of God as the godless are to welcome him to their haunts of giddy pleasure and sin? Another, hovering on the verge of unbelief, unsettled by the silly popular literature of our day, enters a Christian church. He sees an element of unreality and of selfishness strongly marked. He too drifts away. Or some stranger enters a Christian church who is in trouble or in perplexity, and to whom a word of sympathy or guidance would be welcome. But from the self-absorbed and stand-off Christians no encouragement is received. Can we wonder that such persons are alienated from the Church, are often alienated from Christ? And what does Christ think of all this? Listen to his words on the great day: "I was a stranger, and ye took me not in." And when those whom he shall thus address shall say, "Lord, when saw we thee a stranger, and took thee not in?" then shall he answer them, "Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these my brethren, ye did it not to me." Attention shown to the stranger is regarded by the Saviour as attention shown to himself. Such attention "becometh saints" (verse 2). But however the Church may treat strangers, they need not remain strangers to Christ. He has a word and a welcome for all. II. TO ONE ANOTHER. While we are to think of strangers we must not forget our own brethren. "We have careful thought for the stranger, And smiles for the sometime guest; But oft for our own The bitter tone, Though we love our own the best." This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/pulpit-commentary/