CORNELL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY THE GIFT OF ALFRED C. BARNES 1899 Date Due MAR I Ml\R 1 n 1901 ^61 tr GK ^m^ ^m^^j\ jt ^-^-m- W¥^^ Cornell University Library BS266S .H15 1857 olin 3 1924 029 293 805 Cornell University Library The original of tliis book is in tlie Cornell University Library. There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text. http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924029293805 EXPOSITION OF TED EPISTLE TO THE ROIiJ^S; WITH E E MAR K S COMMENTARIES OF DR. MACKNIGHT, PEOPBSSOE MOSES STUART, AND PROFESSOR THOLUCK. BY ROBERT HALDANE,. Esq, NEW-YOEK: ROBERT CARTER & BROTHERS Vf. 530 BEOAD-WAV. 1857. PREFACE. All Scriptni? is ffiven dv inspiration of God. Every page of tlie eacwd yo'.umB it stamped witi tbe impress of Deity, and contains an inexhaustible treasure of wis< dom, and knowledge, and consolation. Some portions of the word of God, like some parts of the material creation, may be more important than others. But all have their proper place, all proclaim the character of their glorious Author, and all ought to be earnestly and reverentially studied. Whatever be their subject, whether it relates to the history of individuals or of nations, whether it contains the words of pre- cept or exhortation, or whether it teaches by example, all is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness. But while every part of the word of God demands the most serious attention, it is not to be doubted that certain portions of the sacred volume call for more frequent and deeper meditation. In the Old Testament, the Book of Psalms contains a summary of all Scripture, and an abridgment of its most important instructions and sweetest consolations. In the New Testament, the Epistle to the Romans is entitled to peculiar regard. It is the only part of Scripture which contains a detailed and systematic exhibition of the doctrines of Christianity. The great truths which are embodied and inculcated in every other part of the Bible, are here brought together in a condensed and compre- hensive form. More especially the glorious doctrine of justification by faith is clearly unfolded and exhibited in the strongest light. The Epistle to the Romans has always attracted the peculiar notice of those whose study has been directed to the interpretation of Scripture. To this portion of the divine record, all who look for salvation by grace have constantiy appealed, and here they have a rich mine of evidence alike solid and inexhaustible. No considerable difference of interpretation has ever been given of its contents by those who have renounced their own wisdom, and determined to follow implicitly the obvious meaning of the word of God. This Epistie has been equally an object of attention to those who admit the authority of Scripture, but follow their own wisdom in forming theii system of religions doctrine. Salvation by grace and salvation by works are so incompatible with each other, that it might well be supposed no attempt would ever be made to bring them into harmony. Still the attempt has been made. Human wis- dom cannot receive the doctrine of the Epistle to the Romans, and men professing Christianity cannot deny it to be a part of Scriptuie. What, then, is to be done ? A compromise is proclaimed between the wisdom of man and the revelation of God. All the ingenuity of Mr. Locke, one of the most acute and subtie metaphysicians that ever appeared, has been exerted to bring the doctrine of Paul into accordance with human science. Like him many others have labored to give a view of this Epistle that may reconcile human merit with divine grace. Nothing is more manifest than the direct opposition between the doctrine of inspira- tion, as unfolded in the Epistie to the Romans with respect to the state and pros- pects of mankind, and the doctrine of this world's philosophy. Paul contemplates all men in their natural state as ruined by sin, and utterly unable to restore them- selves to the Divine favor. Philosophers, on the contrary, survey the aspect of society with real or affected complacency. They perceive, indeed, that imperfection and suffering prevail to a considerable extent : but they discover a vast preponde- rance 01 happiness and virtue. They canny, deny that man is of a mixed character- JT PREFACE. but this is necessAry in oiJer that his virtue may be his own, and that in passing onwards to the summit ot moral excellence, his strength of principle may be more illustriously displayed : and his happiness promoted by his progress in virtue, as well as by his advaincement in knowledge. Nor is this remarkable difference altogether con- fined to philosophy. Even many professors and expounders of Christiamty cannot entirely accord with the Apostle Paul in his representations of human nature. Man, it eeems to them, is not so completely lost, but that he may do something to regain the Divine fwor ; and if a sacrifice were necessary for the expiation of sin, its blessing aiust be equally bestowed on (ill mankind. The doctrine of justification in particular so lar transcends the powers oi our dis- tovery, that men are ever attempting to set it aside, or to mould it info accordance with their own preconceived notions. How wonderful is the contrast between the justification of which this Apostle treats, and the justification which critical ingenuity has often extorted from his Epistles ! While Paul speaks of the believer as possess- ing a righteousness perfectly commensurate to all the demands of the law, and stand- ing at the bar of God spotless and blameless, human wisdom has couuived to exhibit his doctrine as representing salvation to be the result oi a nappy combination of mercy and merit. The doctrine of salvation by faith without works has ever appeared to the wise of this world not only as a scheme insufiicient to secure the interests of morality, but as one which disparages the Divine authority. Yet its good effects are fully demonstrated in every age ; and while nothing but the doctrine of salvation by grace has ever produced good works, this dectrine has never failed of its designed object. In all the ways of God there is a characteristic wisdom, which stamps them vpith the impress of divinity. There is here a harmony and consistency in things the most different in appearance ; while the intended result is invariably produced, although in a way which to man would appear most unlikely to secure success. The mind of every man is by nature disaffected to the doctrine of this Epistle ; but it is only in proportion to the audacity of his unbelief, that any one will directly avow his opposition. While some by the wjldest suppositions will boldly set aside what- ever it declares that opposes their own preconceived opinions, others will receive its statements only with the reserve of certain necessary modifications. Thus, in the deviations from truth, in the exposition of its doctrines, we discover various shades of the same unhallowed disregard for the Divine testimony. The spirit of speculation and of novelty which is now abroad, loudly calls upon Christians to give earnest heed to the truth inculcated in the Epistle to the Romans. There is hardly any doctrine which has not been of late years exposed to the corrup- tions and perversions of men who profess to be believers of divine revelation. Many, altogether destitute of the Spirit of God, and the semblance of true religion, have nevertheless chosen the word of God, and its solemn and awfully momentous truths, as the arena upon which to exercise their learning and display their ingenu- ity. In consequence of the Scriptures being written in the dead languages, there is doubtless scope for the diligent employment of critical research. But if it were inquired how much additional light has been thrown upon the sacred volume by the refinements of modern critics, it would be found to bear a very small proportion to She evil influence of unsanctified learning applied to the holy doctrines of revelation. It has become common, even among Christians, to speak of the critical interpretation of Scripture as requiring little or nothing more than mere scholarship, and many seem to suppose that the office of a critical and that of a doctrinal interpreter are so widely different, that a man may be a safe and useful critip who has no relish for the grand truths of the Bible. There cannot be a more lamentable delusion, or one more calculated to desecrate the character and obscure the majesty of the Word of God. To suppose that a man may rightly interpret the Scriptures, while he is ignorant of the truths of the gospel, or disaffected to some of its grand fundamental doc- trines, — to imagine that this can be to him a useful or even an innocent occupation is to regard these Scriptures as the production of ordinary men, treating of subjects of ordinary importance ; insteid of containing, as they do, the message of the Most High God, revealing life or death to every som to whom they come. If the Scriptures have not testified in vaic that the carnal mind is enmity against PREFACE. * God ; if we are bound to believe that there is no middle state between the Christian and the unbeliever ; can we wonder at the manner in which they have been pervert- ed, not only by the ignorance but by the inveterate prejudices of men from whom the gospel is hid ? Is it reasonable — is it agreeable to the dictates of common sense, to beheve that the critical interpretations of such men are not tinged with their own darkened and hostile views of the divine character and the divine revelation ? And yet such is the opinion entertained of the labors of some of the most unenlightened commentators, that their works have obtained a celebrity altogether unaccountable on any principle of Christian wisdom. Christians ought to be particularly on their guard against tampering in any degree with the word of God. We should never forget, that when we are explaining any expression of Scripture, we are treating of what are the very words of the Holy Ghost, as much as if they had been spoken to us by a voice from heaven. The pro- fane rashness of many critics is much emboldened by the circumstance that men have been employed as the instruments of the Almighty in communicating his reve- lation. A sort of modified inspiration only is granted to the Scriptures, and they are often treated as the words merely of fliose who were employed as the penmen. When God is thus kept out of sight little ceremony is used with the words of the Apostles. The profound reverence and awe with which the Scriptures ought to be read and handled, are in many instances too little exemplified. The poor man's Bible is the word of Gcod, in which he has no suspicion that there is anything but per- fection. The Bible of the profoundly erudite scholar is often a book that is not so necessary to instruct him, as one that needs his hand for alteration, or amendment, or confirmation. Learning may be usefully employed ; but if learning ever forgets that It must sit at the feet of Jesus, it wiU be a curse instead of a blessing. It will raise clouds and darkness, instead of communicating light to the world. The evil of studjdng the Scriptures, and commenting upon them virith as little reverence as a scholar might comment upon the plays of Aristophanes or Terence, has extended itself much farther than might be supposed. This is the spirit^in which the German Neologians have written ; and indeed it is to be feared that, as the neo- logian form of infidelity originated from this profane method of criticising the Scrip- tures, so the same cause may produce the same eflfect in this country. Certain it is that works have been republished or translated here, which are very little calculated to uphold the ancient faith of the church of Christ, or to advance the knowledge oi the truth as it is in Jesus. Prom present appearances, there is every reason to fear that Britain will be inun dated with German Neology. The tide has strongly set in, and unless the Christian public be upon their guard, the whole country will be brought under its influence, It is a solemn thing to be instrumental in ushering into more extended notoriety, pubhcations that have a tendency to lower the character of the Holy Scriptures, to introduce doubt and confusion into the minds of those who are weak in the faith and to embolden others who seek an apology for casting away the fetters of educa- tion and authority, and desire to launch out into the ocean of wild and dangerous speculation. While some appearances in Germany of a reram to the Scripture doc- trine of salvation by Jesus Cfhrist should be gladly hailed by every Christian, yet it must be admitted that those who in that country seem to have made the greatest advances in the knowledge of the gospel, are still far from being entitled to be pointed out as guides to the Christians of Great Britain. Their modifications of divine truth are manifestly under the influence of a criticism too nearly allied to neology. There is great danger, that in the admiration of German criticism a tincture maybe received from continental errors. It would be far preferable if learned Christians at home would pursue truth in a diUgent examination of its own sources, rather than soend their time in retailing the criticisms of German scholars. " Their criticisms," It IS oDserved by Dr. Carson, " aio arbitrary, forced, and in the ' ' hest degree fantas- tical. Their learning is boundless, yet their criticism is mere trash. The vast extent of their literary acquirements has overawed British theologians, and given an importance to arguments that are self-evidently false." In these days of boasted liberality, it may appear captious to oppose with zeal the errors of men who have acquired a name in tki Christian world. The mantle of 71 PREFACE. charity, it will be said, ought to be thrown over mistakes that have resulted from « free and impartial investigation of truth, and if not wholly overlooked, they should be noticed with a sUght expression of disapprobation. Such, however, was not the conduct of the Apostle Paul. He spared neither churches nor individuals, when the doctrines they maintained tended to the subversion of the gospel : and the zeal with which he resisted their errors was not inferior to that with which he encountered the open enemies of Christianity. He affirms that the doctrine introduced into the Galatian churches is another gospel, and twice pronounces a curse against all by whom it was promulgated. Instead of complimenting the authors of this corruption of the gospel as only abusing, in a slight degree, Uie liberty of free examination, he decides that they should be cut off as troublers of the churches. Let not Chris- tians be more courteous in expressing their views of the guilt and danger of cor- rupting the gospel, than &ithful and compassionate to the people of Christ, who ma' be injured by false doctrine. It is highly sinful to bandy compliments at the expen*e of truth. The awful responsibility of being accessory to the propagation of error is strong ly expressed by the Apostle John. " If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed ; for he that biddeth ifiim God speed is partaker of his evil deeds." If the imputation of Adam's sin and of Christ's righteousness be doctrines contained in the word of God, com- mentaries that labor to ejrpel them from that word must be grossly pestiferous books, which no Christian ought to recommend, but which, on the contrary, to the utmost of his power, it is his duty to oppose. A very dangerous misrepresentation of some of the great doctrines of the Epistle to the Romans has lately come before the public, in a commentary on that Epistle, from the pen of Professor Moses Stuart of America. As that work has obtained an extensive circulation in this country, — as it has been strongly recommended, and is likely to produce a considerable eSect, — ^it has appeared proper to make frequent references to his glaring perversions of its important contents. On the same princi- ple, various remarks are introduced on the well-known heterodox commentary of Dr. Macknight; I have also alluded occasionally to the heretical sentiments contaisedin that of Professor Tholuck, lately published. In the following exposition, 1 have availed myself of all the assistance I could obtain, from whatever quarter. Especially I have made use of everything that appear- ed to be most valuable in the commentary of Claude, which terminates at the begin- ning of the twentyrfirst verse of the third chapter. I have also had the advantage of the assistance of Dr. Carson, whose profound knowledge of the original language and well-known critical discernment peculiarly qualify him for rendering efiectnal aid in such a work. As it is my object to make this exposition as useful as possible to all descriptions of readers, I have not always confined, myself simply to an expla- nation of the text, but have occasionally extended at some length, remarks on such subjects as seemed to demand particular attention, either on account of their own importance, or of mistaken opinions entertained concerning them. As to those winch required a fuller discussion than could be conveniently introduced, I have referred to my work on the Evidence and Authority of Divine Revelation. By studying the Epistle to the Romans, an exact and comprehensive knowledge of the distinguishing doctrines of grace, in their various bearings and connexions may, by the blessing of God, be obtained. Here they appear in all their native force and clearness, unalloyed with the wisdom of man. The human mind is ever prone to soften the strong features of Divine truth, and to bring them more into accordance with its own wishes and preconceived notions. Those lowering and debasing modi- fications of the doctrines of Scripture, by which, in some popular works, it is endea- vored to reconcile error with orthodoxy, are imposing only in theory, 'and maybe easily detected by a close and unprqudiced examination of the language of this Epistle. ^ INTRODUCTION. The Epistle to the Romans was written by the Apostle Paul from Corinth, the capital of Achaia, after his second journey to that celebrated city for the purpose of collecting the pecuniary aid destined for the church at Jerusalem. This appears from the fifteenth chapter, where he says that he was going to Jerusalem to minister to the saints. " For," he adds, " it hath pleased them of Macedonia and Achaia, to make a certain contribution for the poor saints which are at Jerusalem." The Epistle appears to have been carried to Rome by Phebe, a deaconess of the church at Cenchrea, which was the port ol Corinth, and we learn from the nineteenth and twentieth chapters oi the Acts, and from different parts of the two Epistles to the Corinth ians, that after having remained about three years at Ephesus, Pau. purposed to pass through Macedonia and Achaia, to receive the con- tributions of the Corinthians, and afterwards proceed to Jerusalem. As to the period when this Epistle was written, it is certain that it was at a time previous to Paul's arrival at Rome. On this account he begins by declaring to the disciples' there, that he had a great desire to see them, and to preach to them the gospel, that he had often pur- posed this, but had hitherto always been prevented. This statement he repeats in the fifteenth chapter. It appears to be earlier in date than the Epistles to the Ephesians and Philippians, and those to the Hebrews and Philemon, and the second to Timothy ; for all of these were written during the Apostle's first or second imprisonment at Rome, but later than the two Epistles to the Corinthians. It is generally supposed that it was written in the year 57 of the Christian era, about twenty- four years after the resurrection of our Lord. Notwithstanding that this Epistle was written after some of the rest, it has been placed first in order among them on account of its excel- lence, and the abundance and sublimity of its contents. It contains, indeed, an abridgment of all that is taught in the Christian religion. It treats of the revelation of God in the works of nature, and in the heart of man, and exhibits the necessity and the strictness of the last judgment. It teaches the doctrine of the fall and corruption of the whole human race, of which it discovers the source and its greatness. It points out the true and right use of the law, and why God gave it to 1 INTRODUCTION. the Israelites ; and also shows the vanity of the temporal advantages over other men which that law confeiTed on them, and which tftey so criminally abused. It treats of the mission of our Lord Jesus unrist, of justification, of sanctification, of free will, and of grace, ot salva- tion and of condemnation, of election and of reprobation, of the per- severance and assurance of the salvation of believers m the midst ot their severest temptations, of the necessity of afHictions, and ot the admirable consolations which God gives his people under them, ol the calling of the Gentiles, of the rejection of the Jews, and of their final restoration to the communion of God. Paul afterwards lays down the principal rules of Christian morality, containing all that we owe to God, to ourselves, to our neighbors, and to our brethren in Christ, and declares the manner in which we should act in our particular em- ployments ; uniformly accompanying his precepts with just and reason- able motives to enforce their practice. The form, too, of this Epistle, is not less admirable than its matter. Its reasoning is powerful and conclusive ; the style condensed, lively, and energetic ; the arrangement orderly and clear, strikingly exhibiting the leading doctrines as the main branches from which depend all the graces and virtues of the Christian life. The whole is pervaded by a strain of the most exalted piety, true holiness, ardent zeal, and fervent charity. This Epistle, like the greater part of those written by Paul, is di- vided into two general parts, the first of which contains the doctrine, and extends to the beginning of the twelfth chapter ; and the second, which relates to practice, goes on to the conclusion. The first is to instruct the spirit, and the other to direct the heart ; the one teaches what we are to believe, the other what we are to practise. In the first part, he discusses chiefly the two great questions which at the beginning of the gospel were agitated between the Jews and the Christians, namely, that of justification before God, and that of the calling of the Gentiles. For as on the one hand the gospel held forth a method of justificatioa very difierent from that of the law, the Jews could not relish a doctrine which appeared to them novel, and was contrary to their prejudices ; and as, on the other hand, they found themselves in possession of the covenant of God, to the exclusion of other nations, they could not endure that the Apostles should call the Gentiles to the knowledge of the true God, and to the hope of his salvation, nor that it should be supposed that the Jews had lost their exclusive pre-emi- nence over the nations. The principal object, then, of the Apostle, was to combat these two prejudices. He directs his attention to the former in the fijTst nine chapters, and treats of the other in the tenth and eleventh. As to what regards the second portion of the Epistle, Paul first enjoins general precepts for the conduct of believprs, afterwards in regard to civil life, and finally with regard to church communion. In the first five chapters, the great doctrine of justification by faith, of which they exclusively treat, is more fully discussed than in any other part of Scriptiure. The design of the Apostle is to establish two things ; the one is, that there being only two ways of justification before God, namely, that of works, which the law proposes, and that of grace INTRODUCTION. by Jesus Christ, which the gospel reveals ; the first is entirely shut against men, and in order to their being saved, there remains only the last. The other thing that he designs to establish is, that justification by grace through faith in Jesus Christ respects indifferently all men, both Je\7s and Gentiles, and that it abolishes the distinction which the law had made between them. To arrive at this he first proves that the Gentiles as well as the Jews are subject to the judgment of God ; but that being all sinners and guilty, neither the one nor the other can escape condemnation by their works. He humbles them both. He sets be- fore the Gentiles the blind ignorance and unrighteousness both of them- selves and of their philosophers of whom they boasted, and he teaches humility to the Jews by showing that they were chargeable with similar vices. He undermines in both the pride of self-merit, and teaches all to build their hopes on Jesus Christ alone ; proving that their salvation can neither emanate from their philosophy nor firom their law, but from the grace of Christ Jesus. In the first chapter, the Apostle commences by directing our atten- tion to the person of the Son of God in his incarnation in time, and his divine nature from eternity, as the great subject of that gospel which he was commissioned to proclaim. After a most striking introduction, every way calculated to arrest the attention, and conciliate the affection of those whom he addressed, he briefly announces the grand truth, which he intends afterwards to establish, that " the gospel is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth," because in it is revealed " the righteousness of God." Unless such a righteousness had been provided, all men must have suffered the punishment due to sin, seeing God had denounced his high displeasure against all " ungod- liness and unrighteousness." These are the great truths which the Apostle immediately proceeds to unfold. And as they stand connected with every part of that salvation which God has prepared, he is led to exhibit a most animating and consolatory view of the whole plan of mercy, which proclaims " glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will towards men." The first point which the Apostle establishes is the ruined condition of men, who, being entirely divested of righteousness, are by nature all under sin. The charge of " ungodliness" and of consequent " un- righteousness," he proves first against the Gentiles. They had departed from the worship of God, although in the works of the visible creation they had sufficient notification of his power and Godhead. In their conduct they had violated the law written in their hearts, and had sinned in opposition to what they knew to be right, and to the testi- mony of their conscience in its favor. All of them, therefore, lay under the sentence of condemnation, which will be pronounced upon the workers of iniquity in the day when God shall judge the secrets of men. In the second chapter, a similar charge of transgression and guilt is established against the Jews, notwithstanding the superior ad- vantage of a written revelation, with which they had been favored. Having proved, in the first two chapters, by an appeal to undeniable facts, that the Gentiles and the Jews were both guilty before God, in INTROnUCTTON. the ihird chapter, after obviating some objections regarding the Jews, Paul lakes both Jews and Gentiles together, and exhibits a fearful pic- ture, drawn from the testimony of the Old Testament Scriptures, of the universal guilt and depravity of all mankind, showing that " there is none righteous, no, not one," and that all are depraved, wicked, and alienated from God. He thus estabhshes it as an undeniable truth, that e^'ery man in his natural state lies under the just condemnation of God, as a rebel against him, in all the three ways in which he has been pleased to reveal himself, whether by the works of creation, the work of the law written on the heart, or by the revelation of grace. From these premises, he then draws the obvious and inevitable conclusion, that by obedience to law no man living shall be justified ; that so far from justifying, the law proves every one to be guilty and under con- demnation. The way is thus prepared for the grand display of the grace and mercy of God announced in the gospel, by which men are saved consistently with the honor of the law. What the law could not do, not from any deficiency in itself, but owing to the depravity of.man, God has fully accomplished. Man has no righteousness of his own which he can plead, but God has provided a righteousness for him. This righteousness, infinitely superior to that which he originally pos- sessed, is provided solely by grace, .and received solely by faith. It is placed to the account of the believer for his justification, without the smallest respect either to his previous or subsequent obedience. Yet so far from being contrary to the justice of God, this method of justifi- cation, " freely by his grace," strikingly illustrates his justice, and vindicates all his dealings to men. So far from making the law void, it establishes it in all its honor and authority. This way of salvation equally applies to all, both Jews and Gentiles — men of every nation and every character ; " there is no difference," for all, without excep- tion, are sinners. The Apostle, in the fourth chapter, dwells on the faith through which the righteousness of God is received, and in obviating certain objections, further confirms and illustrates his doctrine, by showing that Abraham himself, the progenitor of the Jews, was justified not by works but by faith, and that in this way he was tlie father of all believers, the pattern and the type of the justification of both Jews and Gentiles. And in order to complete the view of the great subject of his discussion, Paul considers, in the fifth chapter, two principal effects of justification by Jesus Christ, namely, peace with God, and assurance of salvation, not- withstanding the troubles and afflictions to which behevers are exposed. And because Jesus Christ is tlie author of this divine reconciliation, he comjiares him with Adam, who was the source of condemnation, con- cluding with a striking account of the entrance of sin and of rio-hteous- ness, both of which he had been exhibiting. He next shows the reason why, between Adam and Jesus Christ, God caused the law of Moses to intervene, by means of which the extent of the evil of sin, and the efficiency of the remedy brought m bv righteousness, were both fully exhibited, to the glory of the grace of God. These five chapters dis- close a consistent scheme in tlie Divine conduct, and exhibit a plan of INTROnUCTlOW. reconciling sinners to God, that never could have been vliscovered by the human understanding. It is the perfection of wisdom, yet in all its features it is opposed to the wisdom of this world.* As the doctrine of the justification of sinners, by the imputation of the righteousness of Christ, without regard to their works, which mani^^ fasts, in all their extent, the guilt, the depravity, and the helplessness of man, in order to magnify grace in his pardon, might be charged with leading to licentiousness, Paul does not fail to state this objection, and solidly to refute it. This he does in the sixth and seventh chapters, in which he proves that, so far from setting aside the necessity of obedi- ence to God, the doctrine of justification stands indissolubly connected with the very foundation of holiness and obedience. This foundation is union with the Redeemer, through that faith by which the believer is justified. On the contrary, the law operates by its restraints to stimu- late and call into action the corruptions of the human heart, while at the same time it condemns all who are under its dominion. But through their union with Christ, believers are delivered from the law j and being under grace, which produces love, they are enabled to bring forth fruit acceptable to God. The law, however, is in itself holy, and just, and good. As such, it is employed by the Spirit of God to con- vince his people of sin, to teach them the value of the remedy provided in the gospel, and to lead them to cleave unto the Lord, from a sense of the remaining corruption of their hearts. This corruption, as the Apostle shows, by a striking description of his own experience, will continue to exert its power in believers, so long as tney are in the body. As a general conclusion from all that had gone before, the believer's entire freedom from condemnation through union with his glorious head, and his consequent sanctification, are both asserted in the eighth chapter, neither of which effects could have been accomplished by the law. The opposite results of death to the carnal mind, which actuated man in his natural state ; and of life to the spiritual mind, which he receives in his renovation, are clearly pointed out; and as the love of God had been shown in the fifth chapter to be so peculiarly transcendent, from the consideration that Christ died for men, not as friends and worthy objects, but as " without strength," " ungodly," " sinners,"' " enemies," so here the natural state of those on whom such unspeak* able blessings are bestowed is described as " enmity against God." The effects of the inhabitation of the Holy Spirit in those who are regenerated are next disclosed, together with the glorious privileges which it secures. Amidst present sufferings the highest consolations are presented to the children of' God, while their original source and final issue are pointed out. The contemplation of such ineffable blessings as he had just been describing, reminds the Apostle of the mournful state of the generality of his countrymen, who, though distinguished in the highest degree by • The former editions of this Exposition were published in three separate volume* Of the first volume, including these five chapters, the present is the fifth edition INTRODUCTION. their external privileges, still, as he himself had once done, rejected the Messiah. And as the doctrine he had been inculcating seemed to set aside the promises which God had made to the Jewish people ; and to take from them the Divine covenant under which they had been placed, Paul states that objection and obviates it in the ninth chapter, showing that on the one hand the promises of spiritual blessings regarded only be- lievers, who are the real Israelites, the true seed of Abraham, and on the other, that faith itself being an effect of grace, God bestows it ac- cording to his sovereign will, so that the difference between believers and unbelievers is a consequence of his free election, of which the sole cause is his good pleasure, which he exercises, both in regard to the Jews and the Gentiles. Nothing, then, had frustrated the purpose of God ; and his word had taken effect so far as he had appointed. The doctrine of God's sovereignty is here fully discussed, and that very objection which is daily made, " virhy doth he yet find fault ?" is stated, and for ever put down. Instead of national election, the great subject in this chapter is national rejection ; and the personal election of a small remnant, without which the whole nation of Israel would have been destroyed ; so devoid of reason is the objection usually made to the doctrine of election, that it is a cruel doctrine. In the end of the ninth chapter, the Apostle is led to the consideration of the fatal error of the great body of the Jews who sought justification by works and not by faith. Mistaking the intent and the end of their law, they stumbled at this doctrine, which is the common stumbling-stone to unregenerate men. In the tenth chapter Paul resumes the same subject, and by new proofs, drawn from the Old Testament, shows that the righteousness of God which the Jews, going about to establish their own righteousness for their justification, rejected, is received solely by faith in Jesus Christ, and that the gospel regards the Gentiles as well as the Jews ; and if re- jected by the Jews it is not surprising, since this had been predicted by the prophets. The Jews thus excluded themselves from salvation, not discerning the true character of the Messiah of Israel as the end of the law, and the author of righteousness, to every believer. And yet when they reflected on the declaration of Moses, that to obtain life by the taw, the perfect obedience which it demands must in every case be yielded,, they might have been convinced that on this ground they could not be justified ; on the contrary, by the law they were universally condemned. The Apostle also exhibits the freeness of salvation through the Redeemer, and the certainty that all who accept it shall be saved. And since faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God, the necessity of preaching the gospel to the Gentiles is inferred and asserted. The result corresponded with the prediction. The righteousness which is by faith was received by the Gentiles, although they had not been inquiring for it ; while the Jews, who followed after the law of righteousness, had not attained to righteousness. The mercies of God, as illustrated by the revelation of the right- eousness which is received by faith, was the grand subject which had occupied Paul, in the preceding part of this Epistle. He had INTRODTICTION. announced at the beginning that he was " not ashamed of the gospel ot Christ ; because it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth — ^to the Jew first, and also to the Greek." This great truth he had undertaken to demonstrate, and he had done so with all the authority and force of inspiration, by exhibiting, on the one hand, the state and character of man ; and on the other, the depth of the riches, both of the wisdom and knowledge of God. In the prosecution of this subject, the Apostle had shown that the wrath of God is revealed against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men ; and by arguments the most irresistible, and evidence that could not be gainsaid, he had brought in both Jews and Gentiles as guilty and condemned sinners, justly obnoxious to the vengeance of heaven. Had the Almighty been pleased to abandon the apostate race of Adam, as he did the angels, to perish in their sins, none could have impeached his justice, or arraigned the rigor of the Divine procedure. But in the unsearchable riches of the mercies of God, he was pleased to bring near a righteousness by which his violated law should be magnified, and a multitude whom no man can number rescued from destruction. This righteousness is revealed in the gospel — a righteousness worthy of the source from which it flows — a righteousness which shall for evei abase the pride of the creature, and bring glory to God in the highest. The mercies of God are thus dispensed in such a way as to cut off all ground for boasting on the part of those who are justified. They are, on the contrary, calculated to exalt the divine sovereignty, and to hum- ble those in the dust who are saved before him who worketh all things according to the counsel of his own will, and without giving any account of his matters, either justifies or condemns the guilty according to his supreme pleasure. In the eleventh chapter, the Apostle finishes his argument, and in a manner concludes his subject. He here resumes the doctrine of the personal election of a remnant of Israel, of which he had spoken in the ninth chapter, and affirms, in the most express terms, that it is wholly of grace, which consequently excludes as its cause every idea of work, or of merit; on the part of man. He shows that the unbelief of the Jews has not been universal, God having still reserved some of them by his gratuitous election, while as a nation he has allowed them to fall, and that this fall has been appointed in the wise providence of God to open the way for the calling of the Gentiles. But in order that the Gentiles may not triumph over that outcast nation, Paul predicts that God will ane day raise it up again, and recall the whole of it to communion with himself. He vindicates God's dealings both towards Jews and Gentiies, showing that since all were guilty and justly con- demned, God was acting on a plan by which both in the choice and partial rejection, as well as in the final restoration of the Jews, the Divine glory would be manifested, while in the result, the sovereign mercies of Jehovah would shine forth conspicuous in all his dealings toward the children of men. A most consolatory view is, accordingly given of the present tendency and final issue of the dispensations of God in bringing in the fulness of the Gentiles, and in the general sal INTRODUCTION. vation of Israel. And thus also by the annunciation of the reception which the gospel should meet with from the Jews, first in rejecting it for a long period, and afterwards in embracing it, the doctrine of the sovereignty of him who hath mercy on whom he will have mercy, and hardeneth whom he will, is further displayed and established. Lost in admiration of the majesty of God as discovered in the gospel, the Apostle prostrates himself before his Maker, while, in language of adoring wonder, he summons all whom he addresses to unite in ascrib- ing glory to him who is the first and the last, the beginning and the end, the Almighty. From this point, Paul turns to survey the practical results which naturally flow from the doctrine he had been illustrating. He was addressing those who were at Rome, " beloved of God, called, saints," and by the remembrance of those mercies of which, whether Jews or Gentiles, they were the monuments, he beseeches them to present their bodies a living sacrifice to God, whose glory is the first and the last end of creation. In thus demanding the entire surrender or sacri- fice of their bodies, lie enforces the duty by designating it their reason- able service. Nothing can be more agreeable to the dictates of right reason, than to spend and be spent in the service of that God, whose glory is transcendent, whose power is infinite, whose justice is inviola- ble, and whose tendei mercies are over all his works. On this firm foundation, the Apostle establishes the various duties to which men are called, as associated with each other in society, whether in the ordinary relations of life, or as subjects of civil government, or as members of the Church of Christ. The morality here inculcated, is the purest and most exalted. It presents nothing of that incongruous medley, which is discernible in the schemes of philosophy. It exhibits no traces of confusion or disorder. It places everything on its right basis, and in its proper place. It equally enjoins our duty towards God and our duty towards man ; and in this it differs from all human systems, which uniformly exclude the former or keep it in the back ground. It shows how doctrine and practice are inseparably connected, — how the one is the motive, the source or the principle, — how the other is the effect ; and how both are so united that, such as is the first, so will be the last. According to our views of the character of God, so will be our conduct. The corruption of morals, which degraded and destroyed the heathen world, was the natural result of what in- fidels have designated "their elegant mythology." The abominable cha.racters of the heathen gods and goddesses were at once the tran- script and the provocatives of the abominations of their worshippers • but wherever the true God has been known— wherever the character of Jehovah has been proclaimed, there a new standard of morals has been erected ; and even those by whom his salvation is rejected are in duced to counterfeit the virtues to which they do not attain. True Christianity and sound morals are indissolubly linked together • and ]ust in proportion as men are estranged from the knowledge and service of God so shall we find their actions stained with the corruptions of sin V\ here mall the boasted moral systems of Socrates, Plato, Aristotle' INTROOrCTION. 9 Cicero, Epictetus, Seneca, or the rest of the ns of the wall of the New Jeru- salem ; and all his people are built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner-stone. E\ery qualification of an Apostle centred in Paul, as he shows in various places. He had seen the Lord after his resurrection, 1 Cor. ix., 1. He had received his commission directly from Jesus Christ and God the Father, Gal. i., 1. He possessed the signs of an Apostle, 2 Cor. xii., 12. He had received the knowledge of the gospel, not through any man cr by any external means, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ, Gal. ", 11, 12 ; and although he was as one born out of due time, yet by the j; ace vouchsafed to him, he labored more HOMANS I., 1. abundantly than all the rest. When he here desigiates himself a called Apostle, he seems to refer to the insinuations of his enemies, who, from his not having been appointed during the ministry of oui Lord, considered him as inferior to the other Apostles. The object ot nearly the whole of the 2d Epistle to the Corinthians, is to estabhsh his Apostolic authority ; in the third chapter especially, he exhibits the superiority of the ministration committed to the Apostles, over that entrusted to Moses. Thus the designation of servant, the first of the titles here assumed, denotes his general character— the second, of Apostle, his particular office ; and the term Apostle being placed at the beginning of this Epistle, impresses the stamp of Divine authority on all that it contains. Separated unto the Gospel of God. — This may regard either God s eternal purpose concerning Paul, or his preordination of him to be a preacher of the gospel to which he was separated from his mother's womb, as it was said to Jeremiah, i., 5, " Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee ; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations ;" or rather it refers to the time when God revealed his Son in him, that he might preach him among the heathen. Gal. i., 16. The term separated here used, appears to allude to his having been a Pharisee before his conversion, which signifies one separated or set apart. Now, however, he was separated in a far different manner ; for then it was by human pride, now it was by Divine grace. Formerly he was set apart to uphold the inventions and traditions of men, but now to preach the gospel of God. The gospel of God, to which Paul was separated, signifies the glad tidings of salvation which God has proclaimed. It is the super- natural revelation which he has given, distinguished from the revelation of the works of nature. It denotes that revelation of mercy and salvation which excels in glory, as distinguished from the law, which was the revelation of condemnation. It is the gospel of God, inasmuch as God is its author, its interpreter, its subject ; its author, as he has pur- posed it in his eternal decrees ; its interpreter, as he himself hath declared it to men ; its subject, because in the gospel his sovereign perfections and purposes towards men are manifested. For the same reasons it is also called the gospel of the grace of God, the gospel of peace, the gospel of the kingdom, the gospel of salvation, the everlasting gospel, the glorious gospel of the blessed God. This gospel is the glad tidings from God of the accomplishment of the promise of salvation that had been made to Adam. That promise had been typically represented by the institution of sacrifice, and transmitted by oral tradition. It had been solemnly proclaimed by Enoch and by Noah before the flood ; it had been more particularly announced to Abraham, to Isaac, and' to Jacob ; by Moses, it was exhibited in those typical representations contained in the law, which had a shadow of good things to come. Its fulfilment was the spirit and object of the whole prophetic testimony in the predictions concerning a new covenant, and in all that was fore told respecting the advent of the Messiah. KOMA.NS I., 3. 15 V. 2.— Which he had promised afore by his prophets in the holy scriptures. By declaring that the gospel had been before promised, Paul tacitly repels the accusation that it was a novel doctrine. At the same time he states its divine origin as a reason why nothing new is to be admitted in rehgion. He further shows iA what respect the Old and Nevv Testaments differ — not as containing two religions essentially dissimilar, but as exhibiting the same grand truth predicted, prefigured, and fulfilled. The Old Testament is the promise of the New, and the New the accomphshment of the Old. The gospel had been promisea by all the prophecies which foretold a New Covenant, — ^by those which predicted the coming of the Messiah, — ^by all the observances, under tiie law, that contained in themselves the promise of the things they prefigured — ^by the whole of the legal economy, that preceded the gospel, in which was displayed the strictness of Divine justice, which in itself would have been a ministration only of condenmation, had v not been accompanied by all the revelations of grace and mercy, whicl were in substance and embryo the gospel itself, and consequently fore told and prepared the way for a more perfect development. By his Prophets. — ^Paul here, also, repels another accusation of the Jews, namely, that the Apostles were opposed to Moses and the Prophets ; and intimates their complete agreement. He thus endeavors to secure attention and submission to his doctrine, by removing the pre- judices entertained against it, and by showing that none could reject it without rejecting the Prophets. In addition to this, he estabhshes the authority of the Prophets by intimating, that it was God himself who spoke by them, and consequently that their words must be received as a revelation from heaven. In the Holy Scriptures. — Here he establishes the inspiration of the Scriptures, by pronouncing them holy : and asserting that it was God himself who spoke in them ; and shows whence we are now to take the true word of God and of his Prophets, not firom oral tradition, which must be uncertain and fluctuating, but from the written word, which is certain and permanent. He teaches, that we ought always to resort to the. Scriptures ; for that, in religion whatever they do not contain is really novel, although it may have passed current for ages ; while all that is found there is really ancient, although it may have been lost sight of for a long period. V. 3. — Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh.* The gospel of God concerns his Son. The whole of it is comprised in the knowledge of Jesus Christ ; so that whoever departs one step from him departs from the gospel. For as Jesus Christ is the Divine image of the Father, he is set before us as the real object of our faith It is of him that the gospel of God, promised by the Prophets, treats ; • In the original the words " Jesus Christ our Lord," stand at the conclusion of verse 4th, and the words between them and " concerning his son," may be read as a paren thesis ; but the sense remains the same. 16 ROMANS I., 3. SO that he is not simply a legislator or interpreter of the Divine will like Moses, and the Prophets, and the Apostles. Had the law and the gospel been given by others than Moses and the Apostles, the essential characteristics of these two economies would have remained the same. But it is altogether different respecting Jesus Christ, who is exclusively the Alpha and Omega of the gospel, its proper object, its beginning and its end. For it is he who founded it in his blood, and who has communicated to it all its virtue. On this account he himself says, " I am the way, and the truth, and the life ; no man Cometh unto the Father but by me." He is the Son of God, his own Son, the only begotten of the Father ; which proves, that he is truly and exclusively his Son, of the same nature, and equal with the Father, and not figuratively, or in a secondary sense, as angels or men, as Israel or believers. Jesus Christ. — He was called Jesus, the Greek name of the Hebrew Joshua, signifying Jehovah that saveth ; and so called by the angel before he was born. " Thou shalt call his name Jesus ; for he shall save his people from their sins." Matt, i., 21. The title Christ — that is Messiah, or " Anointed,"* — ^being so often added in designation of his office, at length came into use as a part of his name. Our Lord.— This follows from his being the Son of God. The word translated Lord, comprehends the different names or titles which the Hebrews gave to God, but most usually corresponds with that of Jehovah Where it is used as the name of God, it designates essentially the three persons of the Godhead ; but it is also applied to any one of the Divine persons. In the Acts of the Apostles, and Epistles, it generally refers to Christ ; and in these divine writings this appellation is applied to him in innumerable instances. He is called " the Lord of glory ;" " the Lord both of the dead and living ;" " the Lord of all." The name Jesus refers to his saving his people ; the designation Christ, to his being anointed for that purpose ; and that of Lord, to his sovereign authority. On whatever subject Paul treats, he constantly introduces the mys tery of Christ. In writing to the Corinthians, he says, " I determined not to know anything among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified." This is a declaration, that the doctrine concerning Christ is the whole of religion, in which all besides is comprehended. In delivering his instructions to the saints at Corinth, respecting the incestuous person he points out to them Jesus Christ as the Lamb that was sacrificed' If his subject respects the promises he has made, or the engagements * Oil was the instituted emblem of the grace of the Holy Spirit which was riven tn I'n^n?!^^,'"'-**^''-"* ^^^T measure;\nd anointing oil was the outwarf^sib e sign of the Spirit'8 mward and spiritual graces. We meet with the institution ExX XXX. 22 to the end. The holy ointment was to be used in consecrating the Lbern^Ie and all its ressels and m setting apart certain persons for some great office^ It 1^ unlawful to use it upon any other occasion-whosoever did so was to he P,ft „ff V the people. This consecrating unction was used on the teberZle wWhl5 ?°°' of the body of Christ, and on all the vessels of the tabernacle to show S^at cZ^t III everything respecting him, was under the sanctifying influence of thpTInlto • f' a ILr ord!" "* ''^"' *'^ ^^"P''^*^' ^•^^ priestsU^^n^gTbVcIi^l hetJ^^Z^ EOMANS I., 3. 17 • be has entered into, he draws our attention to tiie promises of God, which are all yea and amen in Christ Jesus. When he treats of the precepts to be obeyed, he regards them as connected with the know- ledge of Christ ; all duties are considered in relation to him, as the only Saviour from whom we can derive power to fulfil them, the only altar on which they can be accepted, that model according to which they are to be performed, and the motive by which those. who perform them are to be actuated. He is the head that gives life to the members, the root which renders the branches fruitful. BeUevers are the workmanship of God, created in Christ Jesus unto good works. Jesus Christ is the end and object of their obedience, in order that the name of the Father may be glorified in the Son, and that the name of the Son may be glorified in them. Accordingly, the Scriptures speak of the commencement and the continuation of the life of believers as being derived from Christ ; of their being planted together with him ; buried and risen with him ; walking in him ; living and dying with him. The principal motives to hohness, in general, or to a,ny particular duty, are drawn from some special view of the work of redemption, fitted to excite to the fulfilment of such obligations. The love of God in Christ is set before us in a multitude of passages^ as the most powerful motive we can have to love him with all our heart, with all our soul, and with all our mind. When we are exhorted to look not to our own thing^ only, but also to those of others, it is because we ought to have the same mind in us that was in Christ Jesus, who being in the form of God, humbled himself to do such wonderful things for us. The duty cf almsgiving is enforced by the consideration, that he who was rich, for our sakes became poor, that we through his poverty might be rich. Forbearance to weak brethren has for its motive the death of Christ for them. If we are exhorted to forgive the oiFences of others, it is because God, for Christ's sake, hath forgiven us. The reciprocal duties of husband and wife are enforced by the consideration of the love of Cluist, and the relation in which he stands to his church. The motive to chastity is, that we are members of Christ's body, and tem- ples of the Holy Ghost. In one word, the various eAortations to the particular duties of a holy life, and the motives which correspond to each of them, are all taken from different views of one grand and hnportant object, the mystery of redemption. He, " his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness." " Ye are bought with a price ; therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God's." Having referred to Jesus Christ under the title of the Son of God, the Apostle immediately subjoins a declaration concerning his person as God and man. Which was made of the seed of David. — The wisdom of God was displayed in the whole of the dispensation that related to the Messiah, who, in liis human nature, was, conformably to many express predictions, to descend Irom David King of Israel.* He was born of a virgin of • In regard of his Divine subsistence, Jesus Christ was begotten, not made ; in regard 2 ,J8 ROMANS I., 3. the family of David, and the first promise, contaming his earliest na^me—the seed of the woman indicated that he was in this super natural manner to come into the world; as also that he was to be equally related to Jews and to Gentiles. To Abraham it vyas afterwards promised, that the Messiah should spring from him. In thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed." But as this promise was still very general, it was next limited to the tribe of Judah. ihe sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor a law-giver from between his feet, until Shiloh come." And to David the Lord had sworn, of the fruit of thy body will I set upon thy throne." Thus, as the period of his birth approached, the promises concerning him were more particular and more restricted. The wisdom of God was pleased m this manner to designate the family in which the Messiah, as to his human nature, was to be born, that it might be one of the characteristics which should distinguish, and make him known ; as well as to confound the unbelief of those who should reject him, and deny his advent. For if he has not yet come, it was to no purpose that the prophets foretold that he should descend from a certain family, since all the genealogies of the Jews are now lost. It must, therefore, be admitted, either that these predictions, thus restricted, were given in vain, or that the Messiah must have appeared while the distinction of Jewish families still subsisted, and the royal-house of David should still be recognized. This declaration of the Apostle was calculated to have great weight with all, both Jews and Gentiles, who reverenced the Old Testament Scriptures, in convincing them that Jesus Christ was indeed the Mes- siah, the hope of Israel. God has also seen it good to exhibit in the birth of Jesus Chiist that union of majesty and dignity on the one hand, and weakness and abasement on the other, which reigns through the whole of his economy on earth. For what family had there been in the world more glorious than that of David, the great King of Israel, most honored and beloved of God, both as a prophet and a king ? And what family was more reduced or obscure when Jesus Christ was born ? This is the reason why he is represented by the prophet Isaiah as the rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a branch growing out of his roots, which marks a family reduced, as if nothing more remained but the roots, which scarcely ap- peared above ground : and by the same prophet, it is also said, " He shall grow up before him as a tender plant, and as a root out of a dry ground." According to the flesh. — The prophets had abundantly testified that the Messiah was to be truly man, as well as truly God, which was necessary, in order to accomplish the purpose of his advent. " Foras- much then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same ; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death." The Apostle John declares that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This expression could not be employed respecting any mere man, as no one who was only a man, of his manhood he was not begotten, but made of the seed of David John i 14 ■ Gal. iv., 4 ! •, . ROMANS I., 4. 19 rc'iM come except in the flesh. Since, then, Jesus Christ might have c .ime in some other manner, these words aifirm his humanity, while at tlie same time they prove his pre-existence. Y- 4.— And declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the Spirit ot holiness, by the resurrection from the dead. Declared to be the Son of God. — The, word here translated, " de- clared," imports, according to the sense of the original as well as. the connexion, defined or proved. The term properly signifies, to point out or to limit, as when bounds are set to a field to regulate its measure- ment. Jesus Christ was made or became the Son of David, but he did not become, but was declared, defined, or demonstrated to be the Son of God. That Jesus Christ is not called in this place the Son of God with reference to his incarnation or resurrection merely, is evident from the fact, that his nature, as the Son of God, is here distinguished from his descent from David. This expression, the Son of God, de- finitely imports Deity, as applied to Jesus Christ. It as properly denotes participation of the Divine nature, as the contrasted expression, Son of Man, denotes participation of the human nature. As Jesus Christ is called the Son of Man in the proper sense, to assert his humanity, so, when in contrast with this he is called the Son of God, the phrase must be understood in its proper sense, as asserting his Deity. The words, indeed, are capable of a figurative application, of which there are many examples in Scripture. But one part of the contrast is not to be taken as literal, and the other as figurative ; and if the fact of a phrase being capable of figurative acceptation, incapaci- tates it from expressing its proper meaning, or renders its meaning mexplicably uncertain, no word or phrase could ever be definite. A word or phrase is never to be taken in a figurative sense, where its proper sens" is suitable ; for language would be unintelligible, if it might be arbitrarily explained away as figurative. This appellation, Son of God, was indeed frequently ascribed to pious men ; but if this circumstance disqualified the phrase from bearing a literal and definite meaning, there is not a word or phrase in language that is capable of a definite meaning in its proper signification. The Apostle John says, " But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God," by which he means to say who Christ is. Paul, after his conversion, " preached Christ in the sjmagogues." And what did he preach concerning him '? " That he was the Son of God." The great burden of Paul's doctrine, was to prove that Jesus is the Son of God ; that term, then, must defioaitely import his Divine nature. It is not only used definitely, but as express- ing the most important article in the Christian faith ; it is used as an epitome of the whole creed. When the Eunuch desired to be baptized, " Phihp said, if thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I beheve that Jesus Christ is the Son of God." The belief, then, of the import of this term, is the substance of Chris- tianity. Faith in Jesus Christ, as the Son of God, overcometh the world " Who is he that overcometh the world, but he that 20 ROMANS I., 4. beheveth that Jesus is the Son of God ? " In the confessioa of Peter, Matt xvi., 16, this phrase is employed as an epitome of the Christian faith To the question, " Whom say ye that lam?" Peter replies, " Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God." We have here the very essence of Christianity. It is asked. Who is Christ ? The reply, then, must answer this question ; it must inform us who Christ is, both as to his person, his office, and nature. Thou art ike Christ, is the answer to the question, so far as it respects his person and office; — thou art the Son of the living God, is his answer as to his nature. The parable in which the king riiakes a marriage for his son, speaks tne same doctrine. Matt, xxii., 2. Christ is there represented to be the Son of God, in the same sense in which a royal heir is the son of the king his father. If, then, the king's son partake of the nature of his father, so must Jesus Christ, the Son of God, partake of the nature of his Father ; if the king's son be a son in the perfect sense of the term, and not a son figuratively, in like manner the son of God is God's son m the proper sense. The question put to the Pharisees by Jesus, Matt, xxii., 42, proves that the phrase, Son of God, means sons'hip by nature. " Whatthink ye of Christ ? Whose Son is he ] " This question evidently refers to proper, not figurative sonship. When we ask whose son such a person is, it is palpably evident tha,t we mean real, not figurative sonship. Though the question might have reference to our Lord's human nature, and the inquiry relate to his father after the flesh, as the Pharisees understood, still it clearly denotes the natural relation ; but that Christ did not mtend it exclusively of his father as to the flesh, is evident firom his next question : " If David, then, call him Lord, how is he his Son ? " Jesus Christ could not mean to deny that he was the Son of David . but he intimates, that though he was the Son of David as to the flesh, he must be the Son of God' in the same sense in which he was David's Son. He asks, who is the father of the Messiah ? and from something affirmed of him, intimates that there is a sense in which be is not David's Son. The answer he received was true, but not full , the supply of the deficiency is " the Son of God." The question, then, and the proper answer, import that Jesus was the Son of God in the literal sense of the words. Besides, David could not call him Lord as to his human nature ; nor was he David's Lord h. any sense but that in which he was God. The condemnation, also, of unbelievers, rests on the foundation of the Saviour's dignity as the Son of God. " He that believeth not is condemned already ; because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God." They are condemned not merely for re- jecting this message, but for not believing in the name of the only begotten Son of God. Faith, then, respects not his doctrine only, but him- self, especially as exhibited in his doctrine. Such sonship implies Deity. In this epistle, ch. viii., Paul argues, that God wil/ deny nothing to those for whom he has given his Son. But this argument would be ill-founded, if Jesus be only figuratively his Son. "He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how sbill he not with ROMANS I., 4. 81 liirn also freely give us all things?" This supposes thai the gift of Christ is greater than the gift of all other things besides, and that in such a disproportion as to bear no comparison. If so, can he be any- thing else than truly Divine ? Had he been the highest of created beings it would not follow as a self-^evident consequence, that such a gift of him imphed the gift of all things else. p^ The epithets attached to tliis phrase, Son of God, show it to import proper sonship. Jesus is called God's own Son — the helmed, — ^the well-beloved Son — ^the begotten — the only begotten Son of God. This sonship, then, is a sonship, not only in a more eminent degree, but in a sense in which it is not true of any other in the lowest degree. God has other sons, but he has no other son in the sense in which Jesus is his Son. He has no other Son who enjoys the community of his nature. Therefore this son is called his begotten, or his only begotten Son. A begotten son is a son by nature, and Jesus must be design- edly so designated, to distinguish his natural sonship from that which is figurative. The phrase is rendered still more definite by the addi- tion of the word only. Jesus is the only begotten Son, because he is the only Son of God in the proper sense of the term. Other sons are figuratively sons, but he is the begotten Son, and the only begotten Son. The phrase, own Son, imports the truth of the sonship by anothei term, and is therefore an additional source of evidence. Own Son, is a son by nature, in opposition to the son of another — ^to a son by law, and to aU^figiiratwe sons. Christ, then, is God's own Son, because he is his Son by nature, because he is not his son by adoption in the view of the law, and because he is his son in opposition to figurative sonships That the words, I and my Father are one, John x., 30, mean unity of nature, and not unity of design, is clear from our Lord's account of the charge of the Jews ; they charged him with blasphemy for caUing himself the Son of God. " Say ye of him whom the Father hath sanc- tified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest, because I said, I am the Son of God ?" Now, the words used were not, I am the Son of God; the words, I and my Father are one, must therefore be tlie same in import, as I am the Son of God ; but if the expression, I and my Father are one, is the same in import as I am the Soii of God, the former cannot mean, I am one in design with my Father. Jesus, in the 36th verse, represents the Jews as charging him with blasphemy, not for saying that he was God, but for saying that he was the Son of God. This incontrovertibly proves that the Jews understood the phrase, Son of God, as importing Deity. The phrase is blasphemous when applied to a mere creature in no other sense than as importing Deity.* * In Dr. Carson's triumphant " Reply to Dr. Drummond's (Arian) Essay on the Doc- trine of the Trinity," published in Dublin, containing a masterly exposition of John x., 30-39, the above subject is fully discussed. He closes a long dissertation on the imjorJ of the term, " the Son of God," by saying, " If I have not shown that it definitely si- presses Deity, as applied to Jesus Christ, I would despair of proving that the name al Jesus Christ is in t'le Bible." 22 ROMANS, I. 4. That the Lord Jesus Christ, in his eternal equality with the Father and not merely as God manifested in the flesh, is called the Son of God, flows directly from the fact, that wherever the first person of the adorable Trinity is personally distinguished in Scripture, it is under the title, the co-relative title of the Father. And what is the objection to this doctrine of our Lord's eternal Sonship ? It is simply, that it differs from aU our ordinary notions of the filial relation to represent the Son as co-eternal with the Father ; or that begotten must necessarily mean " derived," and that to grant derivation is to surrender Deity. In regard to the last form of the objection, it is only necessary to re- mark, that the doctrine of Scripture is not to be held chargeable with the vain and unprofitable speculations about derived personality, on which some of its upholders have adventured. And in regard to the first, it is not difficult to see, that it is destitute of force, except on the impious assumption, that we are not bound to receive any declaration about the Divine nature, about the deepest mysteries which are veiled from our reason and revealed only to our faith, unless we can fuUv comprehend it. To demand that the distinction of persons in the undi vided essence of the Godhead, and the mode of their eternal substance shall be made plain to us ; or to repugn against the doctrine of thi eternal filiation of the Son of God, because it overpasses the boundarie' of our notions of Sonship, what is this but the very summit of unthink ing arrogance ? What is it but to say, that we will make our own nar row minds the measure of all things — ^that we will accept nothing from pure respect to the authority of God — ^that we will give the faithful one only the credit which we allow to a suspected witness, receiving his evidence where it harmonizes with our own apprehensions, and that while to our feeble minds every instinct is a mystery, there must be no arcana in the nature of Him who dweUeth in the light that is inacces sible ? With power. — Some explain the meaning of this to be, that by his resurrection, Jesus Christ was powerfully declared to be the Son of God. But he was not merely powerfully declared — ^which would inti- mate the high degree of the evidence — ^but, according to the Apostle, he was absolutely declared to be the Son of God. Some again sup- pose, that he was declared to be the Son of God by the power of the Father who raised him up. If this had been intended, it would not, it appears, have simply been said with power, but by the power and glory of the Father, as in Rom. vi., 4, and 2 Cor. xiii., 4. The ex- pression, with power, is to be construed with that of the Son of God, which immediately precedes it, not with the word declared, and signi- fies invested with power. All power was inherent in him, as " God blessed for ever," but it was given to him as Mediator, as he himself declares. Matt, xxviii., 18, John xvii., 2, and clearly manifested by his resurrection. He then appeared possessed of eternal, sovereign, and universal power, and that in opposition to the semblance of weakness in -"vhich he had appeared on earth. The dignity of his person having remained for some time concealed under the veil of weakness his re- ROMANS I., 4. 23 sunection gloriously displayed his ineflable power, as the conqueror of death, and by his power also evinced his dignity as the Son of God. The power which was given to our Lord when he rose from the dead, was eminently displayed by his sending out the Holy Spirit when he returned, to the Father. Before his resurrection, if only the veil of infirmity with which in his birth he had been covered, was contem- plated, he appeared merely as a man. But after his resurrection, if we turn our eyes to his sending forth the Holy Spirit, we behold him as the Son of God invested with all power. For he who thus sends forth this glorious Spirit, must be possessed of sovereign and infinite power, and consequently must be the Son of God. The Holy Spirit, too, whom Jesus Christ communicates, marks his divinity by other charac- ters besides that of power, namely, by that of holiness, by that of majesty, by that of eternity, and that of infinity, proving that he only who bestows the Holy Spirit, can be the eternal God, sovereignly holy, and sovereignly glorious. The Apostle has, however, chosen the cha- racteristic of power for two reasons — ^the one is to oppose it to the flesh, denoting weakness, and the other because he has overcome the world, which is an act of ineffable power. To destroy the empire of Satan, to subdue the hearts of men, to change the face of the universe, displays a power which is truly divine. According to the Spirit of Holiness. — There are various interpreta- tions of thes 3 terms, but the proper antithesis can only be preserved by referring them to Christ's Divine nature. If the words are capable of this application, we need not hesitate to adopt it in this place ; and though the phrase is unusual, there can be no doubt that it is capable of this meaning. It is equally unusual in whatever sense it may be applied. This circumstance, then, cannot prevent it from referring to the Deity of Jesus Christ in direct contrast to his humanity. Spirit of Holiness may be used here rather than the phrase Holy Spirit, because the latter is usually assigned to the third person of the Trinity. Though the exact expression does not occur elsewhere in the Scriptures, other passages corroborate this meaning, as "the Lord (that is, Christ) is that Spirit," 2 Cor. iii., 17. He is called "a quickening Spirit," 1 Cor. XV., 45, which character belonged to him in a particular manner after his resurrection, when he appeared as the spiritual head of His Church, communicating spirit and life to all his members. The unusual expression, Spirit of Holiness, appears then, here, to denote his Deity in contrast with his humanity, characterizing him as God, who is a Spirit essentially holy. In the verse before us, connected with the preceding, we see that it is upon the foimdation of the union of the Divine and human natures, in the person of the Messiah, that Paul proceeds to establish all the great and important truths which he sets forth in this Epistle. In an- other passage he afterwards explicitly asserts this union : "Of whom, as concerning the flesh, Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen." Rom. ix., 6. In the same manner Matthew commences his Gospel. He traces the genui\logy of the human nature of Jesus Christ, and afterwards de 24 ROMANS I., 4 Clares his Divine nature. Matt, i., 18, 21, 23. Mark begins by pro- claiming him to be the Son of God. " As it is written in the Prophets, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee. The voice of one crying iu the wilderness. Prepare ye the way of the Lord (of Jehovah), make his paths (for our God) straight." Isaiah xl, 3 ; Mai. lii., 1. Luke introduces his Gospel by asserting his Divine nature. In speaking of the coming of John the Baptist, he says, " And many of the children of Israel shall he turn to the Lord their God ; and he shall go before Him in the spirit and power of Ehas ;" and then he declares his genealogy according to his human nature. Luke i., 16, and iii., 23. John commences his Gos- pel, by saying, " In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God ;" and afterwards, " the Word was made flesh." John i., 1-14. Nearly in the same terms he com- mences and closes his first Epistle. The leading truth which the Apostles taught when they preached to the Jews at Jerusalem was, that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, the Messiah promised, who had been crucified, and who was raised from the dead, and exalted to the right hand of the Father ; and the same great truth was declared to Cornelius, when the gospel was first preached to the Gentiles. The foundation of all that the Apostle advances in the Epistle to the Hebrews respecting the superiority of the New over the Old Covenant, is established upon the union of the Divine and human natures of Jesus Christ. Having announced that he is the Son of God, he determines the import of that title, by quoting a passage which ascribes to him the name, the throne, the kingdom, the righteousness, and the eternity of God. " Thy throne, God, is for ever and ever ; a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom." The Apostle Peter be gins his first Epistle by referring to the resurrection of Jesus Christy and his second, by designating him as " our God and Saviour." And as in the last prophetical book of the Old Testament the Messiah is called Jehovah, so the prophetical book which terminates the New Testament, opens with announcing him to be " Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, which is, and which was, and which 'is to come, the Almighty ;" and closes in a similar manner, " I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last," which" signifies the self-existent' eternal Jehovah.* By the resurrection from the dead. — His resurrection defined or determined Jesus Christ to be the person spoken of by the Prophets as the Son of God, and as the authentic and solemn judgment of God pronouncing him to be his Son. As it is also written in the second Psalm, " Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee," Acts xiii 33. In Scripture, things are often said to be done, when they are pub- licly declared and manifested. When the Son of God was raised from the dead, his eternal dignity, which was before concealed, was brought The name Jehovah, derived from a root which signifies to he, is exoressivp of thi, ttost perfect and independent existence. It represents God as the Author of M hoini Where^the word LORD is printed in the Old Testament in capitals™e originS ROMANS I., 4. 25 o light. His Divine power, being infinite and unchangeable, could receive no augmentation of dignity or majesty. But having chosen to appear among men enveloped as in a cloud of suflferings and apparent weakness, his glorification consisted in his emerging from that cloud, eaving the veil of infirmities in the tomb without any of them adhering to him, when, as the sun breaks forth in his splendor, he was gloriously manifested as the Son of God. By his resurrection, God proclaimed to the universe that Christ was his only begotten Son. The Apostle having in the foregoing verse called Jesus Christ the Son of God, here adds, that he was declared to be the Son of God by the resurrection from the dead. His resurrec- tion then did not constitute him the Son of God, it only evinced that he was truly so. Jesus Christ had declared himself to be the Son of God, and on this account the Jews charged him with blasphemy, and asserted that he was a deceiver. By his resurrection, the clear mani festation of the character he had assumed, gloriously and for ever terminated the contrbversy which had been maintained during the whole of his ministry on earth. In raising him from the dead, God decided the contest. He declared him to be his Son, and showed that he had accepted his death in satisfaction for the sins of his people, and conse- quently that he had suffered not for himself, but for them, which none could have done but the Son of God. On this great fact of the resur- rection of Jesus Christ, Paul rests the truth of the Christian religion, without which, the testimony of the Apostles would be false, and the faith of God's people vain. " But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the first fruits of them that slept." His resurrection is a sure pledge that they who sleep in Jesus, God at his second appear ance will oring with him. As he triumphed in his resurrection over all his enemies, so his people shall arise to victory and blessedness Then they shall know the power of the resurrection of Jesus, the grandeur of that event, and their interest in it through eternity. The resurrection of Jesus Christ proved his sonship, because he had claimed that character during his life, and had appealed in proof of it to his rising from the dead. John ii., 19. Had this testimony been untrue, it could not have taken place. And it not only proved his own eternal power and Godhead, but also manifested his oneness and union in all the perfections and distinguishing characters which constitate Godhead, in common with the Father and the Holy Ghost, each of these glorious persons concurring in that act, as we learn from other Scriptures. Professor Stuart, in his Commentary, asks in this place, " How could the resurrection declare, in a,ny special manner, that Christ was the Son of God 1 Was not Lazarus raised from the dead ? Were not others raised from the dead by Christ, by the Apostles, by Elijah, and by the bones of Elisha ? And yet was their resurrection proof that they were the sons of God ? God did indeed prepare the way for uni- versal dominion to be given to Christ, by- raising him from the dead To the like purpose is the Apostle's assertion in Acts xvii., 31. Bu now an event common to him, to Lazarus, and to many others. 26 ROMANS 1., 4. could of itself demonstrate him to be the Son of God, i" Svydi^,,— remains yet to be shown." This is feeble reasoning. It shows that Mr. Stuart is entirely mistaken as to the manner in which the resurrec- tion of Christ bears testimony to his character. Jesus Christ came into the world professing to be the Son of God, and was put to death fo: that profession. His resurrection then was God's seal to the truth of this claim. In itself it did not testify whether he was God or only man. But it fully established the truth of everything he taught ; and as he taught his own Godhead, his resurrection is proof of his Deity. But how could it ever be supposed that the resurrection of Lazarus would prove as much for him as for Christ ? Lazarus did not, before his death, profess to be the Son of God and Mediator. He never pre- dicted his resurrection as an event which was to decide the justice of his pretensions ; and had he done so, he would not have been raised to confirm a falsehood. Professor Stuart's argument concludes as strongly against the proof of sonship, in any sense, from the resurrection of Christ, as against proper sonship. The mere fact of being raised from the dead is not evidence of being even a good man. But in whatever sense Jesus is the Son of God, his resurrection is here stated by the Apostle to be the grand proof. Before his departure, Jesus Christ told his disciples, that when the Comforter came he should convince the world " of righteousness, because," said he, " I go to my Father, and ye see me no more." In raising him from the dead, and receiving him up into glory, God declared that the everlasting righteousness which the Messiah came to " bring in" was accomplished. His honorable reception by his Father who sent him, furnished the most complete proof that he had faithfully fulfilled the purposes of his mission. " For if," says Archbishop Usher, " he had broken prison and made an escape, the payment of the debt, which as our surety he took upon himself, being not yet satisfied, he should have been seen here again : Heaven would not have held him more than Paradise did Adam, after he had fallen into God's debt." To the same purpose says Bates, "If he had remained in the grave, it had been reasonable to believe him an ordinary person, and that his death had been the punishment of his presumption ; but his resurrec- tion was the most illustrious and convincing evidence, that he was what he declared himself to be. For it is not conceivable that God should put forth an Almighty power to raise him, and thereby authorize his resurrection, if by robbery he had assumed that glorious title of the Son of God. If indeed a single sin which had been ' laid on him ' had been left inexpiated, he must have remained for ever in the grave ; death would in that case have detained him as its prisoner ; for the wages of sin is death." By his incarnation Jesus Christ received in his human nature the fulness of his Spirit ; but he received it covered with the veil of his flesh. By his death he merited the Spirit to sanctify his people ; but still this was only a right which he had acquired without its execution. By his resun-ection he entered into the full exercise of this right ; he ROMANS I., 5. 37 received the full dispensation of the Spirit to communicate it to them , and it was then he was declared to be the Son of God with power. V. 5. — By whom we have received grace and apostleship, for obedience to the faith among all nations, for his name. One of the first acts of the power of Jesus Christ, after his resur- rection, was to bestow his Spirit and his grace on those who were chosen by him, to qualify them to be his witnesses and the heralds of his gospel. Paul was among that number, although appointed at a later period than the rest. We have received. He here speaks of himself in the plural number. He does not appear to use this style that he may include the other apostles ; what is true of him will, how- ever, as to everything essential, apply to all the others. He distin- guishes these two things, Grace and Apostleship. The first, which he had experienced in his conversion, and in every subsequent part of his course, he had received from Jesus Christ ; and by him also he was appointed to the office of an Apostle, to the discharge of which that grace was indispensably necessary. To the obedience of faith. — Paul, as an Apostle, was commissioned to preach the gospel in order to the obedience of faith. Some under stand this of the obedience which faith produces ; but the usual import of the expression, as'well as the connexion in this place, deter mines it to apply to the belief of the gospel. Obedience is no doubt an effect produced by that belief, but the office of the Apostle was, in the first place, to persuade men to believe the gospel. This is the grand object which includes the other. The gospel reforms those who believe it, but it would be presenting an imperfect view of the subject to say, that it was given to reform the world. It was given that men might believe and be saved. The obedience, then, here referred to, signifies submission to the doctrine of the gospel. This is quite in ac- cordance with those passages in which the expression is elsewhere found, as in Acts vi., 7 ; Rom. vi., 17 ; xvi., 26 ; Gal. iii., 1 ; 2 Thess. i. 8 ; 1 Pet. i., 22 ; and in Rom. x., 3 ; where the Israelites are charged with not submitting to the righteousness of God, and especially in the 1 6th verse of that chapter it is said — " But they have not all obeyed the gospel : for Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report ? " " This is his commandment that we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ ;" 1 John iii., 23. The object, then, of faith, is not only a promise, but a promise accompanied with a command to accept it. For since it is God who promises, his majesty and authority accompany his promise. In respect to the promise, that which on our part corresponds to it is called faith, but in regard to the commandment which enjoins us to receive the promise, the act on our part is obedience. On this account, unbe- lief is rebellion against God.^ — Faith, on the other hand, is an act of submission, or the surrender of ourself to God contrary to the natural opposition of our minds, in order that he may possess and conduct us, and make us whatever he pleases. When therefore that opposition is overcome by the weapons with which the Apostles were armed, namely. 28 ROMANS I., 5. the word of truth, our submission is called the obedience of faith. " This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent." The obedience of faith which his people render to Jesus Christ IS an adoration which supposes his deity ; for when reason entirely submits and is swallowed up in his authority, it is a real adoration. " Faith," says Calvin on this passage, " is adorned with the title of obedience, because the Lord calls us by his gospel, and by faith we answer when he calls us ; as, on the contrary, unbelief is the height of, all rebellion against God " Among all nations. — Paul here assigns the reason why he preaches, to Gentiles, namely, that it is the destination of his of&ce or Apostle- ship, and not solely his own choice. Gal. ii., 7. In past ages God had suffered all nations, with the exception of the Jews, to walk in their own ways, although he had not left himself without witness in the works of creation and providence. Both in the universal Deluge, and also upon other occasions, he had manifested his wrath on account of, sin, and his determination to punish it. But after the establishment of the nation of Israel in Canaan, after the institution of his public wor- ship among them, and after he had given to them his written revelation, he did not generally interpose his authority in a visible manner, to turn the nations from the ways they had chosen. Although,, therefore, the times of this ignorance God winked at, he now command-, ed all men to repent. For " thus it is written," that when Christ suffered and rose from the dead, " repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations ; " Luke xxiv., 47. And accordingly Paul closes this Epistle by declaring that it was by the commandment of the everlasting God that the mystery, which had been kept secret from ages and generations, should be made known to all nations, in order to the obedience of faith. This was in con- formity to the commission given by the Lord himself to his eleven Apostles, to go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature ; and likewise to the particular command afterwards received by Paul respecting the Gentiles, " To open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God." Thus the gospel of the uncircumcision was in a special maimer com- mitted to Paul, to which in the verse before us he refers. For his name. — The gospel is preached among all nations for the obedience of faith, but paramount to this is the glory of the name of Jesus Christ. The name, the glory, and the authority of God have the same signification. The world was created for God's glory, and his glory is the chief end of the restoration of sinners. The acts of his goodness to his people are declared to be done for his own name's sake, and for the same end his judgments also are executed on sinners for his own name, Rom. ix., 17. Men are very unwilling to admit that God should have any end with respect to them greater than their happiness. But his own glory is everywhere in the Scriptures represented as the chief end of man's existence and of the existence of all things. It is in the name of Jesus that his people are taught to pray, and we are baptize4 in the n^ne of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, a« ROMANS 1., 7. 29 into one name. This affords unanswerable proof of the divuiity of Christ. Paul was a chosen vessel to bear his name before the (rentiles, Acts 'x., 15. This verse concludes the general introduction to the Epis- tle ; the easy transition to the particular address shouldnot pass unnoticed. V. 6. — Among whom are ye also the called of Jesus Christ. Those to whom Paul wrote, were included among the nations to whom his commission extended. He mentions this that it might not appear strange that he addresses them for the purpose of instructing them, but that, on the contrary, they should receive what he wrote with due confidence and respect He was unknown to them by sight ; he was far distant from them. They might say, what interest had' he in them ? He assures them that his Apostleship regarded and compre- hended them, and that he did nothing beyond his caUing when he desired to increase their knowledge, and confirm their faith. They were the called of Jesus Christ. Thus he had a double right, and was laid under a double obligation to address them, both as belonging to the nations to whom his commission extended, and also as having already beconie obedient to the faith. The Apostolic comiiiission consisted of two parts ; first, to make disciples, and then to teach them to observe all things that Jesus had commanded Thus Paul had a measure that reached even to those to whom he now wrote, as he had to the Church at Corinth, 2 Cor. x., 13. Of Jesus Christ. — Not only called to Jesus, but called by him ; for he is not only that glorious person to whom we ought to go, but who him- self says, Come unto me. The believers at Rome were called both with an external calling by the gospel, and also with an internal calling by the Holy Spirit. Both these callings are ascribed to the Father, and also, as in this passage, to Jesus Christ, because the Son, as Mediator, is the minister of the Father, and executes all things for him. As the High Priest of his people, he has done for them all that is required for establishing the New Covenant ; but as the Prophet and King of his Church, he converts them, and leads them to the Father. This expression, the called of Jesus Christ, imports that they belonged to him, as in Isaiah xlviii., 12, " Israel, my called," that is, who are mine by the right of calling. V. 7. — To all that be in Rome, beloved of God, called, saints : Grace to you, and peace, from God our Father, and the Lord JesuB Christ. To all. — The Apostle here addresses all the saints at Rome without distinction, whether they were Jews or Gentiles, rich or poor, learned or unlearned, bond or free. He does not distinguish the pastors from the people, but addresses himself to them all in common — what he writes being equally intended for their common instruction and edifica- tion. He addresses them by three designations, Beloved of God, Called, Saints. They were saints, because they were called, and they were called because they were beloved of God. Their character as 30 EOMANS I., 7. saints, then, was not the cause, but the effect, of their being heloVed of God. ^ ^ ^ ^ Beloved of God, — in opposition to the rest of mankind whom trod hath left in unbelief and the corruption of the world. Here, then, is the electing love of God placed first in order. It is that love wherewith he loved them when they were dead in sins, Eph. ii., 5. It is the greatest love that God can show toman, being everlasting love, which originates with himself. It is purely gratuitous, and does not spring from the foresight of anything worthy in those who are its objects, but on the contrary goes before all that is good in the creature, and brings with it infinite blessings. It has for its primary object Jesus Christ, the beloved of the Father ; and those whom he beholds in Christ, although in themselves children of wrath, are beloved for his sake. This love is unvarying from eternity and through eternity, although God's dealings towards his people may vary, as it is declared in the 99th Psalm — " Thou takest vengeance on their inventions." He may thus be displeased with them, as it is said, " The thing that Da.Yid did dis- pleased the Lord," but his love to them remains the same, like the love of a father to his child, even when he chastens him for his disobedience. Called.— The first outward effect of election, or of the love of God to his people, is his calling them, not merely by the word, which is common to many, but by the Holy Spirit, which is limited to few, Matt, xxii., 14. " I have loved thee with an everlasting love ; therefore with loving kindness have I drawn thee," Jer. xxxi., 3. The election, then, of believers, is to be traced through their calling, 2 Peter i., 10, and their calling to the everlasting love of God. Saints. — The end of the Divine calling is to convert sinners into saints or holy persons. Their sanctification is not an external or figura tive consecration, as that of Israel was, but a real consecration by which they are made to give themselves to God. It arises from union with Jesus Christ, which is the source of the sanctification of his people, and it consists in internal purity of heart, for God purifies the heart by faith. It supposes a real change of heart and disposition, a new creation, for " if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature." " That which is bom of the flesh is flesh, and that which is bom of the Spirit is spirit." They were not then saints by natural birth", nor did they make themselves saints either in whole or in part ; but they were made so altogether by sovereign grace resulting from sovereign love. All believers are saints, and in one sense all of them are equally sanc- tified. They are equally separated or consecrated to God, and equally justified, but they are not all equally holy. The work of sanctification in them is progressive. There are babes, and young men, and fathers in Christ. Some are weak in faith, and some are strong, but none of them are yet perfect, neither have they attained to that measure of holi- ness at which it is their duty constantly to aim, Phil, iii., 12. They are therefore to forget those things which are behind, and to reach forth unto those things which are before, and are commanded to " grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ." ROMANS I., 7. 2 . ' The path of the just is as the shining light, that slineth more and more unto the perfect day." " Certainly, according to Paul," says Calvin on this place, " the praise of our salvation does not depend upon our own power, but is derived entirely from the fountain of God's love to us. What other cause but his own goodness can moreover be as- signed for his love ? On this also depends his calling, by which, in his own time, he seals the adoption in those who were first gratuitously chosen by him. From these premises the conclusion follows, that none truly associate themselves with the faithful, who do not place a certain degree of confidence in the Lord's kindness to them ; although unde- serving and wretched sinners, being called by his goodness, they aspire to holiness. For he hath not called us to uncleanness, but to holiness." Grace to you, and peace. — In this way the Apostles usually com- mence their Epistles to the Churches. In those addressed to individu- als, mercy is generally added to grace and peace. Grace is uniformly placed first in order, because it is the source whence peace and all the blessings of salvation flow. Grace is the free unmerited favor of God to sinners in the plan of salvation. Grace and peace are joined to- gether, because they are inseparable. God communicates all blessings to those to whom he gives grace, and to none besides ; for whatever does not proceed from grace is not a blessing. It is to the praise of his grace that God exercises mercy, and brings those who were his enemies into a state of peace with him. Grace differs from mercy, as it regards the unworthiness, while mercy regards the sufferings of its objects. Grace or favor is spoken of in Scripture in three points of view, either as the unmerited favor of God towards men as eocisting in him- self ; or as manifested in the gospel, which is called the gospel of the grace of God ; or in its operation in men. Every part of redemption proceeds on the footing of grace. It originates in the grace of God, and flows in its first manifestations and in all its after acts, from the same unceasing fountain, in calhng, adopting, regenerating, justifying, sane tifying, strengthening, confirming grace, in one word, it is all of grace. On this account Peter calls God the God of all grace, which teaches that God is in himself towards his people grace — grace in his very nature — that he knows what each of them needs, and lays it up for them, and communicates it to them. The whole of the salvation of man, from the counsels of God from eternity, is pKnr ai ard executed " to the praise of the glory of his grace," Eph. i., 6, '' who hath saved us and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but accord- ing to his ovra purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began ;" 2 Tim. i., 9. In the operation of grace in the soul, men are not simply passive, nor can it be said that God does a part and they do the rest ; but God pro duces all, and they act all. God is the sole author and source of their acts, but they themselves properly are the agents. In some respects, they are wholly passive, and in others wholly active. In the Scriptures the same things are spoken of as coming from God, and as coming from men It is said that God purifies the hearts of believers, Acts xv., 9, 32 ROMANS I., 7. and that they purify themselves, 1 John iii., 3. They are commanded to work out their own salvation with fear and trembling, because it is God who worketh in them both to will and to do of his good pleasure, Phil, ii., 12. It is not the Holy Spirit, but themselves, by virtue of his power, wao love God and their neighbor, who fear the Lord, who confide in him, and trust in his promises. Paul designates as fhiits of the Spirit, love, joy, peace, long-suffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance. The origin of them all is the Holy Spirit ; it is from him they are derived ; but in their exercise or development they properly belong to believers. If any one falsely infers from the doctrine of grace that there remains nothing for man to do, because it is the grace of God that leads him to act, he understands neither what he says, nor whereof he affirms. He might with the same reason conclude that as God is the Author of our existence, of our souls, and of all our facul- ties, therefore we can neither think, nor reason, nor love. Grace is in our hearts a living principle, implanted by God, and at his sovereign dis- posal. To exercise this principle, is as much our duty as to preserve our life and health ; and as the care which these require demand atten tion and certain acts of the will, in the same manner the exercise of grace in the soul supposes corresponding dispositions and acts. But it is not thus with grace as manifested, which is an object of choice, re- ceived or rejected, according as grace has operated in us or not. In this manner grace, as the principle of renovation, by the sole operation of the Holy Spirit, stands in opposition to every notion of independent power in man, by which it might be supposed he could regenerate himself ; while, on the other hand, considered in its exercise, it sup- poses the efforts of man. Peace includes everything that belongs to the idea of tranquillity in Its largest extent. But the foundation of all must be peace with God. Without this the Christian can have no peace, though he should be on good terms with all mankind ; but possessing this, God will either give him peace with his enemies, or he will give him peace along with their enmity. The Christian may not only have peace, but joy in the midst of persecution and external affliction. Peace with God is the substance of happiness, because without it there can be no happiness, and with it there is happiness, whatever else is wanting. This salutation, grace to rou and peace, may be ::onsidered either as a prayer or a benediction. n the latter sen;e it bears the character of Apostolic authority. From God ow Fai\.'.-, and the Lord Jesus Christ. — God is the Father of cur Lord Jesus Christ, and the Father of all who are in him. Paul here speaks of God, as both his Father and the Father of all those whom he addresssd, and so constituting one family, whether Jews or Gentiles. God the Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ, are the source of all grace and peace, and can alone communicate these blessings, which are the gracious effects that flow from the covenant of love and favor of the Triune Jehovah. Here agam we see an incontrovertible proof of the deity of Jesus Christ, for if he were not God, he could not without impiety be thus jomea wilh or invoked along with Hie Father to impart blessings, of which God alone is the author. I I»">MANS « 8 33 V. S. — First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ fpv you all, tiat your faith is spoken of throaghout the wnoie world. First, I thank my God. — This is a first in order, as if Paul had said, I commence my Epistle by giving thanks to God. It proceeds from that feeling of piety, which ought to pervade all our actions ; at the same time he bestows on those whom he addresses the praise which they deserved. It is also a first in importance, as if he said, above a.) I render thanks to God for you. He shows that their state was a matter of great joy to Mm, arising both from his zeal for the glory of God, and from the interest he took in those whom he addressed. My God. — Paul calls God his God, indicating a hvely and ardent feeling of love to him, of confidence in him, and of liberty of access, which includes a persuasion that his thanksgivings will be agreeable to God. It is also a confession of his duty, and of the obhgations he is under to render thanks to God, because he is his God. It is, besides, an intimation of his own character, as walking in communion with God. This is an example of the working of the Spirit of adoption, and of a Deliever taking to himself in particular the blessing of having God for his God, and of being a partaker of all the blessings of the New Cove- nant flowing from that most gracious declaration, " I will be their God, and they shall be my people." Of such appropriation there are nume reus instances recorded in the book of Psalms. " I will love thee, Lord, my strength. The Lord is my rock, and my fortress, and my deliverer ; my God, my strength, in whom I will trust, my buckler, and the horn of my salvation, and my high tower," Psalm xviii., 1. " Job says, " I know that my Redeemer liveth." " I live," says Paul, " by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me." Such language it is the privilege of every behever to use, and he will do so in proportion as the love of God is shed abroad in his heart by the Holy Ghost which is given unto him. The Christian can thus address God as his own God, and often he should do so even in his public declarations. This displeases the world, because it condemns the world. They aflfect to consider it as presumption, but it is only a proper expression of our belief of God's testimony with regard to his Son. Studiously to avoid such expressions on proper occasions, is not to show humility, but to be ashamed of the truth. Paul thanked God, through Jesus Christ, who is our Great High Priest, and presents the prayers of all saints upon the golden altar before the throne. It is through him alone that all our worship and all our works in the service of God are acceptable. Thus, not only must our petitions ascend to the Father through the Son, but our thanks- givings also, according to the precept, " By him, therefore, let us offer the sacrifice of praise to God continually, that is, the fruit of our lips, giving thanks to his name ;" Heb. xiii., 15. We can have no inter- course with God, but through the one Mediator between God and man, John xiv., 6, and except though him we are not permitted even to return thanksgivings to God. Paul thanks God for all to whom he writes. He had addressed 3 34 KoMANs I., 8. them all as samts, making no exception. It is to such exclusively that the Apostolic Epistles are written, whether as churches or individuals, as being all united to Christ, children of God, heirs of God, and joint heirs with Jesus Christ, who should first suffer and afterwards reign with him. In the first churches, in which everything was regulated by the Apostles according to the will of God, there may have been hypo- crites or self-deceivers ; but as far as man could judge, they were all believers, or if any among them appeared not to be such, the churches were told it was to their shame. If any were discovered who had crept in unawares, or were convicted of unbecoming conduct, or who had a form of godliness, but denied its power, from such they were commanded to turn away. They were not to be unequally yoked with unbelievers, wherefore it is said, " Come out from among them, and be ye separate." It was in the confidence that they obeyed such com- mands that the Apostles addressed them all, as in the passage before us, as the children of God. In the same manner, in writing to the church at Philippi, Paul, after thanking God for their fellowship in the Gospel, and declaring that he was confident that he who had begun a good work in them would perform it unto the day of Jesus Christ, adds, " Even as it is meet for me to think this of you all, because I have you in my heart ; inasmuch as both in my bonds, and in the defence and confirmation of the gospel, ye all are partakers with me of grace." This mode of address runs through the whole of the Apostolic Epistles. The Apostles generally commence their Epistles with the most encouraging views of the present state and future prospects of those to whom they write, and on these considerations are founded the succeed- ing exhortations. They first remind those who are addressed of the rich grace of God towards them in Jesus Christ, and the spiritual blessings of which they are made partakers, for their strong consola- tion, and then they exhort them to a holy conversation becoming such privileges. Of this we have a striking example in the first Epistle to the Corinthians, which, although Paul had so many faults to reprehend in them, he commences by declaring that they were sanctified in Christ Jesus — ^that he thanked God always for the grace given unto them by Jesus Christ, who would also confirm them to the end, that they might be blameless in the day of his coming, reminding them that God was faithful, by whom they were called unto the fellowship of his Son Jesus Christ our Lord. The number of times, no fewer than ten, in which, in the first ten verses of that Epistle, Paul introdi'ces the name of Jesus Christ, should be remarked. In these Epistles, we find no exhortations to unbelievers ; this ought to be particularly observed, as being a key to them, without which they cannot be understood. This is no reason, however, for supposing that (ixhortations to believe the Gospel ought not to be addressed to those who are still in unbelief. The gospel is to be preached to every crea- ture, and all should be enjoined, first to believe it, and then to do al! that God requires. In the book of Acts, when the Apostles preached to the unconverted, their subject was repentance toward God, and faith KOMANS I., 8. 35 toward our Loid Jesus Christ. But in the Epistles where they address behevers, they also admonish and exhort them to the practice of every duty. There is no exhortation to the performance of any duty which does not imply that it is to be performed in faith. " Without faith it is impossible to please God." Believers are taught to regulate all their conduct according to the great things which the Gospel reveals, which are freely given to them of God ; to be imitators of God, and to live not to themselves but to him, as being not their own, but bought with a price, and therefore bound to glorify God in their bodies and in their spirits which are his. Their obedience, as described in the Scriptures, is as much distin- guished by its motives and its foundation from the morality of the unbelieving world, as it is elevated above it in its nature and effects. It is, in all respects, a life of faith, subject to the authority of God, and is practised under the influence and direction of motives inculcated in the Gospel, of which the light of nature gives no knowledge. Those who have not this faith regard it as a barren speculation, but they who possess it know that it is the sole and powerful source of all their works that are acceptable to God, which are opposed to " dead works," Heb. ix., 14 ; and that no works are really good, however excellent they may appear, and however much esteemed among men, or useful in society, which do not proceed from faith. That your faith is spoken of. — It is not the piety of the saints at Rome, but their faith that is here noticed. Wiliiout holiness no man shall see the Lord ; but it is faith in Christ that is the distinguishing mark of the Christian. Paul thanks God that the faith of those to whom he writes was spoken of. He thus acknowledges God as the author of the Gospel, not only on account of his causing it to be preached to them, but because he had actually given them grace to believe ; for if God is thanked for the distinguished faith of Christians, then not only their faith is his gift, but also its measure and advance- ment. That faith is the gift of God, is a truth frequently declared, as in Matt, xvi., 17 ; Luke xvii., 5 ; Acts xi., 21 ; xiii., 48 ; xvi., 14 ; Rom. xii., 3 ; Phil, i., 29. This is also acknowledged in all the thanks- givings of the Apostles for those to whom they write, and is according to the whole of the doctrine of the Scriptures. It is from God that every good and every perfect gift descendeth, and a man can receive nothing, except it be given him from heaven. For " all things," therefore, we are commanded to give thanks. Paul thanks God for his ovm prayers, 2 Tim. i., 3.. Here, as in other places, Paul commences with thanksgiving, thus reminding us that every blessing is from the kindness of God. If we should observe this in blessings of small importance, we ought to do it much more with respect to faith, which is neither an ordinary nor a common blessing of God. Throughout the whole world. — That is to say, throughout the whole' Roman empire, of which Rome being the capital, all that took place there was circulated throughout the whole civilized world. Their faith was proclakned by the voice of all believers, who alone could form a proper opinion regarding it, for the reference is evidently to their 36 ROMANS I., 8. approbatioa. Unbelievers, who hated both the people of God and their faith, could give no proper testimony concerning it. The commenda- tion of the servants of Ood was all that the Apostle valued. Thus the faith of the believers v^hom God had assembled at Rome was held up as an example, and the Apostle here declares not only for their encour- agement, but also to excite them more and more to the performance of their duty, that the eyes of all the servants of God throughout the world were upon them. He says, their faith was spoken of, not that he rests in this circumstance, or that he wishes them to rest in their repu- tation as if he would flatter them. Reputation in itself is nothing. If it be unmerited, it only convinces the conscience of imposture, and when it is real, it is not our chief joy. Paul regards it with reference to the believers at Rome, as a mark of the reality of their faith, and it is on this reahty that he grounds his thanksgiving. It was a reason for thanksgiving that they were thus letting their light shine before men, and so glorifying their Father in heaven. The glory of all that is good in his people belongs to God, and all comes through Jesus Christ. V. 9. — ^For God ig my witness, whom I serve with my spirit in the Gospel of his Son, that without ceasing I make mention of you always m my prayers. God is my witness. — This is substantially an oath ; and refutes the erroneous and mischievous notion of some who maintain, from a mis- apprehension of what is said by our Lord and the Apostle James, that all oaths are unlawful. Paul's affection for those to whom he wrote was such, that in making his appeal to God, he desires to expose it to his judgment in respect to its truth and sincerity. Whom I serve with my spirit. — All the service of God is of this kind, but it is here expressed for the sake of energy, and to distinguish the true servants of God who serve in the gospel with their heart in the work, from hirehngs whose labors are formal and only external. It expresses the sincerity and ardor of the service that Paul rendered to God, as if he had said with all his heart and all the faculties of his soul. It also imports the nature of the service in which he was employed, namely, a spiritual service, in opposition to the service of the Priests and Levites in the tabernacle, which was in a great measure a bodily service. On this account he adds, in the Gospel of his Son ■ that IS to say, m the ministry of the gospel in which he labored for the unfoldmg of the Divine mysteries to make them known. Thus, Paul shows from the character of his ministry, that his obedience was 'not ia pretence only, but in sincerity. Without ceasing I make mention of you always in my prayer s.-- Some place these last words, " always in my prayers," in the begin- ning of the next verse, as in the Vulgate and the French versions -but the difference is not material. This is a striking proof of the frequency of Paul's prayers, in which he interceded for those whom he was addressing— "without ceasing"^" always." In like manner, in writing to the Philippians, he says, « Always, in every prayer of mine for jou all, making request with joy." We thus learn the duty of Christians to pray for |ne another, and that those who beheve the gospel ROMANS 10. Si are as much bound to pray for its success, and the prosperity of the churches, as to labor in the work. Both prayer and labor ought to go together. To pray without laboring is to mock God : to labor without prayer is to rob God of his glory. Until these are conjoined, the gos- pel wiU not be extensively successftd. From many other parts of raul's writings, we learn how assiduous he was in the duty of prayer, which he so earnestly inculcates on all believers. " In everything giving thanks ; for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus concerning you ;" 1st Thess. v., 18. "Be careful for nothing; but in everything by prayer and supplication^ with thanksgiving, let your requests be made known unto God," Phil, iv., 6. How precious is the promise connected with this admonition ! " And the peace of God which passeth all un- derstanding, shall keep your hearts and minds through Christ Jesus." But since all events are fixed, even from eternity, in the counsels and vrisdom of God, of what avail, it may be said, are these prayers ? Can they change his eternal counsels, and the settled order of events ? Certainly not. But God commands us to pray, and even the prayers of his people are included in his decrees ; and what God has resolved to do, he often gives to their prayers. Instead then of being vain, they are among the means through which God executes his decrees. If in- deed all things happened by a blind chance, or a fatal necessity, prayers in that case could be of no moral efficacy, and of no use ; but since they are regulated by the direction of divme wisdom, prayers have a place in the order of events. Aftfet many gracious promises, it is added, Ezek. xxxvi., 37, "Thus saith the Lord God, I will yet for this be inquired of by the house of Israel to do it for them." In this verse Paul shows his zeal for God and his love for believers, which ought never to be separated. We should love our brethren because we love God. These two things corresponded in Paul to the two favors he had received, which be marked in the 5th verse, namely, " Grace and Apostleship ; " " God," as if he said, " has given me grace, and on my part I serve him with my spirt ; he has given me Apostleship, and I have you continually in remembrance." V. 10. -^Making request, if by any means now at length, I might have a prosperous journey, by the will of God, to coffle unto you. Making request. — Paul's affection for those to whom he wrote im- pelled him, not once or twice with a passing wish, but at all times, to de- sire to be present with them, notwithstanding the inconveniences of so long and perilous a journey. He asks of God that by some means now at length he might be permitted to visit them. Thus, Christian love searches out new objects on which to exercise itself, and extends itself even to those who are personally unknown. / might have a prosperous journey, by the will of God. — This teaches us that God by his providence regulates all that takes place. There is nothing with which Christians should be more habitually im- pressed, than that God is the disposer of all events. They should look to his will in the smallest concerns of life, as well as in affairs of the greatest moment. Even a prosperous journey^ from the Lord. In 38 ROMANS I., 12. this way they glorify God by acknowledging his providence in all things, and have the gi-eatest confidence and happiness m walking before him. Here we also learn that while the will of God concerning any event is not'ascertained, we have liberty to desire and pray for what we wish, provided our prayers and desires are conformed to his holmese. But will our prayers be agreeable to God if they be contrary to his decrees ? Yes, provided they be offered in submission to him, and not opposed to any knovra command, for it is the revealed and not the secret will of God that must be the rule of our prayers. We also learn m this place, that since all events depend on the will of God, we ought to ac- quiesce in them, however contrary they may be to our wishes, and likewise that in those things in which the will of God is not apparent, we should always accompany our prayers and our desires with this condition, if it be pleasing to God, and be ready to renounce our desires as soon as they appear not to be conformed to his will. " how sweet a thing," as one has weU observed, " were it for us to learn to make our burthens light, by framing our hearts to the burthen, and making our Lord's will a law." V. 11.— For I lon^ to see you, that I may impart unto you some spiritual gift, to the end ye may be established. Paul greatly desired to see the believers at Rome, to impart to them some spiritual gift. The opinion of Augustine that this means the love of one's neighbour, in which he supposes the Church at Rome was deficient, has no foundation. It was not a new degree of the Spirit of sanctification that he desired to communicate, for this Paul had it not in his power to bestow, 1 Cor. iii., 6. He appears to refer to some of the extraordinary gifts conferred by the Apostles,, by which they might be more established in their most holy faith. V. 12. — That is, that I may be comforted together with you by the mutual faith both of you and me. That is. — This does not mean what follows is intended as an ex- planation of what he had just said ; for to those whom Paul addressed it must have been suificiently clear ; but it is a modification of it respecting his purpose, lest he should appear to consider them as not well instructed or established in their faith. For although he always acted faithfully, no one, as is evident from his writings, was ever more cautious to avoid unnecessary offence. He therefore joins hinself with those to whom he vyrote, and refers to the advantage which he also ex- pected reciprocally to derive from them. It is no valid objection to understanding it to be a miraculous gift which he desired to com- municate, that he hoped for mutual advantage and comfort with those whom he was about to visit. This comfort or confirmation which he looked for, was not from a spiritual gift to be bestowed by them, but would be the effect of their confirmation, by the gift they received through him. The gift, too, bestowed by him, would be a new proof KOMANS I., 13. M «f tlie power of God in him, and of his approbation in enabling hin; to exert such power. He would be comforted and strengthened in witnessing their faith in respect to his own labors in his ministry, by seeing the kingdom of God advancing more and more, and with respect to his nimierous afflictions to which he was on all hands subjected, and also in contrasting the coldness and weakness of many of which he often complains, when he observed the increasing power of divine grace in the saints at Rome. On the other hand, they would derive from Paul's presence the greatest consolation from his instructions in the mysteries of salvation, from his exhortations, which must contribute much to their edification, as well as from his example, his counsels, and his prayers. It is thus the duty of Christians to confirm each other in the faith ; and their mutual intercourse makes known the faith that each possesses. They see that their experience answers as face answers to face in a glass ; and, by beholding the strength of faith in their brethren. Christians are edified and confirmed. V. 13.— Now, I would not have you ignorant, brethren, that oftentimes I purposed to come unto you (but was let hitherto), that I might have some fruit among you also, even as among other Gentiles. Paul's zeal and ajfFection for those to whom he wrote, were not of re- cent origin ; they had long been cherished in his heart. Of this he did not wish them to be ignorant. It is of importance that believers should know the love entertained for them by the servants of God. It is a testimony of the love of God himself. Paul wished to see some fruit of his ministry among them. This was his great desire everywhere in the service of Clirist. " I have chosen you and ordained you," said Jesus to his Apostles, "' that ye should go and bring forth fruit ;" and Paul ardently longed to see the fulfilment of this gracious promise among those to whom he wrote, for believers were his joy and crown. As among other Gentiles. — The Apostleship of Paul had not been unfruirml, ch. xv., 17. He had travelled through a great part of Syria, of Asia, and of Greece, and ever3rwhere he had either been the means of converting sinners or edifying believers. This was a source of much joy to him , but after so many labors, he did not wish for repose. He desired to go to Rome to obtain fruit there also. He had been let, or hindered hitherto. Our desires are always pleasing to God when their object is to promote his glory ; but sometimes he does not see good to give them eifect. It was good that it was in David's heart, although he was not permitted, to build the house of God. The times and the ways of God's providence are often unknown to us, and there- fore our desires and designs in his service ought always to be cherished in submission to his Divine wisdom. Paul had been hindered till now from going to Rome. This may have happened in different ways, and through what are called second causes. It may have been occasioned by the services he found it indispensable to perform in other churches before leaving them, or it may have arisen from the machinations of Satan, the god of this world, exciting disturbances and opposition in these churches, 1 Thess. ii., 18 ; or he may have been prevented by the 40 ROMANS I., 15. Spirit of God, Acts xvi., 7. His being hindered, by M-hatever means, from going to Rome, when he intended it, shows that the Apostles were sometimes thwarted in their purposes, and were not always under the guidance of Divine inspiration in their plans. This, however, has nothing to do with the subject of their inspiration as it respects the Scriptures, or as it regards their doctrine. Those who raise any objection to the inspiration of the Scriptures, from the disappointments or miscon- duct of the Apostles, confound things that entirely and essentially differ. V. 14 —I am debtor both to the Greeks and to the Barbarians, both to the wise and to the unwise. Paul was their debtor, not by any right that either Greeks or Barba- rians had acquired over him, but by the destination which God had given to his ministry towards them. He does not, however, hesitate to recognize the debt or obligation, because, when God called him to their service, he was in effect their servant, as he says in another place, " Ourselves your servants for Jesus' sake." The foundation of this duty was not in those whom he desired to serve, but in God, and the force of this obligation was so much the stronger as it was divine ; it was a law imposed by sovereign authority, and consequently an invio- lable law. With regard to Paul, it included, on the one hand, all the duties of the Apostolic office, and on the other the dangers and persecu- tions to which that office exposed him, without even excepting martyr- lom when he should be called to that last trial. All this is similar to what every Christian owes in the service of God, as far as his abilities, of whatever kind they are, and his opportunities, extend. As the Greeks, under which term all civilized nations were included, were the source of the arts and sciences, of knowledge and civilisation, it might be said that the Apostle should attach himself solely to them, and that he owed nothing to the Barbarians. On the contrary, it might be alleged that he was debtor only to the Barbarians, as the Greeks were already so enlightened. But in whatever way these distinctions were viewed, he declares that both the one and the other were equal to him ; he was debtor to them all, — to the Greeks, because their light was only the darkness of error or of idle speculation — to the Barbarians, for he ought to have compassion on their ignorance. He was debtor to the wise, that is to say, the philosophers, as they were called among the Greeks ; and to the unwise, or those who made no profession oi philosophy. He knew that both stood equally in need of the gospel, and that for them all it was equally adapted. This is the case with the learned and the unlearned, who are both altogether ignorant of the way of sa vation, till it be revealed to them by the gospel, to which every- thing, by the command of G od, the wisdom as well as the folly of the world, in one word, all things besides, must yield subjection. V. 15.— SojSs much as in me is, I am ready to preach the gospel to yoc that are at Rome also. Paul was always zealous to do his duty, at the same time he always acknowledged his dependence on God. This is an example which ROMANS 1,, 15. 41 Christians ought to imitate on all occasions, never to deviate from the path of duty, but to leave the events in the hands of God. The con- trary of this is generally the case. Christians are often more anxious and perplexed about their success, than with respect to their duty. They forget what regards themselves, and wish to meddle with what does not belong to them, but to God. To you also. He does not in- quire or decide whether they ought to be reckoned among the Barba- rians or the Greeks, the wise dr unwise ; he was ready to preach the gospel to them all. Here terminates the Preface to the Epistle. The first five verses include the general introduction, the last ten embrace the particular address to those to whom it is written. The introduction contains the name, the character, and the office of the writer ; his vindication of the gospel against the cavils of the Jews, proving that it was not a novel doctrine, and that the Apostles were not opposed to the Prophets. It authenticates the whole of the Jewish Canon, and attests its inspiration. It undermines the errors of the Jews respecting tradition, and directs them to the Scriptures alone. It next announces the Messiah as the subject of the gospel ; his glorious person as God and man, his birth and resurrection, his abasement and exaltation, and his almighty power. It finally asserts the communication of grace to the Apostle, his ap- pointment to the office he sustained, the purpose for which it was con- ferred, along with a commission, of which he states the grounds, to all the nations under heaven. Where else shall be found so much matter compressed in so little space, — ^where so much brevity connected with so much fulness ? In the latter part, in which Paul addresses those to whom his Epistle was directed, he introduces many things well calculated to rivet theii attention and engage their affections, while at the same time he con veys very grave and salutary instructions. What must have been the feelings of the Roman converts, when they saw the intense interest with which they were regarded by this great Apostle ; when they con- sidered the grandeur and value of the gospel to which he was about to call their attention in his Epistle ; and when they were cheered by the hope of shortly seeing in the midst of them one whose heart glowed with such love to God and such benevolence to them ! All this must have tended to produce a reciprocal regard and reverential feeling to- wards the Apostle ; an ardent desire to profit, by his instructions, toge- ther with much gratitude to God, and many prayers to hasten his voy- age to come among them. Paul did arrive at Rome ; but in the Provi- dence of God, in a very different manner, and in circumstances very •Ufferent from what he appears to have expected when he prayed for a *' prosperous journey." He went there a prisoner in bonds, was shipwrecked on his voyage, and kept in confinement after his arrival. But although he was bound, the word of God was not bound, and all fell out, in the adorable Providence of God, for the furtherance of the gospel. The circumstances, however, in which he was placed were not in the meantime joyous, but grievous. Yet now that he stands before the throne, now that he has received the crown of righteousness, 42 ROMANS I., 16. and is numbered among the spirits of just men made perfect, what regret can he experience that, during the few and evil days he spent on earth, he was conducted to Rome through persecutions, imprisonments, storms, and shipwreck, an outcast among men, but approved and ac- cepted of God ? CHAPTER I. PART II. ROMANS I., 16-"12. Having concluded his prefatory address, the Apostle now announces, in brief but comprehensive terms, the grand subject which occupies the first five chapters of this Epistle, namely, the doctrine of justifica* tion by faith. V. 16.— For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ : for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth ; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. / am not ashamed. — Paul here follows up what he had just said of his readiness to preach the gospel at Rome, by declaring that he was not ashamed of it. This would also convey a caution to those whom he addressed against giving way to a strong temptation to which they were exposed, and which was no doubt a means of deterring many from embracing the gospel to whom it was preached. He knew from personal experience the opposition which the gospel everywhere en- countered. By the Pagans it was branded as Atheism ; and by the Jews it was abhorred as subverting the law and tending to licentious- ness ; while both Jews and Gentiles united in denouncing the Christians as disturbers of the public peace, who, in their pride and presumption, separated themselves from the rest of mankind. Besides, a crucified Saviour was to the one a stumbling-block, and to the other foolishness. This doctrine was everywhere spoken against, and the Christian forti- tude of the Apostle, in acting on the avowal he here makes, was as truly manifested in the calmness with which he viewed the disdain of the philosophers, the contempt of the proud, and the ridicule of the multitude, as in the steadfast resolution with which, for the name of the Lord Jesus, he confronted personal danger, and even death itself. His courage was not more conspicuous when he was ready " not to be bound only, but also to die at Jerusalem," than when he was enabled to enter Athens or Rome without being moved by the prospect of all that scorn and derision which in these great cities awaited him. But the grand reason which induced the Apostle to declare at the outset of this Epistle that he was not ashamed of the gospel, is a reason which applies to every age as well as to that in which Christ was first preached. His declaration implies that while in reality there is no just ROMANS I.J 16. 43 cause 10 be ashamed of the gospel, there is in it something which is not acceptable, and that it is generally hated and despised among men. The natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God ; for they are foohshness unto him. They run counter to his most fondly cherished notions of independence ; they abase in the dust all the pride of his self-reliance, and stripping him of every ground of boasting, and demanding imphcit submission, they awaken all the enmity of the carnal mind. Even they who have tasted of the grace of God, are liable to experience and often to yield to the deeply rooted and sinful feeling of being ashamed of the things of God. So prevalent is this even among Christians the most advanced, that Paul deemed it neces- sary to warn Timothy respecting it, whose faithfulness he so highly celebrates. " Be not thou therefore ashamed of the testimony of our Lord." In connection with this he makes the same avowal for himself as in the passage before us, declaring at the same time the strong ground on which he rested, and was enabled to resist this temptation. Whereunto he says, " I am appointed a preacher, and an apostle, and a teacher of the Gentiles. For which cause I also suffer these things : nevertheless I am not ashamed ; for 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." At the same time he commends Onesi- phorus for not being ashamed of his chain, 2 Tim. i., 8, 12, 16. And He who knew what is in man, solemnly and repeatedly guarded his disciples against this criminal shame, enforcing his admonitions by the most awful sanction. " For whosoever shall be ashamed of me and of my words, of him shall the Son of Man be ashamed, when he shaU come in his own glory, and in his Father's, and of his holy angels." That system, in which there is nothing of " foolishness " in the eyes of this world's wisdom, cannot be the gospel of which Paul deemed it necessary to affirm that he was not ashamed. No other religion is so offensive to the pride of man ; no other system awakens shame in the breasts of its votaries ; and yet every false doctrine has in it more or less of what is positively absurd, irrational, and disgraceful. It is also observable, that the more the gospel is corrupted, and the more its peculiar features are obscured by error, the less do we observe of the shame it is calculated to produce. It is, in fact, the fear of opposition and contempt that often leads to the corruption of the gospel. But this peculiarity affords a strong proof of the truth of the Apostle's doctrine. Had he not been convinced of its truth, would it not have been mad- ness to invent a forgery in a form which excites the natural prejudices of mankind ? Why should he forge a doctrine which he was aware would be hateful to the world ? In this declaration Paul may also have had reference to the false mysteries of the Pagans, which they carefully concealed, because they contained many things that were infamous, and of which they were justly ashamed. When the Apostle says, he is not ashamed ot the gospel, it further implies that he gloried in it, as he says, Gal. vi., 14, " God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross 01 our Lord Jesus Chnst ;" and thus he endeavors to enhance, in the eyes of those to whom he wrote, the value and excellence o^ the gospel . 4 ROMANS I., 16. in order more fully tr arrest their attention before he entered on his subject. The Gospel of Christ.— k. little before, he had called it " the gospel of God ;" he now designates it the gospel of Christ, who is not only its author, but also its essential subject. The gospel is, therefore, caikd the preaching of Jesus Christ, and of the unsearchable riches of Christ. This gospel, then, which Paul was ready to preach, and of which h . was not ashamed, was the gospel of God concerning his Son. The term gospel, which signifies glad tidings, is taken from Isaiah iii., 7, and Ixi., 1, where the Messiah is introduced as saying, "The Lord hath anointed me to preach good tidings." For it is the power of God unto salvation.- — Here the Apostle gives the reason why he is not ashamed of the gospel of Christ. The gospel is the great and admirable mystery, which, from the beginning of the world, had been hid in God, into which the angels desire to look, whereby his manifold wisdom is made known unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places. It is the eificacious means by which God saves men from sin and misery, and bestows on them eternal life — the instrument by which he triumphs in their hearts, and destroys in them the dominion of Satan. The gospel, which is the word of God, is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword ; by it, as the word of truth, men are begotten by the will of God, James i., 18, 1 Peter i., 23 ; and through the faith of the gospel they are kept by his power unto salvation, 1 Peter i., 5. The exceeding greatness of the power of God exerted in the gospel toward those who believe, is Compared to his mighty power which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand, Eph. i., 19. Thus, while the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness, to those who are saved it is the power of God. The gospel is power in the hand of God as opposed to our natural impotence and utter inability to obtain salvation by anything we can do, Rom. v., 6, and also in opposition to the law which cannot save, being " weak through the flesh," Rom. viii., 3. It has been observed that the article the before power is not in the original. The article, how- ever, is not necessary. The Apostle does not mean power as an attri- bute, for the gospel is no attribute of God. It is power, as it is the means which God employs to accomplish a certain end. "When it is said the gospel is God's power unto salvation, all other means of sal- vation are excluded. To every one that believeth.-^This power of God unto salvation is applied through faith, without which God will neither justify nor save any man, because it is the appointed means of his people's union with Jesus Christ. Faith accepts the promise of God. Faith embraces die satisfaction and merit of Jesus Christ, which are the foundation of sal- vation ; and neither that satisfaction nor that merit would be imputed, were it not rendered ours by faith. Finally, by faith we give ourselves to Jesus Christ, in order that he may possess and conduct us for ever. When God justifies he gives grace, but it is always in maintaining the rights of his majesty, in making us submit to his law, and to the direc- ROMANS I., 17. 45 tion of his holiness, that Jesus Christ may reign in our hearts. The gospel is the power of God unto salvation to every one without any distinction of age, sex, or condition, of birth or of country, without excepting any one, provided he be a believer in Christ. The expres- sion, " every one," respects the extent of the call of the gospel, in oppo- sition to that of the law, which was addressed to the single family of Abraham. To the Jew first, and also to the Greek. — This distinction includes all nations, for the Jews were accustomed to comprehend under the name of Greek all the rest of the world, as opposed to their own nation, The Greeks, from the estabhshment of the Macedonian empire, were better known to the Jews than any other people, not only on account of their power, but likewise of their knowledge and civilisation. Paul frequently avails himself of this distinction. To the Jew first. — From the days of Abraham, their great progenitor, the Jews had been highly distinguished from all the rest of the world by their many and great privileges. It was their high distinction that of them Christ came, " who is over all, God blessed for ever." They were thus, as his kinsmen, the royal family of the human race, in this respect higher than all others, and they inherited Emmanuel's land. While, therefore, the evangelical covenant, and consequently justifica- tion and salvation, equally regarded all believers, the Jews held the first rank, as the ancient people of God, while the other nations were strangers from the covenants of promise. The preaching of the gospel, was to be addressed to them first, and at the beginning to them alone, Matt. X., 6 ; for, during the abode of Jesus Christ upon earth, he was the minister only of the circumcision, chap, xv., 8. " I am not sent," he says, "but to the lost sheep of the house of Israel," and he com- manded that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, " beginning at Jerusalem." Acts iii., 26 xiv., 26. Thus, while Jews and Gentiles were united in the parti- cipation of the gospel, the Jews were not deprived of their rank, since they were the first called. . The preaching of the gospel to the iews, first, served various im- portant ends. It fulfilled Old Testament prophecies, as Isa. ii., 3. It manifested the compassion of the Lord Jesus for those who shed his blood, to whom, after his resurrection, he commanded his gospel to be first proclaimed. It showed that it was to be preached to the chief of sinners, and proved the sovereign efficacy of his atonement in expiating the guilt even of his murderers. It was fit, too, that the gospel should be begun to be preached where the great transactions took place on which it was founded and established ; and tliis furnished an example of the way in which it is the will of the Lord that his gospel should be propagated by his disciples, beginning in their own houses and their own country. V. 17. — For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith ; as it i» written. The just shall live by faith. The righteousness of God. — This phrase may, according to circum- 46 ROMANS I., 17. Stances, mean either the personal attribute of God, or, as in this place, the righteousness which God has provided, which he has effected, and which he imputes for justification to all his elect. It is through this righteousness, revealed in the gospel, that the gospel is the power of God unto salvation. Paul reverts to its manifestatiop, chap, iii., 21, where the signification of this most important expression will be fully considered. At present it is sufficient to remark, that the grand object of the Apostle is to show that man, having lost his own righteousness, and thereby fallen under condemnation, God has provided for him a righteousness — the complete fulfilment of the law in all its threatenings and all its precepts — by which, being placed to his account through faith, he is acquitted from guilt, freed from condemnation, and entitled to the reward of eternal life. Is revealed. — This expression regards the assertion in the second verse of this chapter, that the gospel had formerly been promised by the prophets. The righteousness of God must be contemplated at three periods, — first, at the period when God purposed it ; second, at the period when he promised it ; and, third, at the period when he revealed it. He purposed it in his eternal decrees, he promised it after the fall, and now it is actually revealed in the gospel. Paul does not say, that it began only under the gospel to display its efficacy, or that it was not known under the Mosaic dispensation ; on the contrary, he was about to show that the Prophet Habakkuk had referred to it, and in the fourth chapter he proves that Abraham was justified by the imputation of this same righteousness ; but he here declares, that its full and perfect revelation was made by the gospel, in which it is testified that at length it has been " brought in," as had been promised. Daniel ix., 24. Looking forward to the revelation of this righteousness, the Prophet Isaiah Ivi., 1, writes, " Thus saith the Lord, keep ye judgment, and do justice ; for my salvation is near to come, and my righteousness to be revealed." The Prophet thus announced in his time that it was near to be revealed, and the Apostle affirms that it is now revealed. From faith to faith. — Various interpretations have been given of this phrase, although there appears to be little difficulty in ascertaining its meaning. Some explain it as signifying from the f.tith of the Old Tes- tament to the faith of the New ; . some from one degree of faith to another ; some from the faith of the Jew to the faith of the Gentile ; and others altogether of faith. The expression is evidently elliptical ; and in order to understand it, it is necessary to observe, that the literal ren- dering is not "from faith to faith," but " by faith to faith ;" the same words in the original are thus translated in the same verse, the just shall live " by faith." The meaning, then, is, the righteousness which is by faith, namely, which is received by faith, is revealed to faith, or in order to be beheved. This is entirely consistent with what the Apostle says in chapter iii., 22, where he reverts to the subject, and announces that the righteousness of God, which is by, or through faith ot Jesus Christ, is unto all and upon all them that believe. There is then no difficulty in this expression, especially since the meaning is ROMANS 1., 17. 47 placed beyond dispute in this passage, where the same truth is fully expressed. As it is written. — Here is a reference to the Old Testament Scrip- tures, as attesting what had just been affirmed, thus proving the corres- pondence between the Old Testament and the New, as was also shown in the second verse of this chapter, and teaching us to rest our faith on the testimony of the Scriptures in whatever part of them it is found. The just shall live hy faith, or rather, following the order of the words in the original, the just or the righteous by faith shall live. The doc- trine, however, is substantially the same in whichsoever of these ways the phrase is rendered, and the meaning is, they who are righteous by faith, that is, by having the righteousness of God which is received by faith imputed to them, shall live. Paul repeats the same declaration in two other places, namely, in Gal. iii., 11, where he proves that men cannot be justified by the law ; and also in Hebrews x., 38, where he is exhorting those to whom he writes to continue firm in the faith ; and immediately afterwards, explaining the meaning of that expression, he shows at large, in the following chapter, that men were saved by faith before, as well as after, the coming of the Messiah. In both cases the eye of faith was steadfastly fixed on the same glorious object. Before his advent faith rested on that event, considered in the promise. After the coming of the Messiah, faith rejoices in the accomplishment of the promise. Thus it is only by faith in the testimony of God, as receiv- ing his righteousness wrought by the Messiah, that man can be just or righteous in his sight. The passage itself is quoted from the prophe- cies of Habakkuk, and is generally supposed to relate, in its primary sense, to the deliverance from the Babylonish captivity, which was a type of the deliverance obtained by the gospel. Through faith in the Divine promises, the first was obtained, and the second in like manner is obtained through faith. But in whatever sense the prophet used these words, the Apostle, speaking by the same Spirit, assigns to them their just and legitimate extension. They are true in respect to an earthly and temporal deliverance, and are equally true in respect to a spiritual deliverance. Many, however, understand such quotations, where the Apostle says it is written, as mere accommodation, not implying prediction of the thing to which they are applied. This is a most unwarrantable and banefiil method of handling the word of God. It is in this light that professors Tholuck and Stuart, in their Commentaries on this Epistle, often view this form of expression. But, on the contrary, it is always used as introducing what is represented as a fulfilment of prediction, or an interpretation of its meaning. If Neologians are to be held guilty for explaining the miracles of Christ on natural principles, are they less criminal who explain, as mere accommodation of Scripture language, what is quoted by an Apostle as a fulfilment of prophecy ? Several quotations from the Old Testament in this Epistle are explained by both these authors on the above Neological principle. Professor Stuart, on this passage, says, " It is not necessary to suppose, in all cases of this nature, that the vnriter who makes such an appeal, regards the passage 48 ROMANS I., 17. which he quotes as prediction. Plainly, this is n^t always the case with the writers of the New Testament, as nearly all commentators now concede." Professor Tholuck remarks, that " the pious Jew loved to use Bible phrases in speaking of the things of common life, as this seemed to connect, in a manner, his personal observations and the events of his own history with those of holy writ." He adds, that the Tal- mud comains numerous quotations introduced by such forms, without," he continues, " there being understood any real fulfilment of the text in the fact which is |poken of. This practice was also followed by the Apostles."* The subject of quotation by aceomraodation is one of such paramount importance, involving so deeply the honor of the Holy Scriptures, and at the same time is so lightly thought of by many, that it challenges the most serious attention. Nothing can be more dishonorable to the character of divine revela- tion, and injurious to the edification of believers, than this method of explaining the quotations in the New Testament from the Old, not as predictions or interpretations, but as mere illustrations by way of ac- commodation. In this way, many of the prophecies referred to in the Epistles are thrust aside from their proper application, and Christians are taught that they do not prove the very things the Apostles adduced them to establish. The great temptation to this manner of understanding them, is the fact that such prophecies generally, as they lie in the Old Testament, are obviously applied to temporal events, whereas, in the New, they are applied to the affairs of Christ and his kingdom. But this is a difficulty to none who understand tho nature of the Old Testament dis- pensation, while the supposition that it is a difficulty, argues an asto- nishing want of attention to both covenants. Not only the ceremonies, but the personages, facts, and whole history of the Jewish people, have a letter and a spirit, without the kn^owledge of which they cannot be understood, either in their true sense, or in u sense at all worthy of God. That the Old Testament predictions then should primarily refer to temporal events in the Jewish history, and in a secondary, but more important view, to the Messiah and the gospel, is quite in accordance with what is taught us everjrwhere by the New Testament.! Instead • In the Presbyterian Review, No. xxx , p. 237, it is observed, " This idea of quota- tion by accommodation, is as old as the time of Arias Montanus ;" and after remarking that in the above passage it is visited with merited castigation, the reviewer adds : " Professor Tholuck's authority, indeed, in any matter in which the honor of inspira- tion is involved, is not very high ;" so, at least, we think all who have escaped the chilling influence of Socinianism, must acknowledge respecting any writer, who, in one place, tells ua that " Paul probably used certain words, without attaching to them any definite idea"— (p. 156)— in another, suggests the supposition that the Apostle " had forgotten what ought to have followed"— (p. 157)— and, in the present verse, informs us that, with the view of better adapting the declaration of the prophet to his subject, he gave a " violent construction to the translation of the Septuagint :" and whatever Tholuck's authority may be, Stuart's is no greater ; for water cannot rise higher than its source ; and on this subject of accommodation, with the exception of the very obnoxious sentiment which we have just cited, the American critic is no more than the copyist of the German. t See the Author's Book on "the Evidences, &c., on the primary and secondary senses of prophecy, and its division into three branches."— Vol. i., p. 445, 3d edition. ROMANS I., 17. 49 of creating a difficulty, this peculiarity is entirely consistent with the prominent features of Christianity, and calls for fresh admiration of the Divine wisdom. It is one of those characteristics which prove the Bible to be God's own book ; and, as usual, men's attempts to mend it only serve to mar its beauty and obscure its evidence. In Gal. iii., 10, it is asserted, that " as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse." Why are they affiniied to be under the curse ? Because it is written, " Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them." The phrase, it is written, is used here to connect an inference or conclusion with the premises on which it is founded. The assertion, that all who are of the works of the law are under the curse, is founded on the thing said to be written. The phrase, then, is indicative of true fulfilment or in terpretation of meaning. In like manner, what is spoken of, Matthew xiii., 14, and John xii., 39, 40, is, in Rom. xi., 8, introduced with the phrase, " it is vraitten." By the same phrase also is introduced, Gal iv., 27, the reference to the prophecy of Isaiah liv., 1. This must be prediction, because there does not appear to be any reference to a subordinate event in the Jewish history. It is an inunediate prophecy of the calling of the Gentiles. We learn from Gal. iv., 21, 26, that even the history of Abraham's family was typical, and the recorded facts of ancient times are explained as predictions of gospel times. " Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law !" In what respect could they hear the law on the point referred to ? In the events that took place in Abraham's house. These facts are represented as a part of the law, and the spiritual truth as the proper interpretation. Not only is the phrase, "it is written," always applied to indicate Prediction or interpretation, but it was so understood and applied in our iord's time. When the priests and scribes were asked where Christ should be bom, they answered, in Bethlehem, for thus it is written, Matt, ii., 5. This phrase, then, they employed to indicate true fulfilment of prediction. This very reference to Habakkuk is explained. Gal. iii., 11, as pre- diction. It is asserted in the beginning of the verse, that no man can be justified by the law, because it is written by the Prophet. Here the impossibility of justification by the law is founded on the prophecy 3 noted. But if this prophecy related only to a temporal event in the ewish history, the fact bein^ so written would not bear out the con- clusion. That the prophecy there refers to the justification of sinners before God, as its true and most important meaning, is the necessary sense of the passage. So little foundation have the above named writers for their bold perversions of the word of God on this point. Their doctrine respecting it manifests great ignorance of Scripture. The passage in Matthew ii., 15, has been supposed by some to be ut- terly incapable of interpretation, in the sense of real fulfilment, as pre- diction. " Out of Egypt have I called my Son." The prophecy there re- ferred to is found in Hosea xi., 1 , and evidently refers to the calling of the 4 50 ROMANS I., 17. Israelites out of Egypt. How then can it be the fulfilment of tie prophecy according to the application in the Evangelist ? Nothing is more easy than the solution of this supposed insuperable difficulty. The words of the Prophet have, in the primary, or literal sense, a re- ference to the historical event— the caUing of the Israelites, as nation- ally the typical Son of God, ou.i of the land -of Egypt ; and, in the secondary or spiritual sense, couched under fJie figure, they refer to the calling of the true Son of God out of Egypt, where be Trad gone to so- journ in order to accomplish this prediction. The Son of God is, in Isaiah xlix., 3, expressly addressed under the name of Israel. It argues the highest presumption, and even blasphemy, to explain this quotatioh on the principle of accommodation, when the Evangefot gay«, " that it might be fulfilled," and thus intimates that this event was one predeter- mined in the councils of eternity. Is mere accommodation fulfUmeat in any sense 1 How must infidels sneer at such violent efiforts to explain away a difiSculty, which is, after all, imaginary ! The language here used by the Evangelist, establishes beyond all contradiction the double reference of many of the prophecies of the old Testament. Some commentators refer to Acts xxviii., 25, as an example of a passage which the Apostle quotes as prediction, when it is not pre- diction. This Scripture is supposed to have reference to the Jews, as neglecting all warnings till they were finally carried into captivity. It may have such a reference. But this is not so certain as that it has the secondary reference to the state of the Jews with respect to the re- jection of the gospel. Instead, then, of being received as applied to ' the latter by way of accommodation, or as illustrative o( the same principle, there is no absolute certainty of a primary reference ; but there can be no doubt that it predicts the unbelief and hardness of heart manifested by the Jews in the time of our Lord, and afterwards. This is irresistibly evident from Matt, xiii., 14. Here it is expressly said to be a fulfilling of the prophecy — ^that " in them is fulfilled tfe prophecy of Esaias, which saith," &c. The unbelief of the Jews is here in express words stated as the fulfilment of this same prophecy. Is it not ^vonderiiil blindness, is it not the most profane temerity, to explain as mere accommodation what the Holy Spirit asserts to be a real fulfilment ? The same prophecy is referred to in John's Gospel -zs fulfilled in the Jews of our Lord's time, chap, xii., 39. " Therefore they could not believe, because that Esaias said again." What can more strongly express prediction ? Belief was impossible, because of the prediction. They were the words of God, and therefore must be fulfilled. As this is a subject of so much importance, demanding the serious attention of all who tremble at the word of God, and one which is so frequently, I may say so generally, misrepresented, I shall further repeat the following remarks respecting it, from my Book of Evidences vol. i., p. 450, third editio^, on the Old Testament prophecies. " It is not as setting aside the literal application of such passages, that the Apostles quote therii in their spiritual import ; nor in the way of accommodation, as is often erroneously asserted ; but in their ulti- mate and most extensive significations. Nothing has been more ROMANS I., 17. 51 mischievous, more audacious, and more dishonorable to the character of revelalion, than the doctrine that represents the New Testament writers as quoting the Old Testament prophecies by way of accommo- dation. It is based on the supposed difficulty or impossibility of explaining the agreement m the literal accompUshoient. To tfiis it may be replied, that satisfactory solutions of the cases of difficulty have been given. But though no satisfactory solution were given, the supposition would be inadmissible. It contradicts most explicitly tlie Spirit of God, and must he rejected, let the solution be what it may. The New Testament \vritcrS) in quoting the Old Testament prophecies, quote them as being fulfilled in the event which is related. If it is not truly fulfilled, the assertion of fulfilment is false. The fulfilment by accommodation is no fulfiilraent in any real sense of the word. This interpretation then cannot be admitted, as being palpably contradictory to the language of inspiration. To quote the Old Testament prophecies in this way could not, in any respect, serve the purpose of the vvrriters of the New Testament. What confirmation to their doctrine could they find from the language of a prophecy that did not really refer to the subject to which they applied it, but was merely capable of some fanciful accommodation ? It is ascribing to these writers, or rather to the Spirit of God, a puerility of which every writer of sound judgment would be ashamed. The application of the language of inspiration by way of accommodation is a theory that has sometimes found patrons among a certain class of writers. But a due respect for the inspired writings will ever reject it with abhorrence. It is an idle parade of in- genuity, even when it coincides in its explanations with tht truths of the Scriptures. But to call such an acconimodation of Scripture language a fulfilment, is completely absurd. There is nothing in Scripture to warrant such a mode of explanation." "To say," ohserves Mr. Bell, on the Covenants, "that these Scrip- tures had no relation to these events, what is this, but to give the inspired penman the lie ? The question is not what the Old Testament writers intended in such and such sayings, but what the Spirit which was in them did signify. The Prophets might often not know the full extent of their own prophecy, but certainly tije Spirit by which they spake, always did. The Spirit in the Old Testament writers was the same who inspired those of the New, 2 Cor. iv., 13 ; therefore, when the latter quote the words of the former as predictive qf, and fulfilled in, certain events, the Holy Spirit is pointing out what he himself intended. And who dare say, but that he may point out more fully under the New Testament what he intended iri the Old, than ever could have entered into the heart of man? 1 Cor. ii., 9, 10. Surely the only wise God must be allowed to know the full sense of his ovra words. When the Evangelists or Apostles tell us that such and such Scriptures were fulfil- led in such events, they do not give a new sense to these Scriptures which they never had before, but only show what before was latent with us. To say that any of tlieir quotations from the Old Testament are mere allusions, or only used by way of accommodation to their purpose, be- yond the true sense of the words and the intention of the Holy Ghost, 52 ROMANS I., 18. effectually cuts the sinews of their argumentation, and of courge destroys the proofs they adduce."— P. 56. The misunderstandmg, or rather' denial on this point, of the plain import of Scripture, in re- presenting the New Testament writers as quoting from the Old Testament in the way of accommodation, appears to originate, so far as concerns Professors Tholuck and Stuart., in their want of acquaint- ance with the nature of the inspiration of the Bible. Were this not the case, they could not have ventured to take such liberties with the Scrip- tures as appear in their Commentaries.* The declaration in the 16th and 17th verses, that the gospel is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth, to the Jew first, and also to the Greek, because therein is the righteousness of God revealed, serves as the text or ground of the whole of the subsequent disquisition in this and the following nine chapters. V. 18. — For the wrath of God is rpvealed from heaven against all uugodliness and crj:?.ghteousnes3 of men, who hold tne truth in unrighteousness, ^lere commences the third division of this chapter, where the Apos- tie enters into the discussion, to prove that all men being under the just condemnation of God, there remains for them no way of justification but that by grace, which the gospel holds out through Jesus Christ. Mr. Stuart understands this verse and the 17th as co-ordinate, and as supplying — each of them severally — a reason of the statement that Paul was not ashamed of the gospel ; but the subsequent discussion shows the utter inapplicability of verse 18th to the gospel, inasmuch as the Apostle developes, at great length, the truth that the wrath of God is declared against those to whom no explicit revelation has been given.^ It is connected by the particle for with the preceding verse, and con- stitutes an argument in favor of the statement, that nowhere, except in the gospel, is the righteousness of God revealed for the justification of sinners, and marks the necessity for this purpose of that revelation. This argument is evolved at great length, and the exposition of it does not terminate tUl the 20th verse of the third chapter. In this long section of the Epistle, a foundation is laid for the doctrine of grace in the announcement of the doctrine of wrath ; all men are concluded under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe — ^that it might be shown beyond question, that if men are to be justified, it cannot be by a righteousness of their own, but by the righteousness provided by God, and revealed in the gospel. The Apostle begins here by proving that the Gentiles were all guilty, and all subjected to the just judgment of God. The wrath of God is revealed. — The declaration of the wrath of God is a fit preparation for the announcement of grace ; not only On the subject of Inspiration, see the Author's work on " The Authenticity and Inspiration of the Holy Scriptures," and Dr. Carson's unanswered and unanswerable treatise on " The Theories of Inspiration by the Rev Daniel Wilson (now Bishop of Calcutta), the Rev. Dr. Pye Smith, and the Rev. Dr. Dick, proved to be erroneous," and his " Refutation of Dr. Henda-son's doctrine on Divine Inspiration, with a Critical Discussion on 2 Tim. iii., 16." ROMANS I., 18. 53 because wrath necessarily precedes grace in the order of nature, but because, to dispose men to resort to grace, they must be affected with the dread of wrath and a sense of their danger. The wrath of God denotes his vengeance, by ascribing, as is usual in Scripture, the pas- sions of men tc God. It implies no emotion in God, but has reference to the judgment and feeling of the sinner who is punisli»d. It is the universal voice of nature, and is also revealed in the consciences of men. It was revealed when the sentence of death was first pronounced, the earth cursed, and man driven out of the earthly paradise, and afterwards by such examples of punishment as those of the Deluge, and the destruction of the Cities of the Plain by fire from heaven, but especially by the reign of death throughout the world. It was pro- clnLmed in the curse of the law on every transgression, and was intimated in the institution of sacrifice, and in all the services of the Mosaic dispensation. In the eighth chapter of this Epistle, the Apostle calls the attention of believers to the fact, that the whole creation has become subject to vanity, and groaneth and travaileth together in pain. The same creation which declares that there is a God, and publishes his glory, also proves tliat he is the enemy of sin and the avenger of the crimes of men. So that this revelation of wrath is universal throughout the world, and none can plead ignorance of it. But, above all, the wrath of God was revealed from heaven when the Son of God came down to manifest the divine character, and when that wrath was displayed in his suiFerings and death, in a manner more av?ful than by all the tokens God had before given of his displeasure against sin. Besides this, the future and eternal punishment of the wicked is now declared in terms more solemn and explicit than formerly. Under the new dispensation there are two revelations given from heaven, one of wrath, die other of grace. Against, all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men. — Here the Apostle proceeds to describe the awful state of the Gentiles, living under the revelation of nature, but destitute of the knowledge of the grace of God revealed in the gospel. He begins with accusing the whole heathen world, first of ungodliness, and next of unrighteousness. He proves that, so far from rendering to their Creator the love and obedience of a grateful heart, they trampled on his authority, and strove to rob him of his glory. Failing, then, in their duty towards God, and having plunged into the depths of all ungodliness, it was no wonder that their dealings with their fellow-men were characterized by all unrighteousness. The word all denotes two things ; the one is, that the wrath of God extends to the entire mass of ungodliness and unrighteousness, which reigns among men, \\'ithout excepting the least part ; the other is, that ungodliness and unrigliteousness had arrived at their height, and reigned among the Gentiles with such undisturbed supremacy, that there remained no soundness among them. The first charge brought under the head of ungodliness, is that of holding the truth in unrighteousness. The expression, the truth, when it stands unconnected in the New Testament, generally denotes the gospel. Here, however, it is evidently hmited to the truth concerning 54 ROMANS i , 19. God, which by the works of creuion, and the remains of the law of conscience, and partly from tradition, was notified to the heathens, The word " hold " in the original, signifies to hold fast a thii^ supposed to be valuable, as well as to withhold, as it is rendered 2 Tness. ii., 6, and to restrain or suppress. The latter is the meaning here. The heathens did not hold fast the truth, but they suppressed or restrained what they knew about God. The expression signifies they retained it as in a prisofl, under the weight and oppression of their iniquities. But besides this general accusation, tfee Apostle appears particularly to have had reference to the chief men among the Pagans, whom they called philosophers, and who professed themselves wise. The declara- tion that iJie wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, attacked directly the principle which they universally iield to be true, namely, that God could not be angry with any man. Almost all of them believed the truth of the Divine unity which they communicated to those who were initiated into their mysteries. But all of them, at the same time, held it as a maxim, and enjoined it as a precept on their disciples, that nothing should be changed in the popu- lar worship of their country, to which, without a singh exception, they conformed, although it consisted of the most absurd and wicked idola- trous rites, in honor of a multitude of gods of the most odious and abominable character. Thus they not only resisted and constantly acted in opposition to the force of the truth in their own minds, but also suppressed what they knew of it, and prevented it from being told to the people. V. 19. — Because that which may be known of God is manifiest in them ; for God hath showed it unto them. The Apostle here assigns the reason of what he had just affirmed respecting the Gentiles as suppressing the truth in unrighteousness ; namely, that which may be known of God, God had manifested to them. They might have said, they did not suppress the truth in unrighteousness, for God had not declared it to them as he had done to the Jews. He had, however, sufficiently displayed in the works of creation his Almighty power, wisdom, and goodness, and othw of his divine attributes, so as to render them without excuse in their ungodli- ness and unrighteousness. That which may be known of God. — That is to say, not absolutely, fw that surpasses the capacity of the creature. — God is incomprehensible even by angels, and it is by himself alone that he can be fully and perfectly comprehended ; the finite never can comprehend the infinite. Job xi., 7. Nor do the words before us mean all that can be known of him by a supernatural revelation, as the mystery of redemption, that of the Trinity, and various other doctrines, for It is only the Spirit of God who has manifested these things by his word. It is on this account that David says, " He showed his word unto Jacob, his statutes and his judgments unto Israel. He hath not dealt so with any nation ; and as for his judgments, they have not known them." Ps cxlvii., 19. But ROMANS I., 20. 55 what may be kno\ra, of God by the works oi creation he has not con cealed from men. Is manifest in tJnm, or rather to them. — This respects the clearness of the evidence of the object in itself, for it is not an obscure or ambi- guous revelation ; it is a manifestation which renders the thing certain- It is made to them ; for the Apostle is referring here only to the external object, as appears by the following; verse, and not to the actual knowledge which men had of it, of which he does not speak till the 21st verse. For God hath showed it unto them. — He has presented it before their eyes. They all ^ee it, though they do not draw the proper conclusion from it. In like manner he has shown himself to the world in liis Son Jesus Christ. " He that hath seen me hath seen the Father." Yet many saw him who did not recognize the Father in him. These ivurds, " hath showed it unto them," teach us, that in the works of creation, God has manifested himself to men to be glorified by tbem ; and that in preserving the world after sin had entered, he has set before their eyes those great and'-i i/sderful works in which he is represented ; and they farther show that there is no one who can manifest God to man except himself, and consequently, that all we know of him must be founded on bis own revels tioHj -ijuinot. on the authority of any creature. V. 20. — For the iiivwible things! of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being undersJuoJ by the things that are made, even his eternal power and God- head ; so t£at they »t» ivif hout excuse. Invisible things of hm. — God is invisible in himself, for he is a Spirit, elevated beyond the reach of all our senses. Being a Spirit, he is exempted from all composition of parts, so that when the Apostle here ascribes to him " invisible things " in the plural, it must not be imagined that there is not in God a perfect unity. It is only intended to mark the different attributes of Deity, which, although one in principle, are yet distinguished in their objects, so that we conceive of them as if they were many. From the creation of tfte world are clearly seen. — By the works of creation, and from those of a general providence, God can be fully Kicognized as the Creator of heaven and earth, and thence his natural attributes may be inferred. For that which is invisible in itself has, as it were, taken a form or body to render itself visible, and visible in a manner so clear that it is easy to discover it. This visibility of the invisible perfections of God, which began at the creation, has continued ever since, and proves that the Apostle here includes with the works of creation, those of providence, in the government of the universe. Both in the one and the other, the divine perfections very admirably appear. Being understand by the things that are made. — The works of crea- tion and providence, are so many signs or marks, which elevate us to the contemplation of the perfections of Him who made them, and that so directly, thai jjj .i manner these works, and these perfections of their author, are as only one and the same thing. Here the Apostle tacitly 56 ROMANS I., 20. refutes the opinion of some of the philosophers respecting the eternitj of the world; he establishes the fact of its creation, and at the same time teaches, contrary to the atheists, that, from the sole contemplation of the world, there are sufficient proofs of the existence of God. Fi- nally, by referring to the works of creation, he indicates the idea that ought to be formed of God, contrary to the false and chimerical notions of the wisest heathens respscting him. Even his eternal power and Godhead. — The Apostle here only spe- cifies God's eternal power and Godhead, marking his eternal power as the first object which discovers itself in the works of creation, and in the government of the world ; and afterwards denoting, by his God- head, the other attributes essential to him as Creator. His power is seen to be eternal, because it is such as could neither begin to exist, nor to be communicated. Its present exertion proves its eternal exist- ence. Such power, it is evident, could have neither a beginning nor an end. In the contempli^lion of the heavens and the earth, every one must be convinced that liie power which called them into existence is eternal. Godhead ; — this does not refer to ;ill the divine attributes, for they are not all manifested in the works of creation. It refers to those which manifest God's deity. The heavans and the earth prove the deity of their author. In the revelation of the word, the grand truth is the deity of Christ ; in the light of nature the grand triith is the deity of the Creator. By his power may be understood all the attributes called relative, such as those of Creator, Preserver, Judge, Lawgiver, and others that relate to creatures ; and by his Godhead, those that are absolute, such as his majesty, his infinity, his immortality. So that they are without excuse. — The words in the original may either refer to the end intended, or to the actual result — either to those circumstances being designed to leave men without excuse, or to the fact that they are without excuse. The latter is the interpretation adopted by our translators, and appears to be the true meaning. It cannot be said that God manifested himself in his works, in order to leave men without excuse. This was the result, not the grand end. The revelation of God by the light of nature the heathens neglected or misunderstood, and therefore are justly liable to condemnation. Will not then the world, now under the light of the superns mral revelation of grace, be much more inexcusable ? If the perverters of the doctrine taught by the works of creation were without excuse, will God sustain the excuses now made for the corrupters of the doctrine of the Bible ?' When the heathens had nothing else than the manifestation of the di- vine perfections in the works of creation and providence, there was enough to render them inexcusable, since it was their duty to make a good use of them, and the only cause of their not doing so was theii perversity. From this, however, it must not be inferred that since the entrance of sin the subsistence of the world, and the providence which governs it, sufficiently furnish man, who is a sinner, with the knowledge of God, and the means of glorifying him in orde; to salvation. The Apostle here speaks only of tlift revelation of the natural attributes of Uod, which make him indeed the sovereign good to man in innocence. ROMANS I., 21. 57 lout the sovereign evil to man when guilty. The purpose ol God to show mercy is not revealed but by the Spirit of God, who alone search- eth the deep things of God. 1 Cor. ii., 10. In order to this revelation, it was necessary that the Holy Spirit should have animated the Pro- phets and Apostles. It is, therefore, to be particularly observed, that while, in the next chapter, where the Apostle proceeds to prove that the Jews are also without excu9e, he urges that the forbearance and long suffering, and goodness of God, in tiie revelation of grace, led them to repentance, he says nothing similar respe(;ting the heathens. He does not assert that God, in his revelation to them, called them to repent- ance, or that he held out to them the hope of salvation, but affirms that that revelation renders them inexcusable. This clearly shows, that in the whole of the dispensation to tlie heathen, there was no revelation of mercy, and no accompanying Spirit of grace, as there had been to the Jews. The manifestations made by God of Kimself in the works of creation, together with what is declared concerning the conduct of his providence, Acts xiv., 17; and what is again said in chap. 2d of this Epistle, V. 14, 15, resrjecting the law written in the heart, comprise the whole of the revelation made to the heathen, after they had lost sight of the original promise to Adam of a deliverer, and the preaching of the rigliteoussness of God by Noah ; but in these ways God had never left himself without a witness. The works of creation and pro- vidence spoke to them from without, and the law written in their heart from within. In conjunction they declared the being and sovereign authority of God, and man's accountableness to his Creator. This placed all men under a positive obligation of obedience to God. But his law thus made known, admits not of forgiveness when transgressed, and could not be the cause of justification, but of condemnation. The whole, therefore, of that revelation of God's power and Godhead, of which the Apostle speaks in this discourse, he regards as the founda- tion of the just condemnation of men, in order afterwards to infer from it the necessity of the revelation of grace. It must not be supposeil, then, that he regards it as containing in itself a revelation of grace in any manner whatever, for this is an idea opposed to the whole train of his reflections. But how, then, it may be said, are men rendered inex- cusable ? They are inexcusable, because their natural corruption is thus discovered, for they are convicted of being sinners, and conse- quently alienated from communion with God, and subjected to con demnation, which is thus shown to be just. V. 21. — Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful ; but became vain in theii imaginations, and their foolish heart was ilarkened. Knew God. — Besides the manifestation of God in the works of cre- ation, the heathens had still some internal lights, some principles and natural notions, which are spoken of, chap, ii., 12, 15, from which they had, in a measure, the knowledge of the existence and authority of God. There may be here, besides, a reference to the knowledge of God which he communicated in the first promise after the Fall, and S8 ROMANS I., 21. again after the Flood, but which, not liking to retain God in thei; knowledge, and being " haters of God," mankind bad lost. Elsewhere, Paul says, that the Gentiles were without God in the world, Epb. ij., 12; yet here he says they knew God. On this it maybe observed, that they had very confused ideas of the Godhead, but that they fur- ther corrupted them by an almost infinite number of errors. Respect- ing their general notions of deity, these rf y^rcsented the true God ; but respecting their erroneous noh"ns% these only reprcsente*.! ilie phantoms of their imagination. In ths way they ia»ew God, yet nevertheless: they were without God. They knew his existence and some of his perfections, but they had so entirely bewildered their minds, and added so many errors to the truth, that they were in reality living without God. They might be »aid to know God when they confessed him as the Creator of the v/o:'xy., and bad some conceptioa of his unity, wis- dom, and power. Tht Apostle may particularly refer to tl^ wise men among the heathens, but the same truth apphes to all. They all knew more than they practised, and the most ignoiant might have discovered God in his works, had not enmity against him reigned in their hearts. But when Paul says, Eph. ii., 12, that they were without God, he has respect to their worship and their practice. For all their superstitions were exclusively those of impiety, which could only iierve to alienate them from the love and the communion of the true God. They were, therefore, in reality, without God in the world, inasmuch as they set up devils, whom, under the name of gt)ds, they served with the most aoominable rites. They glorified Mm not as Cod.— Paul here marks what ought to be the true and just knowledge of God, namely, that knowledge which leads men to serve and worship him in a manner agreeable to his sovereiga will, and worthy of his holy character. To glorify God signifies to ac^ knowledge and worship him with asci'iptions of praise, because of hi* glorious attributes. Now the heathens, though in their speculations 'jiey might speak of God in a certain way consistent with some of his attributes, as his unity, spirituality, power, wisdom, and goodness, yet never reduced this to practice. The objectSi of their professed worship were either the works of God, or idols. To these they gave the glcay that belonged to God ; — to these they felt and expressed gratitude for the blessings which God bestowed on them. God left them not with- out a witness of his existence and goodness, in that he gave them raia from heaven, and fiu/ti* i seasons ; but the glory for these thinga> and for all other blessings, they rendered to the objects of their false wor- ship. It appears also that the Apostle had in view the fact that the philosophers in their schools entertained some proper ideas of God, but in their worship conformed to the popular errors. Men often justify their neglect of God by alleging that he ;ias no need of their service, and that it cannot be profitable to him ; but we here see that he is to be glorified for his perfections, and thanked for his blessings. Neither were thankful. — We should constantly remember that God is the source of all that we are, and of all that we possess. From this it follows that he ought to be our last end. Consequently one of the KOMAJVs I., 22. B9 principal parts of our worship is to acknowledge our dependence, and to magnify him in all things by consecrating ourselves to his service. The opposite of this is what is meant by the expression, " neither were thankful," and this is what the heathens were not, for they as- cibed one part of what they possessed to the stars, another part tc fortune, and another to their own wisdom- But became vain in their imaginations, or rather in their reasonings, that is, speculations.— Paul calls all their philosophy reasonings, be- cause they related to words and notions, divested of use or efficacy. Some apply this expression, " became vain in their reasonings," to the attempts of the heathen philosophers to explore, in a |diysieal sense, the things which the poets ascribed to the gods. Dr. Macknight sup- poses that the object of the wise men was to show that the religion of the vulgar, though untrue, was the fittest for them. Many explanations, equally fanciful, have been given of these words. The language itself, in connection with the writings of the wise men to whom the Apostle refers, leaves no good reason to doubt that he speaks of those specula- tions of the Grecian philosophers, in which they have manifested the most profound subtilty, and the most extravagant folly. Their reason- ings diverged very far from that truth which they might have discovered by tlie contemplation of the works of creation, and besides, produced nothing for the glory of God, in which they ought to have issued. In fact, aj] rfifiir reasonings were to no purpose, so far as regarded their sanctification, or the peace of their conscience. The whole of what the Apostle here says, aptly describes, and will equally apply to vain specu- lations of modern times. It suits not only modem schools of philosophy, but also some of theology ; not oidy the vain interpretations of Neolo- gians, but of all wh« explain away the distinguishing doctrines of revela- tion. Withoxit being carried away with the learning and research of such persons, every one who loves the Scriptures and the souls of men, should lift up his voice against such degradations of the oracles of God, Their foolish heart mas darkened, — " Imprudent heart," as Dr. Macknight translates this, comes not up to the amount of the phrase. It designates ifae heart, or understanding, as void of spiritual discernment and wisdom— unkiielligent in divine things, though subtle and perspica- cious as to ike things of the world. Their speculations, instead of leading them to the truth, or neaier to God, were the means of darkening their minds, and blmding them still more than they were naturally. The Apostle here marks two evils, the one that they were destitute of the knowledge of the truth, and the other, that they were filled with error, for here their darkness does not simply signify ignorance, but a know- !«dge false aad depraved. These two things are joined together. T. S2. — Professing tbemsetvea to be wise, they became fools. It appears that, by the term wise, the Apostle intended to point out the philosophers, that is to say, in general, those who were most es- teemed for their knowledge, like those among the Greeks who were celebrated by the titles either of wise men or phflosophers. To the two ^0 ROMANS I., 23. evils remarked in the foregoing verse, of their foolishness and their darkness, Paul here adds a third— that with all this they believed themselves to be wise. This is the greatest unhappiness of man, not only not to feel his malady, but to extract matter of pride from whit ought to be his shame. What they esteemed their wisdom, was truly their folly. All their knowledge, for which they valued themselves, was of no avail in promoting virtue or happiness. Their superstitions were in themselves absurdj and instead of worshipping God, they m- tually insulted him in their professed religious observances. How won- derfully was all this exhibited in the sages of Greece and Rome, who rushed headlong into the boundless extravagances of scepticism, doubt- ing or denying what was evident to common sense ! How strikingly is this also veriiied in many modem philosophers ! So far were the heathen philosophers from wisdom, that they made no approach towards the discovery of the true character either of the justice or mercy of God, while with respect to the harmony of these attri- butes, in relation to man, they had not the remotest conception. The idea of a plan to save sinners, which, instead of violating the law of God, and lowering his character as the moral governor of the world, magni- fies the law, and makes it honorable, giving full satisfaction to liis" justice, and commensurate with his holiness, is as far beyond ihe con- ception of man, as to create the world was beyond his power. It is an idea that could not have suggested itself to any finite intellect. Want of knowledge of the justice of God gave occasion to the mani- festation of human ignorance. All the ancient philosophers con.j;dered that consummate virtue and happiness were attainable by man's (>wn efforts, and some of them carried this to such an extravagant pitch, that they taught that the wise man's virtue and happiness were independent of God. Such was the insanity of their wisdom, that they boasted that their wise man had in some respects the advantage of Jupiter himself, because his virtue was not only independent, or his own property, but was voluntary, whereas that of the divinity was necessary. Their wise man could maintain his happiness, not only independent of man, and in the midst of external evils, but also in defiance of God himself. No power, either human or divine, could deprive the sage of his virtue or happiness. How well does all this prove and illustrate the declara- tion of the Apostle, that professing themselves to be wise, they became fools ! V. 23.— And changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and four-footed beasts, and creeping things. Here Paul produces a proof of the excess of the folly of those who pro- fessed themselves to be wise. Their ideas of God were embodied in images of men, and even of birds and beasts, and the meanest reptiles Changed the glory of the incorruptible God, — that is, the ideas of his spirituality, his immateriality, his infinity, his eternity, and his majesty, which are his glory, and distinguish him from all creatures. All these are included in the term incorruptible ; and as the Apostle supposes them to be needful to the right conception of God, he teaches that these J.CMANS I., 24. 61 are all debased and destroyed in the mind of man when the Creator is represented under human or other bodily resemblances. For these lead to conceptions of God as material, circumscribed, and corruptible, ana cause men to attribute to him the nc^anness of the creature, thus eclips- ing his glory, and cianging it into ignommy. The glory of Sod, then refers to his attributes, which distinguish him from the idols which the heathens worshipped. In verse 25, it is called the truth of God, be cause it essentially oelongs to the Divine character. Both expressions embrace the same attributes, but under different aspects. In the one expression these attributes are considered as constituting the divine glory ; in the other, as essential to his being, and distinguishing him from the false gods of the heathen. It is impossible to conceive of anything more deplorably absurd, farther removed from every semblance of wisdom, or more degrading in itself and dishonoring to God, than the idolatrous worship of the hea- thens ; yet among them it was universal. The debasing images to which the Apostle here refers, were worshipped and feared by the whole body of the people, and not even one among all their philoso- phers, orators, magistrates, sages, statesmen, or poets, had discernment sufficient to detect the enormity of this wickedness, or honesty enough to reclaim against it. On the contrary, every one of them conformed to what the Apostle Peter calls " abominable idolatries." It is to no purpose to say that the Heathens did not believe that their images which they set up, were gods, but only resemblances, for the Apostle condemns them under the character of resemblances or like- nesses. Nor is it to any purpose to a£G.rm that those resemblances were only aids to assist the weakness of the human mind, for he also shows that those pretended aids were hurtful and not beneficial, because they corrupted the holy and reverential notions we ought to entertain of the Deity. Neither does it avail to say that they did not serve their images as G od, but that the adoration they rendered was to God ; since the medium itself derogates from his glory. Nor will it do to profess that by those images they did not intend to express the essence, but only the perfections or attributes of God, and that they were rather emblems than images. The Heathens said all this, and the Roman Catholics now say the same : but they are not on this account the less condemned by the Apostle. v. 24. — Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleannesa through the lusts of their o?rn hearts, to dishonor their own bodies between themselves. Wherefore God also gave them up. — The impurities into whica the Gentiles were plunged, sprang from their own corrupt hearts. We must therefore distinguish between their abandonment by God, and the awful effects of that abandonment. The abandonment proceeded from divine justice, but the effect from the corruption of man, in which God liad no part. The abandonment is a negative act of God, or rather a negation of acting, of which God is absolutely master, since, being unclT no obUgation to confer grace on any man, he is free to withhold it as he sees good ; so that in this withholding there is no injustice. ©2 JiOMANS I., 25. But besides this, it is a negation of acting which men have deserved by their previous sins, and consequently firoceeds from his justice, !«id is in this view to be considered as a punishment. Sin is indeed the consequence of this abandonment, but the only cauj'e of it is human perversity. God's giving them up, then, does not -signify any positive act, but denotes his not holding them in check by ihose restramts by means of which he usually maintains a certain degree of order and ap- pearance of moral rectitude among sinners. <^c erred in rendering it backbiters. As Dr. Macknight has no ;.uthority to limit the word to what is spoken face to face, it is equally unwarrantable to confine it to what is spoken in the absence of those who are spoken against. The word translated " whisperers," refers, according to Mr. Tholuck, to a secret, and the word translated " backbiters," to an open slander. Secresy is undoubt- edly the characteristic of the first word, but, the last is not distinguished from it by contrast, as implying publicity ; on the contrary, the former class is included in the latter, though here specifically marked. Besides, though the communication of both the classes referred to may usually be slander, yet it appears that the signification is more extensive Whisperers, as speakers of evil^ may be guilty when they speak nothing but truth. Mr, Stuart has here followed Mr. Tholuck. The former he makes a slander in secret, the latter a slander in public. It is not necessary that all such persons should be slanderers, and the evil speaking of the latter may be in private as well as in public. Haters of God. — There is no occasion, with Mr. Tholuck, to seek a reference here to " those Heathens mentioned by Cyprian, who, whenever a calamity befel them, used to cast the blame of it upon God, and denied a providence," Nor is it nccsssary to suppose, with him, that the propriety of the charge is to be found in the fact, that supersti- tion begets a haired of the gods. The charge is applicable to the whole Heathen world, who hated God, and therefore did not like to keep him in remembrance. This was manifest throughout the world in the early introduction of polytheism and idolatry. No other cause can be assigned for the nations losing the knowledge of *iie true God. They did not like to retain lilrn in their fcaovflsdge. Had men loved God, he would have been known to them in all ages and all countries. Did not mankind receive a sufficient lesson from the Flood ? Yet such was their natural enmity to God, that \kej. were not restrained even by that awful manifestation- of Divine displeasure at foijgetfulness of the Almighty. Although no one will acknowledge, this charge to be appli- cable to himself, yet it is one which the Spirit of God, looking deeply into human nature, and penetrating the various, disguises it assumes, brings home to all men in their natural state. ■' The carnal mind is enmity against God." They hate his holiness, his justice, his sove reignty, and even his mercy, in the way in which it is vouchsafed. The charge here advanced by the Apostle against the Heathens was remarkably Terified, when Christianity on its fii-st appearance among ihem, was so violently opposed by the philosophers and the whole body of the people, rich and poor, learned and unlearned. This melancholv fact is written in the history of the persecutions of the early Christians in characters of blood.* Despiteful. — This term does not express the * Hatred to God, and not dislike to mysterieg, is remarkably verified in infideb Hatred ta God is the origin of Arianigm and Socinianigm. It ig hatred to the sove reignty of God that influences the Arminian. Hatred to God manifests itself by aa almost universal neglect of his laws ROMANS I., 31. 67 meaning of the original. Archbishop Newcome translates it injurious ; but though this is one of the ideas contained in the word, it is essen- tially deficient. It signifies injury accompanied with contumely ; inso- lence, implying insult. It always irpplies contempt, and usually reproach. Often, treatmeni violent and insulting. Mr. Stuart trans- lates it " r&proachful^^ z.e., he says, " lacerating others by slanderous, abusive, passionate declarations." But '.his does not come up to the meaning of the original. All this might be done without affecting to despise its object, or in any point of view to assume superiority over him — an idea always implied in the original Word. Besides, the reproachful words may not be slanderous. Mr. Tholuek makes it pride towards a fellow creature ; but this designation is not sufficiently peculiar. A proud man ma,y not insult others. This vice aims at attaching, disgrace to its object ; even in the injuries it commits on the body, it designs chiefly to wound the mind. It well applies to hootings, hissings, and peltings of a mob, in which, eren when the most dignified persons are the objects of attack, there is seme mixture of contempt. Proi«^.-^This word translates the original correctly, as it refers to the feeling generally, and not to any particular mode of it, which is implied in arrogance^ insolence', haughtiness, to persons puffed up witli a high opinion of themselves, and regarding- others with contempt, as if they were ujiworthy of any intercourse with them. BcMsters. — The term in the original designates ostentatious persons in general ; but as these usually aflect more than belongs to them, it generally applies to persons who extend their pretensions to consideration beyond their just claims. Inventors of evil things. — Dr. Macknight translates this inven- tors of unlawful pleasures, and no doubt such inventions are referred to, but there is no reason to restrict it to the invention of pleasures when there are many other evil inventions. In such a case it is proper to give the expression the utmost latitude it will admits as including all evils. Disobedient to parents.^-Ohedience to parents is here considered as a duty taught by the light of nature, the breach of which condemns the Heathens,, who had not the Fifth Commandment written in words It is a part of. the law originally inscribed on the l^eartj the traces of which are still to be found in the natural love of children to their parents. When the Hieathens, then, disregarded this duty, they departed from the original constitution of their nature, and disregarded fc voice of God in their hearts. V. 31. — Wittitul understanding, covenant breakeis,' without natural affection,- impla- cable, unmercifuL Withautunderstanding: — This well expresses^the original, for although the persons so described wf r& not destitute of understanding as to the tilings of this world, but as to these might fee the most inteUigent and enli^tened, yet in a moral sense, or as respects the things of God, they were unintelligent and stupid. This agrees with the usual signification of the word, and it perfectly coincides with universal experience. All men. are by nature undiscerning as to the things of God, and to this there never was an exception. Dr. Sfacknight entirely misses the 68 ROMANS I., 32. nieanii-e, when he explains it as signifying persons who are "impru dent in" the management of affairs." The translation of Mr. Stuart, " inconsiderate," is equally erroneous. Covenant breakers. — This is a correct translation, if cover.tDi is understood to apply to every agree- ment or bargain referring i'l tile common business of life, as well as solemn and important contracis between nation:? md indiriduals. With- out natural affection. — Therr- is no occasion to seek for some particular reference in this, which has I'vidently its verification ia many different things. Dr. Macknight supposes that the Apostle has the Stoics in his eye. Beza, and after him Mr. Stuart, suppose that it refers to the exposure of children. Mr. Tholuck, with more propriety, extends the term to fihal and parental love. But still the reference is broader ; still there are more varieties comprehended in the term. Why limit to one thing what applies to many ? Even though one class should be peculiarly prominent in the reference, to confine it to this robs it of its force. Implacable. — The word in the original signifies as well persons who will not enter into league, as persons, who having entered into league, per- fidiously break it. In the former sense it signifies implacable, and designates those who are peculiarly savage. In the latter sense it refers to those who violate the most sacred engagements, entered into with all the solcmriities of oaths and religious rites. Our translation afiixes to it the fir.n sense. But in this sense it applies to none but the rudest and most uncivilized nations, and was not generally exemplified in the Roman empire. It appears that it should rather be understood in the latter sense, as designating the common practice of nations in every age, who, without hesitation, violate treaties and break oaths sanctioned by every solemn obligation. The word above rendered covenant-breakers, designates the violators of any engagement. The word employed here signifies the breaker of solemn engagements, rati- fied with all the solemnities of oaths and religious ceremonies. Unmerciful. — There is no reason, like Dr. Macknight, to confine this to those who are unmerciful to the poor. Such, no doubt, are in- cluded ; but it extends to all who are without compassion. Persons need our compassion who are not in want ; they may be suffering in many ways. It applies to those who do not feel for the distresses of others, whatever may be the cause of their distresses ; and to those who inflict these distresses it peculiarly applies. v. 32.— Who, knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit sacL thins are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure i>i tnem that do them. Knowing the judgment of God. — Sentf>«<-e or ordinance of God. This the Heathens know, from the work of tlie law written in their hearts. Although they had almost entirely stifled in themselves the dictates of conscience, it did not cease, in some measure, to remon- strate against the unworthiness of their conduct, and to threaten the wrath of God, which their sins deserved. They recognized it by some remains they had of right notions of the Godhead ; and by which they still understood that God was Judge of the world ; and this was con- ROMANS I., 32. 69 firmed to them by examp5es of Divine vengeance virhich sometimes passed before their eyes. They knew it even by the false ideas of the superstition in which they were plunged, which required them to seek for expiations. That they knew it in a measure is evident by their laws, which awarded punishments to some of those vices of which they were guilty. Worthy of death. — It is difficult to determine with certainty whether death is here to be understood literally or figuratively. Mr. Stuart considers it as decided that it cannot mean literal death, because it cannot be supposed that the Heathens judged everything condemned by the Apostle to deserve capital punishment. He understands it in its figurative sense, as referring to future punishment. But an equal diffi- culty meets him here. Did the Heathens know that God had deter- mined to punish the things thus specified with death, according to its figurative import — everlasting punishment 1 He does not take the word, then, in this sense to its full amount, but as meaning punish- ment, misery, suffering. But this is a sense which the word never bears. If it refer to future punishment, it must apply to that punish- ment in its full sense. That the Heathens judged many of the sins here enumerated worthy of death, is clear from their ordaining death as their punishment. And the Apostle does not assert that they judged them all worthy of death, but that they judged the doers of such things worthy of death. It seems quite enough, then, that those things, for the commission of which they ordained death, were such as he mentions. In this sense Archbishop Newcome understands the word, " For they themselves," he says, " punished some of their vices with death." Not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them,. — This is added to mark the depth of their corruption. For when men are not entirely abandoned to sin, although they allow of it in their own circumstances and practice, yet they condemn it in their general notions, and in the practice of others, because then it is not connected with their own interest and self-love. But when human corruption has arrived at its height, men not only commit sins, but approve of them in those who commit them. While this was strictly applicable to the whole body of the people, it was chargeable in the highest degree on the leaders and philosophers, who, having more light than the others, treated in their schools some of those things as crimes of which they were not only guilty themselves, but the commission of which they encouraged b^' their connivance, especially in the abominable rites practised in the worship of their gods. By these conclusive proofs, Paul substantiates his charge, in verse 18, against the whole Gentile world, first of ungodliness, and then of unrighteousness as its consequence, against which the wrath of God is revealed. It should also be observed, that as, in another place, Titus ii., ] 2, he divides Christian holiness into three parts, namely, sobriety, righteousness, and godliness, in ihe same way, in this chapter, ne classes Pagan depravity under three heads. The first is their ungod- liness, namely, that they have not glorified God — that they have 70 ROMANS TI. changed his glory into images made like to corruptible creatures— 4hat they have changed his truth into a lie, which is opposed to godliness. The second is intemperance. God has delivered them up to unclean ness and vile affections, which are opposed to sobriety. The third is unrighteousness, and all the other vices noted in the last verses, which are opposed to righteousness. It is impossible to add anything to the view here given of the reigr, of corruption among the Heathens, even the most celebrated and civil- ized, which is fully attested by their own historians. Nothing can be more horrible than this representation of their state ; and as the picture is drawn by the Spirit of God, who is acquainted not only with the outward actions, but with the secret motives of men, no Christian can suppose that it is exaggerated. The Aposde, then, had good reason to conclude in the sequel, that justification by wprks is impossible, and that in no other way can it be obtained but by grace. From the whole, we see how terrible to his posterity have been the coasequences of the sin of the first man ; and, on the other hand, how glorious in the plan of redemption is the grace of God by his Son. CHAPTER n. ROMANS n,, 1-29. In the preceding chapter, the Apostle had described the state of the idolatrous Pagans, whom he had proved to be under the just condem- nation of God. He now passes to that of the Jews vrho, while they rejected the Righteousness of God, to which the law and the Pro- phets bore witness, looked for salvation from their relation to Abraiham, from their exclusive privileges as a nation, and from their observance of the law. In this and me two following chapters, Paul combats these deeply-rooted prejudices, and is thus furnished with an oppor- tunity of clearly unfolding the doctrine of the gospel, and of proving that it alone is the power of God unto salvation. In the first part of this chapter, to the ^4th verse, he shows that the just judgment of God must be the same against the Jews as against the Gentiles, since the Jews are equally sinners. In the second part, from the beginning of the 25th verse to the end, he proves, that tlie external advantages which the Jews had enjoyed, were insufficient to ward off this judgmeol. From his language at the commencement of this chapter, in respect to that judgment which the Jews were accustomed to pass on other na- tions, and to which he reverts in the 17th verse, it is evident that through the whole of it he is addressing the Jews, and not referring, as many suppose, to the Heathen philosophers or magistrates. It was not the Apostle's object to convince them in particular that they were sin ROMANS II., 1. - 71 ners. Besides, neither the philosophers nor magistrates, nor any of the Heathens, occupied themselves in judging others respecting their religious worship and ceremonies. Such observances, as well as theii moral effects on those by whom they were practised, appeared to the sages of Greece and Rome a matter of perfect indifference. The Jews, on the contrary, had learned from their law, to judge, to condemn, and to abhor all other religions ; to keep themselves at the greatest distance from those who profess them ; and to reigard all idolaters as under the wrath of God. The man, then, viho judges others, to whom, by a fig- ure of speech, Paul addresses his discourse in the 1st verse, is the same to whom he continues to speak in the rest of the chapter, and whom he names in the 17th verse, " Behold, thou art called a Jew." v. 1. — Therefore thou art inexcusable, man, whoaoever thou art that judgest ; for wherein thou judgest another thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things. Theref<)re. — This particle introduces a conclusion, not from anything in the preceding chapter, but to establish a truth from what follows. The Apostle had proved the guilt of the Gentiles, who, since they had a revelation vouchsafed to them in the works of God, though they did not possess his word, were inexcusable. The Jews, who had his word, yet practised the same things for which the former were condemned, must, therefore, also be inexcusable. In the sequel, he specifies and unfolds the charge thus generally preferred. O man. — This is a manner of address, betokening his earnestness, which Paul frequently employs, as in the ninth chapter of this Epistle. Whosoever thou art that judgest. — The Apostle here refers to the judgment which the Jews passed on the Gentiles. It is generally ex- plained as if he was fiiiding fault with those whom he addressed, and declaring they were inexcusable, because they judged others. But this is erroneous. What he censures, is not their judging, but their doing the same things wiih those whom they condemned. The character of the Jews, which distinguished them from the Gentiles, was that they judged others. God had conferred on them this distinction, when he manifested his covenant to them, to the exclusion of all the other nations of the world. This character of judging, then, can belong only to the Jews, who, according to a principle of their religion, condemned the other nations of the earth, and regarded them ■ as strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world. In this manner the Jews were seated as on a tribunal, from which they pronounced judgment on all other men. Paul, then, had good reason for apostrophizing the Jew as thou that judgest. But, as there were also distinctions among the Jews themselves, and as the Priests, the Scribes, and chiefly the Pharisees, were regarded as more holy than others, he says, whosoever thou art, — ^thus not excepting even one of them. Thou art inexcusable. — Paul intended to bring in all men guilty be- fore God, as appears by what he says in the 19th verse of the third chapter " that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may be- 72 ROMANS II., 1. come guilty before God." He had already proved the inexcusableness of the Gentiles, and he here proceeds to do the same respecting tlie Jews, whom he addresses directly, and not in a manner only implymg that he refers to them, as is supposed by Professors Tholuck and btuart. Mr. Stuart, especially, endeavors to show, that in the first part ol this chapter, Paul does not proceed at once to address the Jews, but lirst, _ he says, " prepares the way, by illustrating and enforcing the general proposition, that all who have a knowledge of what is right, and approve of it, but yet sin against it, are guilty." This view of the passage is equally erroneous with that of those who suppose that the Apostle is addressing the philosophers and magistrates. Both tliese interpretations lead away from the true meaning of the several parts of the chapter, through the whole of which the address to the Jews is direct and ex- clusive. The Apostle's object was to conduct men to the grace of the gospel, and so to be justified in the way of pardon and acquittance. Now, in order to this, their conviction of sin, and of their ruined condition, was absolutely necessary, since they never would have recourse to mercy, if they did not fee) compelled to confess themselves condemned. It is with this view that he here proceeds to strip the Jews, as he had done the Gentiles, of all excuse. For wherein thoujudgest another, thou condemnest thyself. — Where- in, that is, in the thing in which thou condemnest another, thou con demnest thyself. Dr. Macknight translates it tuMsf. But, though the words in the original thus translated often in certain situations bear this signification, here this cannot be the case. When there is nothing in the context to fix the reference, the most general substantive must be chosen. There is nothing in the context to suggest the idea of time, and thing is a more general idea. It is indeed true, that the self-con- demnation of the Jew is contemporaneous with his condemnation of the Gentile. But it is so, because this is implied in the very thing that is alleged, and the thing alleged is more important than the time in which it occurs. Nothing, then, is gained by thus de- viating from the common version. The translation, because that, which is suggested by Professors Tholuck and Stuart as a possible meaning, is also to be rejected. To suggest a great variety of possible meanings has the worst tendency ; instead of serving the truth, it essentially in- jures it. Besides, as has been remarked, the cause of the condem- nation of the Jew was not }a.s judging the Gentiles. The cause of his condemnation was his doing the things which he condemned. The reasoning of the Apostle is clear and convincing. It consists of three particulars, on which the Jew had nothing to object, namely, — 1 St, Thou judgest another ; 2d, Thou doest the same things ; 3d, Thou condemnest thyself, consequently thou art without excuse. Thou judgest another. — That is to say, thou boldest the Gentiles to be criminal and guilty before God, thou regardest them as people whom God has abandoned to themselves, and who therefore, being plunged in vice and sin of all kinds, are the objects of his just vengeance. This is what the Jew could not deny. Thou doest the same things. — This the Apostle was to prove in the sequel. Thou condemnest thyself. — The IIOMANS II., 2. 73 consequence is unavoidable ; for the same evidence that convicts the C-p 'lilies in the judgment of the Jew must, if found in him, also bring iiim in guilty. ,Y- 2.— But we are sure that the judgment of God is according to truth against them which commit such things. Paul proceeds here to preclude a thought that might present itself, and to stifle it, as it were, before its birth. It might be suggested that the judgment of God, that is, the sentence of condemnation vvith re- spect to transgressors, is not uniform ; that he condemns some and acquits others as it pleases him, and therefore, although the Jew does the same things as the Gentile, it does not follow that he will be held equally culpable, God having extended indulgence to the one which he has not vouchsafed to the other. The Jew, then, does not hold himself guilty when he condemns the Gentile, although he does the same things. This is the odious and perverse imagination which the Apostle here repels. We are sure, or more hterally, we know. Who knows ? " Koppe," says Mr. Tholuck, " deems that there is here an allusion to the Jews, who boasted that they alone possessed the true knowledge." But this is palpably erroneous, because the Jews in general did not be- lieve the thing asserted to be known. The Apostle's object is to correct their error. Mr. Tholuck himself is still further astray when he understands it of " those apprehensions of a Divine judgment, which are spread among all mankind, to which the Apostle had alluded, v., 32." It was the Apostle iiimself, and those taught by the same Spirit, who knew with unfaltering assurance the thing referred to. The judgment of God, that is, sentence of condemnation — ^not, as Dr. Macknight says, the curse of the law of Moses. The law of Moses and its curse are different from the sentence which God pronounces according to them. According to truth, against them which commit such things. Not truly, this would qualify the assertion that the judgment of God is against such persons, which, as the general truth, neither the Jew nor the Gentile is supposed to question. In this sense, truly would express the same as really. Nor does it signify according to truth, ss synonjrmous with justice, as Mr. Tholuck supposes. About the justice of the thing there is no question. If the Gentile is justly condemned for every breach of the law written on the heart, the justice of the condemnation cf the transgressing Jew could not be a question. Nor, with Mr. Stuart, is it to be understood as meaning agreeably to the real state of things ; that is, according to the real character of the person judged. This is doubtless a truth, but not the truth asserted in ;his passage. This meaning applies to the judgment that examines and distinguishes be- tween the righteous and the wicked. But the judgment here spoken of, is the sentence of condemnation with respect to transgressors. Nor, with Dr. Macknight, are we to understand this phrase, as signify- ing " according to the true meaning of God's covenant with the Fathers of the Jewish nation." This is not expressed in the text, nor is it sug gested by the context. The real import of this phrase will be ascertained in considering the 74 ROMANS II., 3. chief error of the Jews about this matter. While they admitted that God's law in general condemns ail its transgressors, yet they hoii.' that, as the children of Abraham, God would in their case relax the rigor of his requirements. What the Apostle asserts, then, is designed to explode this error. If God should sentence Gentiles to condemnaticHi for transgression of the work of the law written in the heart, and pass a different sentence on Jews transgfessing the law of Moses, his judg- ment or sentence would not be according to truth. If some transgres- sors escaped, while others were punished, the truth of the threat or penalty was destroyed. The tnili of God in his threatening, or in the penalty of the breach of his law, is not affected by the dehverance of those saved by the gospel. The penalty and the precept are fulfilled in Jesus Christ the Surety. While God pardons, he by no means clears the guilty. His people are absolved because tbey are righteous ; they have fulfilled the law, and suffered its penalty, in the death and obedience of Jesus Christ, with whom they are one. The object of the Apostle, then, was to undeceive the Jews in their vain hope of es- cape, while they knew themselves to be '.raDsgressors. And it equally applies to nominal Christians. It is the most prevalent ground of hope among false professors of Christianity, that ;sus Christ says expressly, that they shall coaiR forth unto the 'resurrection of damnation. This refutes the opinion of Socinian heretics and others, who insist that the punishment of the wicked will consist in an entire annihilation both of body and soul. The terms, " tribulation and anguish," signify a pain of sensa- tion, and consequently suppose the subsistence of the subject. That doeth evil. — The word in the original designates evil workers, as persons who practise wickedness habitually. The co.':nection of punishment with sin is according to the order of Divine justice ; for it is just, that those who have offended infinite majesty should receive the retribution of their wickedness. It is likewise according to the denun- ciation of the law, whether it is viewed as given externally by the word, or as engraven internally m the conscience of every man, ior it threatens punishment to transgressors. Of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile (literally Greek).— In this place " the Jew first " must mean the Jew principally, and implies that the Jew is more accountable than the Gentile, and will be punished according to his superior light ; for as the Jew will have received more than the Gentile, he will also be held more <;ulpable before the Divine tribunal, and will consequently be more severely punished. His privileges will aggravate his culpability, and increase his punishment. " You only have I known of all the families of the earth ; therefore I will punish you for all your iniquities," Amos iii., 2 ; Matt, xi.; 22 ; Luke xii., 47 But although the judgment will begin with the Jew, and on him be more heavily executed, it will not terminate with him, but will be also extended to the Gentile, who will be found guilty, though not with the same aggravation. V. 10.— But glory, honor, and peace to every man that worketh good : to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile. Glory, honor, and peace.— Glory, as has abeady been observed, refers to the state of blessedness to which those who shall inherit eternal life will be admitted .; honor, to the praise and approbation of God, to which is here added peace. Peace is a state of confirmed joy and prosperity. As added to glory and honor, it may appear feeble as a chmax, but in reality it has all the value that is here ascribed to it, No blessing can be enjoyed without it. What would glory and honoi ROMANS II., n. 83 be without peace ? What would they be if there was a possibility of falling from the high dignity, or of being afterwards miseTable ? To every man that worketh good. — ^Happiness, by iho established order of things, is here asserted to be the inseparable consequence of righteousness, so that Tririne should never be unfruitful ; and he who had performed what is hi^s duty, if any such could be found, should enjoy rest and satisfaction. This is aJso according to the declaration of the Divine law ; for if, on the one hand, it threatens transgressors, on the other, it promises good to tJiose who observe it. " The man that doeth them shall hve in them." Gal. iii., 12. Since, then, no righteous man could be disappointed of the fruit of his righteousness, it may, in consequence, be asked, if any creature who had performed his duty exactly would merit anything from God ? To this it i^ re- plied, that the infinite majesty of God, which admits of no propor tion betvy^een himself and the creature, absolutely excludes all idea of merit. For God can never be laid under any obligation to his creature, and the creature, who is notiiing in comparison of him, and who, be sides, has nothing but what God has given him, ^h never acquire any claim on his Creator. Whenever God makes a covenant with man, and promises anythingi that promise indeed engages God on his part, on the ground of his truth and faithfulness ; but it does not so engage him as to give us any claim of merit upon him. " Who hath first given to him, and it shall be recompensed unto him again." Rom. xi., 35. Thus, in whatever manner we view it, there can be betore God no merit in men ; whence it follows, that happiness would not be cqj|- ferred as a matter of right on a man who should be found innocent. It must be said, however, that it would be given by a right of judgment, by which the order and proportion of things is preserved, the majesty of the law of God maintaiHed, and the Divine promises accomplishedi But, in awarding life and salvation to him who has the righteousness of Christ imputed to him, God is both faithful and just, on account of the infinite merit of his. Son. To the Jew first, and also to the Greek. When glory and honor are promised to the Jew first, it implies that he had walked according to his superior advantages, and of course would be rewarded in proportion ; while the Gentile, in his degree, would not be excluded. V. 11. — For there is no respect .<{ persons with God Whatever difference of order there may be between the Jew and the Gentile, that difference does not change the foundation and substance of the judgment. To have respect to the appearance of persons, or to accept of persons, is the vice of^ an iniquitous judge, who in some way violates justice ; but the Divine judgment cannot commit such a fault. Besides we must never lose sight of the train of the Apostle's reason- ing. His design is to show that the Jews, being, as they really are, simiers equally with the Gentiles, are involved with them in the same condemnation. This is what he proves by the nature of the Divine jud^ent, which i^ according to truth, that is, which is perfectly just, 86 ROMANS II., 12. V. 2 ; which nndets to every man according to his deeds, v. 6 ; and which has no respect of persons, v. 11 ; and, consequently, it will be equal to the Jew ar;d the Gentile, so that neither the one nor the other can defend himself against its sentence. The declaration, that God has no respect of persons, is frequently quoted as militating against the doctrine oi eicr.tion ; but it ha,s no bearing on the subject. It relates to men's character, and God's judg- ment according to character. Every man will be judged according to his works. This, however, does not say that God may not choose some eternally to life, and give them faith and create ihem unto good works, according to which, as evidences that they belong to Christ, they shall be judged. God's sovereign love to the elect is manifested in a way that not only shows him to be just in their justification, but also true to his declaration with respect to the future judgment. The assertion of the Apostle in this place is a truth of great importance, not only with respect to the Jews, but also with respect to the profes- sors of Christianity, many of whom fancy that there is a sort of favorit- ism in the judgment of God, that will overlook in some what is in others accounted condemnatorj'. V 12. — ^For as many as have sicned without law shall also perish without law : and is many as have sinned in (or under) law shall be judged by law. Here Paul explains the equality of the judgment, both with respect to the Gentiles and the Jews. Without law, that is, a written law, for none are without law, as the Apostle immediately afterwards shows. The Gentiles had not received the written law ; they had, however, sinned, and they shall perish, that is to say, be condemned without that law. The Jews had received the written law ; they had also sinned, they will be judged, that is to say, condemned by that law ; for, in the next verse, Paul declares, that only the doers of the law shall be justi- fied; and, consequently, as condemnation stands opposed to justification, they who are not doers of it will be condemned. In one word, the Di- vine justice will only regard the sins of men ; and wherever these are found it will condemn the sinner. The Gentiles shall perish without law. They will perish, though they are not to be judged by the written law. It is alleged by some, that although the Apostle's language shows that all the Gentiles aie guilty before God, yet it does not imply that they will be condemned ; for that they may be guilty, yet be saved by mercy through Jesus Christ. But the knguage of the Apostle en- tirely precludes the possibility of such a supposition. It is not said that they who have sinned without law are guilty without law, but that they shall "perish without lawP The language, then, does not merely assert their guilt, but clearly asserts their coi.demnation. They shall perish. No criticism can make this expression consistent with the sal- vation of the Gentiles who know not God. They will be condemned by the work of the law written in their hearts. Many are inclined to think that the condemnation of the Heathen is peculiarly hard ; but it is equally just, and not more stsrore than the punishment of those who have sinned against revelation. They will not be judged by the light ROMANS II., 13, 87 which they had not, nor punished so severely as they who resisted that light.* V. 13. — (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified. This verse, with the two following, forms a parenthesis between the 12th and 6th, explanatory of tlie two propositions contained in the 12th. Some also include the ] 1th and 12th in the parenthesis. If this mode of punctuation were adopted, the 13th, 14th, and 15th verses would be a parenthesis vnthin a parenthesis ; but for this there is no occasion, as the 11th and 12th verses connect with the 10th, and also with the 16th. For not the hearers of the law. — Against what the Apostle had just said concerning the equality of the judgment, two ob- jections might be urged, the one in favor of the Gentiles, the other in favor of the Jews. The first is, that since God has not given his law to the Gentiles, there can be no place for their condemnation, — for how can they be condemned as transgressors if they have not received a law ? The second objection, which is contrary to the first, supposes that the Jews ought to be more leniently treated, since God, who has given them liis law, has, by doing so, declared in their favor, and made them his people ; he will therefore, without doubt, have a regard for them which he has not for the others, whom he has abandoned. The Apostle obviates both these objections in this and the two following verses, and thus defends his position respecting the equality of the judg- ment. As for the last of them, which he answers first in this 1 3th verse, he says, that it is not sufficient for justification before God to have received the law, and simply to be hearers of it ; but that it must be observed and reduced to practice. This is an incontestible truth. For the law has not been given as a matter of curiosily or contemplation as a philosophical science, but to be obeyed ; and the greatest outrage against the law and the legislator is to hear it and not to take heed to practise it. It will be in vain, therefore, for the Jew to say, I am a nearer of the law, I attend on its services, I belong to the covenant of God, who has given me his testimonies. On all these accounts, being a transgressor, as he is, he must be condemned. The presence of the article before the word law in both the clauses of this verse, which is wanting in the preceding verse, shows that the reference is here to the Jews under the written law. The doers of the law shall he justified. — By this we must understanti an exact obedience to the law to be intended, which can defend itself against that declaration, " Cursed is everyone that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them." For it is not the same with the judgment of the law as with that of grace. The gospel indeed requires of us a perfect obedience lo its commands, yet it not only provides for believers pardon of the sins committed before their calhng, but of those also which they afterwards commit. But the judgment of the law admits of no indulgence to those who are under * On the state of ijip Heathen v( orld destilme of the Gospel, see the Appendix 8S ROMANS II., 14. t ; it demands a full and perfect personal observance of all its require ments — a patient continuance in well-doing — without the least deviation, or the smallest speck of sin, and when it does not find this state of perfection, condemns the man. But did not the law itself contain ex piations of sin, and consequently shall not the judgment which will be passed according to the law, be accompanied « ith grace and indulgence through the benefit of these expiations ? The legal expiations had no virtue in themselves, but inasmuch as they were figures of the expia- tion made by Jesus Christ, they directed men to his sacrifice. But as they belonged to the temporal or carnal covenant, they neither expiated nor could expiate any but typical sins, that is to say, uacleanness of the flesh, Heb. ix., 13, which were not real sins, but only external pollutions. Thus, as far as regarded the legal sacrifices, all real sins remained on the conscience, Heb. x., 1, for from these the law did not in the small- est degree discharge ; whence it follows, that the judgment, according to the law, to those who are under it, will be a strict judgment accord- ing to law, which pardons nothing. The woicA justified occurs here for the first time in this Epistle, and being introduced in connexion with the general judgment, means being declared just or righteous by a ludicial sentence. V. 14. — For when the Gentiles, which have not a law, do by nature the things con- tained in the law, these, having not a law, are a law unto themselves. For. — This is the proper translation of the Greek particle, and not therefore, according to Dr. Macknight, who entirely misunderstands both the meaning of the passage itself, and the connexion in which it stands, and founds upon it a doctrine opposed to all that is contained on the subject, both in the Old Testament and the New. This verse has no connexion with or dependence whatever on the foregoing, as is gene- rally supposed, but connects with the first clause of verse 12, which it explains. Together with the following verse, it supplies the answer to the objection that might be made to what is contained in the beginning of that verse, namely, that God cannot justly condemn the Gentile since he has not given them a law. To this the Apostle here replies that though they have not an external and written law, as that which God gave to the Israelites, they have, however, the law of the con- science, which is sufficient to establish the justice of their condem. nation. This is the meaning of that proposition, having not a law, are a law unto themselves, and of that other, which show the work of the law written in their hearts ; by which he also establishes the justice of what he had said in the 12th verse, that as many as have sinned without law'shall also perish without law. He proves it in two ways : 1st, Be- cause they do natur-ully the things that the law requires, which shows that they have a law in themselves, since they sometimes act according to its rule ; 2d, He proves it by their not being devoid of a conscience, since, according to its decisions, they accuse or excuse one another. This evidently shows that they have a law, the work of which is writ- ten in their hearts, by which they discern the difference between rigbl and wrong — ^what is just and v^h'ii is unjust. ROMAICS II., 15. 89 They who have -nof- a law, — that is, an externally writtto law, — do by nature the things com: :ined in the law. . It could not be the Apostle's intention to assert, that the Heathens in general, or that any one of them, kept the law written in the heart, when the contrary had been proved in the preceding chaj.ter ; but they did cs-rtain liungs, though imperfectly, commanded by tlie law, which provea that they had, by their original constitution, a d.scernment of the difference between right and wrong. They did nothing, however, in the manner which the law required, that is, from the only motive that makes an action good, namely, a spirit of obedience and of love to God. God governs the world in this way. He rules the actions of men and beasts by the in- stincts and affections which he has implanted in them. Every good action that men perform by nature they do by their constitution, not from respect to the authority of God. That the Pagans do many things that as to the outward act are agreeable to the law of God is obviously true, and should not be denied. That they do anything ac- ceptable to God is not true, Euid is not here asserted. V. 15. — Which show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the meanwhile accusing or else excusing one another.) The work of the law. — We have here a distinction between the law itself, and the work of the law. The work of the law is the thing that the law doeth, that is, what it teaches about actions, as good or bad. This work, or business, or office of the la'.v, is to teach what is right or wrong. This, in some measure, is taught by tlie light of nature in the heart of every man. There remains then in all men, to a certain de- gree, a discernmejit of what the law requires, designated here the " work" of the law : the performance or neglect of which is followed by the approbation or disapprobation of the conscience. It has no re- lation to the authority of the lawgiver, as the principle of the law itself ; but solely to the distinctions between actions, as right or wrong in themselves, and the hope of escaping future punishment, or of ob- taining future reward. The love and the reverential fear of God, which are the true principles of obedience, have been effaced from the mind ; but a degree of knciwledge of his justice, and the consciousness that tfie violations of his law deserve and will be followed by punishment, have been retained. Written in their hearts, — This is an allusion to the law written by the finger of God upon tables of stone, and afterwards recorded in the Scriptures. The great principles of this law were communicated to man in his creation, and much of it remains with him in his fallen state. This natural light of the understanding is called tbe law written in the heart, because it is imprinted on the mind by the author of crea- tion, and is God's work as much as the writing on the tables of stone Conscience witnessing together. — Together with the law written in the heart. But it may be asked, are not these two tilings the same ' They are not. They are different principles. Light, oi knowledge of 90 ROMANS II., 15. duty, is one thing, and conscience is another. Knowledge shows what is right, the conscience approves of it, ar.d condemns the contrary. We might suppose a being to have the knowledge of duty, without the principle th.it approves of it, and blames ihe transgression. Their thoughts i 'n meanwhile accusing, or else excusing between one another.— ^ol alternately, nor in turn. Their reasonings (not thoughts; between one another, condemning, oi- else defending. What is the object of their condemnation or defence ? Not themselves, but one another ; that is, those between whom the reasonings take place. The reference evidently is to the fact, that in all places, in all ages, men are continually, in their mutual intercourse, blaming or excusing human conduct. This supposes a standard of reference, a knowledge of right and wrong. No man could accuse and condemn another, if there were not some standard of right and wrong ; and no man could defend an action without a similar standard. This is obviously the meaning of the Apostle. To these ideas of right and wrong are naturally joined the idea of God, who is the sovereign judge of the world, and that of rewards and punishments, which will follow either good or bad actions. These ideas do not fail to present themselves to the sinner, and inspire fear and inquietude. But as, on the other hand, self-love and corrup- tion reign in the heart, these come to his support, and strive, by vain reasonings, to defend or to extenuate the sin. The Gentiles, then, how- ever depraved, lost, and abandoned, and however destitute of the aid of the written law, are notwithstanding, a law to themselves, having the law written in their hearts. They have still sufficient light to discern between good and evil, virtue and vice, honesty and dishonesty ; and their conscience enables them sufficiently to make thai distinction, whether before committing sin, or in tl.c commission of it, or after they have committed it. Besides this, rerjiorse, on account of their crimes, re- minds them that there is a God, a judge before whom they must appear 10 render account to him of their actions. Tiiey are then a law to them- selves, they have the work of the law written in their hearts. That the knowledge of the revealed law of God has not been pre- served in every nation, is, however, entirely to be attributed to human depravity ; and if it was restored to one nation for the benefit of otlicis, it must be ascribed to the goodness of God. The law of God, and the revelation respecting the Messiah, had been delivered to all men after the Flood by Noah, who was a preacher of the everlasting righteousness, 2 Peter ii., 5, which was to be brought in, to answer the demands of that law. But all the nations yf the earth had lost the remembrance of it, not liking to retain God in their knowledge. God again discovered it to the Jews in that written revelation with which they were favored. If it be asked, why was tiie law vouchsafed in this manner to that na- tion and not also to the Gentiles ? Paul explains this mystery, chap, xi. It is sufficient then to say, that God has willed to make known, by this abandonment, how great and dreadful was the fall of the human race, and by that means one day to magnify the glory of the grace which he purposed to bestow on men by Jesus Christ. He willed to ROMANS II., 16. 91 leave a great part of men a prey to Satan, to show how great is his abhorrence of sin, and how great was the wrath which our disobedience had kindled against the world. But why did he not also abandon the Jews ? Because he chose to leave some ray of hope in the world, and it pleased him to lay the foundation of redemption by his Son. But why was the greater part abandoned ? Because then was the time of Divine wrath and justice, and sin must be allowed to abound that grace might superabcund. Why, in fine, choose the nation of the Jews rather than any other nation? Because, witliout any further reason, it was the sovereign good pleasure of God. V. 16.— In the day .vhen God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ, accord- ing to my gospel. This verse is to be construed in connexion with the 12th, to the contents of which the three intermediate verses had given, in a paren- thesis, the explanatory answers. In the day when God shall jud^c. — It is here assumed by the Apostle that God is the judge of the world. This is a truth which nature and right reason teach. Since intelligent creatures are capable of obedience to law, it necessarily follows that they have a judge, for the law would be null and void if it were left as a dead letter, without a judge to put it in execution. And as there is a law common to the whole human race, it must also be admitted that there is a common judge. Now this judge of aU can ^.iily be God, for it is only God who possesses all the qualifications for such an office. The Apostle likewise assumes that there will be a day when God will hold this judgment. This is also a truth conformable to right reason, for there must be a fixed time for rendering public the decrees of justi- fication, otherwise it would not be duly honored, since its honor consists in being recognized to be what it is before all creatures. If, then, there were only individual judgments, either in this life or at death, justice would not be manifested as it ought to be. Hence it follows, that there must be a public and solemn day in which God will execute judgment before the assembled universe. Besides, the Apostle here intimates that there will be an end to the duration of the world, and the succession of generations ; for if there be a day appointed for a univer- sal judgment, it follows that all men must there appear. And if such be the case, their number must also be determined, while, without a single exception, the time of their calling and of their life must termi- natej so that the succession of generations must come to an end. The secrets of men. — It is not here meant that God will judge only their secrets, so that their public and known actions should pass with- out being judged ; for there is nothing that God does not judge. But it is intended to show with what exactness the judgment will proceed, since it takes account of things the most secret and the most concealed. It will not resemble the judgment of men, which cannot fathom the hearts and thoughts, God will not only take cognizance of external, but also of internal actions, and will discover even the inmost thoughts of men. AH actions then, whether open or secret, will come into judgment, but secrets or hidden things are here said to be judged, 92 ROMANS II., 17. because they are reached by no other judgment. If men can conceal their evil deeds, they are safe from human judgment. Not so with respect to the Judge at the great day. The 'nost secret sins will then be manifested and punished. By Jesus Christ. — God will carry into effect that judgment by Jesus Christ. " He hath appointed a day in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom hs lath ordained." Acts xvii., 31. Jesus Christ will conduct the judgment, not' only as it respects behevers, but also the wicked. If the secrets of men are to be brought into judgment, and if Jesus Christ is to be the Judge, he :aust be the Searcher of hearts. Acts i., 24, Re*-, ii., 23. He must then be truly God. In the economy of Jesus Christ tliere are two excreme degrees, one of abasement, the other of exaltation. The lowest degree of his abase- ment was his death and burial. The opposite degree of his exaltation will be the last judgment. In the former he received the sentence which condemned him, and which included in his condemnation the absolution of his people. In the latter he will pronounce the condem- nation or absolution of all creatures. In the one covered over with reproaches, and pierced \.l nil the privileges they enjoyed, they possessed already a signal advaiiii it "' Mr. Tholuck, then, has no groiuid to sup pose the contrary. gg ROMANS II., 23. V. 22— Thou that sayest a man should not commit adultery, dost thou commit adul- tery ? thou that abhorrest idols, dost thou commit sacrilege ? Oppression of the poor, and adultery, are the crimes with which the Jews were chiefly charged by our Lord. Abhorrest idols. — The Jews now generally abhorred the idolatry to which in the former ages of their history they were so prone, even in its grossest forms. The word in the original signifies to abominate, alluding to things most disagreeable to the senses. This is according to God's account of the sin of idolatry. According to human standards of morality, idolatry appears a very inno- cent thing, or at least not very sinful ; but in Scripture it is classed among the works of the flesh. Gal. v., 20, and is called " abominable." 1 Peter iv., 3. It robs God of his glory, transferring it to the creature. Commit sacrilege. — The word here used literally applies to the robbery of temples, for which the Jews had many opportunities, as well as of appropriating to themselves what was devoted to religion, as is com- plained of, Nehemiah xiii., 10 ; and of robbing God in tithes and offer- ings, Malachi iii., 8 ; also, of violating and profaning things sacred. V. 23. — Thou that makest thy boast of the law, through breaking the Itw dishonorest thou God ? The Jews gloried in the law as their great natural distinction, yel they were egregiously guilty of bre.vking it, which was highly incon- sistent and dishonorable to God, not merely " as God was the author of the law," which is the explanation of Mr. Smart, but because they professed to be God's people and to glory in his law. In any other light, the breach of the law by the Gentiles, when they knew it to be God's law, would have been equally dishonorable to God. But God is dishonored by the transgressions of his people, in a manner in which he is not dishonored by the same transgressions in the wicked, who make no profession of being his. It is a great aggravation of the sins of God's people, if they are the occasion of bringing reproach on his religion. The world is ready to throw the blame on that religion which he has given them ; and it is for this that the Apostle, in the following verse, reproaches the Jews in regard to the Heathen. Sinners also are thus emboldened to sin with the hope of impunity, and opposers make it a handle to impede the progress of divine truth. It appears that, in the above three verses, the Apostle alludes to what is said, Psalm 1., 16-21. " But unto the wicked God saith, What hast thou to do to declare my statutes, or that thou shouldst take my cove- nant in thy mouth ? Seeing thou hatest instruction, and easiest my words behind thee. When thou sawest a thief, then thou consentedst with him, and hast been partaker with adulterers. Thou givest thy mouth to evil, and thy tongue frameth deceit. Thou sittest and speak est against thy brother ; thou slanderest thine own mother's son These things hast thou done, and I kept silence ; thou thoughtest that I was altogether such an one as thyself : but I will reprove thee, and set them in order before thine eyes." On this it may be remarked, that the 50th Psalm predicts the change which God was to make in his covenant at the coming of the Messiah, and likewise his rejection of ROMANS II., 23. 97 his ancient people. As to the change of the covenant, it was declared that the sicrifices of the law. were not acceptable to him, and that henceforth he will not require from men any other than those of praises, thanksgivings, and prayers, which are the only acceptable worship. Respecting the rejection of his ancient people, God reproaches them with their crimes, and more especially with hypocrisy, which are pre- cisely the charges made against them in this place by the Apostle. The conclusion from the whole is, that the pretended justification of the Jews by the external advantages of the law was a vain pretence ; and that as they had so vilely abused the law of which they boasted, according to the prediction of the Psalmist, it must follow, that the accusation now brought against them was established. The Apostle in these verses exhibits the most lively image of hypo- crisy. Was there ever a more beautiful veil than that under which the Jew presents himself ? He is a man of confession, of praise, of thanks- giving — a man whose trust is in the law, whose boast is of God, who knows his will, who approves of things that are excellent ; a mail who calls himself a conductor of the blind, a light of those who are in dark- ness, an instructor of the ignorant, a teacher of babes : a man who directs others, who preaches against theft, against adultery, against idolatry, and, to sum up the whole, a man who glories in the command- ments of the Lord. Who would not say that this is an angel arrayed in human form — a star detached from the firmament, and brought nearer to enlighten the earth ? But observe what is concealed under this mask. It is a man who is himself unt^iught ; it is a thief, an adulterer, a sacrilegious person ; in one word, a wicked man, who continually dishonors God by the transgression of his law. Is it possible to imagine a contrast more monstrous than between these fair appearances and this awful reahty ? Doubtless, Paul might have presented a greater assenftbkge of par- ticular vices prevalent among the Jews, for there were few to which that nation was not addicted. But he deems it sufficient to generalize them all under these charges, — that they did not teach themselves, that they dishonored God by their transgressions of the law ; and of these vices he has only particularized three, namely, theft, adultery, and sacri- lege : and this for two reasons — ^first, because it was of these three that God had showed the greatest abhorrence in his law ; and secondly, be- cause these three sins, in spite of all their professions to the contrary, were usual and common among the Jews. There was no people on earth more avaricious and self-interested than they ; it is only necessary to read the narrations of their prophets and historians, to be convinced how much they were addicted to robbery, to usury, and to injustice. They were no less obnoxious to the charge of fornication and adultery, as appears from the many charges preferred against them in the writings of the prophets. They converted the offerings to the purposes of th,eir avarice, they profaned the holy places by vile and criminal actions ; and as the Lord himself, after Jeremiah, upbraided them, they turned God's house of prayer into a den of thieves. These three capital vices, which the Apostle stigmatizes in the Jews, 7 98 ROMANS II., 24. like those which he had preferred against the Gentiles, stand opposed, on one hand, to the three principal virtues which he elsewhere enurae- rates as comprehending the whole system of sanctity, namely, to hve soberly, righteously, and godly; and, on the other hand, they are conformable to three odious vices which he had noted among the Gen- tiles, namely, ungodliness, intemperance, unrighteousness. For theft includes, in general, every notion of unrighteousness ; adultery includes that of intemperance ; and the guilt of sacrilege that of ungodliness. Hence, it is easy to conclude, that whatever advantages the Jews pos- sessed above the Gentiles, they were, notwithstanding, in the same condition before the tribunal of God — ^like them unrighteous, like them intemperate, like them ungodly, and, consequently, like them sub jected to the same condemnation. V. 24. — ^For the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles through you, as it is written. The charge alleged here against the Jews, is not that they themselves blasphemed the name of God, as some understand it, but that they gave occasion to the Heathen to blaspheme. The Apostle is not charging the Jews with speaking evil of God, or with one particular sin, but with the breach of their law in general. He here confirms what he had just said to this purpose, in the foregoing verse, by the authority of Scrip- ture. Many suppose that he refers to a passage of Isaiah Hi., 5, where the Prophet says, " and my name continually every day is blasphemed." But there the Prophet does not charge the Jews, as having by their bad conduct occasioned the injury which the name of God received. He ascribes it, on the contrary, to the Assyrians by whom they had been subjected. In the passage before us the reference is to Ezek. xxxvi., 17-20, where it is evident that the Jews, by the greatness and the number of their sins, had given occasion to the Gentiles to insult and blaspheme the holy name of God, which is precisely the meaning of the Apostle. The Gentiles, as the Prophet there relates, seized on two pretexts to insult the name of God, the one drawn from the afflictions which the sins of his people had brought upon them, and the other from the con- templation of the sins themselves. According to the first, they accused the God of Israel of weakness and want of power, since he had not saved his people from so miserable a dispersion. According to the second, they imputed to the rehgion and the God of the Israehtes all the crimes which they saw that people commit, as if it had been by the influence of God himself that they were committed. It is on account of these two arrogant and malignant accusations that God reproaches his people for having profaned his name among the nations, and adds (not for the sake of his people, who had rendered themselves altogether unworthy, but for that of his own name) two promises opposed to those two accusations ; the one of deliverance, the other of sanctification. " For I will take you from among the Heathen, and gather you out of all countries, and will bring you unto your own land. Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean ;" ver. 24 25. I ROMANS 11., 25. 99 will deliver you, in order to repel their insult on me, m accusing me of want of power. I will cleanse you, in order to vindicate myself from the accusation of being the author of your crimes. God had no need of either of these ways of justifying himself. He had shovni, on nu- merous occasions, the irresistible power of his arm in favor of the Israelites ; and the sanctity of his law was self-evident. Yet he promises to do these things for his own glory, inasmuch as the Gentiles and his people had dishonored his name. No accusation against the Jews could be more forcible than that which, in the verse before us, was preferred from the testimony of their own Scriptures. It proved, that not only were they chargeable before God with their own sins, but that they were likewise chargeable with the sins which the Gentiles committed in blaspheming his name. This showed clearly that they were no more prepared to sustain the judg- ment of the strict justice of God than were the Gentiles, whom they were as ready to condemn as the Apostle himself was. V. 25. — For circumcision verily pyofiteth, if thou keep law : but if thou be a breaker of law, thy circumcision is made uncircumcision. Paul here pursues Hap Jew into his laist retreat, in which he imagined himself most secure. He presses him on the subject of circumcision, which the Jews viewed as their stronghold — ^that rite even more ancient than Moses, and by which they were distinguished from other nations. The sum of this, and the following verses to the end of the chapter, is, that the Jews being such as the Apostle had represented them, all their advantages, including circumcision, could only enhance their condem- nation before the tribunal of God, and that, on the contrary, if the Gentiles, who have not received the law, observed its precepts, they would be justified without circumcision. Two things are here to be observed, namely, what is asserted of the Jews and Gentiles, and the proof that follows. The assertions are, that circumcision serves only as a ground of condemnation to transgressors of the law ; and, on the other hand, that the want of it would be no detriment to those who ful- filled the law. The proof is, that before God the true Jew and the true circumcision consist not in external qualities, but in internal and real holiness. The reason why circumcision was not included in the enumeration before given of the advantages of the Jews is, that in it- self it is not an advantage, but only a sign of other advantages, and it is mentioned here, because, in the character of a sign, it includes them ; to name circumcision, then, is to refer to them all. In this verse, the Apostle does not speak of circumcision according to its real and most important signification, as he does in the two concluding verses, but in that view in which the Jews themselves considered it, as the initiatory and distinctive rite of their religion, without the observance of which they believed they could not be saved. Circumcision verily profiteth, if thou keep the law. — It is not meant that circumcision will come into the account before the tribunal of God, as the fulfillmg of the law ; but that it would be an aid and motive to the observance of the law, and viewed in the light of an obhgation «o 100 ROMANS II., 26. keep the law ; if the Jew had kept it he could refer to his circumcision as an obligation which he had fulfilled. Circumcision may be viewed in two lights, either as given to Abraham, or as enjoined by Moses. 1. It was the token of the covenant that Abraham should be the father of the promised Saviour, and, moreover, a seal or pledge of the introduc tion and reality of the righteousness imputed to him through faith, while uncircumcised, in order that he might be the father of all be- lievers, whether circumcised or not, to whom that righteousness should also be imputed. 2. Circumcision, as enjoined by Moses, was a part of his law ; John vii., 22, 23. In the first view, it was connected with all the privileges of Israel, Phil, iii., 4, 5 ; in the second, it was a part of the law, whose righteousness is described, Rom. x., 5.* The Jews entirely mistook the object of the law, Rom. v., 20; Gal. iii., 19; which shut up all under sin, Gal. iii., 22, by cursing every one who con- tinued not in all things written in the book of the law to do them ; and in this view, as a part of the law of Moses, circumcision could only profit those who kept the whole law. But, instead of this, the name of God was blasphemed among the Gentiles, through the wickedness of the Jews, and hence their having the form of knowledge and of the truth in the law would only aggravate their condemnation. When, therefore, the Apostle says, if thou keep the law, he supposes a case, not implying that it was ever verified ; but if it should exist, the result would be what is stated. If, on the other hand, the Jew was a breaker of the law, his circumcision was made uncircumcision, Jer. ix., 26 ; it would be of no more avail than if he had not received it, and would give him no advantage over the uncircumcised Gentile. This decla- ration is similar to the way in which our Lord answers the rich young man. If the law is perfectly kept, eternal life will be the reward, as the Apostle had also said in verses 7 and 10 ; but if there be any breach of it, circumcision is of no value for salvation. V. 26.— Therefore, if the uncircumcision keep the righteousness of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be counted for circumcision ? The Apostle does not mean to afHrm that an uncircumcised Gentile can fulfil the righteousness of the law, nor does he here retract what he had said in the first chapter respecting the corruption and . guilt of the Gentiles, but he supposes a case in regard to them, like that concerning the Jews in the preceding verse. This hypothetical mode of reasoning is common with Paul, of which we have an example in this same chapter, where he says, that the doers of the law shall he justified ; of whom, however, in the conclusion of his argument, chap, iii., 19, he affirms that none can be found. The supposition, then, as to the obe- * It is in this second view of circumcision being a part of the law, that the Apostle tells the Galatians, that if they were circumcised, they were debtors to do the whole law. They had professed to receive Christ, who is the end of the law for riffhteoUs- ness to every one that believeth ; but their want of confidence in Christ's righteousness in -flnich they professed to rest, was evident, by their adding to it the observance of circuDicision. " Thus they returned to the law, and were debtors to fulfil it"— Gal v., 3, 4 The righteousness of the law and Christ's righteousness cannot, even in the least uegree, be united. ROMANS II., 27. 101 dience of the Gentile, though in itself impossible, is made in order tc prove that, before the judgment-seat of God, neither circumcision nor uncircumcision enters at all into consideration, for justification or con- demnation. If an uncircumcised Gentile kept the law, his uncircum- cision would avail as much as the circumcision of the Jew. The reason of this is, that the judgment of God regards only the observance or the violation of the law, and not extraneous advantages or disadvantages, and, as is said above, with God there is no respect of persons. In reality, then, the Jews and Gentiles were on a level as to the impos- sibility of salvation by the law ; in confirmation of which truth, the inquiry here introduced is for the conviction of the Jew on this import- ant point. But what is true upon a supposition never realized, is actually true with respect to all who believe in Jesus. In him they have this righteousness which the law demands, and without circum- cision have salvation. Dr. Macknight egregiously errs, when he sup- poses that the law here referred to is the law of faith, which Heathens may keep and be saved ; this is a complication of errors. V. 27. — And shall not uncircumcision which is by nature, if it fulfil the law, judge thee, who by the letter aad circumcisipn dost transgress the law .' Paul continues, in this terse, to reason on the same supposition as in the one preceding, and draws from it another consequence, which is, that if the Gentile who is uncircumcised, fulfilled the law, he would not only be justified, notwithstanding his uncircumcision, but would judge and condemn the circumcised Jew who did not fulfil it. The reason of this conclusion is, that, in the comparison between the one and the other, the case of the circumcised transgressor would appear much worse, because of the superior advantages he enjoyed. In the same way he said. Matt, xii., 41, that the Ninevites shall condemn the Jews. The uncircumcision which is by nature — That is to say, the Gentiles in their natural uncircumcised state, in opposition to the Jews, who had been distinguished and set apart by a particular calling of God. Dr. Macknight commits great violence when he joins the words " by nature" with the words " fulfil the law," as if it implied that some Gentiles did fulfil the law by the light of nature. Who by the letter and circumcision dost transgress the law. — Dr. Macknight affirms, that the common translation here ** is not sense." But it contains a very important meaning. The Jews transgressed the law by means of their covenant and circumcision being misunderstood by them. This fact is notoriously true, they were hardened in their sin from a false confidence in their relation to God. Instead of being led to the Saviour by the law, according to its true end, they transgressed it, through their views of the letter df the law and of circumcision ; of both of which, especi- ally of circumcision, they made a Saviour. The fulfilling of the law and its transgression are here to be taken in their fullest import, name- ly, for an entire and complete fulfilment, and for the slightest trans- gression of the law ; for the Apostle is speaking of the strict judgment of justice by the law, before which nothing can subsist but a perfect and uninterrupted fulfilment of all the commandments of God. But it 102 ROMANS II., 29. may be asked how the uncircumcised Gentiles could fulfil the law which, they had never received. They could not indeed fulfil it as written on tables of stone and in the work of Moses, for it had never been given to them in that way ; but as the book of the law, or the doctrine it teaches, was written in their hearts, it was their bounden du- ty to obey it. From this, it is evident that in all this discussion respecting the condemnation of both Gentiles and Jews, the Apostle understands by the law, not the ceremonial law, as some imagine, but the moral law ; for it is the work of it only which the Gentiles have by nature written in their hearts. Besides, it is clear that he speaks here of that same law of which he says the Jews were transgressors when they stole, committed adultery, and were guilty of sacrilege. V. 28. — For he is not a Jew, which ia one outwardly ; neither is that circumcision which is outward in the flesh : V. 29. — But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly ; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter ; whose praise is not of men, but of God. The Apostle now passes to what is reality, not supposition, and gives here the proof of what he had affirmed, namely, that circumcision effects nothing for transgressors of the law, except to cause their deep- er condemnation, and that the want of circumcision would be no loss to those who should have fulfilled the law. The reason of this is, that when the Jew shall appear before the tribunal of God, to be there judged, and when he shall produce his title as a Jew, as possessing it by birth, and his circumcision, as having received it as a sign of the covenant of God, God will not be satisfied with such appearances, but will demand of him what is essential and real. Now, the essence and reality of things do not consist in names or in external signs ; and when nothing more is produced, God will not consider a man who. possesses them as a true Jew, nor his circumcision as true circumcision. He is only a Jew in shadow and appearance, and his is only a figurative circumcision void of its truth. But he is a Jew, who is one inwardly ; that is to say, that in judg- ing, God will only acknowledge as a true Jew, and a true confessor of his name, him who has the reality, namely, him who is indeed holy and righteous, and who shall have fulfilled the law ; for it is in this fulfil- ment that confession, and praise, and giving of thanks consist, which are the things signified by the name Jew. It is thus we are to under- stand the contrast which Paul makes between " outwardly" and in- wardly." What is outward is the name, what is inward is the thing itself represented by the name. And circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter. It is essential to keep in view that here, and in all that pre- cedes, from the beginning of the 18th verse of the first chapter, Paul is referring not to the gospel, but exclusively to the law, and clearing the ground for the establishment of his conclusion in the following chapter, verses 19th and 20th, concerning the universal guilt of man- kind, and the consequent impossibilitj- of their being justified by the law. The whole is intended to prepare the way for the demonstration ROMANS I ., 29. 103 of the grand truth announced, chap, i., 17, — and resumed, chap. iii.. 21, of the revelation of a righteousness adequate to the demands of the law, and provided for all who believe. From a misapprehension in this respect, very erroneous explanations have been given by many of this verse and the context, as well as of the 7th, 8th, 9th, and 10th of the 2d chapter, representing these passages as referring to the gospel, and not exclusively to the law. This introduces confusion into the whole train of the Apostle's reasoning, and their explanations are entirely al variance with his meaning and object. And circumcision. — This passage is often considered as parallel tc that in the epistle to the Colossians, chap. ii., 11. "In whom also ye are circumcised, with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ.'' But the purpose of the Apostle in the one place and the other is alto- gether different. Many passages, in different connexions, which are similar in their expressions, are not so at all in their meanings. Foi the illustration of this, it is necessary to remember that the Apostle, as has just been observed, is here referring solely to the law, and likewise that circumcision in one view respected the legal covenant, of which il was a ceremonial obligation, and in another, the fevangelical covenant, of which it was a type. In the character of a ceremonial obligation of the legal covenant, it represented the entire and perfect fulfilling of the law, which consisted not merely in external holiness, but in perfect purity of soul ; and in this sense it represented what no man possessed, but which any man must have, in order to be justified by the law. Li the character of a type, it represented regeneration and evangelical ho- liness, which consist in repentance and amendment of life by the Spiril of Christ ; and in that sense shadowed forth what really takes place in those who believe in Jesus Christ. In Colossians ii., 11, the Apostle views it" in this last aspect, for he means to say, that what the Jew had in type and figure under the law, the believer has in reality and truth under the gospel. But in the passage before us, Paul views it in its first aspect, for he is treating of the judgment of strict justice by the law, which admits of no repentance or amendment of life. The meaning then here is, that if the Jew will satisfy himself with bringing before the judgment of the law what is only external, and merely a ceremonial observance, without his possessing that perfect righteousness which this observance denotes, and which the Judge will demand, it will serve to no purpose but for his condemnation. That of the heart in the spirit. — That is to say, what penetrates to the bottom of the soul ; in one word, that which is real and effective. The term spirit does not here mean the Holy Spirit, nor has it a mys- tical or evangelical signification ; but it signifies what is internal, solid, and real, in opposition to that which was ceremonial and figurative. And not in the letter. — Not that which takes place only in the flesh ac- cording to the literal commandment, and in all the prescribed forms. In one vvord, it is to the spiritual circumcision that the Apostle refers, which is real in the heart and spirit. Whose praise is not of men, but 104 ROMANS ni. of God. — Here Paul alludes to the name of Jew, which signifies praise, which may be taken either in an active sense, as signifying praising, or in a passive sense, as praised. Moses has taken it in the second meaning, when, relating the blessmg of Jacob, he says, " Judah, thou art he whom thy brethren shall praise." The Apostle here takes it in the same way, but he does not mean that this praise is of men, but of God. The meaning is, that in order to be a true Jew, it is not suf- ficient to possess external advantages, which attract himian praise ; but it is necessary to be in a condition to obtain the praise of God. The object of the whole of this chapter is to show that the Jews are sinners — ^violators of the law, as well as the Gentile, and consequently, that they cannot be justified before God by their works ; but that, on the contrary, however superior their advantages are to those of the Gentiles, they can only expect from his strict justice, condemnation. The Jews esteemed it the highest honor to belong to their nation, and they gloried over all other nations. An uncircumcised person was by them regarded with abhorrence. They did not look to character, but to circumcision or uncircumcision. Nothing, then, could be more cogent or more calculated to arrest the attention of the Jews than this argument respecting the name in which they gloried, and circumcision, their distinguishing national rite, with which Paul here follows up what he had said concerning the demands of the law, and of their outward transgressions of its precepts. He had dwelt in the preceding part of this chapter on their more glaring and atrocious outward violations of the law, as theft, adultery, and sacrilege, by which they openly disho- nored God. Now, he enters into the recesses of the heart, of which, even if their outward conduct had been blameless, and the subject of the praise of men, its want of inward conformity to that law, which was manifest in the sight of God, could not obtain his praise. CHAPTER ni. PART I. ROMANS m., 1-20. This chapter consists of three parts. The first part extends to the 8th verse inclusively, and is designed to answer and remove some objec- tions to the doctrme previously advanced by the Apostle. In the se- cond part, from the 9th to the 20th verse, it is proved bv the testimo- nies of various Scriptures that the Jews, as well as the" Gentiles, are involved in sin and guilt, and, consequently, that none can be justified by the law. The third part commences at verse 21, where the Apostle reverts to the declaration, chap, i., 17, with which his discussion com- menced, and exhibits the true and only way of justification for all men by the righteousness of God imputed through faith in Jesus Christ ' ROMANS I., 2. 105 V I. — ^What advantage then hath the Jew ? or what profit is there of circumcision ? If the preceding doctrine be true, it may be asked, what advantage hath the Jew over the Gentile, and what profit is there in circumcision if it does not save from sin ? If, on the contrary, the Jews, on account of their superior privileges, will be held more culpable before the tribu- nal of Divine justice, as the Apostle had just shown, it appears obviously improper to allege that God has favored them more than the Gentiles. This objection it was necessary to obviate, not only because it is spe- cious, but because it is important, and might, in regard to the Jews, arrest the course of the gospel. It is specious, for if, in truth, the advantages of the Jews, so far from justifying them, contribute nothing to cause the balance of Divine judgment to preponderate in their favor — if their advantages rather enhance their condemnation, does it not appear that they are not only useless, but positively pernicious ? In these advantages, then, it is impossible to repose confidence. But the objection is also important, for it would be difficult to imagine that all Gpd had done for the Jews, his care of them so peculiar, and his love of them so great — in short, all the privileges which Moses exalts so highly, were lavished on them in vain, or turned to their disadvantage. The previous statement of the Apostle might then be injurious to the doctrine of the gospel, by rendering him more odious in the eyes of his countrymen, and therefore he had good reasons for fully encounter- ing and answering this objection. In a similar way it is still asked by carnal professors of Christianity, of what use is obedience to the law of God or the observance of his ordinances, if they do not save the soul, or contribute somewhat to this end ? V. 2. — Much every way ; chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God. Paul here repels the foregoing objection as false and unfounded. Although the privileges of the Jews cannot come into consideration for their justification before the judgment-seat of God, it does not follow that they were as nothing, or of no advantage. On the contrary, they were marks of the peculiar care of God for that people, while he had, as it were, abandoned all the other nations. They were as aids, too, which God had given to deliver them from the impiety and depravity of the Gentiles ; and by the accompanying influences of his Spirit they were made effectual to the salvation of many of liiem. Finally, the revelation made to the Jews contained not only figures and shadows of the gospel, but also preparations for the new covenant. God had be- stowed nothing similar on the Gentiles ; the advantage, then, of the Jews was great. Much every way.-^T\as does not mean in every sense, for the Apostle does not retract what he had said in the preced- ing chapter, namely, that their advantages were of no avail for justifi- cation to the Jews continuing to be sinners ; for, on the contrary, in that case they only enhanced their condemnation. But this expression signifies, that their advantages were very great and very considerable. Chirf,y, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.— 106 ROMANS III., 2. The original denotes primarily, which is not a priority of order, but a priority in dignity and advantage ; that is to say, that of al the advan- tages God had vouchsafed to them, the most estimable and most excel- lent was that of having entrusted to them his oracles. The word here used for oracles signifies the responses or answers given by an oracle, and when the Scriptures are so designated, it impHes that they are alto- gether, in word, as well as in sense, the communications of God. By these oracles we must understand in general all the Scriptures of the Old Testament, especially as they regarded the Messiah, and, in particu- lar, the prophecies which predicted his advent. They were oracles, inasmuch as they were the words from the mouth of God himself, in oj^osition to the revelation of nature, which was common to Jews and Gentiles ; and they were promises, in respect to their matter, because they contained the great promise of sending Jesus Christ into the world. God had entrusted these oracles to the Jews, who had been constituted their guardians and depositaries till the time of their fulfil- ment, when they were to be communicated to all, Isaiah ii., 3, and through them possessed the high character of the witnesses of God, Isaiah xliii., 10 ; xliv., 8, even till the time of their execution, when they were commanded to be communicated to the whole world, accord- ing to what Isaiah ii., 3, had said, — " For out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem." These oracles had not, however, been entrusted to the Jews simply as good things for the benefit of others, but also for their own advantage, that they might themselves make use of them ; - for in these oracles the Messiah — ^who was to be born among them, and among them to accomplish the work of redemption — ^was declared to be the proper object of their con- fidence, and through them they had the means of becoming acquainted with the way of salvation. But why were these oracles given so long before the coming of the Messiah 1 It was for three principal reasons,— ^rs^. To serve as a tes- timony that, notwithstanding man's apostasy, God had not abandoned the earth, but had always reserved for himself a people, and it was by these great and divine promises that he had preserved his elect in all ages ; secondly. These oracles were to characterize and designate the Messiah when he should come, in order that he might be known and distinguished ; for they pointed him out in such a manner that he could be certainly recognized when he appeared. On this account Philip said to Nathaniel, John i., 45, " We have found him of whom Moses in the law, and the Prophets did write, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph ;" thirdly. They were to serve as a proof of the divine origin of the Christian rehgion, for the admirable correspondence between the Old Testament and the New is a clear and a palpable demonstration of its divinity. It is, moreover, to be observed, that this favor of having been constituted the depositaries of the sacred oracles was peculiar to the Jews, and one in which the Gentiles did not at all participate. This is what the Apostle here expressly teaches, since he considers it as an illustrious distinction conferred upon this nation, a pre-eminence over all the kingdoms of the world. ROMANS III., 3. 107 But why again does the Apostle account the possession of these oracles their greatest advantage ? Might not other privileges nave been considered as equal, or even preferable, such as the glorious miracles which God had wrought for the deliverance of the Israelites ; his causing them to pass through the Red Sea, in the face of all the pride and power of their haughty oppressor ; his guiding them through the sandy desert by a pillar of fire by night, and of cloud by day ; his causing them to hear his voice out of the fire, when he descended in awful majesty upon Sinai ; or, finally, his giving them his law, written with his own finger, on tables of stone ? It is rephed, the promises respecting the Messiah, and his coming to redeem men, were much greater than all the others. Apart from these, all the other advantages would not only have been useless, but fatal to the Jews, for, being sin- ners, they could only have served to everwhelm them with despair, in discovering, on the one hand, their corruption, unmitigated by the kind- ness of Jehovah ; and, on the other, the avenging justice of God. In these circumstances they would have been left under the awfiil impos- sibility of finding any expiation for their sins. If, then, God had not added the promises concerning the Messiah, all the rest would have been death to them, and therefore the oracles which contained these promises were the first and chief of their privileges. V. 3.— For what if some did not believe ? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect .' This is not the objection of a Jew, but as it might readily occur is supposed by the Apostle. It is not " But what," as Dr. Macknight translates the first words, it is " For what." The Apostle answers the objection in stating it. " For what if some have not believed ;" that is, " the unbelief of some is no objection to the doctrine." " Will their unbelief destroy the faithfulness of God ?" This repels, and does not, as Dr. Macknight understands it, assert the supposition. The meaning is, that the unbelief of the Jews did not make void God's faithfulness with respect to the covenant with Abraham. Though the mass of his descendants were unbelievers at this time, yet many of them, both then, as the Apostle asserts, chap, xi., 2, and at all other times, were saved in virtue of that covenant. Paul then here antici- pates and meets an objection which might be urged against his asser- tion of the pre-eminence of the Jews over the Gentiles, testified by the fact, that to them God had confided his oracles. The objection is this — ^that since they had not believed in the Messiah whom these oracles promised, this advantage must not only be reckoned of little value, but, on the contrary, prejudicial. In reply to this objection, the Apostle, in the first place, intimates, that their unbelief had not been universal, which is tacitly understood in his only attributing unbelief to some ; for when it is said that some have not believed, it is plainly intimated' that some have beheved. It does not indeed appear that it would have been worthy of the Divine wisdom to have given to one nation, in preference to all others, so ex- cellent and glorious an economy as tiiat of the Old Testament, to have 108 ROMANS HI., 3. chosen them above all otaers of his free love and good pleasure, and to have revealed to them the mysteries respecting the Messiah, while, at the same time, none of them should have responded to all this by a true faith. There is too much glory and too much majesty in the Person of Jesus Christ, and in his vpork of redemption, to allow it to be supposed that he should be revealed only externally, by the word, without profit to some, Isaiah Iv., 10, 11. In all ages, before as well as since the coming of the Messiah, although in a different measure, the gospel has been the ministration of the Spirit. It was fitting, then, that the an- cient promises, which were in substance the gospel, should be accom- panied with a measure of that Divine Spirit who imprints them in the hearts of men, and that as the Spirit was to be poured out on all flesh, the nation of the Jews should not be absolutely deprived of this bless- ing. This was the first answer, namely, that unbelief had not been so general, but that many had profited by the divine oracles, and conse- quently, in respect to them at least, the advantage to the Jews had been great. But the Apostle goes farther ; for, in the second place, he admits that many had fallen in incredulity, but denies that their incre- dulity impeached the faithfulness of God. Here it may be asked whether the Apostle refers to the Jews under the legal economy who did not believe the Scriptures, or to those only who, at the appearing of the Messiah, rejected the gospel. The reference, it may be answered, is both to the one and the other. But it may be said, how could unbelief respecting these oracles be ascribed to the Jews, when they had only rejected the person of Jesus Christ ? For they did not doubt the truth of the oracles ; on the con- trary, they expected with confidence their accomplishment ; they only denied that Jesus was the predicted Messiah. It is replied, that to reject as they did the person of Jesus Christ, was the same as if they had formally rejected the oracles themselTes, since all that was contained in them could only unite and be accomplished in his person. The Jews, therefore, in reality, rejected the oracles, and so much the more was their guilt aggravated, inasmuch as it was their prejudices, and their carnal and unauthorized anticipations of a temporal Messiah, which caused their rejection of Jesus Christ. Thus it was a real dis- belief of the oracles themselves, for all who reject the true meaning of the Scriptures, and attach to them another sense, do in reality dis- believe them, and set up in their stead a phantom of their own imagi- nation, even while they profess to believe the truth of what the Scrip- tures contain. The Apostle, then, had good reason to attribute unbelief to the Jews respecting the oracles, but he denies that their unbehef can make void the faith, or rather destroy the failMulness, of God. By Xhe faithfulness of God some understand the constancy and faith- fulness of his love to the Jews, and they suppose that the meaning is, that while the Jews have at present faUen into imbelief, God wUl not however fail to recall them, as is fully taught in the 11th chapter. But the question here is not respecting the- recall of the Jews, or the con- stancy of God's love to them ; but respecting their condemnation before his tribunal of strict justice, which they attempted to elude by produc ROMANS III., 4. 109 mg these advantages, and in maintaining that if these advantages only led to their condenanation, as the Apostle had said, it was not in sincerity that God had conferred them. This objection alone the Apostle here refutes. The term, then, faith of God, signified his sincerity or faith- fulness, according to which he had given to the Jews these oracles, and the Apostle's meaning is, that the incredulity of the Jews did not im- peach that sincerity and faithfulness, whence it followed that it drew down on then a more just condemnation, as he had shown in the pre ceding chapter. V. 4. — 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. God forbid. — Literally, let it not be, or far be it, a denial frequently made by the Apostle in the same way in this Epistle. It intimates two things, namely, the rejecting of that which the objection would infer, not only what is false, but even impious ; for it is an affront to God to make his faithfulness dependent on the depravity of man, and his favor on our corruption. Though the privileges of the Jew, and the good which God had done for him, terminated only in his condemnation, by reason of his unbelief, it would be derogatory to the Almighty to ques- tion his faithfulness, because of the fault of the unprincipled objects of these privileges. The Apostle also wished to clear his doctrine from this calumny, that God was unfaithful in his promises, and insincere in his proceedings. Let God he true, but every man a liar. — The calling ' of men, inasmuch as it is of God, is faithful and sincere ; but the fact that it produces a result contrary to its nature and tendency, is to be attributed to man, who is always deceitful and vain. If the Jews had not been corrupted by their perversity, their calling would have issued in salvation ; if it has turned to their condemnation, this is to be attri- buted to their own unbelief. We must therefore always distinguish between what comes from God, and what proceeds from man ; that which is from God is good, and right, and true ; that which is from man is evil, and false, and deceitful. Mr. Tholuck grievously errs in his Neological supposition that this inspired Apostle " utters, in the warmth of his discourse, the wish that all mankind might 1)rove cove- nant breakers, as this would only tend to glorify God the more, by being the occasion of manifesting how great is his fidelity." This would be a bad wish ; it would be desiring evil that good might come. It is not a wish. Paul states a truth. God in every instance is to be believed, although this should imply that every man on earth is to be condemned as a liar. As it is written, that thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest mercome when thou art judged. — This passage may be taken either in a passive signification, when thou shalt be judged, or in an active signification, when thou shalt judge. In this latter sense, accord- ing to the translation in Psalm li., 6, the meaning will be clear, if we have recourse to the history referred to in the second book of Samuel, chap, xii., 7, 11, where it was said that Nathan was sent from God to David. In that address, God assumed two characters, the one, of the 110 ROMANS III., 4. party complaining and accusing David as an ungrateful man, who had abused the favors he had received, and who had oifended his benefactor; the other, of the judge who pronounces in his own cause, according to his own accusation. It is to this David answers, in the fourth verse of the Psalm : ^^ Against thee, thee only have I sinned, and done this evil in thy sight, that thou mightest be justified when thou spedkest :" As if he had said, thou hast good cause to decide against me ; I have offended thee ; I am ungrateful ; thou hast reason to complain and to accuse me ; thou hast truth and justice in the words which thy Prophet has spoken from thee. He adds, that thou mightest be clear when thou judgest ; that is to say, as my accuser thou wilt obtain the victory over me, before thy tribunal, when thou pronouncest thy sentence. In one word, it signifies, that whether in regard to the ground of that sentence or its form, David had nothing to allege against the judgment which God had pronounced in his own cause, and that he fully acknowledged the truth and justice of God. Hence, it clearly follows, that when God pleads against us, and sets be- fore us his goodness to us, and on the other hand, the evil return we have made, it is always found that God is sincere and true towards us, but that we have been deceivers and unbelieving in regard to him, and therefore that our condemnation is just. This is precisely what the Apostle pro- posed to conclude against the Jews. God had extended to chem his favors, and they had requited them only by their sins, and by a base incredulity. When, therefore, he shall bring them to answer before his judgment-seat, God will decide that he had been sincere in respect to them, and that they, on the contrary, had been wicked, whence will follow their awful but just condemnation. Paul could not have adduced anything more to the purpose than the example and w ords of David, on a subject altogether similar, nor more solidly have replied to the objec- tion supposed. The answer of the Apostle will lead to the same conclusion, if the passive sens& be taken. Thou shalt be judged. Though so eminent a servant of God, David had been permitted to fall into his foul trans- gressions, that God might be justified in the declarations of his word, which assert that all men are evil, guilty, and polluted by nature, and that in themselves there is no difference. Had all the eminent saints, whose lives are recorded in Scripture, been preserved blameless, the world would have supposed that such men were an exception to the character given of man in the word of God. They would have con- cluded that human nature is better than it is. But when Abraham and Jacob, David and Solomon, and Peter and many others, were permitted to manifest what is in human nature, God's word is justified in its description of man. God "overcomes when he is judged;" that is, such examples as that of the fall of David, prove that man is what God declares him to be. Wicked men are not afraid to bring God to their bar, and impeach his veracity, by denying that man is as bad as he declares! But by such examples God i? justified. The passive sense, then, of the word " judge," is a good and appropriate meaning ; and the phrase acquitting, or clearing, or overcoming, may be applicable, not to the person who judges God, but to God who is judged. This meaning is ROMANS III., 7. Ill also entirely to the Apostle's purpose. Let all men be accounted liars, rather than impugn the veracity of God, because, in reality, all men are in themselves such. Whenever, then, the Divine testimony is contra- dicted by human testimony, let man be accounted a liar. V. 5. — But if our unrighteousness commend the righteousness of God, what shall w« say.' Is God unrighteous who taketh vengeance ? (I speak as a man.) Out of the answer to the question in the first verse of this chapter, another objection might arise, which is here supposed. It is such as a Jew would make, but is proposed by the Apostle classing himself with the Jews, as is intimated, when he says I speak as a man, just as any writer is in the habit of stating objections in order to obviate them. The objection is this ; if then it be so that the righteousness of God, — ^that righteousness which is revealed in the gospel, chap, i., 17, by the imputation of which men are justified, — if that righteousness which God has provided is more illustriously manifested by our sm, showing how suitable and efiicacious it is to us as sinners, shall it not be said that God is unjust in punishing the sin that has this eflfect ? What shall we say ? or what answer can be made to such an objection ? Is God, or ratlier, is not God unjust, who in this case taketh vengeance ' This is a sort, of insult against the doctrine of the gospel, as if the objection was so strong and well founded that no reply could be made to it. / speaJc as a man. — That is to say, in the way that the impiety of men, and their want of reverence for God, lead them to speak. The above was, in effect, a manner of reasoning common among the Jews and other enemies of the gospel. It is, indeed, such language as is often heard, that if such doctrines as those of election and special grace be true, men are not to be blamed who reject the gospel. V. 6. — God forbid ; for then how shall God judge the world ? Far be it. — Paul thus at once rejects such a consequence, and so perverse a manner of reasoning, as altogether inadmissible, and proceeds to answer it by showing to what it would lead, if admitted. For then how shall God judge the world ? — If the objection were well founded, it would entirely divest God of the character of judge of the world. The reason of this is manifest, for there is no sin that any man can commit which does not exalt some perfection of God, in the way of contrast. If, then^^t be concluded, that because unrighteousness in man illustrates the righteousness of God, God is unrighteous when he taketh vengeance, it must be further said, that there is no sin that God can justly punish ; whence it follows that God can no longer be the judge of the world. But this would subvert all order and all religion. The objection, then, is such that, were it admitted, all the religion in the world would at once be annihilated. For those sins, for which men will be everlastingly punished, will no doubt be made to manifest God's glory. Such is the force of the Apostle's reply. V. 7.— For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory ; xtij yet am I also judged as a sinner .' 112 ROMANS III., 8. This verse is generally supposed to contain the objection here reite rated, which was before stated in the 5th verse. It would appear strange, however, that the Apostle should in this manner repeat an objection, in a way, too, in which it is not strengthened, which he had effectually removed, and that after proposing it a second time he should add nothing to his preceding reply, farther than denouncing it. It is not then a repetition of the same objection, but a second way in which Paul replies to what had been advanced in the 5th verse. In the preceding verse he had, in his usual brief, but energetic manner, first repudiated the consequence alleged in the 5th verse, and had next replied to it by a particular reference, which proved that it was inadmissible. Here by the word For, he introduces another consideration, and proceeds to set aside the objection, by exposing the inconsistency of those by whom it was preferred. The expression ( «ayu ) I also, shows that Paul speaks here in his own person, and not in that of an opponent, for otherwise he would not have said, I also, which marks an application to a particular individual. His reply then here to the objection is this : If, according to those by whom it is supposed and brought forward, it would be unrighteous in God to punish any action which redounds to his own glory, Paul would, in like manner, say, that if his lie — ^his false doc- trine, as his adversaries stigmatized it, commended the truth of God, they, according to their own principle, were unjust, because on this account they persecuted him as a sinner. In this manner he makes their objection recoil upon those by whom it was advanced, and refutes them by referring to their own conduct towards him, so that they could have nothing to reply. For it could not be denied that the doctrine which Paul taught respecting the justification of sinners solely by the unrighteousness of God, whether true or false, ascribed all the glorv of their salvation to God. V. 8. — And not rather (as we be slanderously reported, and as gome affirm that we say). Let us do evil that good may come ; whose damnation is just. This is the third thing which the Apostle advances against the objection of his adversaries, and is in substance, that they established as a good and just principle, what they ascribed to him as a crime, namely, that men might do evil that good may come. They calumniously imputed to Paul and his fellow-laborers this impious maxim, in order to render them odious, while it was they themselves who maintained it. For if, according to them, God was unrighteous in punishing the unrighteous- ness of men when their unrighteousness redounded to his glory, it fol- lowed that the Apostles might without blame do evil, provided that out of it good should arise. Their own objection then proved them guilty of maintaining that same hateful doctrine which they so falsely laid to his charge. As we be slanderously reported. — Here Paul satisfies himself with stigmatizing as a slanderous imputation this vile calumny, from which the doctrine he taught was altogether clear. Whose damnation is just. — This indignant manner of cutting short the matter, by simply affirming the righteous condemnation of his adversaries, was the more proper, ROMANS III., 9. 113 not only as ihey were calumniators, but also because the principle of doing evil that good might come, was avowed by them in extenuation of sin and unbelief. It was fitting, then, that an expression of abhor- rence, containing a solemn denunciation of the vengeance of God, on account of such a complication of perversity and falsehood, should for ever close the subject. On these verses we may observe that men often adduce specious reasonings to contradict the decisions of the Divine word ; but Christians ought upon every subject implicitly to credit the testimony of God, though many subtle and plausible objections should present themselves, which they are unable to answer. V. 9. — What then, are we better than they ? No, in no wise : for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin. Here commences the second part of the chapter, in which, having proposed and replied to the above objections to his 'doctrine, Paul now resumes the thread of his discourse. In the two preceding chapters, he had asserted the guilt of the Gentiles and of the Jews separately ; in what follows he takes them together, and proves by express testimonies from Scripture that all men are sinners, and that there is none right- eous, no not one. In this manner he follows up and completes his ar- gument to support the conclusion at which he is about to arrive in the 20th verse, which all along he had in view, namely, that by works of law no man can be justified, and with the purpose of fully unfolding in verses 21, 22, 23, and 24, the means that God has provided for our justi- fication, which he had briefly announced, ch. i., 17. In the verse before us he shows that, although he has admitted that the advantages of the Jews over the Gentiles are great, it must not thence be concluded that the Jews are better than they. When he says, " are we better," he classes himself with the Jews, to whom he was evidently referring ; but when, in the last clause of the verse, he employs the same term "we" he evidently speaks in his own person, although, as in some other places, in the plural number. What then ? Are we better than they ? — The common translation here is juster than Mr. Stuart's; which is, "have we any preference ?" The Jews had a preference. The Apostle allows that they had many advantages, and that they had a preference over the Gentiles ; but he denies that they were better. Not at all. — By no means. This is a strong denial of what is the subject of the question. Then he gives the reason of his denial ; namely, that he had before proved both Jews and Gentiles that they are all under sin. All not only signifies that there were sinners among both Jews and Gentiles, for the Jews did not deny this ; on this point there was no difierence between them and the Apostle ; but he includes them all singly, without one exception. It is in this sense of universality that what he has hitherto said, both of Jews and Gentiles, must be taken. Of all that multitude of men there was not one found who had not wandered from the right way. One alone, Jesus Christ, was without sin, and it is on this account that the 8 114 ROMANS III., 10. Scriptures call him the " Just or Righteous One," to distinguish him by this singular character from the rest of men. " Under sin." That is to say, guilty; for it is in relation to the tri- bunal of Divine justice that the Apostle here considers sin, in the same way as he says. Gal. iii., 22, " The Scripture hath concluded (shut up) all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe." That it is in this sense we must understand the expression under sin, and not as Roman Catholic commentators explain it, as under the dominion of sin, evidently appears, 1st, Because in this discussion, to be under sin, is opposed to being under grace. Now, to be under grace, Rom. vi., 14, 15, signifies to be in a state of justi fication before God, our sins being pardoned. To be under sin, then, signifies to be guilty in the eye of justice. 2d, It is in reference to the tribunal of Divine justice, and in the view of condemnation, that Paul has all along been considering sin, both in respect to Jews and Gentiles. To be under sin, then, can only signify to be guilty, since he here repeats in summary all that he had before advanced. Finally, he explains his meaning clearly when he says, in verse 19, " that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God." V. 10. — Aa it is written, There is none righteous, no not one. Afler having proceeded in his discussion, appeaUng to the natural sentiments of conscience and undeniable fact, Paul now employs the au- thority of Scripture, and alleges several passages drawn from the books of the Old Testament, written at diiferent times, more clearly to establish the universal guilt both of Jews and Gentiles, in order that he might prove them all under condemnation before the tribunal of God. There is none righteous. — This passage may be regarded as the leading pro- position, the truth of which the Apostle is about to establish by the following quotations. None could be more appropriate or better adapted to his purpose, which was to show that every man is in himself entirely divested of righteousness. There is none righteous, no not one. Not one possessed of a righteousness that can meet the demands of God's holy law. The words in this verse, and those contained in verses 1 1 and 12, are taken from Psalms xiv. and liii., which are the same as to the sense, although they do not follow the exact expressions. But does it sdem proper that Paul should draw a consequence in relation to all, from what David has only said of the wicked of his time ? The answer is, that the terms which David employs are too strong not to contemplate the universal sinfulness of the human race. " The Lord looked down from heaven upon the children of men, to see if there were any that did understand, and seek God. They are all gone aside ; they are all together become filthy ; there is none that doeth good, no, not one." This notifies universal depravity, so that, according to the Prophet, the application is just. It is not that David denies that God had sanctified some men by his Spirit : for, on the contrary, in the same Psalm, he speaks of the afflicted, of whom God is the refuge ; but the intention ROMANS III., 10. 115 is to say that, in their natural condition, without the grace of regenera- tion, which God vouchsafes only to his people, who are a small number, the whole human race is in a state of universal guilt and condemnation. This is also what is meant by Paul, and it is the use, as is clear from the context, that he designed to make of this passage of David, ac- cording to which none are excepted in such a way as that, if God ex- amined them by their obedience to the law, they could stand before him : and, besides this, whatever hohness is found in any man, it is not by the efficacy of the law, but by that of the gospel, and, if they are now sanctified, they were formerly under sin as well as others ; so that it remains a truth that all who are under the law, to which the Apostle is exclusively referring, are under sin, that is, guilty before God. Through the whole of this discussion it is to be observed that the Apostle makes no reference to the doctrine of sanctification. It is to the law exclusively that he refers, and here, without qualification, he asserts it as a universal truth, that there is none righteous — ^not one who possesses righteousness, that is, in perfect conformity to the law ; and his sole object is to prove the necessity of receiving the righteousness of God in order to be delivered from condemnation. The passage then, here adduced by Paul, is strictly apphcable to his design. Dr. Macknight supposes that this expression, " there is none right- eous," applies to the Jewish common people, and is an Eastern expres- sion, which means that comparatively very few are excepted. There is not the shadow of ground for such a supposition. It is evident that both the passages quoted, and the Apostle's argument, require that every individual of the human race be included. And on what pretence can it be restricted to " the Jewish common people ?" Whether were they or their leaders the objects of the severest reprehensions of our Lord during his ministry ? Did not Jesus pronounce the heaviest woes on the Scribes and Pharisees ? Matt, xxiii., 15. Did he not tell the chief priests and elders that the publicans and the harlots go into the kingdom of heaven before them ? Matt, xxi., 31. Mr. Stuart also supposes that the charge is not unlimited, and justifies this, by alleging that the believing Jews must be excepted. But it is clear that the believing Jews are not excepted. For though they are now delivered, yet they were by nature under sin as well as others, and that all men are so is what Paul is teaching, without having the small- est reference to the gospel or its effects. In this manner Dr. Macknight and Mr. Stuart, entirely mistaking the meaning of the Apostle and the whole drift of his argument, remove the foundation of the proofs he adduces, that all men are sinners. Mr. Stuart also appears to limit the charges to the Jews, and in support of this refers to the 9th and 19th verses. The 9th verse speaks of both Jews and Gentiles, and the purpose of the 19th evidently is to prove that the Jews are not excepted, while the 20th clearly shows that the whole race of mankind are in- cluded, it being the general conclusion which the Apostle draws from all he had said, from the 18th verse of the first chapter, respecting both Jews and Gentiles, of whom he affirms, in the 9th verse, that they were 116 ROMANS ni , 10. all under sin. And is it not strictly true, in the fullest import of the term, that there is none righteous in himself, no, not one ? Is not righteousness the fulfilling of the law ? And do not the Scriptures testify, and everywhere show, that " there is no man that sinneth not ?" 1 Kings viii., 46. " Who can say I have made my heart clean, I am pure from my sin ?" Prov. xx., 9. " For there is not a just mar. upon earth, that doeth good and sinneth not." Eccl. vii., 20. And the Apostle James, including himself as well as his brethren to whom he wrote, declares, " In many things we all offend."* Like Mr. Stuart, Taylor of Norwich, in his Commentary, supposes that in this and the following verses to the 1 9th, the Apostle means no uni- versality at all, but only the far greater part, and that they refer to bodies of people, of Jews and Gentiles in a collective sense, and not to particular persons. To this President Edwards, in his treatise on Original Sin, p. 245, replies, " If the words which the Apostle uses, do not most fully and determinately signify an universality, no words ever used in the Bible are sufficient to do it. I might challenge any man to produce any one paragraph in the Scripture, from the beginning to the end, where there is such a repetition and accumulation of terms, so strongly and emphatically, and carefully, to express the most perfect and absolute universality, or any place to be compared to it. What instance is there in the Scripture, or indeed any other writing, when the meaning is only the much greater part, where this ineaning is signified in such a manner by repeating such expressions — They are all — they are all — they are all — together — every one — all the world ; joined to multiplied negative terms, to show the universality to be without exception ; saying. There is no flesh — there is none — there is none — there is none — there is none, four times over ; besides the addition of no, not one — no, not one — once and again ! When the Apostle says. That every mouth may he stopped, must we suppose that he speaks only of those two great col- * " Here a question," it is observed in the Presbyterian Review, " arises, vrhich materially affects the interpretation of the next two verses, — ' whether Paul continues to devote himself to the inculpation of the Jews only, or of all mankind.' It is natural, of course, to refer the quotations from the Old Testament to the sentiment which is nearest them, that all, whether Jews or Gentiles, are under sin ; and it is right to do so, unless some strong reason can be shown to the contrary. Mr Stuart imagines he has discovered such a reason, in the alleged fact that, ' in the Old Testament, in the con- nection in which they stand, some of the passages have not an unlimited signification.' But this argument, if of any weight at all, proves a great deal too much. For, if their original meaning was so specific as not to comprehend all the world, it was likewise so specific as not to comprehend all the Jews. On Mr. Stuart's supposition most of them refer primarily to the ' impious part of the Jewish nation.' Would then those who made their boast of God, submit to be marked as of this fraternity .' No, not one of them would identify himself with the impious ; and the arrows which the Apostle de- signed to pierce their hearts, would prove either pointless or misdirected, If, therefore. We must restrict the signification of these verses, according to our previous views of their force in the passages whence they have been transplanted, let us do so consist- ently, and aSirm at once, that the Apostle, wishing to bring home guilt to the Jewish people (for we go on Mr. Stuart's own supposition), adduced authorities which oear only upon part of them, and were of no efficacy for the conviction of the whole. But, if this is too appalling for our acceptance, let us renounce the argument which involves it ; let us learn from Paul himself the object of his own citations, connect them (as is most natural) with the nearest context, and understand them as expressive of the most perfect and absolute universality." RoM^vs 'n. 'I. 117 lective bodies, figuratively ascrib'wg to each of them a mouth, and means that those two mouths are stopped ?" Again, p. 241, " Here the thing which I would prove, viz., that mankind, in their first state, before they are interested in the benefits of Christ's redemption, are universally wicked, is declared with the utmost possible fulness and precision. So that, if here this matter be not set forth plainly, ex- pressly, and fiilly, it must be because no words can do it ; and it is not in the power of language, or any manner of terms or phrases, however contrived and heaped one upon another, determinately to signify any such thing." v. 11. — ^There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God. Paul here applies equally to Jews and Gentiles, that which he charges upon the Gentiles, Eph. iv., 18. " Having the understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness (or hardness) of their hearts." This is true of every individual of the human race naturally. " The na- tural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God ; for they are foolishness unto him," In the parable of the sower, the radical dis- tinction between those who finally reject, and those who receive the word and bring forth fruit, is, that they who were fruitful " understood" the word, while the others understood it not. Matt, xiii., 19-23, and the new man, he who is bom again, is said to be renewed in knowledge, after the image of Him that created him. The assertion, then, in this passage, requires no limitation with respect to those who are now be- lievers, for they were originally like others. All men are naturally ignorant of God, and by neglecting the one thing needful, show no un- derstanding. They act more irrationally than the beasts. None that seeketh after God. — To seek God is an expression fre- quently used in Scripture to denote the acts of religion and piety. It supposes the need all men have to go out of themselves to seek else- where their support, their life and happiness, and the distance at which naturally we are fi:om God, and God irom us, — we by our perversity, and he by his just wrath. It teaches how great is the blindness of those who seek anything else but God, in order to be happy, since true wis- dom consists in seeking God for this, for he alone is the sovereign good to man. It also teaches us that during the whole course of our life, God proposes himself as the object that men are to seek, Isaiah Iv., 6, for the present is the time of his calling them, and if they do not find him, it is owing to their perversity, which causes them to flee from him, or to seek him in a wrong way. To seek God is, in general, to answer to all his relative perfections ; that is to say, to respect and adore his Sovereign Majesty, to instruct ourselves in his word as the primary truth, to obey his commandments as the commandments of the Sovereign Legislator of men, to have recourse to him by prayer as the origin of all things. In particular, it is to have recourse to his mercy by repentance ; it is to place our confidence in Him ; it is to ask for his Holy Spirit to support us, and to implore his protection and bless- 118 ROMANS III., 13. ing ; and all this through him who is the way to the Father, and who declares, that no man cometh to the Father but by him. v. 12. — They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable ; there is none that doeth good, no, not one. Sin is a wandering or departure from the right way ; that is to say, out of the way of duty and. obligation, out of the way of the means which conduct to felicity. These are the ways open before the eyes of men to walk in them ; he who turns from them wanders out of the way. The Prophet here teaches what is the nature of sin, he also shows us what are its consequences ; for as the man who loses his way cannot have any rest in his mind, nor any security, it is the same with the sinner ; and as a wanderer cannot restore himself to the right way without the help of a guide, in the same manner the sinner cannot restore himself, if the Holy Spirit comes not to his aid. They are to- gether become unprofitable. — They have become corrupted, or have rendered themselves useless ; for everything that is corrupted loses its use. They are become unfit for that for which God made them ; un- profitable to God, to themselves, and to their neighbor. There is none that doeth good, no, not one — ^not one who cometh up to the require- ments of the law of God. This is the same as is said above, there is none righteous, and both the Prophet and the Apostle make use of this repetition to enhance the greatness and the extent of human corruption. V. 13. — Their throat is an open sepulchre ; with their tongues they have used de- ceit ; the poison of asps is under their lips. What the Apostle had said in the preceding verses was general, he now descends to something more particular, both respecting words and actions, and in this manner follows up his assertion that there is none that doeth good, by showing that all men are engaged in doing evil. As to their words, he marks in this and the following verse, all the organs of speech, the throat, the tongue, the lips, the mouth. All this tends to aggravate the depravity of which he speaks. The first part of this verse is taken from Psalm v., 9, and the last from Psalm cxl., 3. Open Sepulchre. — This figure graphically portrays the con- versation of the wicked. Nothing can be more abominable to the senses than an open sepulchre, where a dead body beginning to putrify steams forth its tainted exhalations. What proceeds out of their mouth is infected and putrid ; and as the exhalation from a sepulchre proves the corruption within, so it is with the corrupt conversation of sinners. With their tongues they have used deceit — ^used them to deceive their neighbor, or they have flattered with the tongue, and this flattery is joined with the intention to deceive. This also characterizes, in a striking manner, the way in which men employ speech to deceive each other, in bargains, and in everything in which their interest is con- cerned. The poison of asps is under their lips. — This denotes the mortal poison, such as that of vipers or asps, that lies concealed under the lips, and is emitted in poisoned words. As these venomous crea- tures kill with their poisonous sting, so slanderers and evil-minded per ROMANS III ,18 119 sons destroy the characters of their neighbors. " Death and life," it is said, in the book of Proverbs, " are in the power of the tongue." V 14. — Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness. This is taken from Psalm x., 7. Paul describes in this and the fore- going verse the four principal vices of the tongue, filthy and infected discourse, deceitful flatteries, subtle and piercing evil speaking, finally outrageous and open malediction. This last relates to the extraordi- nary propensity of men to utter imprecations against one another, pro- ceeding from their being hateful, and hating one another. Bitterness apphes to the bitterness of spirit to which men give vent by bitter words. All deceit and fraud is bitter in the end ; that is to say, desolating and afiiicting. " They bend their bows to shoot their arrows, even bitter words." " Their teeth are spears and arrows, and their tongue a sharp sword ;" Psalm Ixiv., 3 ; Ivii., 4. " The tongue," says the Apostle James, " is set on fire of hell." V. 15. — Their feet are swift to shed blood. After having spoken of men's sinfulness as shown by their woros, the Apostle comes to that of actions, which he describes in this and the two following verses. This passage is taken from Isaiah lix., 7, and from Proverbs i., 16, which describe the general sinfulness of men, the injustice and violence committed among them, and how ready they are to shed blood when not restrained either by the consideration of the good of society, or by fear of the laws. Every page of history attests the truth of this awful charge. V. 16. — Destruction and misery are in their ways. This declaration, taken also from Isaiah lix., 7, must be understood in an active sense ; that is to say, men labor to destroy and to ruin one another ; proceeding in their perverse ways, they cause destruction and misery. v. 17.— And the way of peace have they not known. They have not known peace to follow and approve of it ; and are not acquainted with its ways, in which they do not walk in order to procure the good of their neighbor, for peace imparts prosperity, or the way to maintain concord and friendship. Such is a just descrip- tion of man's ferocity, which fills the world with animosities, quarrels, hatred in the private connexions of famihes and neighborhoods ; and with revolutions, and wars, and murders among nations. The most savage animals do not destroy so many of their own species to appease their hunger, as man destroys of his fellows, to satiate his ambition, his revenge, or cupidity. V. 18.— There is no fear of God before their eyes. This is taken from Psalm xxxvi., 1. After having followed up the 120 ROMANS III., 18. general charge, that there is " none righteous, no not one " by produc- ing the preceding awful descriptions of human depravity, and having begun with the declaration of man's want of understanding, and his alienation from God, the Apostle here refers to the primary source of all these evils, with which he sums them up. There is " no fear of God before their eyes." They have not that reverential fear of him which is the beginning of wisdom, which is connected with departing from evil, and honoring and obeying him, and is often spoken of in Scripture as the sum of all practical religion. On the contrary, they are regardless of his majesty and authority, his precepts and his threat- enings. It is astonishing that men, while they acknowledge that there is a God, should act without any fear of his displeasure. Yet this is their character. They fear a worm of the. dust like themselves, but disregard the Most High, Isaiah li., 12, 13. They are more afraid of man than of God — of his anger, his contempt, or ridicule. The fear of man prevents them from doing many things from which they are not restrained by the fear of God. That God will put his fear in the hearts of his people, is one of the distinguishing promises of the new covenant, which shows that prior to this it is not found there. The Apostle could have collected a much greater number of passages from the law and the prophets to prove what he intended, for there is nothing more frequent in the Old Testament than the reproaches of God against the Israelites, and all men, on account of their abandoning themselves to sin ; but these form a very complete description of the reign of sin among men. The first of them, ver. 10, prefers the general charge of unrighteousness. The second, ver. 11, 12, marks the internal character or disorders of the heart; the third, ver. 13, 14, those of the words ; the fourth, ver. 15, 16, 17, those of the actions ; and the last, ver. 18, declares the cause of the whole. In the first and second we see the greatness of the corruption, and its universality. Its greatness, in the extinction of all righteousness, of all wisdom, of all reh- gion, of all rectitude, of all that is proper, and, in one word, of all that is good. Its universality, in that it has seized upon the whole man, without leaving anything that is sound or entire. In the third, we observe the four vices of the tongue which have been already pointed out, namely, corrupt conversation, flattery and deceit, envenomed slan- der, outrageous malediction. In the fourth, justice violated in what is most sacred— the hfe of man ; charity subverted in doing the evil, which it prohibits ; and that which is most fundamental and most necessary, peace destroyed. And in the last, what is taost essential entirely cast off, which is the fear of God. In this manner, having commenced his enumeration of the evils to which men are addicted, by pointing out their want of understanding and desire to seek God, the Apostle terminates his description by exposing the source from whence they all flow, which is, that men are destitute of the fear of God,— his fear is not before their eyes to restrain them from evil. They love not his character, not rendering to it that veneration which is due they respect not his authority. Such is the state of human nature, while the heart is unchanged From all this a faint idea may be formed of ROMANS III., 19. 121 what will ne the future state of those who shall perish, from whom the gospel has been hid, — of those whose minds the god of this world has blinded, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine into them. Then the various restraints which in this life operate so powerfully, so extensively, and so constantly, will be taken off, and the natural depravity of fallen man will burst forth in all its unbridled and horrible wickedness. V. 19.— Now we know that whatsoever thing the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law ; that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. The article is in this verse prefixed to the term law, while it is want- ing in the following verse. This shows that here the reference is to the legal dispensation, and applies in the first clause specially to the Jews, while in the last clause, the expression " all the world," and in the following verse the term " law," without the article, refer to all mankind. Paul here anticipates two general answers which might be made to those passages which he had just quoted, to convict the Jews, as well as all other men, of sin. First, that they are applicable not to the Jews but to the Gentiles, and that therefore it is improper to employ them against the Jews. Second, that even if they referred to the Jews, they could only be applied to some wicked persons among them, and not to the whole nation, so that what he intended to prove could not thence be concluded, namely, that no man can be justified before God by the law. In opposition to these two objections, he says, that when the law speaks, it speaks to those who are under it — ^to the Jews, there- fore ; and that it does so in order that the mouths of all, without dis- tinction, may be stopped. If God should try the Jews according to the law, they could not stcind before his strict justice, as David said, " If thou, Lord, shouldst mark iniquity ; O Lord, who shall stand ?" Psalm cxxx., 3. And, in addition to this, whatever there was of piety and holiness in some, it was not by the efficacy of the law, but by that of the gospel — ^not by the spirit of bondage., but by the spirit of adoption ; so that it remains true, that all those who are under the law are under sin. That, or in order that. — This must be taken in three senses. 1st, The law brought against the Jews those accusations and reproaches of which Paul had produced a specimen in the passages quoted, in order that every mouth may be stopped ; this is the end which the law pro- Eosed. 2d, This vras also the object of God, when he gave the law, for e purposed to make manifest the miquity of man, and the rights of justice, Rom. v., 20. 3d, It was likewise the result of the legal economy. Every mouth may he stopped. — This expression should be carefully remarked. For if a man had fulfilled the law, he would have something to allege before the Divine tribunal, to answer to the de- mands of justice ; but when convicted as a sinner, he can only be silent — ^he can have nothing to answer to the accusations against him ; he must remain convicted. This silence, then, is a silence of confes- sion, of astonishment, and of conviction. This is what is elsewhere i22 ROMANS III., 20. expressed by confusion of face. " Lord, righteousness belongeth unto thee ; but unto us, confusion of faces." Daniel ix., 7. And all the world. — That is to say, both Jews and Gentiles. The first clause of this verse, though specially applicable to the Jews, proves, that since they who ' enjoyed such peculiar privileges were chargeable with those things of which the law accused them, the rest of mankind, whom the Apostle here includes under the term " all the world," must also be under the same condemnation. The law of nature, written on their consciences, sufficiently convicts the Gentiles, and as to the Jews, who try to stifle the conviction of their consciences by abusing the advantages of the law, that law itself, while it accuses, convicts them also. This expression, then, must include the whole human race. It applies to all men, of every age and every nation. None of all the children of Adam are excepted. Words cannot more clearly include, in one general condemnation, the whole human race. Who can be excepted 1 Not the Gentiles, since they have all been destitute of the knowledge of the true God. Not the Jews, for them the law itself accuses. Not believers, for they are only such through their acknowledgment of their sins, since grace is the remedy to which they have resorted to be freed from condemnation. All the world, then, signifies all men universally. May become guilty. — That is, be compelled to acknowledge them- selves guilty. The term guilty signifies subject to condemnation, and respects the Divine judgment. It denotes the state of a man justly charged with a crime, and is used both in the sense of legal responsi- bility and of blameworthiness. This manifestly proves, that in all this discussion the Apostle considers sin in relation to the condemnation which it deserves. Before God. — When the question respects appear- ing before men, people find many ways of escape, either by concealing their actions, by disguising facts, or by disputing what is right. And even when men pass in review before themselves, self-love finds excuses, and various shifts are resorted to, and false reasonings, which deceive. But nothing of this sort can have place before God. For although the Jews flattered themselves, in the confidence of their own righteousness, and on this point all men try to deceive themselves, it will be entirely different in the day when they shall appear before the tribunal of God ; for then there will be no more illusions of conscience, no more excuses, no way to escape condemnation. His knowledge is infinite, his hand is omnipotent, his justice is incorruptible, and from him nothing can be concealed. Before him, therefore, every mouth will be stopped, and all the world must confess themselves guilty. V. 20.— Therefore by the deeds of law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight ; for by law is the knowledge of sin. This is the final conclusion drawn from the whole of the preceding discussion, beginning at verse 18th of chapter 1st. The Apostle had shown that both the Gentiles and the Jews are under sin ; that is, they have brought down upon themselves the just condemnation of God. He had proved the same thing in the preceding vevse, according to the ROMANS III., 20. 123 Scriptures before quoted. Therefore. — The conclusion, then, from the whole as contained in this verse is evident. By the deeds of the law, or as in the original, of law. — The reference here is to every law that God has given to man, whether expressed in words, or imprinted in the heart. It is that law which the Gentiles have transgressed, which they have naturally inscribed in their hearts. It is that law which the Jews have violated, when they committed theft, adulteries, and sacri- leges, and which convicted them of impiety, of evil speaking, of ca- lumny, of murder, of injustice. In one word, it is that law which shuts the mouth of the whole world, as had been said in the preceding verse, and brings in all men guilty before God. The deeds, or works of law. — ^When it is said, by works of law no flesh shall be justified, it is not meant that the law, whether natural or written, was not capable of justifying. Neither is it meant that the righteousness thus resulting from man's fulfilment of all its demands, would not be a true righteousness, but that no man being able to plead this fulfilment of the law before the tribunal of God — that perfect obe- dience which it requires — ^no man can receive by the law a sentence pronouncing him to be righteous. To say that the works of the law if performed are good and acceptable, and would not form a true right- eousness, would contradict what had been affirmed in the preceding chapter, verse 13 — that the doers of the law shall he justified. The Apostle, then, does not propose here to show either the want of power of the law in itself, or of the insufficiency of its works for justification, but solely to prove that no man fulfils the law, that both Gentiles and Jews are under sin, and that all the world is guilty before God. No flesh. — This reference appears to be to Psalm cxliii. David there says, " no man living." Paul says, " no flesh." The one is a term which marks a certain dignity, the other denotes meanness. The one imports that whatever excellence there might be supposed to be in man, he eould not be justified before God ; and the other, that being only flesh, that is to say, corruption and weakness, he ought not to pretend to justification by himself. Thus, on whatever side man regards him- self, he is far from being able to stand before the strict judgment of God. Shall be justified in his sight. — The meaning of the term justified, as used by the Apostle in the whole of this discussion, is evident by the different expressions in this verse. It appears by the therefore with which the verse begins, that it is a conclusion which the Apostle draws from the whole of the foregoing discussion. Now, all this dis cussion has been intended to show that neither Gentiles nor Jews could elude the condemnation of the Divine judgment. The conclusion, then, that no flesh shall be justified in the sight of God by the works of law, can only signify, that no man can be regarded as righteous, or obtain by means of his works a favorable sentence from Divine justice. It is in this sense that David has taken the term, justify in Psalm cxliii., to which the Apostle had reference, Enter not into judgment with thy servant ; for in thy sight shall no man living he justified. The terms, in his sight, testify the same thing, for they accommodate themselves 124 ROMANS III., 20. to the idea of a tribunal, before which men must appear to be judged. It is the same with regard to the otlier terms, hy the deeds of law ; for if we understand a justification of judgment, the sense is plain ; no one can plead before the tribunal of God a perfect and complete fulfilment of the law, such as strict and exact justice demand ; no one, therefore, can in that way obtain justification. In justifying men God does all, and men receiving justification, contribute nothing towards it. This is in opposition to the justification proposed by the law by means of obe- dience, in which way a man would be justified by his own righteous- ness, and not by the righteousness which God has provided and bestows. For by the law is the knowledge of sin. — ^Paul does not here intend simply to say, that the law makes known in general the nature of sin, inasmuch as it discovers what is acceptable or displeasing to God, what he commands, and what he forbids ; but he means to afiSirm that the law convicts men of bejng sinners. For his words refer to what he had just before said in the preceding verse, that all that the law saiih, it saith to them who are under the law ; that every mouth may be stop- ped, and all the world may become guilty before God, which marks a conviction of sin. But how, it may be said, does the law give that knowledge or that conviction of sin ? It does so in two ways. By the appUcation of its commandments, and its prohibitions in the present state in which man is placed, for it excites and awakens the conscience, and gives birth to accusing thoughts. This is common both to the written law and the law of nature. It does this, secondly, by the de- claration of punishments and rewards which it sets before its trans- gressors and observers, and as it excites the conscience, and gives rise to fear and agitation, thus bringing before the eyes of men the dreadful evil of sin. This also is alike common to the law of nature and. the written law. Here it is important to remark, that God, having purposed to esta- bhsh but one way of justification for all men, has permitted, in his providence, that all should be guilty. For if there had been any ex- cepted, there would have been two different methods of justification, and consequently two true religions, and two true churches, and believ- ers would not have had that oneness of communion which grace produces. It was necessary, then, that all should become guilty, Rom. xi., 32 ; Gal. iii., 22. The Scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe. Gal. iii., 22 ; Rom. xi., 32. ROMANS in., 21 125 CHAPTER HI. PART III. ROMANS m., 31. At the opening of his discussion, chap, i., 16, 17, Paul had announced that the gospel is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth, because therein is the righteousness of God revealed. He had said that the righteous by faith shall live, intimating that there is no other way of obtaining life. In proof of this he had declared, that the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, and had shown at large that both Jews and Gentiles are all under sin, and that, therefore, by obedience to law, no flesh shall be justified. He now proceeds to speak more particularly of the righteousness of God provided for man's justification, describing the manner in which it is conferred, and the character of those by whom it is received. To this subject, therefore, he here reverts. . V. 21. — But now the righteousness of God without law is manifested, being witness- ed by the law and the prophets. Now — That is to say, under the preaching of the gospel — in the period of the revelation of the Messiah ; for it denotes the time present, in opposition to that time when God appeared not to take notice of the state of the Gentile nations, as it is said. Acts xvii., 30, " The times of this ignorance God winked at, but now commandeth all men every where to repent." And also in opposition to the legal economy respect- ing the Jews, as again it is said, John i., 17, " The law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ." This is what the Scriptures call " the fulness of times," Eph. i., 10 ; Gal. iv., 4. " The last days," Isa. ii., 2 ; Heb. i., 2 ; Acts ii., 17 ; 1 John ii., 18. " The acceptable year of the Lord," Isa. Ixi., 2. " Now is the accepted time ; behold now is the day of salvation," 2 Cor. vi., 2. The day of the Saviour that Abraham saw, John viii., 56. The righteousness of God. — This is one of the most important ex- pressions in the Scriptures. It frequently occurs both in the Old Testament and the New ; it stands connected with the argument of the whole of the first five chapters of this Epistle, and signifies that fulfil- ment of the law which God had provided, by the imputation of which sinners are saved. Although perfectly clear in itself, its meaning has been involved in much obscurity by the learned labors of some who know not the truth, and by the perversions of others by whom it has been greatly corrupted. By many it has been misunderstood, and has in general been very slightly noticed even by those whose views on the subject are correct and scriptural. To consider its real signification is the more necessary, as it does not appear always to receive that atten- tion from 'Christians which its importance demands. When the ques- tion is put, Why is the gospel the power of God unto salvation ? how 126 ROMANS III., 21. few give the clear and unfaltering answer of the Apostle, Because therein is the righteousness op God revealed. Before attending. to the true import of this phrase, it is proper to advert to some of the significations erroneously attached to it. Of these I shall select only a few examples from many that might be furnished. Origen understood by this righteousness God's attribute of justice ; while Ghrysostom explained it as Divine clemency. According to Dr. Campbell of Aberdeen, the righteousness of God consists in man's conformity to the declared will of God. In his note on Matt, vi., 33, he says, " The righteousness of God, in our idiom, can mean only the justice or the moral rectitude of the Divine nature, which it were absurd in us to seek, it being, as all God's attributes are, inseparable from his essence. But in the Heb. idiom, that righteous- ness, which consists in a conformity to the declared will of God, is called his righteousness. In this way the phrase is used by Paul, Rom. iii., 21, 22 ; x. 3, where the righteousness of God is opposed by the Apostle to that of the unconverted Jews ; and their own righteousness, which he tells us they went about to establish, does not appear to sig- nify their personal righteousness, any more than the righteousness of God signifies his personal righteousness. The word righteousness, as I conceive, denotes there what we should call a system of morality or righteousness, which he denominates their own, because fabricated by themselves, founded partly on the letter of the law, partly on tradition and consisting mostly in ceremonies and mere externals. This crea ture of their own imaginations they had cherished, to the neglect of that purer scheme of morality which was truly of God, which they might have learned even formerly from the law and the prophets properly understood, but now more explicitly from the doctrine of Christ." Such is the explanation by this learned critic of that leading phrase, " the righteousness of God," according to which the reason why the gospel is the power of God unto salvation, is, because therein a pure scheme of morality is revealed. Were this explanation just, so far from being the reason why the gospel should be the means of salvation to sinners, -it would be the cause of their universal and hopeless condemnation. Dr. Macknight supposes, that the righteousness of God signifies a righteousness belonging to faith itself, and not the righteousness conveyed and received by faith. " Righteousness hy faith," he says, on Rom. ii., 18, "is called the righteousness of God, 1st. Because God hath en- joined faith as the righteousness which he will count to sinners, and hath declared that he will accept and reward it as righteousness : 2d. Because it stands in opposition to the righteousness of men, which con- sists in a sinless obedience to the law of God. " Thus, while Dr. Macknight differs from Dr. Campbell in the meaning of the' expression, the righteousness of God, he so far coincides with him in his radical error as to suppose that it does not signify the righteousness which God provides for the salvation of sinners, but the righteousness which he requires them to perform. The explanations of both of these writers ROMANS III., 21. 127 are destructive of the Scripture doctrine of justification, opposed tc the justice of God, subversive of the plein of salvation, and render the whole train of the Apostle's reasoning from Rom. i., 16, to the end of the 4th chapter, inconclusive and self-contradictory. Archbishop Newcombe, whose translations are so much eulogized by Socinians, together with many who have followed him, translates this phrase, " God's method of justification." What the Apostle has de- clared in precise terms, is thus converted into a general and indefinite annunciation, pointing to a different sense. In the Socinian version, as might be anticipated, it is also translated, " God's method of justifica- tion." " The righteousness of God" cannot mean God^s method of justifica- tion, nor the justification which God bestows, because the word trans- lated righteousness does not signify justification. Righteousness and justification are two things quite different. God's righteousness is revealed in the gospel, just as God himself is said to be revealed. To reveal God is not to reveal a method of God's acting, and to reveal God's righteousness is not to reveal a method of God's making sinners righteous, but to reveal the righteousn'ess itself. This righteousness is also said to be of God hy faith, that is, sinners become partakers of it by faith. The righteousness of God, then, is not a method of justifica- tion, but the thing itself which God has provided, and which he confers through faith. Nor can the expression, " the righteousness of God," in the 10th chapter, signify God's method of justification. It is true the Jews were ignorant of God's method of justification, but that is not the thing which is there asserted. They were ignorant of the righteousness which God had provided for the guilty ; and in conse- quence went about to establish their own righteousness. What is there meant by God's righteousness, is seen by the contrast. It is opposed to their own righteousness. Now, it was not a method of justification that the Jews went about to establish, but it was their own righteous- ness which they endeavored to establish — a righteousness, in which they trusted, of their own working. If so, the righteousness of God contrasted with this must be, not a method of justification, but the righteousness which God confers on his people through faith. To establish a man's righteousness, is not to establish a method with re- spect to this, but to establish the thing itself. To say that the gospel is the power of God unto salvation, because that in it is revealed a divine method of justification, or the justification which God bestows, leaves the great question which immediately pre- sents itself utterly without an answer. It gives no light to the reader as to what the gospel reveals. It is only in general a divine scheme of justification. But the language itself, Rom. i., 17, leaves no such un- certainty. It shows that the gospel is the power of God unto salvation, because it reveals God's righteousness, — ^that righteousness which fulfils the demands of his law, which his justice will accept, and which is upon all them that believe. Mr. Tholuck explains the phrase, the righteousness of God, thus : — ' The gospel makes known a way to that perfect fulfilment of the law 128 ROMANS III., 21. which is required by God." What is the meaning of this exposition ? It does not give the trae meaning, and may have a most erroneous im- port. The best that can be said for it is, that it is so dark, and vague, and equivocal, that it may elude condemnation on the principle of its not having any one definite meaning. It is more ambiguous than the answer of an oracle that has only two meanings, for it may have several. Does it mean that the gospel reveals a way by which man may himself fulfil the law, so as to be perfectly righteous ? If Mr. Tholuck does not mean this, the expression might mean it. Does it mean that the law IS not yet fulfilled, but that the gospel reveals a way in which it may be fulfilled ? This is the most obvious sense. Does it mean that the gospel reveals a way in which men perfectly fulfil the law by faith ? This is evidently false, even according to Mr. Tholuck's sentiments ; for though faith were, as held forth by him, " the most excellent of vir- tues," he could, not affirm that it fulfils the law. , After this dark and vague account of the term righteousness, we need not wonder at that most erroneous meaning which he affixes to it in chapter iv., 3.* Mr. Stuart, in his translation of the Epistle, renders this phrase, in Rom. i., 17, and iii., 21, " The justification which is of God;" and in his, explanation of it, " the justification which God bestows, or, the jus- tification cf which God is the author." He observes that this "is a phrase among the most impprtant which the New Testament contains, and fundamental in the right interpretation of the epistle before us." This is true ; and the effect of his misunderstanding the proper signifi- cation of the original word in these passages, and rendering it justifica- tion, instead of righteousness, appears most prominently in several of his subsequent interpretations, especially as shall afterwards be pointed out in the beginning of the 4th chapter, where, like Mr. Tholuck, he entirely misrepresents the doctrine of justification. His translation he endeavors to defend at some length ; but none of his allegations sup- port his conclusion. The proper meaning of the original word in chap, i., 17, and iii., 21, which he makes justification, is righteousness ; and this meaning will apply in the other passages where it is found. In the New Testament it occurs ninety-two times, and, in the common version, is uniformly rendered righteousness. It occurs thirty-six times in the Epistle to the Romans, in which Mr. Stuart has sixteen times translated it righteousness. But he appears to have been led to adopt the translation he has given in the above verses from the supposed * Not only has Mr. Tholuck failed in giving any distinct explanation of the term " the righteousness of God," he has besides entirely mistaken the meaning of that other great leadmg expression, chapter vi., 2, " dead to sin." The former of these terms is laid as the foundation of the doctrine of justification, the latter of that of sanc- tification. After such interpretations as Mr Tholuck has given of these declarations which form the ground-work of the grand subjects of discussion in this EpisUe, is it surprising that he should so often mistake the meaning of the Apostle, and the train of his argument, or in points of high importance directly contradict him ? What has been affirmed of the Commentary of Professor Stuart on this Epistle applies with equal truth to that of Professor Tholuck. " The technicalities of his discussions are a very inadequate compensation for the errors he has broached • and the truth he has elicited may be put in a nut-ahell. The useful illustrations in his work on the Komans bear no proportion to his pernicious errors." ROMANS III., 21. 129 necessity of the case ; and, indeed, this was necessary for Mr. Stuart, who not only denies expressly the imputation of Adam's sin to his pos- terity, but also the imputation of Christ's righteousness to believers. This should put Christians on their guard against a translation founded on the denial that Christ's righteousness is placed to their account for salvation, a doctrine which Dr. Macknight most ignorantly maintains is not to be found in the Bible. Mr. Stuart observes that there are three expressions, viz. " iiKaiouiv,,, iiKaiaiia, and 5i«ai' Jetus Christ, hath abounded unto many. 216 ROMANS v., 16. Not as the offence, so also is the free gift. — There is a likeness between the sin of Adam and the gift of righteousness by Christ. But as m most instances with regard to types, the antitype surpasses the type ; and while, in some respects, the type furnishes a likeness, in others it may be very dissimilar. The ' sin of Adam involved all his posterity in guilt and ruin, as they were all created in him as their head, and consequently in him are gtiilty by his disobedience. This was a shadow of the gift of righteousness by grace. All Christ's seed were created in him, Eph. ii., 10, and are righteous by his obedience. But while the one was type of the other in this respect, there is a great dissimilarity both as to the degree of the evil and of the blessing. The evil brought death, but the blessing not only recovered from ruin, but abounded to unspeakable happiness. If through the offence of one many he dead, or died. — Here it is taken for granted, that "the many" who die, die through Adam's offence. Infants then die through Adam's offence, for they are a part of " the many." But we have before seen that death comes only by sin ; that is, none die who are not sinners, and there is no sin where there is no law, consequently infants are sin- ners, and must be included in the law under which Adam sinned. If infants die by Adam's offence, they must be guilty by Adam's offence ; for God does not visit with the punishment of sin where there is no sin. Grace of God, and gift by grace. — These differ, as the one is the spring and fountain of the other. The gift, namely, the gift of righteousness (ver. 17), is a gift which results purely from grace. Some explain this phrase, as if by a figure one thing is made into two. But they are really two things. By one man Jesus Christ. — The gift comes only by Jesus Christ. Without his atonement for sin, the gift could not have been made. Grace could not operate till justice was satisfied. Much more hath abounded unto many. — The greater abounding cannot possibly be with respect to the greater number of individueds benefited. None are benefited by Christ but those who were ruined in Adam. And only a part of those who were ruined are benefited. In this respect, then, instead of an abounding, there is a shortcoming. The abounding is evidently in the gift extending, not only to the reco- very of what Adam lost, but to blessings which Adam did not possess, and had no reason to expect. The redeemed are raised in the scale of being above all creatures, whereas they were created lower than the angels. Some are of opinion that the Apostle here rests the abounding of the gift on a supposition, which in the following verses he proves. Thus, as so much evil has come by Adam, it may well be supposed that much more good will come by Christ. But this is evidently mis- Laking the meaning altogether. The Apostle does not rest on supposi- tion derived from the nature of the case ; he asserts a fact. He does not say that it may well be supposed that a greater good comes by Christ than the evil that came by Adam ; but he says that the good that comes by Christ does more than repair the evil that came by Adam. V. 3.6.— And not as it was by one tha.t sinned, so is the gift ; for the judgment was by one to condemnation, but the free gift is of many offences unto justification. ROMANS v., 17. 217 By one that sinned. — Many read hy one sin ; but the common read- ing is preferable. The meaning is — in the case of the one that sinned, namely Adam, condemnation came by one offence, but the free gift of righteousness extends to many oflFences, and to life eternal. This is another particular in which the gift exceeds the evil. It not only, as is stated in the last verse, confers more than Adam lost, but it pardons many sins, whereas condemnation came by one sin on the part of Adam. The gift by grace, then, not only procures to him who receives it the pardon of that one offence on account of which he fell under condem- nation ; but it brings to him the pardon of his many personal offences, although these offences deepen and aggravate the condemnation, and bear witness that he allows the deeds of his first father. Judgment, or sentence. — The original word here often itself signifies condemnation, or a condemning sentence ; but as it here issues in condemnation, it must denote simply sentence, a judgment, without involving the nature of that sentence. Condemnation. — Here it is expressly asserted that condemnation has come by the one sin of the one man. If, then, all are condemned by that sin, all must be guilty by it, for the righteous judge would not condemn the innocent. To say that any are con- demned or punished for Adam's sin who are not guilty by it, is to accuse the righteous God of injustice. Can God impute to any man anything that is not true ? If Adam's sin is not oUrs as truly as it was Adam's sin, could God impute it to us ? Does God deal with men as sinners, while they are not truly such ? If God deals with men as sinners on account of Adam's sin, then it is self-evident that they are sinners on that account. The just God could not deal with men as sinners on any account which did not make them truly sinners. The assertion, however, that Adam's sin is as truly ours as it was his, does not imply that it is his and ours in the same sense. It was his person- ally ; it is ours because we were in him. Adam's sin, then, is as truly ours as it was his sin, though not in the same way. By one. — Some make the substantive understood to be man. But though this would be a truth, yet, from the nature of the sentence, it is evident that the substantive understood is not man, but sin; for it is opposed to the many offences. It is, then, the one offence opposed to many offences. Unto justification. — The free gift confers the pardon of the many offences in such a way that the person becomes righteous ; he is of course justified. v. 17. — ^For if by one man's offence death reigned by one ; much more they which receiTe abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness, shall leign in life by one Jesus Christ. By one marCs offence. — Rather by the offence of the one man ; the margin has " by one offence," for which there is no foundation. Death reigned. — ^It is here said that death reigned by the offence of the one man, consequently every one over whom death reigns is involved in that one offence of that one man. The empire of death, then, extends over m- fants ajid all men, on account of the one man. Instead of dying for their actual sins, death is to all men the penalty of the first sin. Reign>- 218 ROMANS V,, 18. ed. — Those who die are here supposed to be the subjects of death and death is considered as their king. If infants were not guilty :ii Adam, they could not be under the dominion of death. If they aic not worthy of condemnation till they sin actually, they would not die till they sin actually. Much more. — Here the abounding of the gift over the evil is specified. Those redeemed by the death of Christ are not merely recovered from the fall, but made to reign through Jesus Christ, to which they had no title in Adam's communion. The saved are described as receiving abundance of grace, or the superabundance, that is, the grace that abounds over the loss. This apphes to all the redeemed. They all receive the superabundance of grace ; they all receive more than was lost. They are also said to receive the super- abounding of the gift of righteousness. This refers to the superior righteousness possessed by the redeemed, which is better than that which in innocence was possessed by Adam ; for theirs is the right- eousness of Christ, the righteousness of him who is God. To this the righteousness of Adam and of angels cannot be compared. Shall reign in life. — Believers are to be kings as well as priests. All this they are to be through the one Jesus Christ ; for as they were one with Adam in his fall, so they are one with Christ in his victory and triumph. If he be a king, they are also kings, for they are one with him as they were one with Adam. They shall not be re-established in the terrestrial paradise, in which man was first placed, subject to the danger of falling ; but shall be conducted to honor and glory and im- mortality in the heavenly world, before the throne of God, without the smallest danger of ever losing that blessing. They shall eat of the tree of life, which, says Christ, " I will give them, not on earth, but in the midst of the paradise of God." Speaking of his sheep in the character of a shepherd, Jesus Christ himself says, " I am come that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly." " I give unto them eternal life, and they shall never perish, neither shall any pluck them out of my hand. My Father, which gave them to me, is greater than all, and none is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand." " Your hfe is hid with Christ in God," Col. iii., 3. By all this we learn the excellence of that hfe in which believers shall reign, by whom it is conferred, its absolute security, and eternal duration. V. 18. — Therefore, as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condem- nation ; even sa by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justi- fication of life. Therefore, or wherefore, then. There are two words in the original — the one word signifies wherefore, the other signifies then, or conse- quently. It states the result of what was said. By the offence of one, or hy one offence. — Both of these are equally true, but the latter ap- pears to be the design of the Apostle, as the word one wants the article. There is nothing in the original corresponding to the terms judgment and free gift, but they are rightly supplied by an ellipsis from verse 16. Condemnation. — Here it is expressly asserted that all men are condemned in the first offence. Infants, then, are included. ROMANS v., 18. 219 If they are condemned, they cannot be innocent — ^they must be sinners foi condemnation would not have come upon them for a sin that is not theirs. The whole human race came under the condemnation of death in all its extent, spiritual," temporal, and eternal. Even so, that is in the same manner. By the righteousness of one, or rather by one righteous- ness. Mr. Stuart prefers the former, because of the antithesis, le his iiKtttdiiaTos, which, he says, " naturally cannot mean anytliing but the righteousness of one (not one righteousness)." But the phrase alluded to can very naturally and properly signify one righteousness, as the obedience of Christ is summed up in his act of obedience to death. Righteousness here, Mr. Stuart renders obedience, holiness, righteous- ness. But it is righteousness in its proper sense. By the one act, of giving himself for our sins, Christ brought in everlasting righteousness. The free gift came upon all men. — How did the free gift of the right- eousness of God come upon all men, seeing all are not saved ? Mr. Stuart explains it, as signifying that righteousness is provided for all. But this is not the Apostle's statement. The coming of the free gift upon all is contrasted with the coming of condemnation on all, and therefore it cannot mean that condemnation actually came upon all, while the free gift was only provided for all. Besides, it is added, unto justification of life. — This is the issue of the coming of the free gift. It ends in the justification of life. Upon all men. — The persons here referred to must be those and those oiuy, who are partakers of justifica- tion, and who shall be finally saved. What then ? Are all men to be justified ? No, but the " all men" here said to be justified, are evi- dently the " all" of every nation, tribe, and kindred, whether Jews or Gentiles, represented by Christ. All who have been one with Adam were involved in his condemnation, and all who are one with Christ shall be justified by his righteousness. No violence is necessary in order to restrict the universality of the terms " all men" as they appear in this verse. General expressions must ever be construed with reference to their connexion, and the con- text suflSciently defines their meaning. There is here an obvious and specific reference to the two heads of the human race, the first and the second man, and the " all men," twice spoken of in this verse, are placed m contrast to each other, as denoting the two families into which the world is divided.* The all men then must be limited to their re- spective heads. When this is understood, the meaning is alike clear and consistent, but without this all is dark and incongruous. If the " all men" in the latter clause of the verse are made to apply to mankind without exception, then it follows that all men are justified, and all are made partakers of Eternal life. But as this would contradict truth and Scripture, so the whole tenor of the Apostle's argument proves that the interpretation already stated is the true one. On account of the offence of Adam, sentence of death was pronounced upon all whom he represented. On account of the righteousness of Jesus Christ, sen- • This division was announced by God in pronouncing sentence on the serpent, " I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed."- Gen. iii., IS. 220 ROMANS T., 18, tence of justification unto life was pronounced in favor of all wliottj he represented, " That the two multitudes," it is observed in the Presbyterian Re- view, "are co-extensive, that the point of the similitude is in some effect common to the whole human race, Mr, Stuart infers, quite as a matter of course, from this 18th verse, ' As by the offence of one, judg- ment came upon all men to condemnation, even so by the righteousness of one, the free gift came upon all men to joistification of life.' And were we to confine our view to that verse, the inference might appear sufficiently probable. But we must attend to the scope of the whole section, and take care that we do not affix to one clause a signification which would make it a downright contradiction of another, of which the meaning is vmtten as with a sunbeam. Now the sacred penman is throughout comparing Adam and Clirist in* their influence on two great bodies of human beings, and illustrating, by the comparison, the doctrine of justification. He states the likeness at first broadly, but lest his readers should be disposed to extend it too far, he accompanies it, in verses 15-17, with some explanations and restrictions. In these verses, therefore, the two contrasted multitudes must be the same as those mentioned in the general statement of verses 18 and 19, unless we wish to make the Apostle guilty of the deception of changing his terms upon us in the course of his argument, and while he is develop- ing a similarity between A and B, interposing some limitations which have no reference to the connection of these terms, but which bear upon the relative positions of A and C, Now the multitude mentioned in the latter member of the contrast, which verses 15-17 express, is not the whole of mankind. It will not be pretended that all men obtain justification (verse 16) or that all 'shall reign in life through Jesus Christ' (verse 17). In these verses the second member cannot \yt un- derstood as comprising the entire human race ; and as confessedly the phrase ' all men * (see John xa.., 32, 2 Cor. iii., 2) may be used in a limited signification, there is no obvious reason why in verse 18 it must be so used. " There is just one obiection to this exegesis which it is worth while to notice. Mr. Stuart thus states it : — ' If we say that sentence of eternal perdition in its highest sense comes upon all men by the offence of Adam, and this without any act on their part, or even any voluntary concurrence in tiieir present state and condition of existence, then, in order to make grace fuperabound over all this, how can we avoid the conclusion, that justification in its highest sense comes . upon all men without dieir concurrence T It is always a great convenience to a reviewer when an author refutes himself. This is the case in the pre- sent instance. ' In regard to the superdbounding of the grace of the gospel,' says Mr. Stuart, in the very same page, ' it must be noted, in order to avoid mistake, that I do not construe it as appertaining to the number of the subjects., but to the number of offences forgiven by it,' Now, on this principle, our view of the diversity of the two multitudes does not abolish the superabundance of grace, "To tiie elect, not merely the penal consequences of Adam's sin are remitted, but those ROMANS v., 19. 221 if all their own innumerable transgressions, and thus grace still ngain- ains its due pre-eminence. " This objection, vanishing so easily by a wave of the same wand vhich conjured it up, we are enabled fully to conclijde, that although Jle whole of mankind are comprehended in the first number of the comparison, only the elect are included in the second ; that the notion of placing extent of influence — the number of persons to whom the condemning or saving energy reaches, — among the points of resem- blance, obtains no countenance from Paul, and that the opinion resting upon it, that sentence of condemnation can be passed upon none except for actual transgression, has no foimdation."* v. 19. — ^Por as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedi- ence of one shall many be made righteous. For. — This assigns a reason for what the Apostle has said in the pre- ceding verses. By one man!& disobedience many were made sinners. — Here it is expressly asserted that the many (not many ; it includes all who were in Adam, that is, all the human race) were made sinners by Adam's disobedience. Mr. Stuart attempts to evade this, by supposing that they are led into sin by the occasion of Adam's sin. This is a great perversion. Adam's disobedience is said not merely to be the occasion of leading his posterity into sin,, but to have made them sin- ners. Mr. Stuart rests much on the absurdity of supposing that one man is punished for another's offence. But Adam's offence is the offence of all his posterity. It m^ade them sinners. That sin must be theirs by which they were made sinners. If there is any self-evident truth, this is one of the clearest. We must, like little children, receive God's testimony upon this as well as every other subject. We must not rest our acquiescence in God's testimony upon our ability to fathom the depth of his unsearchable counsels. Mr. Stuart makes Adam's sin merely what he calls the instrumental or occasional cause. But with no propriety can Adam's sin be called the instrument by which his posterity sinned. This is altogether absurd. And an occasional cause is no cause. Every person knows the difference between a cause and an occasion. Besides, to suppose that Christ's own obedience is the real cause of our justification, and that Adam's sin is only the occa- sion, not properly the cause of our condemnation, is to destroy the contrast between Adam and Clurist, on which the Apostle here insists. If Christ's obedience is the ground of our justification, Adam's disobe- dience must, by the contrast, be the ground of our condemnation. So by the obedience of one shall the many be made righteous. — Only a part of mankind are included, in that covenant of which Christ is the surety. In consequence of Adam being the covenant head of all man- kind, all are involved in his condemnation, but Christ is not the head * Here it may be observed that, if all men had been saved, it would have given coun- tenance to the supposition that fallen men had some claim upon God, that there was some hardship connected with their being brought under condemnation not by thsir individual transgression, but by that of Adam, and thus the riches of grace would h4f« Deen tarnished. 222 ROMANS v., 19. of ali mankind but of the Church, and to all but the church he will say, " I never knew you." /So.^-That is, in this way, not in like man- ner. It is not in a manner that has merely some likeness, but it is in the very same manner. For although there is a contrast in the things, the one being disobedience, and the other obedience, yet there is a per- fect identity in the manner. This is important, as by the turn given to the word translated so, Mr. Stuart perverts the passage. The many shall be constituted righteous. The many here applies to all in Christ. It is argued, that the phrase, " the many," must be equally extensive in its application in both cases. So it is as to the respective represent atives The many, with reference to Adam, includes all his race. The many, with respect to Christ, implies all his seed. Again, if it is said that Adam's posterity became sinners merely by the example, influence, or occasion of his sin, it may, with equal propriety, be said that Christ's posterity became righteous by the example or occasion of his right- eousness. This makes the gospel altogether void. The passage before us is of the highest importance. It forms a striking conclusion to all that goes before from the beginning of the 1 2th verse, and asserts in plain terms two grand truths on which the gospel in all its parts proceeds, though by many they are strenuously opposed, and by others only partially admitted. In the 12th verse the Apostle had said, that death passed upon all men, /or that all have sinned. In the 13th and 14th verses he had shown that to this there is no excep- tion, and had further declared that Adam was the figure of Christ who was to come. In the following verses to the end of the 17th, he had asserted the opposite effects that follow from the sin of the one and the righteousness of the other. In the 18th verse he had given a summary of what he had said in the preceding verses. Condemnation he had there affirmed had come by the offence of one, and justification by the righteousness of one. But as it would not be readily admitted that either a curse or a blessing should come on men on accoimt of the sin or righteousness of another, he here explicitly affirms this truth, which was indeed included in his preceding statements, but being of so great importance, it was proper that it should be declared in the plainest terms. It is grounded on the constituted unity of all men with their covenant heads. By the disobedience of Adam those who were one with him in the first creation were made sinners. In the same way, by the obedience of Jesus Christ, they who are one with him in the new creation are made righteous. This 19th verse contains the expli- cit declaration of these two facts, and the appellations " sinners " and " righteous " must be understood in the full extent of these terms. Here, then, these two doctrines of the imputation of sin and of right- eousness, which are taught throughout the whole of the Scriptures, are exhibited in a manner so clear, that without opposing the obvious mean- ing of the words, they cannot be contested. It is impossible to con- ceive how men could be made sinners by the disobedience of Adam, or rig-hteous by the obedience of Jesus Christ, in any degree whatever, if the truth of the doctrine of the imputEltion of the sin of tlie former, and of the righteousness of the latter, be not admitted. ROMANS v., 19. 223 In order to remove every pretext for the supposition that the sin of Adam is not asserted in this 19lh verse to be truly our sin, it is essen lial to observe, that wh^n it is here said, that by one man's disobedience many were made " sinners," there is no reference to the commission of sin, or to our proneness to it from our innate corruption. The refer- ence is exclusively to its guilt. It was formerly shown in the exposi- tion of the 3d chapter that it was in reference to the Divine tribunal, and respecting condemnation, that Paul had all along been considering sin both in regard to Jews and Gentiles, and that his assertion that they are under sin, can only signify that they are guilty, since he there repeats in summary what he had before advanced. And he fully establishes this meaning when he afterwards says, in the 19th verse of that chapter, " that every mouth maybe stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God." Now, these remarks equally apply to every part of his discussion from the beginning of the Epistle to the end of this 5th chapter. In the whole course of it, all he says of the commission of sin is solely with a view to estabhsh the guilt of those of whom he speaks, on account of which they are under condemnation, in order that, in contrast, he might exhibit that righteousness by which men being justified, are freed from guilt and condemnation. In the same manner, it is evident from all the preceding context, that, by the term sinners in the verse before us, Paul does not mean that through the disobedience of one many were rendered depraved and addicted to the commission of sin, but that they become guilty of sin. In the 15th and 17th verses he says, that through the oflfence of one many are " dead," and that death reigned; and in verse 16, that the judgment was by one to " condemnation ;" and this he repeats in the 18th verse, where he says, that as by the offence of one, or by one offence, judgment came upon all men to " condemnation," so by the righteousness of one, or by one righteousness, the free gift came upon aU men unto "justification" of life. He is speaking, then, all along, of sin only in reference to con- demnation, and of righteousness only in reference to justification. In the same way, in this 19th verse, where he repeats or sums up all that he had asserted in the preceding verses, when he says, that by the disobedience of one many were made "sinners," the reference is exclusively to the guilt of sin which occasions condemnation. When, on the other hand, he says, that by the obedience of one many were made righteous, the reference is exclusively to justification. And, as it is evident that the expression righteousness has here no reference to inherent righteousness or sanctification, so the term sinners has no reference to the pollution, in-dwelling, or actual commission of sin, or the transmission of a corrupt nature, otherwise the contrast would be destroyed, and, without any notification, a new idea would be introduced entirely at variance with the whole of the previous discussion from ihe beginning of the Epistle, and of that in the immediate connexion of this verse with its preceding context. It is, then, in the guilt of Adam's sin that the Apostle here asserts we partake, and, therefore, that sin must be truly our sin, otherwise its guilt could not attach to us. But although men are here expressly declared to be sinners by the 224 ROMANS v., 19. disobedience of Adam, just as they are righteous by the obedience of Christ, this is rejected by multitudes, and by every man in his natural state, to whom the things of God are foolishness. If such an one attends to it at all, it must undergo certain modifications, which, chang- ing its aspect, make it altogether void. On the other hand, that men are righteous in the way here declared, though not so repulsive to the natural prepossessions of the human mind, meets also wifli much oppo- sition. But why should there be such reluctance to receive these truths, which by every means possible are attempted to be avoided ? To him that submits to them nothing can be more consolatory. He is compelled to acknowledge that he sinned in Adam, and fell under con demnation. But at the same time he is called to rejoice in the heart- cheering declaration that the righteousness of Christ is his righteous- ness, because he has been " created in Christ Jesus," Eph. ii., 10; with whom he is one. Gal. iii., 28 ; and that, being thus righteous in him, he shall reign with him in life. While, however, it is solely of the imputation of Adam's sin, and the imputation of Christ's righteousness, that the Apostle is treating, showing, that by our oneness with these our respective covenant heads the sin of the first and the righteousness of the last Adam are really ours, it is proper to remark that, though it is not touched upon in the verse before us, there is a further beautiful analogy between the effect of our union with the first man who is of the earth earthy, and of our union with the second man who is the Ijord from heaven. We not only partake of the guilt of the personal sin of Adam, and consequently of condemnation ; but also of a corrupt nature transmitted from him. In the same way, we are partakers not only of the righteousness of Jesus Christ, and consequently of justification, but also of sanctification, by a new nature derived from him. Mr. Stuart seems to understand that, according to the doctrine of imputation, sins are accou^ited to Adam's race that are not their sins, or in other words, that God accounts a thing to be fact which is not fact ; just as he had before affirmed, that faith is imputed as righteousness. But Adam's sin is imputed to his posterity, because it is their sin in reality, though we may not be able to see the way in which it is so. Indeed we should not pretend to explain this, because it is to be be- lieved on the foundation of the Divine testimony, and not on human speculation, or on our ability to account for it. 1. If God testifies that Adam's first sin is also that of all his posterity, is he not to be credited ? If there be no such Divine testimony, we do not plead for the doctoine. It is on the Divine testimony the doctrine must rest. 2. Mr. Stuart speaks of imputation in its strict sense, or in a rigid sense. This too much resembles an artifice designed to deceire the simple into the behef that he admits the doctrine, if not substantially, at least in some sense. This, however, is not the fact. He cannot admit imputation in any sense. He does not admit Adam's sin to be our sin in the lowest degree. 3. If in reality he does admit imputation in the lowest degree, then it is not impossible m the highest. If it is essentially unjust, it cannot exist in the lowest degree. Why, then, does he speak in this BOMANS v., 19. 225 uncandid manner T Does this language betoken a man writing under she full conviction that he is contending for the truth of God ? He pro- fesses to determine this question by an appeal to the natural sentiments of men. But if this tribunal is sufficient to decide tliis point, is it not equally so with respect to innumerable others, in which Deists and heretics have made a like appeal ? On this ground may not a man say, I cannot admit the eternity of future punishment, for it is contrary to my natural sentiments : I cannot admit that a good Being is the creator of the world, for he would not have permitted evil to enter it had he been able to keep it out ? He says, p, 233, " We never did, and never can, feel guilty of another's act, which was done without any know- ledge or concurrence of our own." But if God has testified that there IS a sense in which that act is our own, shall we not be able to admit and feel it ? It altogether depends on the Divine testimony. Now such is the testimony of the verse before us in its obvious sense. How this is, or in what sense this is the case, we may not be able to com- prehend. This is no part of our business. This is no part of the Divine testimony. We are to believe God on his word, not from our capacity to understand the manner in which the thing testified is true. Mr. Stuart himself asserts, p. 235, that the sufferings of infants may conduce to their eternal good, yet, he says, " In what way I pretend not to determine." And are we to determine in what way Adam's sin is ours, before we admit the fact on the Divine testimony ? He says, p. 233, " We may just as well say, that we can appropriate to ourselves and make our own the righteousness of another, as his unrighteous- ness." Here he denies the imputation of the righteousness of Christ. If the Divine testimony assures us, that by a divine constitution we are made one with Christ, is not his righteousness ours ? If it b& declared that God " hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin ; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him," shall we not believe it ? In opposition to all such infidel reasonings, it is becoming in the believer to say, I fully acknowledge, and I humbly confess, on the tes- timony of my God, that I am guilty of Adam's sin ; but by the same testimony, and by the same Divine constitution, I beheve that I am a partaker of God's righteousness — the righteousness of my God and Saviour Jesus Christ, of the free gift of that righteousness, which not only removes the guilt, and all the fatal consequences of that first sin, but of the many offences which I have myself committed. Regarding the difficulties that in both these respects present themselves, I hear my Saviour say, " What is that to thee ? follow thou me." In the meantime, it is sufficient for me to know, that the Judge of all the. earth will do right : What I know not now, I shall know hereafter. The summary argument commonly used against the imputation of Adam's sin, namely, that it is " contrary to reason," proceeds on a mere assumption — an assumption as unwarrantable as that of the Socinian who denies the trinity in unity, because it is above his comprehension. Most persons are in the habit of considering many things which they cannot fathom, and which they cannot relish, as being contrary m reason. But this is not just. A thing may be very disagxoeable, and 15 226 ROMANS v., 19. far beyond the ken of human penetration, which is not contrary to reason" We are not entitled to pronounce anything contrary to reason which does not imply a contradiction. A contradiction cannot be true, but all other things may be true, and on sufficient evidence, ought to be received as true. That Adam's sin may, in a certain view, be our sin, and that Christ's righteousness may, in a certain view, be our right- eousness, no man is entitled to deny on the ground of self-evident truth. Whether it is true or not must depend on evidence. Now, the testi- mony of God in the Scriptures leaves no doubt on the subject. Adam's sm is our sin. Christ's righteousness is the righteousness of all his people. If it be contrary to reason to have the sin of Adam counted as our own, it is still worse to suppose that we suffer, as is generally admitted, for a sin which is not ours. If there is injustice in the one, there is much more injustice in the other. This surely is the, language of reason, and, as such, has been insisted on by orthodox vwiters, both of our own and of other countries. Of this, I shall give the following ex- amples. "If that sin of Adajii," says Brown of Wamphray in his Life of Justification Opened, p, 179.; "If that sin of Adam be im- puted, in its curse and punishment, the sin itself must be imputed as to its guilt ; else we must say, that God curseth and punishetb the pos-! terity that is no ways guilty, which to do suiteth not the jusJice of God, the righteous governor of the world." '• Certainly," says B. Pictet, in his Christian Theology, vol. i., p. 368, " if the sin of Adam had not been imputed to his descendants, we could not give a reason why God has permitted that the corruption which was in Adam, the consequence of his first sin, should have pass- ed to his posterity. That this reasoning may appear just, we must consider that the corruption which we bring from the womb, of oui mothers is a very great evil, for it is the source, of 9,11 sins. To permit, then, that this coiTuption should pass from their fathers to children, is to inflict a punishment. But how is it that God should punish men, if they had not sinned, and if they were not: guilty ? Now, it is certain that, when this corruption communicates itself from fathers to children, the children themselves have not sinned. It must then be the fact, that the sin of Adam is imputed to them, and that God considers them as having pajt in the sin of their first father. " It cannot be explained, consistent with Pivine justice," says Wit- smsj in his Economy, vol. i., p. 153, " how, without a crime, death should have passed upon Adam's posterity. Prosper reasoned solidly and elegantly as foUows : — ' Unless, perhaps, it can be said that the punishment, and not the guilt, passed on the posterity of Adam, but to say this is in every respect false ; for it is too impious to judge so of the justice of God ; as if he would, contrairy to his own law, condemn the innocent with the guilty. The guilt, therefore, is evident, where the punishment is so, and a partaking in punishment shows a partaking in guilt ; that human misery is not the appointment of the Creator, bu,t the retribution of the Judge.' If, theiefore," continues Witsius ROMANS V.j 19. 227 ' through Adam all are obnoxious to punishment, all, too, must have sinned in Adam." A considerable part of the resistance to the imputation of Adam's sin, is owing to the ground on which the evidence of the fact is often rested. It is not simply placed on the authority of the testimony of God, but is attempted to be justified by human procedure. The diflS- culty that some persons feel on this subject, arises from the supposi- tion, that though the sin of the first man is charged upon his posterity, yet it is not theirs. But the Scriptures hold it forth as ours in as true a sense as it was Adam's. We may be asked to explain how it can bi ours, and here we may find ourselves at a loss for an answer. But we ought to consider that we are not obliged to give an answer on this point either to ourselves or others. We are to receive it on the Di- vine testimony, assured that what God declares must be true, however unable we may be to comprehend it. We ought not to perplex our^ selves by endeavoring to ascertain the grounds of the Divine testimony on this subject. Our duty is to understsmd the import of what is testi- fied, and to receive it on that authority — ^not to inquire into the justice of the constitution from which our guilt results. This is not revealed, and it is utterly beyond our province and beyond our depth. Did Abraham understand why he was commanded to ofier up his son ? No. But he was strong in faith, and his faith in obeying in that in- stance is held forth in Scripture for our imitation. Like Abraham, let us give glory to God, by believing implicitly what we have no means of knowing to be tiue^ b'lt simply on the testimony of God. The defenders of scriptural truth take wrong ground when they rest it on anything but the testimony of Scripture. It is highly dishonora- ble to God to refuse to submit to his decisions till we can demonstrate their justice Those who have endeavored to vindicate the Divine jus- tice in accounting Adam's sin to be ours, and to reconcile the mind of man to that procedure, have not only labored in vain, but actually in- jured the cause they meant to uphold. The connexion according to which we suffer with our first father, is not such as is to be vindicated or illustrated by human transactions. The union of Adam and his pos- terity is a Divine constitution. The grounds of this constitution are not to be found in any of the justifiable transactions of men ; and all attempts to make us submit by convincing us of its propriety, from what we are able to understand upon a comparison with the affairs of men, are only calculated to impose on credulity, and to produce unbe- lief. We receive it because God says it, not because we see it to be just. We know it to be just, because it is part of the ways of the just God. But how it is just we may not be able to see. We receive it like little children wh& believe the testimony of their father, though they do not understand the grounds or reasons of the thing testified. , Nothing is more common than to vindicate the equity of our impli- cation in the ruin of Adam's fall, by alleging that had he stood, we should have been partakers in all his blessings. Had he stood, it is said, you would have reaped the benefit of his standing ; is it not there- fore just that you should also suffer the loss of hm failure ? Here the 228 ROMANS v., 19 matter is rested, not on God's testimony, but on our sense of justice in the affairs of men. To this it will be rephed, that if the transaction is not entered into with our consent there is no apparent equity in our being punished with the loss. Adam's sin, then, we acknowledge to be ours, not because a similar thing would be just among men, but because God, the just God, testifies that it is so ; and we know that the righteous God will do righteously. To submit in this way is rational ; to submit on the ground of understanding the justice of the thing, is to pretend to understand what is incomprehensible, and to rest faith on a fallacy, namely, that the ground of the imputation of Adam's sm is of tne tame nature with human transactions. The method of vindicating Divine ir ith here censured has also the most unhappy tendency in en- couraginr '"Jhristians to think that they must always be able to give a reason ia their believing God's testimony, from their ability to com- prehenu the thing testified. It accustoms them to think that they should believe God, not simply on his testimoijiy; u-' on seeing with their own eyes that the thing is true independently of his testimony. On the contrary, the Christian ought to be accustomed to submit to God's testimony without question, and without reluctance, even in things the farthest beyond the reach of the human mind. " Speak, Lord, for tliy servant heareth," ought to be the motto of every Christian. Yet how few follow out to their full extent the plain statements of the word of God on these subjects ; and while many utterly deny and abhor every representation of the imputation of sin and righooo.isuess, others hide its genuine features by an attempt to enable mer-. to understand the reasons of it, and to justify the Divine procedure. This is altogether improper. "The ways of God are too deep for our feeble minds to fathom them, and it is impious as well as arrogant to make the attempt. Against nothing ought Christiar. s to be mure constantly and earnestly guarded, than the opinion that they ought to be able to comprehend and justify what they believe on the authority of God. The true ground on which to vindicate it is the explicit testimony of God inthe Scriptuie. This is so clear, that no man can set it aside, we need not say without wiesting the Scriptures, but, we may assert, without being conscious of violence of interpretation. Our defence of this doctrine, then, should ever be, " Thus saith the Lord." This Uie^iiod of defence, which we are taught in this same epistle, chap, ix., v<>, is not merely the only scriptural one, but it is the one that will have tlie great; est success. As long as a reason is alleged by the wisdom of man in support of the doctrine, so long, from the same source, an argument will be produced on the other side. But when the word of God is ap- pealed to, and upon it all the stress of evidence rested, the Christian must submit. The writer knows from personal experience the effect ©f this method of teaching this doctrine. " You cannot comprehend," says Luther, "how a just God can con- demn those who are bom in sin, and caniiot help themselves, but rsdsi, by a necessity of their natural constitution continue in sin, and remain children of wrath. The answer is, God as incomprehensible through- out ; and therefore his justice, as well as his other attributes, must be ROMANS v., 20. 229 incomprehensible. It is on this vety ground that St. Paul exclaims, ' the depth of the riches and the luiowledge of God ! How un- searchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out !' Now his judgments would not be past finding out, if Wo could always per- ceive them to be just." The imputation and consequences of Adam's sin are well expressed in the Westminster Confession of Faith, in which it is said, " These (our first parents) being the root of all mankind, the guilt of this sin was imputed, and the same death in sin and corrupt nature conveyed to all their posterity, descending from them by ordinary generation." And again, " The covenant, being made with Adam as a public person, not for himself only, but for his posterity, all mankind descending from him by ordinary generation, sinned in him, and fell with him in the first transgression. . . . The sinfulness of that estate whereinto man fell consisteth in the guilt of Adam's first sin." V. 20. — ^Moreover, the law entered, that the offence might abound, but where sin abounded, grace did much more abound. The Apostle had now arrived at the conclusion of the discussion, com- mencing at the 17th verse of the first chapter, in the course of which, after having briefly announced the remedy which God had provided for the salvation of man, he had proceeded to show the need there is for the application of this remedy by proving the sinful state of all, both Jews and Gentiles, whatever had been their various means of instruction. He had next fully exhibited that remedy for their dehverance, and also the manner in which it is applied. In the beginning of this fifth chap- ter he had unfolded the blessed effects that follow from its reception, in the experience of all believers, and had extolled the love of God in its appointment. Having next proved, from the universality of the reign of death, that the law and sin existed from the beginning, and so before the public promulgation of the law, at mount Sinai, he had taken occa- sion to point out the entrance both of sin and righteousness, and of the imputation first of the one and next of the other. And as it might now be asked, " Wherefore, then, serveth the law 1" Gal. iii., 19, if man's personal obedience to it enters in no respect into his justification, it there- fore formed a proper conclusion to the whole to recur, as in the verse before us, to that law at which, in passing, Paul had glanced in the 13th verse, and to show that it had been introduced, in order that on the one hand the abounding of sin might be made manifest, and on the other the superabounding of grace, on both of which he had been insisting in proof of the reality and fatal effects of the former, and the necessity, the glory, and the blessedness of the latter. The law entered, " privily entered," says Dr. Macknight, referring to the law of .nature, which he says, privily entered after the fall of our first parents. But no new law entered after the fall. What is called the law of nature, is only the remains of the law written in creation on the heart of man. The law here is evidently the law of Moses, and the word in the original signifies that the law entered in addition to the law which Adam transgressed, and to the law written in the heart. This is the 230 ROMANS v., 80. effect of ^a/ia in this place. That the offence might abmind, — ^The word translated offence, here and in several of the verses above, litatally signi- fies " fall," and is applied in these verses to the first sin of Adam. In verse 16, however, in the plural, it refers to sins in general, and in some other places is rendered trespasses. In that before us, it may refer par- ticularly, as in those preceding, to the first sin, which, as the root and cause of all other sins, has abounded in its baneful effects, and like a noxious plant shot up and spread in all directions ; so that, as God had testified before the flood, " the wickedness of man is great on the earth," Gen. vi., 5. This was fidly discovered by the entrance of the law. The law then entered, not that sinners might be justified by it, for no law could give life to fallen man, GeQ. iii., 21. Sinners, in order to be saved, must be redeemed fi:om the curse of the law, and created again in Christ Jesus. But it entered that the offence might abound, ami that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before Gt)4 chap, iii., 19 ; that we might learn that the righteous God loveth right- eousness, that his law is exceeding broad, that it is spiritual, extending to all the imaginations of the thoughts, that he will not abate one jot or tittle of this perfect standard, which is a transcript of hfe character. The law is a perfect standard, by which men are tau^t to measure them- selves, that they may see their guilt and condemnation, and be led to look to Him who is the end of the law fi)r righteousness to every one that believeth. Some translate this clause, which is rendered, that the offence might abound, " so as the offence eventually abounds." This is not the Apostle's meaning. They say that the intention of the law was not to make sin abound, but to restrain sin, and make fewer sins. If this was the intention of giving the law, the lawgiver has been disappointed, for «ins have been multiplied a thousandfold by the entrance of the law. This their view of the matter admits ; for tiiey acknowledge that this was the event, though not the intention. But if this was the event, it must also have been the intention of the lawgiver, though not of the law. God cannot be disappointed of his intentions. But it is self-evidently clear that the intention of the promulgation of the law of Moses could not be to lessen the numbrar of sins, when almost the whole ceremonijJ part of it makes things to be sin, which were not sin before the giving of the law, and which are not sinful in their own nature. Besides, sin is greatly increased as to the guilt of the breach of the moral law, by the promulgation of the law of Moses. While the law of God is holy, and just, and good, it was evidently God's intention, in the giving of it, that offences might abound. In this way the wickedness of the human hear; was manifested. It showed men that they were sinners. Had not the law been repeated in its extent and purity at Sinai, such was the dark- ness in men's minds, that they would not have thought themselves trans- gressors of its precepts, or obnoxious to its curse ; and not seeing them- selves sinners, they would not have seen the necessity of a Surety. The <' commandment is a lamp and the law is light." Prov. vi., 23. It discovers the real state of human nature, and manifests not only the evil and aggravation, but also the vast accumulation and extent of the wick- edness of man. The entrance, then, of the law between the author of ROMANS v., 21. 23 condemnation and the author of justification, in order that sin miohl abounii, was of the highest importance. " By the law is the knowledge of sin." The law did not put sin into the heart, but it was an instrument to^ display the depravity already existing in the heart. But vain man will be wise, and he will compel the word of God to submit to his own views. It may be justly said, that such displays of the deep things of God as are made in his word, are intended to manifest the blindness of the human mind, and the deep depravity of human nature. Where sin abounded grace did much more abound.— This was another effect of the entrance of the law, that as by the clear light it imparts, sin would abound in all its extent and enormity, so grace might be exhi- bited ss abounding above sin. The grace of God, dispensed from his throne, not only pardons the most numerous and most heinous sins, but also confers eternal life upon him who has sinned. It restores him to communioE with God, which by transgression he had forfeited ; re-es- tablisbJEg it not only in a far higher degree, but in a manner so perma- nent as never again to be interrupted. " When sin," says Calvin, *' had held men plunged under its power, grace came to their relief. For Paul teaches us, that the more sin is known the grandeur and magnifi- cence of grace is the more evident, and is poured out in so copious a manner as not only to overcome, but even to overwhelm the overflowing deluge of iniquity.^' V. 21. — That as sin hath reigned Hnto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord. As sin hath reigned unto death. — Death here, and throughout this chapter, as well as in many other places, signifies not temporal death merely, but the whole punishment of sin, of which temporal death is perhaps the smallest part Eternal misery is included in it, but the word " death" does not literally denote eternal misery. This is called the " second death," and this expression gives us the key to understand the full extent of thft meaning of the word. The punishment of hell is the second death, according to Scripture explanation. Rev. xx., 14 ; xxi., 8, and therefore it is no fancy to understand future eternal punish- ment as included in the term. But though the expression includes this, it is not proved from the literal meaning of the word death. As death is the greatest of all temporal evils, it was not only a part of the punish- ment of the first sin, but it was the symbol of the second death. It is another proof tiiat death includes the whole punishment of sin, that, in Rom. vi., 23, death is called the wages of sin. If death be the wages of sin, then death must include everything that is the wages or punish- ment of sin. But the Scriptures point out future misery, as well as temporal death, as the wages of sin. The proof is incontrovertible. The Scriptures show, that the punishment of sin is eternal misery ; if so, death includes eternal misery. While this lays no stress on the necessary literal meaning of the word death, it comes to the same conclusion. Another proof that death here signifies the whole punishment of sin, and, consequently, that it includes eternal misery, is, that the gift of God is said to be « eternal life." Now life literally is 232 ROMANS v., 31. as limited as death. Yet life here signifies not merely existence m a state of consciousness, but of happiness. Life, indeed, even without the word eternal, is in Scripture taken to signify all the happines.s of the future state of the blessed. "What objection, then, can there be to a like extended signification of the term death 1 That it includes spirit- ual death is beyond a question, as the Scriptures expressly use this term in this sense, Eph. ii., 1 ; Col. ii., 13. That they are all included in the threatening against the eating of the forbidden fruit is most certain. It is no objection that it was not explained to Adam in this sense. If any part of Scripture explains it in this sense it is sufficient. It may be said, that it would be unjust to punish Adam in any extent that he did not understand as included in the threatening. He understood by it destruction, or at least we have no ground to say that he did not. Re- turning to the dust is not the explanation of the threatening, it being God's appointment in connexion with the promise of Christ. But it is perfectly sufficient that he knew the law that was given him. To make him guilty there was no necessity for any threatening. Is not a child guilty when he breaks the command of a father, even though the com- mand be unaccompanied with threatening? With regard to Christ's suflfering for us, it was not necessary that he should suner eternally. It answers all the ends of justice if he has suffered a perfect equivalent That he has done so we have the clear testimony of the Scriptures, and we have no need to show how he has done so by metaphysical explana- tions and calculations of our own. Even so might grace reign through righteousness. — ^Mr. Stuart having subverted, by his interpretations and reasonings, every idea of the imputation of sin, as he had formerly altogether set aside the impu- tation of righteousness, is only consistent in misrepresenting the meaning of this passage. As he has mistaken the import of the expression righteousness at the commencement of this discussion, so he also misun- derstands it here. His explanation is, that " grace might reign or have an influence widely extended, in the bestowment of justification or par- doning mercy." The passage informs us, that grace reigns unto eternal life, which does indeed include the bestowment of justification. But it informs us of something more, and that of the last importance, which Mr. Stuart's mistaking righteousness for justification leads him entirely to omit. Grace reigns thkough righteousness, even the righteousness of God, which fulfils his law, and satisfies his justice, and displays his holiness ; whereas, did grace bestow a justification in such a way as Mr. Stuart describes, it would do so at the expense of law and justice, and dishonor the whole Divine administration. Unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord. — ^This is that life of which Jesus Christ, who is risen from the dead, is the author, as the death here spoken of is that which he came to destroy. The source of our natural life is Adam, but he is dead, and in his communion we all die. But a new source of life is provided in the second Adam, that he may deliver from death all that are in his communion. "The first Adam was made a living soul," that he might communicate natural life to those who had not received it. " The last Adam was made a quick- ROMANS v., 21. 239 caing spirit," that he might impart spiritual life to those who had lost it. The first communictted an earthly and perishable life, the second a life that is celestial and immortal. Jesus Christ is that eternal life which was with the Fither, and was manifested unto us ; and the Father hatli given him power over all flesh, to give eternal life to as many as he hath given him. " My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me, and I give unto them eternal life." The termination, then, of the reign of death over those whom he represents, and the establishment of the reign of grace through the everlasting righteous- ness which he has brought in, are all by Jesus Christ. He hath abolished death. By him came grace and ti'uth ; he brought life and immortality to light. He " is the true God, and eternal life." And " to this end Christ both died and rose, and revived, that he might be the Lord both of the dead and the living." The similarity of the Apostle's commence- ment in imfolding the doctrine of justification, and of his conclusion, is very striking. He begins, chap, i., 17, by declaring that the gospel of Christ is the power of God unto salvation, because therein is the right- eousness of God revealed ; and he here ends by affirming, that grace reigns through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord. Li this 21st verse the doctrine of the whole preceding context, of the salvation of believers, is summed up in a manner most beautiful and striking. Having exhibited in a strong light the righteousness of God, ch. iii., 21, 22, the Apostle returns to it in this chapter ; and having contrasted Clirist and Adam, he brings out his conclusion in this verse with a contrast of the reign of sin and grace. Sin had an absolute sway over all the descendants of Adam. There was nothing good among them, or in any of them. Sin existed and predominated in every human soul. Therefore it is said to reign. The absolute and universal influence of sin is figured by the empire of a monarch exer- cising authority in uncontrolled sovereignty. Grace also reigns. There was nothing in men to merit salvation, or to recommend them in any measure to God. Grace, therefore, reigns in their salvation, which is wholly and entirely of free favor. Sin is said to reign unto, or in, death. This shows that death was, in every human being, the eifect of his sin. The way in which death manifested its universal reign over the human race, was in causing their death. This most fully proves that infants are sinners. If sin ruled in causing death to its subjects, then all who died are the subjects of sin. Death to the human race is in everv instance the eflFect of the dominion of sin. Sin reigns unto death. But, if sin has reigned, grace reigns. If the former has reigned in death, the latter reigns in life; yea, it reigns unto eternal life. How, then, does it reign imto life 1 Is it by a gratuitous pardon 1 Doubtless it is. But it is not by forgiving the siimer in an arbitrary way, with respect to the punishment due to sin. Forgiveness is indeed entirely fratuitous, but if it cost believers nothing, it has cost much to their urety. Grace reigns through righteousness. — How beautifiilly is thus fulfilled the prophetic declaration of Psalm Ixxxv., 10-13. Grace did not, could not, deliver the lavrful captives without paying the ransom. It did not trample on justice, or evade its demands. It reigns by pro* i^4 ROMANS v., 21. Tiding a Saviour to suffer in tlie room of Hie gailty. By the deatfc of Jesus Christ, full compensation was made to tibe law and justice of God. The Apostle, in the end of this diapterj brings ais argument to a close. Every individual of the human race is proved to be guilty before God, and on the ground of his own righteousness no man can be saved. The state of the Gentile world is exhibited in the most degrading view, while history and experience fully concur in the condenmatioH. Man is represented as vile, as degraded below the condition of the brates, and the facts on which the charge is grounded, were so notorioxK, that they could not be denied. Nor could the most uncultivated Pagans offer any apology for their conduct. Their sins were against nature, and their ignorance of God was in spite of the revelation cf his character in the works of creation. They are condemned by the standard they themselves recognize, and tbeir own mutual recriminations and defences prove that they were fully aware of sin and responsibility. But are not the Jews exxrepted from this black catalt^e of crimes ? Are they not righteous through that holy, just, and good law which they received from the GSod of Israel 1 By no means. By the testimcay of that revelation which they received, all men are guilty, and this testimony directly implies those to whom the revelation was given. With this experience also coincides. The Apostle charges them as actually doii^ he same things which they condemned in tire Heathens. Both, then, ire guilty, and from their superior light the Jews must be the most ^ilty. Nor was it ever in contemplation of the law of Moses to give the Jews a righteousness by their own obedience. The law was designed rather to manifest their guilt. By the law there was to no individual a righteousness unto life ; by the law was the " knowledge of sin." All men, then, without exception, were shut up unto condemnation. But this law veiled the truth, which the Apostle now unfolds, and exhibits in the strongest light. He proclaims a rigbteousness so perfect, as to answer all the demands of law, both as to penalty and obedience — a lighteousness so free as to extend to the very chief of sinners. This righteousness is in Jesus Christ. He has borne the curse of the law, and perfectly obeyed all its prec^ts. All his obedience becomes ours by believing the testimony of the Father concerning his Son, and trust- ing in him. The most guilty child of Adam, whether he be Jew or Gentile, becomes perfectly righteous the moment he believes in the work of Christ. This glorious plan of salvation vindicates the law, exalts the character of God, and reconciks mercy with justice. In the gospel grace appears ; in the gospel grace rdlgns ; but it reigns not on the ruins of law and justice, but in the more glorious establishment of both; it reigns through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord. In the salvation of men by the Son of God, the law is not made void. It is magnified and made honorable. In this salvation sin is not represented as harmless. It is here seen in a more awful light than in the future punishment of the wicked. The gospel is the only manifestation of God in the iiiU glory of his character as the just Goi ROMANS v., 21. Z3& yet the Saviour — punishing sin to the utmost extent of its demerit, at the same time that his mercy reaches to the most guilty of the children of men. The doctrine contained in tliis chapter is so importanlj and often so Ul understood, that it appears proper to subjoin the following valuable remarks from the Presbyterian Magazine, contained in the conclusion of the Review,* which has again and again been quoted above. They are introduced by observing, that Mr. Stuart's denial of a federal the- ology bears a most impressive witness respecting the evil of surrender- ing any part of the truth of Scripture. " The rejection of Adam's covenant headship has led Mr. Stuart to an abandonment of the doctrine of Christ's representative character. The indissoluble connexion between these was, indeed, long ago remarked, and the progress of error, as exemplified in tliis author, verifies with sur- prising accuracy, the anticipation of the doctors of the Theological Faculty of Leyden, in a testimony on the subject of original sin, borne by them on the 15th November, 1645. 'We have learned,' say they, ' with great pain, that the doctrine which has been by common consent received as scriptural, respecting the imputation of Adam's sm, is now disturbed; although, when it js denied, the original corruption of human nature cannot be just, and a transition is easy to a denial of the imputation of the second Adam's righteousness. ' " We need not enter into any lengthened refutation of the perilous and unsupported assertion, that the federal ' form of theology' is not essential 'to the Christian doctrine of redemption.' The marvel is, how any man who had studied the Epistle to the Hebrews could evade the force of such declarations, as that Christ is ' the mediator of the new covenant,' or escape the conviction that he represented the elect as their head in a federal arrangement. To such a relationship between him and his people, likewise, the whole legal dispensation pointed. The impressive ceremony of the scape-goat represented, by the plainest symbols, a transfer — an imputation of guilt; and frophecy intimated it in the unambiguous announcement, that 'the (Ord laid on him the iniquity of us all.' The Scripture is so pervad- ed by federal language and allusions, that he who would remove from it the doctrine of Christ's covenant headship, would need either tc write it anew, or to expoimd it on some unheard-of principle. " But is a covenant relation necessary ' to the Christian doctrine of depravity ? ' So at least it appears to us ; and the reader who will consult the dissertation of Rivetus, from which the above opinion of the divines of Leyden has been extracted, will find that it has appeared so to almost all the fathers of the Reformation, and to a host of eminent reformed divines, a mere catalogue of whose names would * From a memoir of the life of Mr. James Halley, vdiich has lately been published, it appears that he was the author of the above review. His learning and accomplish- ments as a scholar, but above all his solidity and spirituality of mind promised, had hjs life been spared, to have made him a workman, eminently fitted rightly to. divide the word of God. 236 ROMANS T., 21. occupy several of our pages. But we are very far from resting this sentiment on human authority ; we appeal to the law and to the testi- mony of God. " First, ihen, that God treated with Adam, not merely by way of commandment, but by way of covenant, we regard as manifest from the train of events as recorded in the commencement of Genesis. There were two contracting parties. There was something to be done by the one, which, on the part of the other, was to meet with a certa;in recompense ; for the threatening of death, in case of eating the forbid- den fruit, bears with it the counterpart assurance, that, if the crearare continued in obedience, his state of happiness would be indefinitely prolonged ; the existence of a promise is implied in the words of the Apostle (Gal. iii., 12), 'the man that doeth them shall live in them,' and similar expressions elsewhere ; and the very thought, that a me- nace was uttered, unmingled with any more cheering intimation, ac- cuses the God of all Grace of being more ready to punish than to crown. There was, in fine, on the part of Adam, an acceptance of the offered terms ; for to suppose it otherwise, is to embrace the contradic- tion, that a creature could be holy, and yet his will at war with his Creator's. It is of no consequence to object that the covenant is not fully developed ; for the early part of the Mosaic narrative is remark- able for its rapidity, and neither is the covenant of grace evolved into any amplitude of detail in the record of its first announcement in Para- dise. " Secondly, That Adam in the covenant was the head of all his off- spring, appears from a variety of considerations. For example, the train of events as recorded in Genesis, to which we may here renew our reference, intimates, not obscurely, that Adam was dealt with in aU things as the representative of humanity. The blessing of increase was not designed for him alone ; nor the donation of empire over the crea- tures ; nor the institution of the Sabbatic rest ; nor the curse that was launched forth against the ground ; nor the sentence which consigned him over to the grave. It is in vain to object, that not one word is said of posterity in the recital of these promises, and injunctions, and threatenings, and ma,ledictions ; for experience proves their universal apphcation, and proves it antecedently to all individual guilt, for the in- fant is affected by that curse wherewith the earth is stricken. And if any one is included in the sentence, he must first have been compre- hended in the threatening ; which lands us in the doctrine of the fede- ral headship of Adam. Again, why, in 1 Cor. xv., is Christ called the second man — the second Adam ? The only assignable reason is his covenant headship ; for never could his resurrection have been viewed, not only as demonstrative of the possibility of the reviviscence of others, but as betokening and implying the final disruption, by all believers, of the bands of death, except on some principle, amounting to the admission of the fundamental truth, that he was their great federal representative. " From this view, which rests on such clear grounds, of the constitut- ed connexion between our first progenitor and iiis offspring, the impu- tation of his guilt to them directly follows. If there were one with ROMANS v., 21. 237 I him in receiving the law, in possessing ability to observe it, and in coming under an obligation to obedience they were one With him also in his breach of the condition of the covenant. He broke the first link of the golden chain which primarily united all mankind to their Maker, and the dependent parts of it necessarily partook of the separation. But imputation might be established by independent processes of reasoning ; and thus, from two different directions, a flood of light might be poured upon the doctrines, if we had space to pursue the inquiry. " 1 . We might refer, for a strong presumptive proof, to the analogy and correspondence between the economy of condemnation and the economy of redemption — the ministration of death and the ministration of life. In the latter we find an imputed righteousness and an inheirent holiness, the one constituting the matter of the believer's justification, and the other preparing him for glory ; and so, in the former, we might expect to find an imputed guilt and an inherent sinfulness, the one being the antecedent ground of the sentence of death, and the other carrying the criminal downwards in an augmented fitness for the society of the lost. Thus, imputed guilt occupies, in the one part of the scheme, a place co-ordinate to that which imputed righteousness holds in the other, inborn depravity corresponds to the implanted principles of sanc- tification, and an exact harmony is maintained between the divine dis- pensations. " 2. We might prosecute, in the next place, an argument, at which we have already hinted, from the sufferings and mortality of suckhngs. Not only do the ' cries of infants, who are only eloquent to grief, but dumb to all things else, discover the miseries that attend them,' and 'the tears which are born with their eyes, signify they are come into a state of sorrow,' but a very large proportion of the human race is swept away into . the grave at the very dawn of their being. Like Jonah's gourd, they spring up and wither in a night. Now, on Mr. Stuart's principle, that nothing but actual transgression deserves the name, we have here a punishment without a crime — the wages apart from the deed which earns them. But this cannot be under the government of him who is righteous in all his ways. Assuredly, in- fents would not die, if they were not guilty — a sinless soul would not be lodged in a mortal habitation. It is no valid objection to this, that Christ's body was mortal ; for * he was made sin for us.' Death, then, follows sin like its shadow ; and, like the shadow, demonstrates the real presence of the substance. It follows that infants are sinners ; and, since actual offence is impossible, they are sinners in the ancient transgression of their first father. " 3. We might, in fine, argue backwards from the fact, acknowledged even by Mr. Stuart, that we ' are bom destitute of holiness.' This original destitution, in virtue of which we are ' hy nature children of wrath,' must proceed from God, either as a Creator, or as the Sovereign Lord, or as a Judge. But it does not come from him as Creator simply, for in this respect we hold the same relation to him as Adam did, who was formed in righteousness and true holiness ; nor as Lord over all 238 ROMANS T., 21. for it were blasphemy to imagine that he would employ I ic supreme dominion in promoting the ruin of a rational creature. It is resolved, therefore, into a judicial infliction — an infliction on account of some sin committed before we had a being ; and, as this infliction has pass- ed upon every man since our first progenitor — ^to his grand ofience, which the Apostle, throughout this passage, represents as so pregnant with evil, it must of consequence be referred. Hence, as punishment infers guilt, the stain of his iniquity is ours — ^his guilt is ours by im- putation. "Mr. Stuart admits that, ' in consequence of Adam's fall, and without any act or concurrence of their own,' all his posterity are subject to ' sufierings in the present state f- — that their nature is brought under a 'moral degradation,'' — ' an imperfect condition, in which it is certain that the sensual passions will get the victory and lead them to sin, and certain that they will never have any holiness without being born again,' — and in which the second death will certainly come upon them, without the interposition of mercy through Ghrist.' This is stated, doubtless, in milder phrases than the other, — in the languagis of a man giving forth an opinion which he receives, not denouncing one which he rejects ; but it possesses all the substantial features of the other scheme, and involves all its principles^ — with the exception of that principle — ^the principle of imputation, — which, so far as man's feeble intellect can penetrate, supplies the only key to the whole, and vindi- cates tlie Creator from the charge of cruelty. The question is simply, — shall we regard the deprivation of original righteousness as judicial- ly connected with Adam's first transgression, or as linked to it by some bond of arbitrary and mysterious severity ? The reader expects, no doubt, to find all ' the elements' of Mr. Stuart's ' moral nature sponta- neously in array,' against the latter of these suppositions. But no ; it is his own opinion ; an opinion of which the native hideousness can only be veiled by the novel expedient of transforming into a pecuhar species of discipline all the evils which originate in the fall- " But it is urged again, that such an imputation of guilt is at variance with the general principles of the Divine administration, — of which it is a fundamental law, that ' the son shall not bear the iniquity of the Father,' Ezek. .Tviii., 20. We had always understood that the funda- mental laws of God's moral government were embodied in the Deca- logue. And there we read (Exod. xx., 5) that the Lord is ' a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children.' But is there, indeed, an inconsistency in the word of inspiration ? Are con- tradictory principles announced as alike fiindamental ? No, traly. God's general right to punish the offspring for their parent's guilt was declared from Sinai,— and the course of Providence, in such cases as that of Dathan and Abiram, as well as in the indiscriminate destruc- tion wrought by the flood, which spared not a single infant because of its imagined innoceney — has impressively repeated the intimation. Ezekiel was only commissioned to declare, in a special instance, a for- bearing to insist on this right. Besides, were the prophet's message taken as the promulgation of a fundamental statute, it would be impos ROMANS v., 21. 239 BJbL to escape from tbe imputation of contravening it, even although we weie to prune and pare down our theological system, till it was re- duced to the most meagre PelagianisHi. By having the evil example of our parents set before us — to take no higher ground — we are, in consequence of Adam's transgression, placed in less favorable circum- stances than those in which he was situated ; and in this way we bear the iniquity of our father. On Mr. Stuart's system, this becomes more obvious still ; so that, with this view of the announcement of Ezekiel, his own scheme is at irreconcileable variance. The view of that an- nouncement, which we have presented above, removes this difficulty from his scheme ; but it also removes it from ours. " But there is one consequence of Mr. Stuart's views of original sin, which, at the risk of being blamed for prolixity, we cannot omit to no- tice. This opinion, as already stated, is, that no one can be sentenced to the extreme punishment of sin, except for actual transgression — that we are not born in a state of condemnation — that, in the highest and most awful sense of the words, we are not ' by nature the children of wrath.' Now, from this it irresistibly follows, that infants, not having sinned actually, and so (according to him) not being under the curse, do not need salvation. 'The whole have no need of a physician, but they that are sick.' Mr. Stuart evidently feels this difficulty, and la- bors to escape from it. He urges, that, since infants are bom destitute of holiness, and since ' without holiness no man shall see the Lord,' Christ has much to do for them by his Spirit, in removing the imperfec- tion of their nature, and in in^arting to them a positive taste for the sacred exercises and joys of heaven. On this ground, and to this ex- tent, he thinks that the Lord Jesus may properly enough be called their Saviour. But this falls far short of the scriptural representations of the great salvation of the gospel. In that salvation, deliverance from wrath is a principal element. But, according to Mr. Stuart's scheme, this has no place in the case of infants. They are not saved from vnrath ; they are not saved from sin ; no positive evil is removed from them ; they are only made partakers of certain good dispositions to which they were primarily stranger:^. Their first state is a pure negative ; Christ bestows some positive giflrs upon them, and so becomes their Sa- viour. In short, he sanctifies them by his Spirit. But he does not procure their justification; they obtain it for themselves ; although not holy, they are harmless and undefiled. And hence, ipso facto, they are accepted as righteous. They are directly, and without Emmanuel's intervention, embraced in the provisions of that eternal law which nexes immortality to innocence ; of redemption, therefore, properly so called, they have no necessity. This system involves some strange anomalies — enough to destroy the authority of any scheme of doctrine. Christ is in it called a Saviour ; liut the first step in the mighty pro- cess is taken, and one important part of it is fully accomplished, not in consequence of his work, but because of the very condition of nature in those whom became to save. These objects of his love are promot- ed and perfected, but not redeemed ; and although in a certain sense he saved them, their lips must be sealed, when, among the ranks of the 240 ROMANS yi. glorified, .there reverberates the everlasting song, — ' Tho'i wast slafti. and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood.' " In dismissing the subject of original sin, we cannot permit it to es- cape without a passing remark, Mr. Stuart's repeated affirmation, that the received doctrine on that topic originated with Augustme. As he gives no proof of this, we shall be excused for meeting his authority with that (certainly not inferior) of Gerard John Vossius, from whose history of Pelagianism we extract the following thesis, which he sup- ports by appropriate quotations from the fathers. ' The Church uni- versal has ALWAYS thus judged, that the first sin is imputed to all,' &c. And, again, ' Augustine proves this dogma from the writings of the earlier fathers from whom he produces testimonies so plain (and scarce- ly less remarkable are many which he has omitted), that it is altogether marvellous, that there were any of old, or are any of this day, who themselves believe, and would persuade others that this doctrine is an invention of Augustine.' " No truth revealed in the Divine word stirs up against itself more than the doctrine of original sin, the enmity of the human heart ; and none, accordingly, has met, in different ages, with more determined and persevering opposition ; yet a right understanding of it is absolutely necessary to any satisfactory knowledge of the plan of mercy. In the church's earlier days, all the ingenuity of Pelagius was exerted in at- tempts to explain it away from the page of inspiration. Shortly after the Reformation, the Remonstrants and Socinians revived his heresy, the former veiling it under many cautious restrictions, fuid . the latter far over-stepping even the errors of the master ; more recently still, Taylor of Norwich proposed a new and unheard of system, rivalling Socinianism in audacity of interpretation, — and in our own days. Pro- fessor Stuart has assailed the faith of the Reformed churches, and, as we firmly believe of that scripture on which they are built, with calmness, indeed, which honorably disting-uishes him from the mass of its enemies, but we feel bound to say, with a want of logic, and a straining of criticism, which would do no dishonor to the most accom- plished disciple of the school of Taylor. Our readers must have gathered ere now that we do not estimate Mr. Stuart's scholarship so highly as it has generally been valued, and that we regard his theology as most unsound. We coincide entirely in Mr. Haldane's impressions of the responsibility resting upon those who have reconmiended his Commentary." CHAPTER VI. In the preceding part of the Epistle the universal depravity and guilt of man, and the free salvation through the blood of the Lord Jesus Christ, had been fully exhibited. Paul now proceeds to prove the intimate connection between the justification of believers and their sanc- tification. He commences by stating an objection which has in all ROMANS VI., 1. 241 ages been advanced as an unanswerable argument against salvation by grace. He asks, what is the consequence of the doctrine he has been inculcating? If justification be bestowed through faith, without works, and if, where sin abounded, grace has much more abounded, may we not continue in sin that grace may abound ? No objection could be more plausible. It is such as will forcibly strike every natural man and is as common now as it was in the days of the Apostle. Paul repels this charge by declaring the union of believers with Jesus Christ, by whom, as is represented in baptism, his people are dead to sin, and risen with him to walk in newness of life. Having established these important truths, he urges (ver. 11) on those whom he addresses the duty of being convinced that such is their actual state. In verses 12 and 13, he warns them not to abuse this conviction ; and for their encouragement in fighting the good fight of faith, to which they are called, assures them that in the 14th verse that sin shall not have dominion over them, because they are not under the law but under grace. Thus, the Apostle proves, that, by the gracious provision of the covenant of God, ratified by the blood of him with whom they are inseparably united, they who are justified cannot continue to live in sin ; but though sin shall not have dominion over them, still, as their sanctification is not yet perfect, he goes on to address them as liable to temptation. What he had said, therefore, concerning their state as being in Christ, did not preclude the duty of watchfulness ; nor, since they had formerly been the servants of sin, of now proving that they were the servants of God, by walking in holiness of life. Paul con- cludes by an animated appeal to their own experience of the past, and to their prospects for the future. He asks what fruit had they in their former ways, which could only conduct to shame and death ? On the other hand, he exhorts them to press onwards in the course of holiness, at the end of which they would receive the crown of everlasting life. But along with this assurance, he reminds them of the important truth, that while the just recompense of sin is death, eternal life is the gift of God, through Jesus Christ our Lord. V. 1. — What shall we say then ? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound ? What shall we say then ? — That is, what conclusion are we to draw from the doctrine previously taught ? The question is first asked generally. In the following words it is asked particularly, — Shall we continue^n sin, that grace may abound ? Many expound this objec- tion, as coming from a Jew, and imagine a sort of dialogue between him and the Apostle. For this there is no ground. The supposition of a dialogue in difierent parts of this Epistle has been said to give life and interest to the argument ; but instead of this it is only cumbersome and entangling. There is no necessity for the introduction of an objector. It is quite sufficient for the writer to state the substance of the objection in his own words. It was essential for the Apostle to vindicate his doctrine, not only from such objections as he knew would be made by the enemies of the cross of Christ, to whom he has an 16 242 ROMANS VI., 2. eye throughout the whole of the Epistle, but also to Christians them selves, whom he was directly addressing. We see in his answer in the following verses, to the questions thus proposed, what an ample field it opened for demonstrating the beautiful harmony of the plan of salvation, and of proving how every part of it bears upon and supports the rest. V. 2. — God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, lire any longer therein ? Paul, in his usual manner, on similar occasions, strongly rejects such a consequence as the question in the first verse supposes, and asks another, which implies the absolute incongruity of the assumption that Christians will be emboldened to coritmue in sin, by the knowledge of their being freely justified. On the very ground on which the objec- tion rests, he shows that this is impossible. We that are dead to sin. — The meaning of this expression is very gene- rally misunderstood, and extended to include death to the power of sin, to which it has not the smallest reference. It exclusively indicates the justification of believers, and their freedom from the guilt of sin, hav- ing no allusion to their sanctification, which, however, as the Apostle immediately proceeds to prove, necessarily follows. It was indispen- sable, in the view of obviating the objection proposed, distinctly to characterize both the persons, and their state of justification, to whom the answer he was about to give applied. Accordingly, by using the term we, he shows that he speaks of the same persons, of whose justi- fication he had been treating in the conclusion of the fourth, and in the first part of the foregoing chapter, to whom, in this way, he there refers more than twenty times. Their justification he expresses by the term dead to sin, which, though only a part of justification, implies all that it includes. No other designation could have been so well adapted to introduce the development of their state, and its inseparable conse- quences, as contained in the following verses. This term, then, is most appropriately employed. Formerly, the persons spoken of were dead in sin, but now they were dead to it, as it is said in the 7th verse, they are justified firom it. In the seventh chapter, it is affirmed, that believers are dead to the law. They are therefore dead to sin, for the strength of sin is the law, and, consequently, sin has lost its power to condemn them, their connection with it, in respect to its guilt, being for ever broken. In the 10th verse, it is said that Christ died unto sin, and liveth to God, and in the same way believers have died to sin, and are alive to God, to serve him in newness of life. It has indeed been argued, that if the expression, dead to sin, does not comprehend death to the power of sin, it does not contain an answer to the objection urged in the preceding verse. Even, however, though the power of sin were included, it could not be considered as an answer by which the objection was removed, but simply a denial of its validity. But it is not intended as an answer, though it clearly infers that union with Jesus Christ, which is immediately after exhibited as the complete onswe :. Without this union we cannot be dead to sin. but being united ROMANS TI., 2. 243 to him, believers are not only dead to it, but also by necessary conse- quence risen with him to walk in newness of life. Nothing could be more conclusive than in this manner to show, that so far from the doc- trine of justification leading to the evil supposed, on the contrary, ft provides full security against it. Paul, accordingly, presents that very aspect of this doctrine, namely, death to sin, which peculiarly bears on the point, and this for the purpose of introducing that union by which it takes place, which is at once the cause, both of justification and sanc- tification. So far, therefore, from these being contrary the one to the other, or of the first being in the smallest degree opposed to the last, they are inseparable ; and thus the possibility of those who are justified continuing in sin, that grace may abound, is absolutely precluded. Dr. Macknight translates the phrase, " dead to sin," " have died by sin." This does not convey the Apostle's meaning, but an idea alto- gether different, and entirely misrepresents the import of the passage. All men have died by sin, but believers only are dead to the guilt of sin, and it is of its guilt exclusively that the Apostle here speaks. Unbelievers will not, through all eternity, be dead to sin. Dr. Mac- knight says that the common translation "is absurd, for a person's living in sin who is dead to it, is evidently a contradiction in terms." But had he understood the meaning of the expression, " dead to sin," he would have seen that there is nothing in this translation either con- tradictory or absurd. He ought also to have observed that the phrase- ology to which he objects, is not an assertion, that they who are dead to sin live in it, but is a question that supposes the incompatibility of the thing referred to. Mr. Stuart also totally misunderstands the signification of the expres sion " dead to sin," which, he says, " means to renounce sin ; to become as it were insensible to its exciting power and influence, as a dead person is incapable of sensibility." The clause that follows — Shall we that are dead to sin, live any longer therein ? he interprets thus, — " How shall we who have renounced sin, and profess to be insensible to its influence, any more continue to practise it, or to be influenced by it ?" On this it is remarked, in the Presbyterian Review, that " the objection stated by the Apostle is, that the tendency of his doctrine of justification by faith was bad, leading to licentiousness, and what sort of refutation is it to reply, whatever its tendency may be, nevertheless, it should not produce such efiects because we have professed other- wise. Professions might be multiplied a thousand-fold, and yet the tendency of the doctrine would remain the same, and the objection con- sequently would remain in all its force. Nay, it is plain that such a reply as this takes for granted that the tendency of the doctrine by itself is to licentiousness, and that in order to prevent these its natural effects from being developed, the person who receives it must be hemmed around with innumerable professions and obligations, to re- nounce those sins into which he might naturally be led by such a doctrine standing alone." Mr. Stuart's explanation of becoming insen- sible to the exciting power or influence of sin, as a dead person is inca- pable of sensibility, perfectly coincides with the Popish interpretation 244 ROMAVS VI., 2. of the passage — " The spirit, the heart, the judgment, have no more life for sin than those of a dead man for the world." But the Roman Catholic Quesnel, perceiving that his interpretation is contradicted by- experience, immediately adds : " Ah, .who is it that is dead and insensi- ble to the praises, to the pleasures, to the advantages of the world?'" Mr. Stuart, however, disregarding both fact and experience, adheres to his interpretation, and announces the third time : — " To become dead to sin, or to die to sin, plainly means, then, to become insensible to its influence, to be unmoved by it ; in other words, to renounce it and refrain from the practise of it." This is justly chargeable with the ab- surdity unjustly charged by Dr. Macknight on the common translation of the passage. The assertion then would be, as we refrain from the practice of sin, we cannot continue to practise it. According to Mr. Stuart's interpretation, when it is enjoined on believers, verse 11, to reckon themselves dead to sin, the meaning would be that they should reckon themselves perfect. In order to understand the manner in which the Apostle meets and obviates the objection, that the doctrine of justification by grace tends to encourage Christians to continue in sin, the ground on which he founds his denial of its validity must be particularly attended to. He does not rest it, according to Dr. Macknight, on the impossibiUty of believers " hoping to live eternally by continuing in sin," if they have died by it. This would not only be no adequate security against such an effect, but, owing to the strength of human depravity, no security at all. Neither does he rest it on their having ceased, according to Mr. Stuart, to feel the influence of sin, which is alike contrary to Scripture and experience. Nor, according to Mr. Tholuck, because "they obey it in nothing more," which is not only repugnant to truth, biit would be simply a denial of the allegation without the shadow of proof. He rests it in no degree, either on any motive presented to them, or on any change produced in themselves, as these writers suppose. It should also be observed that, when the Apostle characterizes believers as dead to sin, he is not introducing something new, as would be the case were either Dr. Macknight's or Mr. Stuart's or Mr. Tholuck's explanation d the term correct. He is indicating the state of those to whom the bbjection applies in order to its refutation. That it does not lead them to continue in sin he had in effect shown already, in verses 3d and 4th of the foregoing chapter, where he had declared the accompaniments of their justification. But as this objection is constantly insisted on, and is so congenial to human nature, and, besides, might appear plausi- ble from the fact that they are the ungodly who are justified, chiap. iv., 5, he still considered it proper to meet it fully and directly. Paul therefore proceeds formally to repel such a calumny against his doc- trine, by exhibiting in further detail in the following verses the grounds of justification to which he had referred, chap, iv., 24, 25, namely, the interest of believers both in the death and resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ. The expression, then, dead to sin, does not in any de- gree relate to their character or conduct, but exclusively to their state before God. Their character or conduct with regard to abstinence ROMANS VI., 2. 245 from the commission of sin, is referred to in the question that follows, demanding, How those who are dead to sin shall live any longer there- in ?" But to explain the expression " dead to sin," as meaning dead to the influence and love of sin, is entirely erroneous, and what the Apostle by no means asserts. Death to the influence and love of sin must involve their annihilation .n the person of whom this could be aifirmed, for death annihilates to its subject all things whatsoever, and in this case it might well be said with Mr, Stuart, that a man who is dead to sin has " become insensible to its exciting power' or influence, as a dead person is incapable of sensibility." How Mr. Stuart could make such statements, thrice repeated, yet totally unfounded, and flatly contradicted by every man's experience, is indeed astonishing. Utterly erroneous, too, is the explanation of other Commentators, who say that the meaning is dead to " the guilt and power" of sin, thus joining death to the power, to death to the guilt of sin. This indicates a condition with respect to sin which was never realized in any of the children of Adam while in this world. No believer is dead to the power of sin, as Paul has abundantly shown in the 7th chapter of this Epistle. On the contrary, he there affirms that there was a law in his members which warred against the law of his mind, that he did the things he would not, and that when he would do good, evil (and what is this but the power of sin ? ) was present with him. The same truth is clearly exhibited in all the other Epistles, in which believers are so often reproved for giving way to the power of sin, and earnestly exhort- ed and warned against doing so. But when the expression is under- stood as exclusively signifying dead to the guilt of sin, it may and must be taken in the full sense of what death imparts, being nothing less than absolute, total, and final deliverance from its guilt. To sup- pose, then, that in these words there is the smallest reference to the character or conduct of believers — to their freedom from the love or power of sin—to conjoin these in any respect, or in any degree, tvith their freedom from its guilt, in other words, with their justified state, is not merely to misapprehend the meaning of the Apostle, but to represent him as stating that to be a fact which has no existence ; while it deprives the passage of the consolation to believers, which, when properly understood, it is so eminently calculated to impart. In proof of the correctness of this view of the subject, let it be re- membered that the Apostle's refutation in the following verses, of the supposed pbjectipn, does not rest on the supposition that sin is mortified in himself and those whqna he is addressing, or that they are released from any propensity to it ; but on the fact of their being one with Jesus Christ. They are united to him in his death, and consequently in his life, which was communicated to them by Him who is " a quickening spirit," — and thus their walking with him in newness of life, as well as their resurrection with him, are secured. These ideas are exhibited in the 3d, 4th, 5th, and 6th verses. In the 7th verse, the reason of the whole is summed up ; for he who is dead (with Christ) is justified from iin," and in the 8th verse, that which will afterwards follow our being iustified from sin is stated-^" If we be dead with Chrjst, we believe 246 ROMANS VI., 2. that we shall also live with him." Finally, in tne 9th and 10th verses the Apostle declares the consequence of Christ's dying to sin to be that he liveth unto God. The same eflfect in respect to the members must follow, as to the Head with whom believers are one ; and there- fore, he immediately proceeds to assure them, in the 14th verse, that sin shall not have dominion over them. The result, then, of the doc- trine of justification by grace is the very reverse of giving not merely license, but even place to continue in sin. On the contrary, according to that doctrine, the power of God is engaged to secure to those who are dead to sin, i. e. justified, a life of holiness corresponding with that state into which, by their union with his Son, he has brought them. The full import and consequence of being dead to sin, will be found, chap, iv., 7, 8. " Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered. Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will hot impute sin." They who are dead to sin are those firom whom, in its guilt or condemning power, it is in Christ Jesus entirely removed. Such persons, whose sins are thus covered, are pronounced " blessed." They enjoy the favor and blessing of God. The necessary effect of this blessing is declared in the new covenant, according to which, when God is merciful to the uiuighteousness of his people, and remembers their sins arid iniquities no more, he puts his laws into their mind, and writes them in their hearts, and promises that he will be to them a God, and they shall be to him a people. In one word, they who are dead to sin are united to him who is the fountain of life and hoHness, and are thus delivered from the curse pronounced upon those who, being under the law, continue not in all things that are written in the book of the law to do them. The guilt of their sins, which sepa- rated between them and God, having now been cancelled, they enjoy his favor, and all its blessed effects. It is upon these great truths that the Apostle rests his absolute denial that the doctrine of justification by grace, which he had been unfolding, is compatible with continuing to Eve in sin. Live any longer therein. — ^To continue in sin, and to live any longer therein, are equivalent expressions, implying that before their death to sin, the Apostle himself, and all those whom he now addressed, were enslaved by sin and lived in it. In the same way — in writing to the saints at Ephesus — he says, that formerly he and all of them had their conversation among the children of disobedience, fulfilling the de sires of the flesh and of the mind. By denying, then, that believei* continue in sin, he does not mean to say that they never commit sin, or fall into it, or, according to Mr. Stuart, have become insensible to its influence, or to Mr. Tholuck, that they " obey it in nothing any more ;" for, as has been observed, it is abundantly shown in the 7th chapter, where he gives an account of his own experience (which is also the experience of every Christian), that this is very far from being a fact ; but he denies that they continue to live as formerly in sin and ungodliness, which he had shown was impossible. Here it may however be remarked, that the full answer which in the following verses is given to the objection brought against the tendency of the ROMANS VI., 3. 247 doctrine of justification, cannot be understood by the natural man, to whom it must appear foolishness. Hence, the same calumny is re- peated to the present day against this part of divine truth. V. 3. — Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ, were bap- tized into his death ? In this and the following verses, Paul proceeds to give his full an- swer to the objection he had supposed, by showing that the sanctifica- tion of believers rests on the same foundation, and springs from the same source as their justification, namely, their union with Jesus Christ, and, therefore, so far from their being contrary to each other, they are not merely in perfect harmony, but absolutely inseparable ; and not only so, but the one cannot exist without the other. In the conclusion of the preceding chapter he had declared that sin had reigned unto death. It reigned unto the death of Jesus Christ, the surety of his people, who, as is said in the 4th verse of the chapter before us, " died unto sin." But as in his death its reign as to him terminated, so its reign also terminated as to all his people, who with him are " dead to sin." The effect, then, of his death being the termination of the reign of sin, it was at the same time to them the commencement of the reign of grace, which took place " through righteousness, — the everlasting cighteousness brought in by his death." Instead, therefore, of being under the reign of sin, Chris- tians are under grace, whereby they " serve God acceptably with reve- rence and godly fear," Heb. xii., 28. It may, however, be remarked, that although their union with Christ is the ground of the Apostle's denial, that believers will be induced to continue in sin that grace may abound, and of their absolute security that this shall not be its effect, yet he does not fail to present, as in the concluding part of this chapter, such motives to abstain from sin as are calculated powerfully to influence their conduct. The consideration, too, that they died with Christ, and are risen with him to newness of life, connected with the certainty that they shall live with him in future glory, announced in the 5th and 8th verses, furnishes the strongest motives to the Iqve of God, which is the grand spring of obedience, for we love him when we know that he has first loved us. That this view of the death of Christ, and of our death with him, operates as a powerful motive to the love of God, is shown, 2 Cor. v., 14, where it is said, " The love of Christ constraineth us ; because we thus judge, that if one died for all, then were all dead (or all died). And that he died for all, that they which live should not henceforth live unto themselves, but unto him which died for them, and rose again." Although, then, the solid ground and absolute security that behevers shall not live in sin, is shown to consist in their union with Christ, yet motives are not excluded. In the verse before us the Apostle proves that Christians are dead to sin, because they died with Christ. The rite of Baptism exhibits Chris- tians as dying, as buried, and as risen with Christ. Knoiv ye not. — He refers to what he is now declaring as a thing well-known to those whom he addresses. Baptized into Jesus Christ. — ^By faith believers are made one with Christ : the.' become members of his body. This oneness is 248 ROMANS VI., 4. represented emblematically by baptism. Baptized into his death. — ^In Baptism, they are also represented as dying with Christ. This rite, then, proceeds on the fact that they have died with him who bore their sins. Thus, the satisfaction rendered to the justice of God, by him, is a satis- faction from them, as they are constituent parts of his body. The be- liever is one with Christ as truly as he was one with Adam — he dies with Christ as truly as he died with Adam. Christ's righteousness is his as truly as Adam's sin was his. By a divine constitution all Adam's posterity are one with him, and so his first sin is really and truly theirs. By a similar divine constitution, all Christ's people are one with him, and his obedience is as truly theirs as if they had yielded it, and his death as if they had suffered it. When it is said that Christians have died with Christ, there is no more figure than when it is said that they have died in Adam. The figure of baptism was very early mistaken for a reality, and accordingly some of the fathers speak of the baptized person as truly born again in the water. They supposed him to go into the water with all his sins upon him, and to come out of it without them. This indeed is the case with baptism figuratively. But the carnal mind soon turned the figure into a reality. It appears to the impatience of man too tedious and ineffectual a way to wait on God's method of converting sinners by his Holy Spirit through the truth, and therefore they have effected this much more extensively by the performance of external rites. When, according to many, the rite is observed, it cannot be doubted that the truth denoted by it has been accomplished. The same dis- position has been the origin of Transubstantiation. The bread and wine in the Lord's Supper are figuratively the body and blood of Christ ; but they have been turned into the real body, blood, soul, and divinity of the Lord, and the external rite has become salvation. So many of us. — ^This does not imply that any of those to whom the Apostle wrote were not baptized, for there could be no room for such a possibility. It applies to the whole of them, as well as to himself, and not merely to a part. It amounts to the same thing as if it had been said, " We who were baptized ;" as in Acts iii., 24, " As many as have spoken," that is, all who have spoken, for all the prophets spoke V. 4. — Therefore we are buried with him in baptism into death : that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. The death of Christ was the means by which sin was destroyed, and his burial the proof of the reality of his death. Christians are there- fore represented as buried with him by baptism into his death, in token that they really died with him ; and if buried with him, it is not that they shall remain in the grave, but as Christ arose from the dead they should also rise. Their baptism, then, is the figure of their complete deliverance from the guilt of sin, signifying that God places to their account the death of Christ as their own death : it is also a figure of their purification and resurrection for the service of God. ROMANS VI., 4. 249 By the glory of the Father. — ^The exercise of that Almighty power of Gfod, by which, in various passages, it is asserted that Christ was made alive again, was most glorious to God who raised him up. Christ's resurrection is also ascribed to himself, becaase he was a par- taker with the Father of that power by which he was raised. " I lay down my life that I might take it again." "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up." To reconcile these, and similai passages, with" those that ascribe his resurrection to the Father, it must be observed, that if the principle be regarded by which our Lord was raised up, it is to be referred to that divine power which belongs in common to the Father and the Son. The Son was raised equally by his own power as by that of his Father, because he pos- sessed the divine as well as the human nature. But as in the work of redemption the Father acts as the Sovereign ruler, it is He who has received the satisfaction, and who, having received it, has given to the Son its just recompense in raising him from the dead. His resur- rection, then, in this view, took place by the decree of the Eternal Father, pronounced from his judgment throne. Even so we also should walk in newness of life. — It is the purpose of our rising with Christ, that we also, by the glory or power of the Father, 2 Cor. xiii., 4, should walk in newness of life. The resurrec- tion of Christ was the effect of the power of God, not in the ordinary way of nature, but of a supernatural exertion of power. In the same manner, believers are raised to walk in newness of life. It is thus, that when Paul, Eph. i., 20, exalts the supernatural virtue of grace by which we are conveated, he compares it to the exceeding greatness of that power by which Christ was raised from the dead. This shows the force of the Apostle's answer to the objection he is combating. Believers are dead to the guilt of sin, and, if so, the ground of their separation from God being removed, his Almighty power is engaged and exerted to cause them to walk with their risen Lord in that new life which they derive from him. It was, then, the purpose of Christ's death that his people should become dead to sin, and alive imto righteousness. " Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we Deing dead to sins, should live unto righteousness," 1 Pet. ii., 24. On this same ground, when viewing it simply as a motive, Paul reminds believers that since they are dead with Christ, they should set their affec- tions on things above, and not on things on the earth, assuring them that when he who is their life shall appear, then shall they also appear with him in glory. Col. iii., 4. And again he declares, " If we be dead with him, we shall also live with him," 2 Tim. ii., 1 1. Dr. Macknight is greatly mistaken when he applies what is said in this verse to the new life, which does not take place till after the resur- rection of the body. This destroys the whole force of the Apostle's reasoning, who is showing that believers cannot continue in sin, not only as they are dead to sin, but as they are risen with Christ, thus receiving a new and supernatural life, for the purpose of walking in obedience to God. 250 ROMANS- TI., 6. V. 5. — For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection : For if. — ^The conditional statement is here evidently founded on •what is premised. The Apostle does not pass to a new argument to prove that we are dead with Christ ; but having asserted the burial of the Christian with Christ in baptism, he goes on to show that his resurrec- tion with him is equally implied. If we have been buried with Christ so we shall rise with him. Planted together. — ^The word in the original, when it refers to trees, designates planting them in the same place or bed. It signifies the closest union of any kind as being incorporated, growing together, joined with, united. The meaning then is, that as in baptism we have been exhibited as one with Christ in his death, so in due time we shall be conformed to him in the likeness of his resurrec- tion. We shall be. — ^The use here of the future tense has caused much per- plexity respecting the connexion of this verse with the preceding, and contrary to its obvious meaning, the present time has been substituted. But while the proper force of the future time is preserved, the two verses stand closely connected. Both a spiritual and a literal resurrection are referred to in the emblem of baptism ; but in the preceding verse, the former only is brought into view, as being that which served the Apostle's immediate purpose. In this verse, in employing the future tense, he refers to the literal resurrection hereafter, as being inseparably connected with what he had just advanced concerning walking in new- ness of life ; and thus he unfolds the whole mystery included in dying and rising with Christ, both in this world and the world to come. Be- lievers have already been raised spiritually with Christ to walk with him on earth in newness of life, and with equal certainty they shall be raised to live with Him in heaven. This meaning is confirmed by what is said afterwards in the 8th and 9th verses. How powerful is this considera- tion, if viewed as a motive to the believer to walk in this world with his risen Lord in newness of life ! " Every man that hath this hope in him purifieth himself even as he is pure," 1 John iii., 3. V. 6. — Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin. Knowing this. — That is, assuming it as a thing with which they were already well acquainted, or a thing which they should know. That our old man was crucified with him. — Paul draws here the same conclusion from the believer's crucifixion with Christ that he had previously drawn from his baptism into Christ's death. All believers died with Christ on the cross, as they were all one in him, and represented by him. Their old man, Eph. iv., 22 ; Col. iii., 9, or sinful nature, was crucified to- gether with Christ. If, then, -their old man has been crucified with him, it cannot be that they will for the future live according to their old nature. That the body of sin might be destroyed. — Body of sin, that is sin em bodied, meaning the whole combination and strength of corruption, as having all its members joined into a perfect body. The purpose of his ROMANS VI., 7. 251 people's crucifixion with Christ was, that this hody of sin should finally perish and be annihilated. It is called a body, as consisting of various members, like a complete and entire body — a mass of sin j not one sin, but all sin. The term body is used, because it is of a body only that there can be a literal crucifixion, and this hody is called the body of sin, that it may not be supposed that it is the natural body which is nicant. That henceforth we should not serve sin. — ^The design of the believer's crucifixion with Christ is that he may not henceforth be a slave to sin. This implies that all men who do not believe in Christ are slaves to sin, as wholly and as absolutely under its power as a slave is to his master. But the end of our crucifixion with Christ by faith in his death, is, that we may be delivered from this slavery. Believers, then, should resist sin as they would avoid the most cruel slavery, K this be the end of cruci- fixion with Christ, those cannot be considered as crucified with Christ who are the slaves of sin. Christians, then, may be known by their lives, as the tree is known by its fruits. It was the result of Paul's cru- cifixion with Christ, that Christ lived in him. " I am crucified with Christ : nevertheless I live ; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me," Gal. ii., 20. V. 7. — For he that is dead is freed from sin. For he that is dead ; that is, dead with Christ, as is said in the fol- lovdng verse. — ^This does not mean natural death, but death in all its extent, signifying " the second death," the penalty of which Christ suffered, and therefore all his members have suffered it with him. Freed from sin. — ^The original word, which is here translated freed, different from that rendered jree inverses 18, 20, 22, is literally, ^Msfi^ed. It occurs fifteen times in this Epistle, and twenty-five times in other parts of the New Testament : and except in this verse, and one other where it is translated righteous, is uniformly rendered by the word justified. In this verse, as in all the other passages, its proper rendering ought to be retained, instead of being exchanged for the term "freed" which has evidently been selected to convey a different sense. To retain its proper translation in this place is absolutely necessary, in order clearly to perceive the great and cheering truth here announced, as well as to apprehend the foil force of the Apostle's answer to the objection stated in the first verse. As to the phrase " justified from sin," we find the Apostle expressing himself in the same manner (Acts xiii., 39), " By him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses." No objection can be made to the use of the expression " justified," since the Apostle is speaking of the state of believers, to which it is strictly applicable. In justification, which is a judicial and irrevocable sentence pronounced by God, there are two parts : the one includes absolution from the guilt of the breach of the law : the other, the pos- session of that obedience to its precepts which the law demands. These being inseparable, they are both included in the expression justified from sin. If a man be dead with Christ, he possesses, as has been observed, all the blessings which, according to the tenor of the new covenant, are included in and connected with the state of justification ?52 ROMANS VI., 7. by grace. Instead, then, of encouraging him to continue in sin, it furnishes absolute security against such a result, and insures the cer- tainty that he shall walk in newness of life until he attains the pos- session of eternal glory. The Apostle, therefore, is so far from admit- ting that, according to the supposed objection which he is combating, gratuitous justification is opposed to sanctification, that, after having shown, in the preceding verses, that sanctification springs from union with Christ, he here asserts, as he had formerly proved, that on the very same ground the doctrine of justification is established. The one cannot, therefore, be hostile to the interests of the other. The bond by which sinners are kept under the power of sin is the curse of the law. This curse, which is the penalty of disobedience, consists in man being cut off from all communion with God. By throwing off his allegiance to his Creator, he has become the subject of the devil, and is led captive by him at his will. The curse consists in being given up to sin, which is represented as reigning over the human race, and exercising an absolute dominion. So long as the sinner is under the guilt of sin, God can have no friendly intercourse with him ; for what commimion hath light with darkness 1 But Christ having cancelled his people's guilt, having redeemed them from the curse of the law, and invested them with the robe of his righteousness, there is no longer any obstacle to their communion with God, or any barrier to the free ingress of sanctifying grace. As the sin of the first man divested of holiness every one of his descendants, causing each individual to enter the world dead in trespasses and sins, in like manner the obedi- ence of the second Adam imparts holiness to all his members, so that they can no longer remain under the thraldom of sin. Were a sinner when he is redeemed not also sanctified, it would argue that he was still under the curse, and not restored to the favor of God. Besides, what is the state of the believer 1 He is now united to him who has the inexhaustible fulness of the Spirit, and he cannot fail to participate in the spirit of holiness which dwells without measure in his glorious Head. It is impossible that the streams can be dried up when the fountain continues to flow, and it is equally impossible for the members not to share m the same holiness which dwells so abundantly in the Head. As the branch when united to the living vine necessarily par- cakes of its life and fatness, so the sinner when united to Christ must receive an abundant supply of sanctifying grace out of his immeasura- ble fulness. The moment, therefore, that he is by faith brought into union with the second Adam — ^the grand truth on which the Apostle had been insisting in the preceding part of this chapter, by means of which believers are dead to sin — ^in that moment the source of sancti- fication is opened up, and streams of purifying grace flow into his 50ul. He is delivered from the law whereby sin had dominion over him. He is one with him who is the fountain of holiness. These are the grounds on which justification and sanctification are inseparably connected ; and the reasons why those who are dead to sin, or, as it is here expressed, justified from sin, can no longer live therein, From all this, we see the necessity of retdning the Apostle's expression ROMANS VI.. 8. 253 in the Verse befo're us, justified from sin. That it has oeen exchanged for the term, freed in the English, as well as in most of the French ver- sions, and that commentators are so generally undecided as to the proper rendering, arises from not clearly perceiving the ground on which the Apostle exclusively rests his denial of the consequence charged on his doctrine of justification, as leading to licentiousness. But on no other ground than that, as above explained, on which he has triumphantly vindicated it from this supposed pernicious consequence, can it be proved not to have such a tendency, and not to lead to such result. On this ground, his vindication must for ever stand unshaken. Had his answer to the question in the first verse ultimately rested, according to the rea- son given by Dr Macknight, on the force of a motive presented to believers, however strong in itself, such as their having experienced the dreadful effects of sin in having died by it, or on the fallacious idea, according to Mr. Stuart, that they were insensible to its influence, how weak, as has been remarked, insufficient, and delusive, considering the state of human nature, would such reasons have been, on which to have rested his confident denial that they could continue to live in sin. But when the Apostle exhibits, as the cause of the believer's not continuing in sin, his union with Christ, and the power of God in Christ Jesus, as he does in the preceding verses, he rests it on a foundation as stable as the throne of God. He had taught, in the foregoing part of the Epistle, that Jesus Christ is made to his people righteousness ; he here teaches that he is also made to them sanctification. Throughout the whole of the discussion, it is material to keep in mind, that they to whom, along with himself, the Apostle is referring, are those whom he had addressed (chap, i., 7) as " Beloved of God ;" as « Called ;" as « Saints." The same great truths are fully developed in the 29th and 30th verses of the 8th chapter, where it is shown that the persons who are conformed to the image of Christ, were those who are justified, and who shall be glorified, the whole of which Paul there traces up to the sovereign ap- pointment of God. There, in like manner, he shows that the people of God, being conformed to Christ in his death, are also conformed to him in their walking in newness of life, as the prelude of their resurrection with him to glory. To the same purpose he writes to the saints at Colosse, where he assures them that l5iey are " complete in Christ ; being buried with him in baptism, wherein also they are risen with him, through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead." V. 8. — Now, if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him : Nmi), rather since then, believers are one with Christ in his death, they have the certain prospect of for ever living with him. That the life here mentioned is the life after the resurrection, as in verse 5th, appears from the phraseology. The Apostle speaks of it as a future life, which it is unnatural to mterpret as signifying the believer's spiritual life here, or as importing the continuation of it to the end of his course. There is no need of such straining, when the obvious meaning is true 254 ROMANS VI., 10. and most important. Besides, the point is decided by the assertion, " we believe." It is a matter of faith, and not of present experience. " We believe." — Upon this it is useful to remark, that though the Apostle reasons and deduces from principles, yet we are to be cautious not to consider his doctrine as needing any other support but his own assertion. His statement, or expression of belief, is demonstration to a Christian. It was a truth believed by those whom he addressed, because taught by Paul, and the other Apostles. V. 9. — Knowing that Christ, being raised from the dead, dieth no more ; death hath no more dominion over him. Knowing that. — The Apostle states the assumption that, as Christ hav- ing been raised from the dead, will not die again, so neither will those die again who have died and risen with him. This obviously refers to the resurrection life, and not to the present spiritual life. It is a fact of inconceivable consolation, that, after the resurrection, the believer will never again die. All the glory of heaven could not make us happy without this truth. Death hath no more dominion over him. — ^This implies that death had once dominion over Christ himself. He was its lawful captive, as he took our place, and bore our sins. It is far from being true, according to Mr. Tholuck, that the word here used " seems to involve the idea of a usurped power, for properly, as Christ was an innocent being, there was no reason why he should die." Christ was lavrfully under the power of death for a time, and the word which signifies this, applies to a lawful lord as well as to an usurper. Jesus Christ being declared by his resurrection to be the Son of God, with power, his people are engaged to put their trust in him as the Creator and ruler of the universe. In his resurrection they receive the assurance of the effect of his death, in satisfying divine justice while making full atonement for their sins ; and in his rising from the dead to an immortal life, as their Lord and Head, they have a certain pledge of their own resurrection to life and immortality. V. 10. — ^For in that he died, he died unto sin once ; but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God. In that, or with respect to that he died. He died unto sin. — Here we have the same declaration concerning our Lord and Saviour, as in the 2d verse concerning believers, of whom the Apostle says that they are dead to sin. Whatever, then, the expression signifies in the one case, it must also be understood to signify in the other. But those who attach a wrong interpretation to the phrase in the first occurrence, are necessitated to attribute to it a different one in the second. Accordingly, Calvin remarks on this 10th verse, " The very form of expression, as applied to Christ, shows that he did not, like us, die to sin for the pur- pose of ceasing to commit it." Here are two misinterpretations, first, of the 2d verse, and next, as a natural consequence, of this 10th. A similar difference of interpretation will be found in the other commenta- tors. Having mistaken the meaning of the one, 'hey are compelled to vary it in the other. In the first they introduce thr i'^lea of death to ROMANS VI., 11 255 the power of sin, but in the last this is impossible. Our Lord iievei felt the power of sin, and therefore could not die to it. But he died to the guilt of sin — to the guilt of his people's sins which he had taken upon him ; and they, dying with him, as is above declared, die to sin precisely in the same sense in which he died to it. This declaration, then, that Christ died to sin, explains in the clearest manner the meaning of the expression. " dead to sin," verse 2d, proving that it signifies ex clusively dying to the guilt of sin ; for in no other sense could our Lord Jesus Christ die to sin. The eflfect of the death of believers to sin, the Apostle, after con- cluding his argument, shows to be, that sin shall not have dominion over them, verse 14th, for they are not under the law, but under grace. His argument is, that the doctrine of a free justification, which he had asserted in the 5th chapter, according to which believers are dead to, or justified from sin, by their oneness with Christ in his death, brings them into an entirely different state from that in which they formerly were in respect to their relation to God. Having been delivered from its guilt — dead to it, or justified from it, verse 7th, they are in conse- quence delivered from its power. But to include the idea of power in the expression " dead to sin," verse 2d, entirely confuses and misrepre- sents his meaning. Jesus Christ suffered the penalty of sin, and ceased to bear it. Till his death he had sin upoii him ; and therefore, though it was not com- mitted by him personally, yet it was his own, inasmuch as he had taken it upon him. When he took it on him, so as to free his people from its guilt, it became his own debt as truly as if it had been contracted by him. When, therefore, he died on account of sin, he died to it, as he was now for ever justified from it. He was not justified from it till his resurrection, but from that moment he was dead to it. When he shall appear the second time, it will be " without sin." — Heb. ix., 28. Once. — He died to sin once, and but once, because he fully atoned for it by his death. On this circumstance, the Apostle, in the Epistle to the Hebrews, lays much stress, and in proving the excellence of his sacrifice beyond the legal sacrifices, often repeats it, Heb. ix., 12, 26, 28; X., 10, 12, 14. He 'liveth unto God. — It need not excite any surprise that Christ is said henceforth to live unto God. The glory of God must be the great end of all life. Christ's eternal life in human nature will no doubt, more than all things else, be for the glory of God. v. 11. — ^Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord. Believers are here commanded to reckon themselves to be really and effectually dead to sin — dead to its guilt, and alive unto God in Jesus Christ, as it ought to be rendered. The obligation thus enjoined follows from all that the Apostle had been inculcating respecting their blessed state as partakers with Christ, both in his death and in his life. As this is their real condition, he here commands them to maintain a full sense and conviction of it. The duties of the Christian life, flow 256 ROMANS VI., 11. ing from their union with Jesus Christ, and acceptance with God, he immediately proceeds to enforce. But here it is the obligation to maintain the conviction of their state that he exclusively presses upon them. To note this is of the greatest importance. Unless we keep in mind that we are dead to sin, and alive unto God in Jesus Christ our Lord, we cannot serve him as we ought : we shall otherwise be serving in the ,oldness of the letter, and not in newness of spirit. But when the believer's state of reconciliation with God, and his death to sin, from which he is delivered, is steadily kept in view, then he cultivates the spirit of adoption — then he strives to walk worthy of his calling, and in the consideration of the mercies of God, presents his body a living sacrifice holy and acceptable unto God, Rom. xii., 1 ; he rejoices in the Lord, and abounds in hope through the power of the Holy Ghost ; he has peace in his conscience, his heart is enlarged, and he runs the way of God's commandments. Of their high privileges and state of acceptance with God, believers are ever reminded in Scripture ; and it is not till a man has the answer of a good conscience toward God by the resurrection of Jesus Christ, 1 Pet. iii., 21, and a sense of being justified from sin, having his con- science purged from dead works by the blood of Christ, that he can serve the living God, Heb. ix., 14. How important, then, is this admo- nition of the Apostle, Reckon ye also yourselves to he dead indeed unto sin, though often much obscured by false glosses turning it away from its true and appropriate meaning. By many it would be accounted pre- sumptuous in Christians to take it home to themselves. Hence they are not aware of the obligations they are under to labor to maintain the assurance of their union with Christ, and of their participation with him in his death and resurrection. But we see that the Apostle, after he had fully developed the blessed state of believers, and declared the foundation on which it rests, with which their continuing to live in sin is incompatible, expressly enjoins this as a positive duty on those whom he addresses, and consequently on all Christians, thus reminding them that what he had said was not to be viewed in the light of abstract truth, but ought to be practically and individually brought home to their own bosoms. How seldom is this use made of the text before us ! How seldom, if ever, is the duty it enforces urged upon Christians !* How little is it considered as binding on their consciences ! Yet, without attending to this duty, which, in connection with a right under- standing of the gospel, is consistent with the deepest humility, how can they possibly bring forth those precious fruits of the Spirit, which lie at the foundation of all the rest, love, and joy, and peace ? How, in a word, can they walk with God ? There was no part of the Exposition in which I felt so much diffi- culty as in the commencement of this chapter. In consulting a multi- tude of commentators, I found no satisfactory solution. Most ot them explam the expression " dead to sin," in the 2d verse, as importing death not only to the guilt, but also, as has been remarked, to the power * I do not recollect that I ever heard any one jjreach on this text, Horn, vi , 12, althout^b it contains 3o important an injunction, and is of such practical importance. ROMANS VI., 12. 257 of sin, a proof that the assertion of the Apostle is misunderstood. But when it is perceived that the guilt of sin only is included, a cxar light IS thrown on this highly important part of the Epistle. This is the way in which it appears to have been viewed by Mr. Romaine, of which, till lately, I was not aware, and I do not recollect ever meeting with it in the works of any other writer. I subjoin the following in- teresting passage from his treatise on the walk of faith. " True spiritual mortification does not consist in sin not being in thee, nor in its being put upon the cross daily, nor yet in its being kept upon It. There must be something more to establish perfect peace in thy con- science ; and that is the testimony of God concerning the body of sin. He has provided for thy perfect deliverance from it in Christ. Every- thing needful for this purpose was finished by him upon the cross. He was thy surety. He suffered for thee. Thy sins were crucified with him and nailed to his cross. They were put to death when he died : for he was thy covenant head, and thou wast legally represented by him, and art indeed dead to sin by his dying to sin once. The law has now no more right to condemn thee, a believer, than it has to condemn him. Justice is bound to deal with thee, as it has with thy risen and ascended Saviour. If thou dost not thus see thy complete mortifica lion in him, sin will reign in thee. No sin can be crucified either in heart or life, unless it be first pardoned in conscience ; because, there will be want of faith to receive the strength of Jesus, by whom alone il can be crucified. If it be not mortified in its guilt it cannot be sub- dued in its power. If the believer does not see his perfect deadness to sin in Jesus, he will open a wide door to unbelief : and if he be not persuaded of his completeness in Christ, he gives room for the attacks of self-righteous and legal tempers. If Christ be not all in all, self must still be looked upon as something great, and there will be food left for the pride of self-importance and self-sufficiency ; so that he cannot grow into the death of Christ in sensible experience, farther than he believes himself to be dead to sin in Christ. The more clearly and steadfastly he believes this, as the Apostle did — I am crucified with Christ, in proportion will he cleave to Christ, and receive from him greater power to crucify sin. This believing view of his absolute mor- tification in Christ, is the true gospel method of mortifying sin in our own persons. Read the sixth of the Romans, and pray for the Spirit of revelation to open it to thee. There thou wilt discover the true way to mortify sin. It is by believing that thou art planted together with Christ in his death ; from thence only thy pardon flows, from thence thy daily victory is received, and from thence thy eternal victory will be perfected." V. 12. — Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, that ye should obey it in tf:t lusts thereof. Having proved how unfounded is the objection that the doctrine of justification leads to the indulgence of sin, the Apostle now exhorts those whom he addresses to live agreeably to the holy nature and de- sign of the gospel. With this object he presents, throughout the rest 17 258 ROMANS VI., 13. of the chapter, various considerations adapted to indiice them to walS in that newness of life to vyhich they are risen with Christ. It should here be remarked, that although the Apostle had expressly taught that they who are justified are likewise sanctified, yet as God is pleased to cause his people to act with him in their sanctification — so that they shall both will and do, because he worketh in them to will and to do of his good pleasure — the earnest exhortations to obedience, and the mo tives held forth in the conclusion of the chapter, are entirely consistent with what had been declared as to the certainty of their sanctification resting on the power of God, and to be viewed as outward means which God employs to effect this purpose. Therefore. — The exhortation in this verse is foundied on the preced- ing. Here, then, we have an example of the manner in which the Apostle urges believers to the performance of their duty to God. Be- cause, being united to Christ, they were dead to sin, the conviction of which he had just before enjoined them to maintain, he exhorts them in this and the following verse to abstain from sin. Unless they pos- sessed that conviction, the motive on which he here rests his exhortation would be inapplicable. This is his manner in all his Epistles, in com- mon with the other Apostles, of enforcing the obligation of Christians to the performance of their duty. " Be ye kind one to another, for- giving one another, even as God, for Christ's sake, hath forgiven you." tie proceeds on the fact of their knowledge that their sins were for given. It is diificult to see what precise idea the Apostle intends to com- municate by the addition of the epithet mortal ; yet it is certain that he uses no unmeaning appendages, and that this word must add to the sense. The propriety of the epithet as ascribed to the body is evident; but still, why is this epithet added here ? Paul had just charged -be- lievers to reckon themselves dead to sin, but alive to God. When, therefore, he here urges them not to allow sin to reign in their bodies, and designates their bodies as mortal^ it may be, that he means to inti- mate either that their struggle with sin, which will only continue while they are in the body, will be short, or to contrast the present state of the body with its future spiritual state. As in its future glorified state it is to live entirely to God, and to be without sin, so it follows that, even in its present mortal state, sin should not have it in subjection; Calvin is undoubtedly mistaken in saying that the word body here " is not taken in the sense of fleshi skin, and bones ; but means, if I may be allowed the expression, the whole mass of the man ;" that is, man as soul and body in his present earthly state. This would import that the soul is now mortal. Sin reign. — Sin is here personified and viewed as a King. Such a ruler is sin over all the world, except those who believe in the Lord, Jesus Christ, 1 John v., 19. This is the reason why men will spend their substance and their labor in the works of the flesh. Sin rules in them as a sovereign ; and they of their own accord with eagerness pursue every ungodly course to which' their corrupt nature impels them; and in the service of sin they will often ruin their health as well ROMANS VI., 13. 259 as their fc>rtune. That ye should obey it, or so as to obey it. — Sin is still a law in the members of behevers, but it is not to be allowed to reign. It must be constantly resisted. Obey it in the lusts thereof. — That is, to obey sin in the liists of the body. Sin is obeyed in gratify- ing the lusts or corrupt appetites of the body. The term lusts, imports the inward corrupt inclination to sin from whence the acts of sin pro- ceed ; and of which the Apostle speaks particularly in the following chapter, where he shows that till after the commandment' came to him in power he had not known that corrupt inclination to be sin. Augustine here remarks that the Apostle does not say that in believers there is no sin, but that it should not reign, because while they live there must be sin in their members. V. 13. — ^Neither yield ye your members as instruments of unrighteousness unto sin : but yield yourselves unto God, as those that are alive ftom. the dead, aUd your members as instruments of righteousness unto God. Neither yield. — That is, do not present, afibrd, or make a donation of your members. Instruments — or weapons, or organs, to be em- ployed in works of unrighteousness. Unto sin. — This surrender, against which the believer is cautioned, is to sin. They who employ the members of their bodies in doing the works of the flesh, present their bodies to sin as their sovereign. Members. — There is no occasion, with Dr. Macknight and others, to suppose that the word members here includes the faculties of the mind as well as the members of the body. It is of the body that the Apostle is speaking. It follows, indeed, as a consequence, that if sin is not to be practised through the members of the body, neither is it to be indulged in the thoughts of the mind, for it is the latter that leads to the former. The word instruments evidently limits the expression to the members of the body. But yield yourselves unto God. — ^Yield yourselves soul and body. The exhortation, as it respected the service of sin, mentions only the members of the body which are the instruments of gratifying the cor- ruptions of the mind. But this, as was observed'; sufficiently implies that we are forbidden to employ the faculties of the soul in the service of sin, as w^ll as the members of the body. There can be no doubt that all we are commanded to give to God we are prohibited from giv- ing to sin. If we are commanded to present ourselves unto God, then we are forbidden to present either the faculties of the mind or the members of the body to sin. The believer is to give himself up to God, 'without any reservation. He is to employ both body and mind, in every work required' of him by God. He must decline no labor which the Lord sets before him, no trial to which he calls him, no cross which he lays upon him. He is not to count even his life dear if God demands its sacrifice. As those that are alive from the dead. — Here again Christians are addressed as those who know their state. They are already in one sense raised from the dead. They have a spiritual life, of which they were by nature entirely destitute, and of which unbelievers are not alto- gether destitute, but which they cannot even comprehend. Your mem 260 KOMANS VI., 14. bers as instruments of righteousness. — The members of the body are not only to be used in the direct worship of God, and in doing those things in which their instrumentaUty is required, but in every action they ought to be employed in this manner, even in the common business of life, in which the glory of God should be constantly kept in view. The laborer who toils in the field, if he acts with an eye to the glory of God, ought to console himself with the consideration that when he has finished his day to man, he has wrought a day to God. This view of the matter is a great relief under his daily toils. Unto God. — That is, yield your members unto God. As the natural man presents his members to sin, so the believer is to present his members to God. V. 14. — ^For sin shall not have dominion over you : for ye are not under the lavr, but under grace. For sin shall not have dominion over you. — Such is the unqualified affirmation with which Paul in this place shuts up his triumphant reply to the objection to his doctrine urged in the 1st verse. No truth is more certain than that sin shall not have dominion over believers. God's veracity and glory are pledged to prevent it. They are dead to the guilt of sin, and therefore its power shall no more predominate in them. They have put on the new man, and the warfare with the old man shall finally terminate in his destruction. The first for in this verse gives a reason why believers should exert themselves to give their members to the service of God. They shall not fail in their attempt, for sin shall not have dominion over them. The next for gives the reason why sin shall not have dominion over them. For ye are not under the law — ^literally, under law.^A great variety of interpretations are given of this declaration. But the meaning can- not be a matter of doubt to those who are well instructed in the nature of salvation by grace. It is quite obvious, that the law which believers are here said not to be under, is the moral law, as a covenant of works, and not the legal dispensation, to distinguish it from which, may be the reason why the article is here omitted. To affirm that law here is the legal dispensation, is to say, that all who lived under the law of Moses were under the dominion of sin. In the sense in which law is here understood, the Old Testament saints were not under it. They had the gospel in figure. They trusted in the promised Saviour, and sought not to justify themselves by their obedience to the law. Besides, all unbelievers, both Jews and Gentiles, are under the law, in the sense in which believers are here said not to be under it. Believers are not under the law as a covenant, because they have endured its curse, and obeyed its precept in the person of their great Head, by whom the righteousness of the law has been fulfilled in them, chap, viii., 4. But every man, till he is united to Christ, is under the law, which condemns him. When united to him, the believer is no longer under the law either to be condemned or to be justified. When Mr. Stuart says, that it is from the law, " as inadequate to aifect the sa ictification, and secure the obedience of sinners," that the Apostle here declares us to be free, he proves that he entirely misunderstands what is meant. The circum ROMANS VI., 14. 261 Stance that the law cannot sanctify the sinner, and secure his obedience, confers no emancipation from its demands. The believer is free from he law, because another has taken his place, and fulfilled it in his stead. This implies that all who are under the law, are also under the dominion of sin, and under the curse, Gal. iii., 10. The self-righteous who trust in their works, and boast of their natural ability to serve God, are under the dominion of sin, and the very works in which they trust are sinful, or " dead works," Heb. ix., 14. They are such worl^ as men perform before their consciences ai-e purged by the blood of Christ. But under grace. — Believers are not under the covenant of works, but under the covenant of grace, by which they enjoy all the blessings of that gracious covenant in which all that is required of them is promised to them. They are in a state of reconciliation with God. They know the Lord. According to the tenor of that gracious cove- nant his law is written in their hearts, and his fear is put within them, he has promised not to depart from them, and that they shall not depart from him, Jer. xxxii., 40 ; and their sins and iniquities, which separated them from God, are no more remembered by him. Being made par- takers of the favor of God through Jesus Christ, in whom grace was given them before the world began, 2 Tim. i., 9, they have every spiritual supply through him who is full of grace. His grace is suffi- cient for them, 2 Cor. xii., 9. The grace of God, which bringeth salvation, that hath appeared to all men, teacheth them to deny ungod- liness and worldly lusts, and to live soberly, righteously, and godly Titus ii., 1 1 . Not only is this grace manifested to them, but it ope- rates within them. God works in them what is well pleasing in his sight, both to will and to do of his good pleasure. They who are under the law have nothing but their own strength in order to their obedience ; sin therefore must have the dominion over them. But they who are under grace are by God himself thoroughly furnished unto all good works. Sin, therefore, shall not have dominion over them. The great principle of evangelical obedience is taught in this -passage. Holiness is not the result of the law, but of the liberty, wherewith Christ has made his people free. He sends forth the Spirit of grace into the hearts of all who belong to the election of grace, whom God hath from the beginning chosen to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth ; and the word of God worketh effectually in all who believe, 1 Thess. ii., 13. Jesus Christ is the absolute master of the hearts of his people, of which he has taken possession, and in whom he reigns by the invincible power of the Spirit of Grace. The new covenant made with him, for those whom he has redeemed, and which is ratified with his blood, is immutable and irre- versible. Here, again, it should be observed, that the assurance thus given to believers that sin shall not have dominion over them, could not be duly appreciated except on the ground that they knew that they were dead to sin and alive to God. Just in proportion as Christians are convinced of this, they will feel encouragement from this promise to oersevere in 262 ROMANS VI., 15. their course. The assurance given to them, that sin shall not have the dominion over them, is then very far from furnishing a pretext or induce- ment to a life of sin. On the contrary, they are thereby bound, by every consideration of love and gratitude, to serve God, while, by the certain prospect of final victory, they are encouraged to persevere, in spite of all the difficulties and opposition, either from within or from without. v. 15. ^What then ? shall we sin, because we are not under law, but under grace > God forbid. The Apostle had been :proving that his doctrine of a free justification by faith without works furnishes no license to believers to continue in sin, but, on the contrary, that the death of Jesus Christ for the sins of his people, and his resurrection for their justification, secures their walking in holiness of life. On this ground, in verses 12 and 13, he had urged on them the duty of obedience to God ; and having finally declared, in the 14th verse, that by the blessing of God they should be enabled to perform it,:he :now proceeds to caution them against the abuse of this gracious declaration. If a man voluntarily sins, on the pretext that he is not under the law, but under grace, it is a proof that the grace of God is not in him. " Whosoever is bom of God doth not commit sin, for his seed remaineth in him ; and cannot sin, because be is bom of God." What then 1 — ^What is the inference which should be deduced from the preceding declaration 7 Shall we sin, because we are not under law, but under grace ? — This question, proposed by the Apostle as an objection likely to be urged against his doctrine, plainly shows in what sense we are to understand the term law in the 144h verse. Were it not understood of the moral law, it would not be liable to the supposed objection. The fact of not being under the ceremonial law, or of a change of dispensation from that of Moses to that of Christ, would never lead to such an objection. No one could suppose that the abolition of certain external rites woiild authorize men to break moral precepts. No view of the law could give occasion to the objection but that which includes freedom from the moral law. This would al once appear to furnish a license to sin with impunity ; and it would be justly liable to this objection if freedom from the moral law meant, as some have argued, a freedom from it in every point of view. The freedom from the moral law which the believer enjoys is a freedom from an obligation to fulfil it in his own person for ;his justification — a freedom from its condemnation on account of imperfection of obedi- ence. But this is quite consistent with the eternal obligation of the moral law as a rule of life to the Christian. Nothing can be more self-evidently certain than that if the moral law is not a rule of life to believers, they are at liberty to disregard its precepts. But the very thought of this is abominable. The Apostle therefore rejects it in the strongest terms, in the way in which he usually expresses his disap- probation of what is most egregiously wrong EOMANS VI., 16. 263 V. 16. — Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, hia servants ye are to whom ye obey ; whether Of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteous- ness. Know ye not. — That is, the .thing by which I am now going to illus- trate the subject, is a fact of which you cannot be ignorant. All of them well knew the truth of what Paul was about to say, and by this similitude they would be able to comprehend the doctrine he was teaching. The ground, however, of the use of this phraseology has no resemblance, as Mr. Stuart supposes, to that used in verses 6 and 9. -Here, the Apostle speaks of a thing which ;all men know, and which belongs to the common relations of society. — There, he speaks of what they know only as Christians by revelation. Yield yourselves, or present yourselves. — ^Not, as Mr. Stuart trans- lates it, " proffer yourselves." It is possible among men. that proffered service may be rejected ; or that, at least, something may occur to prevent performance of the actual service — and it is of transactions among men that th5 Apostle is speaking ; but in the Apostle's view, the presented service is accepted. Mr. Stuart's translation in his com- mentary is better. " Where you have once given up yourselves to any one as servants." This, however, is quite a different idea from what he expresses in the text. Servants to obey, literally, unto obedience. — Mr. Stuart's translation is not to be approved of here, "ready to obey," or " bound to obey." The idea is not that they were bound by this presentation of themselves to continue in obedience to the master. The servants unto obedience, are not servants who are bound to obey, but servants who actually obey —whose servitude is proved and perfected in their works. Mr. Stuart entirely mistakes the sentiment expressed by the Apostle, when he pa- raphrases thus : — " When you have once given up yourselves to any one as Joi^ous ei's iTaxohv, you are no longer your own masters, or at your own disposal ; you have put yourselves within the power, and at the disposal, of another master." The language of the Apostle is not designed to prove that, by presenting themselves to a master, they are bound to his service, but to state the obvious fact that they are the servants of him whose work they do. If we see a number of laborers in a field, we know they are the servants of the proprietor of the field, of the person in whose work they are enaployed. The application of this fact to the Apostle's purpose is obvious and important. If men are doing the word of Satan, must they not be Satan's servants ? — If they are doing God's work, must they not be the servants of God ? Mr. Stuart's exposition leads entirely away from the Apostle's meaning. Of sin. — Sin is here personified, and sinners are its servants. Unto death. — That is, which ends in death. This is the wages with which sin rewards its servants. Obedience unto righteousness. — Obedience is also personified, and the work performed to obedience is righteous- ness ; that is, the works of the behever are righteous works. Nothing can be more false as a translation, or more erroneous in sentiment than the version of Mr. Stuart. "Obedience unto justification." In his paraphrase, he says, " But if you are the servants of that obedience 264 ROMANS VI., 17. which is unto justification, i. e., which is connected with justification, which ends in it — then you may expect eternal life." AiKonxrim, which he here translates justification, is righteousness, and never justification. In verses 18, 19, and 20, that follow, he himself translates it righteous- ness. And what can be more completely subversive of the doctrine of justification, and of the gospel itself, than the assertion that obedi- ence " ends in," or, as he says afterwards, will lead to justification ? This is the translation of the Enghsh Socinian version, and of that adopted in their different editions of the New Testament by the Soci- nian pastors of the church of Geneva. " De I'obeissance qui conduit a, la justification." Of obedience which leads to justification. They have, however, printed the word " conduit" (leads to) in italics, to show that it is a supplement. Mr. Stuart says that his view seems to him quite clear, from justifi- cation being the antithesis unto death. But justification is not an exact antithesis to death. It is life that is the antithesis to death. There is no need, however, that there should be such an exact correspondence in the parts of the antithesis as is supposed. And there is a most ob- vious reason why it could not be so. Death is the wages of sin, but life is not the wages of obedience. Mr. Stuart asks, " How can iiKaioaivnv here mean holiness, uprightness, when ivMoti itself necessarily designates this very idea 1 What is an obedience which leads to right- eousness ? Or how does it differ from righteousness itself, inasmuch as it is the very act of obedience which constitutes righteousness in the sense now contemplated ?" It is replied that obedience is here personified, and therefore righteous actions are properly represented as performed to it. Mr. Stuart might as well ask why are obedience to sin, and the lusts of sin, supposed to be different things in verse 12 In like manner we have righteousneess and holiness in verse 19, and fruit and holiness in verse 22. Besides, obedience and righteousness are not ideas perfectly coincident. Righteousness refers to works as tc their nature ; obedience refers to the same works as to their principle Mr. Stuart's remark is both false in criticism, and heretical in doctrine. v. 17. — But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin ; but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you. The Apostle here expresses his thankfulness to God, that they who had formerly been the servants of sin were now the servants of righteous- ness. To suppose, as some do, that sin itself could be a matter of thank- fulness, is a most palpable error, than which nothing can be more remote from the meaning of this passage. Obeyed from the heart. — Christian obedience is obedience from the heart, in opposition to an obedience which is by constraint. Any attempt at obedience by an unconverted man, is an obedience produced by some motive of fear, self-interest or constraint — and not from the heart. Nothing can be more convincing evidence of the truth of the gospel than the change which, in this respect, it produces on the mind of the believer. Nothing but Almighty power could at once transform a man from the love of sin to the love of holiness. That form of doctrine which was delivered you. — There are various ROMANS VI., 19. 265 solutions of this expression, all substantially agreeing in meaning, but differing in the manner of bringing out that meaning. The most usual way is to suppose that there is a reference to melted metals transferred to a mould, which obey or exactly conform to the mould. It is, perhaps, as probable that the reference is to wax or clay, or any soft matter that takes the form of the stamp or seal. There is another method of explain- ing the phraseology not unworthy of consideration — ^Ye have obeyed fiom the heart that form or model of doctrine unto which you have been committed. In this way the form of doctrine or the gospel is considered as a teacher, and believers are committed to its instructions. The word translated delivered, will admit of this interpretation, and it is sufficiently agreeable to the general meaning of the expression. The substance of the phrase, however, is obvious, and let it be translated as it may, there is no essential difference in the meaning. It proves the holy tendency of the doctrine of grace which believers have received, the blessed effects of which they have felt, and manifested in its fruits. Titus ii., 11, 12. V. IS. — Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness. Being then made free from sin. — ^The original word here rendered free, as also in verses 20 and 22, is different, as has been observed, from that improperly rendered freed in verse 7th, and has no respect to the justified state of the believer, as is clear from the context, but relates to his freedom from the dominion of sin assured to him in the 14th verse. There is here a reference to the emancipation of slaves from their masters. Formerly they were slaves to sin, now they have been emancipated by the gospel. This deliverance is called their freedom. It does not, how- ever, by any means import What has been called sinless perfection, or an entire freedom from the influence of sin. Ye became servants of right- eousness. — Here we see the proper meaning of the word gi^aioaim. The ser\'ants of righteousness are men obedient to righteousness, being devoted to the practice of such works as are righteous, or as is said in o^er words, in verse 22, " servants of God." What meaning could we attach to servants of justification 1 The idea is that the believer ought to be as entirely devoted to God as a servant or slave is to his master. Mr. Stuart is here of necessity compelled to allow the true meaning of the same word, which in the 16th verse, in consistency with his unscriptural system, he had mistranslated, by rendering it justification. V. 19. — I speak after the manner of Inen, because of the infirmity of your flesh : for as ye have yielded your members servants to uncleanness, and to iniquity unto iniquity ; even so now yield your members servants to righteousness unto holiness. / speak after the manner of men. — ^This refers to the illustration of the subject by the customs of men as to slavery. Mr. Stuart has eithei missed the idea here, or expressed it too generally. He translates, " in language usual to men," and expounds, " I speak as men are accustomed to speak, viz. I use such language as they usually employ in regard to the affairs of common life." This makes the reference merely to the words used J whereas the reference is to the illustration drawn from human customs. In what way could the Apostle speak but as men are S66 ROMANS VI., 19. accustomed to speak 1 Could he speak in any other langu tge than thai which was usual to men 1 This is a thing in which there is no choice. If he speaks at all he must use human language. But to illustrate spiri- tual subjects by the customs of men is a matter of choice, because it might have been avoided. This establishes the propriety of teaching Divine truth through illustrations taken from all subjects with which those ad- dressed are acquainted. This method -not only facilitates the right per- ception or apprehension of the;subj.ect, %ut also assists the memory in retaining the information received. Accordingly it was much used by our Lord and his Apostles. Calvin has not caught the spirit of this passage : " Paul," he says, " means that he speaks after the manner of men with respect to forms, not the subject-matter, as Christ '(John iii., 12) says, 'If I have told you earthly things,' when he is, however, discoursing on heavenly mysteries, but not with so much majesty as the dignity of the subject demanded, because he accommodated himself to the capacity of a rude, dull, and slow people." Here Calvin also makes the reference apply not to human customs, but to human language and style. It may also be asked why the Lord did not express himself with so much majesty as the dignity of the subject demanded 1 It cannot be admitted that his lan- guage, or the language of inspiration, ever falls short of the dignity demanded by the subject. Because of the infirmity of your fiesh. — ^That is, the weakness of their spiritual discernment through the corruption of human nature. This does not refer, as Mr. Stuart supposes, to " the feeble or infantile state of spiritual knowledge among the Romans," but is applicable to mankind in general. Men in all places, :and in all ages, and in every period of their lives, are weak through the flesh, both in spiritual dis- cernment, and in the practice of holiness. Men of the most powerfiil mental capacity are naturally dull in apprehending the things of the Spirit. Accordingly, errors abound with them as much as with the most illiterate, and often in a far greater degxee. Besides, such a peculiar application to those in the church at Rome is inconsistent with chap, xv., 14, where the Apostle says that they were "filled with all knowledge, able also to admonish one another." For as ye have yielded your members servants to uncleanness. — This shows the state of men by nature, and especially the state of the heathen world at the period of the highest refinement. Uncleanness means all impurity, but especially the vice opposed to chastity. Iniquity, as d,istinguished from this, refers to conduct opposed to laws human and divine. The one refers principally to the pollution, the other to the guilt of sin. Unto iniquity. — Some understand this as signifying from one iniquity to another, or from one degree of iniquity to another, which is not its meaning. Neithef can it signify, as it is sometimes understood, for the purpose of iniquity, for men often sin when it cannot be justly said that they do so for the furpose of sinning. They often sin from the love of the sin, when they wish it was not a sm. Their object is selfish gratification. It is evident that th« phrase ROMANS VI., 21. 267 is to be understood on a principle already mentioned, namely, tha> iniquity is in the first occurrence personified, and in the second, it is the conduct produced by obedience to this sovereign. They surrender their members unto the slavery of iniquity as a king, and the result is, that iniquity is practised. This corresponds with the sense, and suits the antithesis. Righteousness unto holiness.- ^Righteousness is here personified as iiuquity was before, and obedience to this sovereign jpro- duces holiness. V. 20. — ^For when ye were the servants of sin, ye were free from righteousness. Mr. Tholuck misunderstands this verse, which, in connexion with the 21st, he paraphrases thus: "While engaged in the service of sin, you possessed, it is true, the advantage of standmg entirely out of all sub- jection to righteousness ; but let us look to what is to be the final result." The Apostle is not speaking of freedom from righteousness as an advan- tage either real or supposed, nor could he thus speak of it. He is speaking of it as a fact ; and from that fact he argues, that, as when they were the servants of sin they were free from righteousness — yielding no obedience to it, and acting as if they had nothing to do with, and had no relation to it — so now, as they are the servants of right- eousness, they ought to hold themselves free from the slavery of sin. The consequence, indeed, is not drawn, but is so plain that it is left to the reader. The sentiment is just and obvious. When they were the subjects of their former sovereign they were free from the service of their present sovereign. So now, as they are the subjects to righteous- ness, they ought to be free from sin. Mr. Stuart also misunderstands this verse. He explains it thus : " When you served sin, you deemed yourselves free from all obligation to righteousness." This the Apostle neither says, nor could say. Por it is not true that natural men, whether Pagans, or under a profession of Christianity, regard themselves as bound by no obligations to right- eousness. The law of nature teaches the contrary. But whatever is their light on this, subject, it is a fact that they are free from righteous- ness. This, we learn, is the state of all natural men. V. 2].^What fruit'had ye then in those things whereof ye are now ashamed ? for the end of those things is death. WJiat fruit had ye then m those things. — iBesides the exhortations tc holiness which he had already employed, the Apostle here sets before believers the nature and consequences of sin. Unprofitable and shame- ful in its character, its end is death. He asks what advantage had they derived from their former conduct. Fruit here signifies advantage, and not pleasure. Many interpret this verse as if the Apostle denied that they had any pleasure in their sins at the time of committing them. This the Apostle could not do ; for it is a fact that men have pleasure in sin. To say that sinful pleasure is no pleasure, but is imagi- nary, is to abuse terms. All pleasure is a matter of feeling, and a man is no less happy than he feels himself to be ; if he imagines 268 ROMANS VI., 23. that he enjoys pleasure, he actually enjoys pleasure. But what advan- tage is there in such pleasure 1 This is the question which the Apostle asks. Whereof ye are now ashamed. — ^It is a remarkable fact that men in a state of alienation from God will commit sin, not only without shame, but will glory in many things of which they are ashamed the moment they are dianged by the gospel. They now see their conduct in another light. They see that it was not only sinful but shameful. For the end of those things is death. — ^Here is the answer to the question, with respect to the fruit of unrighteous conduct. Whatever pleasure they might have found in it, the end of it is ruin. Death. — This cannot be confined to natural death, for that is equally the end with respect to the righteous as well as the wicked. It includes the whole penalty of sin — eternal punishment. V. 22. — ^But now, being made free from sin, and become servants to God, ye have your fruit unto holiness, and the end everlasting life. Having concluded his triumphant reply to the objection, that his doc- trine concerning justification leads to indulgence in sin, the Apostle here assures those to whom he vsrote of the blessed effects of becoming ser- vants to God. In the eighth chapter these are fully developed. But now being made free from sin, that is, emancipated from a state of slavery to sin. Fruit unto holiness. — ^Fruit in this verse denotes conduct, and holiness its specific chciracter or quality. When conduct or works are called fruit, their nature is not expressed. They are merely considered as the production of the man. Fruit unto holiness is conduct that is holy. And the end everldsting life. — ^Fruit unto holiness, or holy con- duct, is the present result of freedom from sin, and of becoming servants to God ; eternal life is the final result. Eternal life is the issue of the service of God, but it is not the reward of its merit. Hence, the Apostle here uses the phrase eternal life, when he is speaking of the issue of the serHce of God. But in verse 16, he says, " obedience unto righteous- ness, and not obedience unto eternal life," because he bad, in the pre- ceding member of the sentence, spoken of deatii as the punishment of sin. Had he used the word eternal life in connexion with obedience in this antithesis, it would have too niuch resembled an assertion, that eter- nal life is the reward of our obedience. V. 23.— For the vyages of sin is death ; but the gift of God is eternal life, through Jesus Christ our Lord. The wages of sin is death. — Here, as in the conclusion of the pre- ceding chapter, death is contrasted with eternal life. Sin is a service or slavery, and its reward is death or eternal misery. As death is the greatest evil in this world, so the future punishment of the wicked is called death figuratively, or the second death. In this sense death is frequently spoken of in Scripture, as when our Lord says, " whosoever believeth on me shall never die." Death is the just recompense of sin. The Apostle does not add, but the wages of obedience is eternal life. This is not the doctrine of Scripture. He adds, but the gift of God is ROMANS VI., 23. 269 eternal life. The gift that God bestows is eternal l.fe. He bestows no less upon any of his people ; and it is the greatest gift that can be bestowed. Dr. Gill on this passage remarks — " These words, at first sight, look as if the sense of them was, that eternal life is the gift of God through Christ, which is a great and glorious truth of the gospel ; but their standing in opposition to the preceding words requires another sense, namely, that God's gift of grace issues in eternal life, through Christ ; Wherefore by the gift of God is not meant eternal life, but either the gift of a justifying righteousness, or the grace of God in regeneration and sanctification, or both, which issue in eternal life." This remark does not appear to be well founded. The wages of sin do not issue in death, or lead to it, but the wages of sin is death. Death is asserted to be the wages of sin, and not to be another issue to which the wages of sin lead. And the gift of God is not said to issue in eternal life, but to be eternal life. Eternal life is the gift here spoken of. It is not, as Dr. Gill represents, " eternal life is the gift of God," but " the gift of God is eternal life." The meaning of these two propositions, though nearly alike, is not entirely coincident. The common version is per- fectly correct. Both of the propositions might with truth be rendered convertible, but as they are expressed by the Apostle they are not con- vertible ; and we should receive the expression as it stands. No doubt the gift of righteousness issues in eternal life ; but it is of the gift of eternal life itself, and not of the gift of righteousness, that the Apostle is here speaking, and the Apostle's language should not be pressed into a meaning which is foreign to his design. Life and death are set before us in the Scriptures. On the one hand, indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish ; on the other, glory, and honor, and peace. To one or other of these states every child of Adam will finally be consigned. To both of them, in the concluding verse of this chapter, our attention is directed, and the grounds on which never-ending misery or everlasting blessedness will be awarded, are expressly declared. " The wages of sin is death : but the gift of God is eternal life, through Jesus Christ our Lord." The punishment of that death which was the threatened penalty of the first transgression, will, according to Scripture, consist in the pains both of privation and suiFering. Its subjects will not only be bereaved of all that is good, they will also be overwhelmed with all that is ter- rible. As the chief good of the creature is the enjoyment of the love of God, how great must be the punishment of being deprived of the sense of his love, and oppressed with the consciousness of his hatred ! The condeimned will be entirely divested of every token of the pro- tection and blessing of God, and visited with every proof of his wrath and indignation. According to the awful declaration of the Apostle, they shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power, in that day " when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, in flaming fire, taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ." 270 ROMANS VI., 23. This punishment will be adapted to both the component parts of man's nature, to the soul as well as to the body. It will connect all the ideas of the past, the present, and the future. As to the past, if will bring to the recollection of the wicked the sins they committed, the good they abused, and the false pleasures by which they were de- luded. As to the present, their misery will be aggravated by their knowledge of the glory of the righteous, from which they themselves are for ever separated, and by the direful company of the Devil and his angels, to the endurance of whose cruel slavery they are for ever doomed. As to the future, the horrors of their irreversible condition wilL be rendered more insupportable by the overwhelming conviction of its eternity. To the whole must be added, that rage against Godj whom they will hate as their enemy; witJiout any abatement or diminution. It is not to be questioned that there will be degrees in the punishment of the wicked. This is established by our Eord himself, when he de- clares that it shall be more tolercible for Tyre and- Sidon in the Day of Judgment than for the Jews, This punishment being the effect of Divine justice, the necessary proportion between crime and suffering" will be observed, and as some crimes are greater and more aggravated than others, there will be a difference in^ the punishment inflicted. In one view, indeed, all sins are equal, because equally offences against God, and transgressions of his law ; but, in another view, they differ from each other. Sin is in degree proportioned not only to the want of love to God and man, which it displays, but likewise to the manner in which it is perpetrated. Murder is more aggravated than theft, and the sins against the second table of the law are less heinous than those committed a;gainst the first. Sins likewise vary in degree, according to the knowledge of him who commits them, and inasmuch as one is carried into foil execution, and another remains but in thought or purpose. The difference in the degree of punishment will' not con- sist, however, in what belongs to priva^on — ^for in this it must be equal to all' — but in those sufferings which wiU be positively inflicted by God. Our Lord, three times in one discourse, repeats that awful declara- tion, " Their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched." The term fire presents the idea of the intensity of the wrath or vengeance of God, It denotes that the sufferings of the condemned sinner are such as the body experiences from- material fire, and tliat entire desolation which accompanies its devouring flames. Fire, however, consumes the matter on wlJch it actSj and is thus itself extinguished. But it is not so with those who shall be delivered over to that fire which is not quenched. They will be upheld in existence by Divine justice, as the subjects on which it will be ever displayed. The expression^ " their worm dieth not," indicates a continuance of pain and. putrefaction such, as the gnawing of worms would produce. As fire is extinguished when its fuel is consumed, in the same way the worm dies when the subject on which it subsists is destroyed. But here it is represented as never dying, because the persons of the wicked are supported for the endur- ance of this punishment. In employing these figures, the Lord seems ROMANS VI., 23. 271 to refer to the two methods in which the bodies of the dead were in former times consigned to darkness and obhvion, either by incremation or interment. In the first, they were consumed by fire — in the second, devoured by worms. The final punishment of the enemies of God is hkewise represented by their being cast into the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone. This imports the multitude of griefs with which the wicked will be overwhelmed. What emblem can more strikingly portray. the place of torment than the tossing waves, not merely of a flood of waters, but of liquid fire ? And what can describe more awfully the intensity of the sufferings of those who are condemn- ed, than the image of that brimstone by which the fierceness of fire is augmented ? These expressions, their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quench- ed, to which it is added, " For every one shall be salted with fire," preclude every idea either of annihilation or of a future restoration to happiness. Under the law the victims offered in sacrifice were ap- pointed to be salted with salt, called " the salt of the covenant," Lev. xi., 13. Salt is an emblem of incorruptibility, and its, employment an- nounced the perpetuity of the covenant of God with his people. In the same manner all the sacrifices to his justice will be salted with fire. Every sinner will be preserved by the fire itself, becoming thereby in- corruptible, and fitted to endure those torments to which he is destined. The just vengeance of God will render incorruptible the children of wrath, whose misery, any more than the blessedness of the righteous, will never come to an end. " The Son of Man," said Jesus, " goeth, as it is written of him ; but woe unto that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed ! It had been good for that man if he had not been born." If the punishment of the wicked in the future state were to terminate in a periodj however re- mote, and were it to be followed with eternal happiness, what is here affirmed of Judas would not be true. A great gulf is fixed between the abodes of blessedness and misery, and every passage from the one to the other is for ever barred. The punishment, then, of the wicked will be eternal, according to the figures employed, as well as to the express declarations of Scripture. Sin being committed against the infinity of God, merits an infinite pun- ishment. In the natural order of justice this punishment ought to be infinitely great ; but as that is impossible, since the creature is incapa- ble of suffering pain in an infinite degree, infinity in greatness is com- pensated by infinity in duration. The punishment, then, is finite in itself, and on this account it is capable of being- inflicted in a greater or less degree ; but as it is eternal, it bears the same proportion to the greatness of Him who is offended. The metaphors and comparisons employed in Scripture to describe the intensity of the punishment of the wicked, are calculated deeply to impress the sentiment of the awful nature of that final retribution. " Tophet is ordained of old ; yea, for the king it is prepared ; he hath made it deep and large : the pile thereof is fire and much wood ; the 272 ROMANS VI., 23. breath of the Lord, like a stream of brimstone, doth kindle it." Isa XXX., 33. While the doctrine of eternal happiness is generally admitted, the eternity of future punishment is doubted by many. The declarations, however, of the Holy Scriptures respecting both are equally explicit. Concerning each of them the very same expressions are used. " These shall go away into everlasting (literally eternal) punishment : but the righteous unto life eternal." Matt, xxv., 46. Owing to the hardness of their hearts men are insensible to the great evil of sin. Hence the threatenings of future punishment, according to the word of God, shock all their prejudices, and seem to them unjust, and such as never can be realized. The tempter said to the woman, " Ye shall not surely die," although God had declared it. In the same way that malignant de- ceiver now suggests that the doctrine of eternal punishment, although written as with a sunbeam in the book of God, although expressly affirmed by the Saviour in the description of the last judgment, and so often repeated by him during his abode on earth, is contrary to every idea that men ought to entertain of the goodness and mercy of God. He conceals from his votaries the fact that if God is merciful he is also just ; and that, while forgiving iniquity, and transgression, and sin, he will by no means clear the guilty. Some who act as his servants in promoting this delusion, have admitted that the Scriptures do indeed threaten everlasting punishment to transgressors j but they say that God employs such threatenings as a veil to deter men from sin while he by no means intends their execution. The veil, then, which God has provided is, according to them, too transparent to answer the pur- pose he designs, and they in their superior wisdom have been able to penetrate it. And this is one of their apologies for the Bible, with the design of making its doctrines more palatable to the world. On their own principles, then, they are chargeable with doing all in their power to frustrate what they affirm to be a provision of mercy. Shall men, however eminent in the world, be for a moment listened to, who stand confessedly guilty of conduct so impious ? Infinitely great are the obligations of believers to that grace by which they have been made to differ from others, to flee to the refuge set before them in the gospel, and to wait for the Son of God iiom Heaven, whom he raised from the dead, even Jesus, which delivered us from wrath to come. Eternal life. — Of the nature of that glory of which the people of God shall be put in possession in the day of their redemption, we cannot form a clear and distinct idea. " It doth not yet appear what we shall be ; but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is." In the present state, believers, beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, as by the Spirit of the Lord. This transformation, while they see only through a glass iarkly, is gradually proceeding ; but when they see face to face, and shall know even as they are known, this image shall be perfected. Their blessedness will consist in a knowleilge of God and his mysteries, a full and exquisite sense of ROMANS VI., 23. 273 his love, ineffable consolation, profound tranquillity of sou , a perfect concord and harmony of tlie soul with the body, and with all the powers of the soul among themselves ; in one word, in an assemblage of all sorts of blessings. These blessings will not be measured in the pro- portion of the creatures who receive them, but of God who confers them ; and of the dignity of the person of Jesus Christ, and of his merit ; of his person, for they shall obtain that felicity only in virtue of the communion which they have with him ; of his merit, for he has purchased it with the price of his blood. So far, then, as we can con- ceive of majesty, excellency, and glory, in the person of the Redeemer, so far, keeping always in view the proportion of the creature to the Cre- ator, ought we to conceive of the value, the excellence, and the abun- dance of the eternal blessings which he will bestow upon his people. The Scriptures call it a fulness of satisfaction, not a fulness of satiety, but a fulness of joy, at the right hand of God, where there are pleasures for evermore. It will be a crown of righteousness ; they shall sit down with Christ in his throne, as he is set dovra with his Father in his throne. " Blessed are they which are called unto the marriage- supper of the Lamb." As to the duration of this blessedness, it shall be eternal. But why eternal ? Because God will bestow it upon a supernatural principle^ and, consequently, upon a principle free from changes to which nature is exposed, in opposition to the happiness of Adam, which was natural. Because God will give it not as to hirelings, but as to his children in title of inheritance. " The servant," or the hireling, says Jesus Christ, " abideth not in the house for ever, but the son abideth ever." Because God will confer it as a donation, that is to say, irrevocably. On this account, Paul declares, that " the gift of God is eternal life." None of the causes which produce changes will have place in heaven ; — not the inequality of nature, for it shall be swallowed up in glory — not sin, for it will be entirely abolished — not the temptations of Satan, for Satan will have no entrance there — not the mutability of the creature, for God will possess his people fully and perfectly. Through Jesus Christ. — Eternal life comes to the people of God as a free gift, yet it is through Jesus Christ. By his mediation alone reconciliation between God and man is effected, peace established, communion restored, and every blessing conferred. The smallest as well as the greatest gift is bestowed through him ; and they are not the less free gifts from God, because Christ our Lord has paid the price of redemption. He himself was given for this end by the Father, and he and the Father are one. He, then, who pays the ransom is one and the same who justifies, so that the freeness of the gift is not in the smallest degree diminished. This gift of eternal life is bestowed through Jesus Christ, and by him it is dispensed, " Glorify thy Son, that thy Son may also glorify thee : as thou hast given him power over all flesh, to give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him." " My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me, and I give unto them eternal life." Our Lord. — ^His people are constantly to keep in mind that Jesus 18 274 ROMANS VI., 23. Christ is their Lord, whose authority they aie ev: to regard, and whom, as their Lord and Master, they are impliclcly to obey. He is the Lord both of the dead and the hving, to whom every knee shall bow, and before whose judgment-seat we shall all stand. There is a striking similarity between the manner in which the Apostle winds up his discussion on the free justification of sinners, in the close of the preceding chapter, and that, in which he now concludes the doctrine of their saHCtification. " Grace," he there says, " reigns through righteousness, unto eternal life, by Jesus Christ our Lord ;" and through Him, it is here said, " the gift of God is eternal Ufa." All is of grace, all is a free gift, all is vouchsafed through, and in Him, who was- delivered for our offences, and raised again for our justifica- tion, from whom neither death nor life shall separate us. " Thanks be unto God for his unspeakable gift." The doctrine of free justification by faith without works, on which the Apostle had been insisting in the preceding part of the Epistle, is vindicated in this- chapter from the charge of producing those conse- quences which are ascribed to it by the wisdom of the world, and by all who are opposed to the gospel. Far from conducting to licentious- ness, as many venture to affirm, it stand? inseparably connected with the santification of the children of God. In the conclusion of the preceding chapter, Paul had asserted that, as the reign of sin had been terminated by the death of the Redeemer, so the reign of grace, through righteousness, unto eternal life, by Jesus Christ our Lord, has succeeded. He had shown in the third and fourth chapters, that this righteousness is upon all them that believe, who are thus justified freely by grace. In the fifth chapter, he had ex- hibited the effects and accompaniments of their justification. The ob- jection which he had seen it proper to introduce in the beginning of this sixth chapter, had led to a further development of the way in which these blessed effects are pToduced. In order to this, he says nothing, as has been observed, of the character or attainments of believers, but simply describes their state before God, in consequence of their union with Christ. The sanctificatibn of believers, he thus shows, proceeds from the sovereign determination, the eternal purpose, and the irresisti- ble power of God, which are exerted according to his everlasting cove- nant, through the mediation of his beloved Son, and in consistency with every part of the plan of salvation. While this, however, is the truth — truth so consolatory to every Christian — it is an incumbent duty to con- sider, and to seek to give effect' to those motives to holiness, presented by the Spirit of God in his own word, as the means which he employs to carry on this great work in the soul — ^presented, too, in those very doctrines, which the wisdom of the world has always supposed will lead to licentiousness. Every view of the character of God, and every part of the plan of salvation, tends to promote holiness in his people', and on every doctrine contained in the Scriptures, holiness is con spicuously inscribed. The doctrine of justification without works, so far from leading 'o ROMANS VI., 23. 27S liciSintiotsrjess, furnishes the most powerful motives to obedience to God. They who receive the doctrine of justification by the righteous- ness of God, have the fullest and most awful sense of the obligation which the holy law of God enforces on his creatures, and of the extent' and pujity of that law connected with the most profound sentiment of the evil of sin. Every new view that believers take of the gospel of their salvation, is calculated to impress on their minds a hatred of sin, and a desire to flee from it. In the doctrine of Christ crucified, they perceive that God, who is holy and just,, pardons nothing without an atonement, and manifests his hatred of sin by the plan which he adopts for the salvation of sinners. The extent of the evil of sin is exhibited m the dignity and glory of him by whom it has been exjiiated, the depth of his humiliation, and the greatness of his suiferings. The ob- ligation of the law of God also derives unutterable fdrce from the purity of its precepts as well as from the awfulhess of its sanction. . If the principal object, or one of the essential characteristics of the doctrine of justification by faith, was to represent God as easily pacified towards the guilty, as taking a superficial cognizance of the breach of his holy law, and punishing it lightly, it might with reason be con- cluded that it relaxes the bonds of moral obligation. But far from thiS, that doctrine maintains in the highest degree the holiness of God, and discovers the danger of continuing in sin. It teaches that even when the Almighty is determined to show compassion to the sinner, he cannot deny himself, and therefore his justice must be saitisfied. That Jesus Christ should have purchased, at the price of his own blood, a license to sin against God, would be utterly incompatible with the wis- dom and uniformity of the Divine government. God cannot hate sin before its expiation by his Son, and love it after the suiferings inflicted on account of it. If it behoved him to punish sin so severely in tlie' Divine Surety of his- people, it can never be pleasing to him in those for whom the Surety has made satisfaction.- His hbhness is fartlier displayed by this doctrine, which teaches that it is only through a right- eous advocate and intercessor that they -who are jiisfified have access to God. The gospel method of justification by the hlbod of Christ discovers sin and its fatal consequences in the most hideous aspect, while at the same time it displays the mercy of God in the most attractive form. Believers afe punished with^ death in the person of their Divine Surety, according- to the original and irrevocable sentence pronounced against" man oti account of his traMsgression. But as JeSus Christ has been raised from the dead by the power of the Fathef, they also have beeii raised -with him towalkin newness of life; Theyare, therefore, bound, IJy evtry considieration of love and fear; of gratitude and joyful hope, to regulate the actions of that life which has thus been granted to them in a new and holy v?ay. Being baptized into the death of Christ, in whom they are " complete," they ought to be conformed to him, and to sepa- rate tliemselves from sin by its entire destruction. Their baptism, which is the instituted sign of their forfeiture by sin of Adam's life, and their rcgensration ar i fellowship with Christ in his death and resurrection. S76 ROMANS VI., 23. exhibit to them in the clearest manner the necessity of piirily and hpli ness, the way by which these are attained corjformably to the gospel, and their obligation to renounce everything incompatible with the ser- vice of God. "I am crucified," says the Apostle Paul, "with Christ; nevertheless I live ; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me ; and the life which I now live in the flesh, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me." And addressing tJie belivers to whom he wrote, he says, " As many of you as have been baptized into Christ, have put on Christ." Ye are " buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead," Col. ii., 12. These bless- ings believers enjoy by that faith which unites them to Christ, and which is wrought in their hearts by the same power that raised up Jesus from the dead, and that will raise them up at the last day. The inducements, then, to love and gratitude to God, neld out and enforced by the doctrine of justification by faith, are the strongest that can be conceived. The inexpressible magnitude of the blessings which they who are justified have received ; their deliverance from everlasting destruction ; the right they have obtained to eternal blessedness, and their meetness for its enjoyment : the infinite condescension of the great author of these gifts, extending mercy to those who, so far from serving him, have provoked his wrath ; the astonishing means employed in the execution of his purpose of saving them, and the conviction which be- lievers entertain of their own unworthiness, all impose the strongest obligations, and furnish the most powerful motives, to walk in obedience to God. " We have known and believed," says the Apostle John, " the love that God hath to us." As long as the sinner continues to live under the burden of unpardoned guilt, so long as he sees livine justice and holiness armed against him, he can only be actuated, in any attempt towards obedience, by servile fear ; but when he believes the precious promises of pardon flowing from the love of God, when he Knows the just foundation on which this pardon is established, he cleaves with reciprocal love to God. He rests his confidence solely on the merits of the Lord Jesus Christ, and ascribes to his heavenly; Father all the glory of his salvation. Being justified by faith, he has peace with God, which he no longer labors to acquire by his own works. His obedience is a constant expression of love and thankful- ness for the free gift of that righteousness which the Son of God was sent to introduce, which he finished on the cross, and which confers a title to divine favor sufficient for the most guilty of mankind. If any man professes to believe in Jesus Christ, to love his name, and to enjoy commimion with God, yet he obeys not his commandments, he " is a liar, and the truth is not in him. But whoso keepeth^his word, in him, verily, is the love of God perfected." That which does not produce obedience is not love, and what does not proceed from love is unworthy of the name of obedience. The pretence of love without obedience is hypocrisy, and obedience without love is a real slavery. The sanctification of the people of God depends on the death of Christ in the way of its meritorious cause ; for through his death tlieV ROMANS VI., 23. 277 receive the Holy Spirit, by whom they are sanctified. Jesus Christ has also sanctified himself, that he might sanctify them. He had, in- deed, no corruption from which he needed sanctification ; but when he took on him the sins of his people, they were his sins as truly as if he had been personally guilty. This is in accordance with what is de- clared, 2 Cor. v., 21 — "He hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin : that we might be made the righteousness of God in him." In this light, then, he must be sanctified from sin, and this was effected by his suffering death. He was sanctified from the sin he had taken upon him by his own blood shed upon the cross, and iii him they are sanctified. The sanctification of believers depends, too, on the death of Jesus Christ in the way of obligation ; for, having redeemed his people to himself, he has laid them under an inviolable obligation to be holy. " Ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers, but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot." " Ye are bought with a price, therefore glorify God in your body and in your spirit, which are God's." Their sanctification arises also from the example of Jesus Christ ; for, in his death as well as in his life, all Christian virtues were exhibited and exercised in a manner the most admirable, and set before us for our imitation. " Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that we should follow his steps." The sanctification of believers likewise depends on the death of Christ in the way of motive ; for it furnishes an almost infinite number of motives to holiness of life. In his death, believers discover the pro found misery in which they were plunged in the slavery of sin and Satan — as children of rebellion and wrath separated from the commu- nion of God. To procure their deliverance it was necessary, not only, that the Son of God should come into the world, but that he should suffer on the cross ; whence they ought to regard their former condition with holy terror and abhorrence. In his death they perceive how hate- ful sin is in the sight of God, since it was necessary that the blood of an infinite and Divine person should be shed in order to its expiation. In that death they discover the ineffable love of God, which has even led to the delivering up of his only begotten Son for their salvation. They discover the love and compassion of the Son himself, which in- duced him to come down from heaven to save them, which should beget reciprocal love, and an ardent zeal for his service. They per- ceive the hope of their calling, and realize the blessings of the eternal inheritance of God, which have been acquired by that death. They contemplate the honor and dignity of their adoption, for Jesus Christ has died that they might become 'the children of God. They have been born of his blood, which binds them never to lose sight of this heavenly dignity, but to Conduct themselves in a manner suitable lo then high vocation. In the death of Jesus Christ the eyes of believers are directed to the Spirit of sanctification, whom God hath sent forth ; for in dying Jesus 278 jioMANs VI., 23- Christ has obtained for his people the inexhaustible gi ices of the Holy Spirit. This leads them to renounce the spirit of the world, and sub mit to the direction ?ipd guidance of the Spirit from on high. They feel the honor of the;ir communion with Jesus Christ, being his bre thren and joint heirs, the members of his bo ly, those for whom he shed his blood, and whom he hath redeemed at so astonishing a price. They behold the peace which he has made between God and them, which inq)oses on them the duty of never disturbing that blessed recon- ciliation, but, on the contrary, of rendering the most profound obedience to the divine law. They discover the most powerful motives to humi- lity, for the death of Jesus Christ is a mirror in which they behold the yileness and indignity of their natural corruption, and perceive diat they have nothing in themselves wherewith to satisfy divine justice for their sins. His death placing before their eyes their original condition, leads them to cry out before God, " O Lord, righteousness belongeth unto thee ; but unto us confusion of face, " Our justification is a Eiessing which proceeds from thy grace, thou hast conferred on us the righteousness of thy Son, but to ourselves belongeth nothing but misery and ruin." The death of Jesus Christ presents the strongest motives to repentance, for jf, after the redemption he has wrought, they should still continue in their sins, it would be making him, as the Apostle says, " the minister of sin." And, finally, the death of Jesus Christ teaches them not to dread their own death, for he hath sanctified the tomb, and rendered death itself innoxious to his people, since for them he has condescended to suffer it himself. Their death is the last part of their fellowship on earth with their suffering Redeemer ; and as his death was the gate through which he entered into his glory, so the earthly house of their tabernacle must be dissolved, that they may be also glorified together with him. " death, where is thy sting ? O grave, where is thy vic- tory ? Thanks be to God which giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ." The resurrection of Jesus CJirist, as well as his death, presents the strongest motives for the encouragement and sanctification of believers. His resurrection establishes their faith, as being the heavenly sea] with which God has been pleased to confirm the truth of the gospel. Having been declared to be the Son of God with power by his resur- rection from the dead, they regard him as the Creator of the world, and the eternal Son of the Father. It assures them of the effect of his death in expiatrog their sins, and obliges them to embrace the blood of his cross as the price of their redemption. His resurrection being the yictory which he obtained over the enemies of his church, they are bound to place all their confidence in him, and to resign themselves for ever to his guidance. It presents the most powerful motive to have constant recourse to the mercy of the Father, for having himself raised up the Head and Surety of his people ; it is an evident pledge of his eternal purpose to love them, and of their freedom of access to God by his Son. In the resurrection and exaltation of Jesus Christ believers are taught the certainty of their immortalitv and future blessedness. Laza ROMANS VI., 23. 279 xus and others who were raised up, received their life in the same state as they possessed it before ; and after they arose they died a second time ; but Jesus Christ, in his resurrection, obtained a life entirely dif- ferent. In his birth a life was communicated to him which was soon to terminate on the cross. His resurrection communicated a life imperishable and immortal. Jesus Christ being raised from the dead, death hath no more dominion over him. Of this new life the Apostle speaks as being already enjoyed by his people. " He hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus." Elsewhere he calls that heavenly life which Jesus Christ now possesses, their life. " Your life is hid with Christ in God. When Christ wlio is our life shall appear, ye also shall appear with him in glory." " Whosoever liveth and believeth in me," he himself hath said, " shall never die." All this should inspire his people with cou- rage to finish their course here, in order to go to take possession of the heavenly inheritance which he has gone before to prepare for them, and from whence he will come again to receive them to himself. It should inspire them with fortitude, that they may not sink under the afflictions and trials which they experience on earth. The Apostle counted all things but loss and dung, that he might win Christ — that he might know him and the power of bis resurrection. On the resurrec- tion of Jesus Christ he rests the whole value and evidence of the truth of the gospel. " If Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is vain." " But now is Christ risen from the dead, and be- come the first fruits of them that slept." The resurrection of Jesus Christ, on which believers rest their hope, is intimately connected with every part of the Christian religion. The perfections of the Father, his power, his justice, his faithfulness, were all engaged in raising up his Son from the grave. The constitution of the person of Jesus Christ himself also required it. He was the Son of God, the Prince of Life, holy, and without spot, consequently having nothing in common with death. His body was joined with his deity, of which it was the temple, so that it could not always remain under the power of the grave. His resurrection was also necessary on account of his office as Mediator, and of the general purposes of his coming into the world, to destroy the works of the devil, to subvert the empire of death, to make peace between God and man, and to bring life and immortality to light. It was necessary, too, in consideration of liis office as a Prophet, in order to confirm by his resurrection the word which he had spoken ; and of his office as a Priest, for, after having presented his sacrifice, he must live to intercede for his people and to bless them. And to reign as a King, he must first triumph personally himself over all his enemies, in order to cause his people to triumph. Upon the whole, as in the preceding part of the Epistle the Apostle had rested the justification of believers on their union with Jesus Christ, so upon the same union he rests in this chapter their sanctifica- tion. It is in virtue of this union between Him as the head, and the church as his body that the elect of God are the subjects of his 2S0 ROMANS VI., 23. regenerating grace, enjoy the indwelling of his Spirit, and bring forU fruit unto God. " As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine ; no more can ye, except ye abide in me. I am the vine, ye are the branches. He that abideth in me and I in him, the seme bringeth forth much fruit ; for without me ye can do nothing." This union of believers with Jesus Christ is represented in Scrip- ture in various expressions and by different images. The Scriptures declare that we are one with him, that he dwells in our hearts, that he lives in us and we in him, that we are chanj,od into his image, and that he is formed in us. This union is spoken of as resembling the union of the head with the other parts of the body, and the foundation with the superstructure. This union does not result solely from Jesus Christ having taken upon him, by his incarnation, the human nature. For if in this alone our union with him consisted, unbelievers would be as much united with him as believers. The union of believers with Jesus Christ is a spiritual and mystical union ; and as one with him, by him they are represented. He represents them in the act of making satisfaction to the Father, taking their sins upon him, and enduring the punishment they deserved ; for it was in their place, as their head and mediator, that he presented to God that great and solemn sacrifice which has obtained for them heavenly glory. He represents them ;.n the act of his resurrection, for as the head he has received for them •){ his Father life and immortality. He represents them in his interces- sion in their name ; and also in his exaltation on his throne. The spiritual life which they derive from him consists in present grace and future glory. In grace there are three degrees. The first is peace with God ; the second is hohness, comprehending all that constitutes their duty ; and the third is hope, which like an anchor of the soul enters into that within the veil. In glory there are also three degrees ; the resurrection of the bodies of the believers ; their elevation to heaven ; and the eternal enjoyment of the kingdom prepared for them from the foundation of the world. Paul enjoins on Titus to affirm constantly the great truths he had been declaring, in order that they which have believed in God might be careful to maintain good works. Those doctrines alone, which in the opinion of many make void the law, and give a license to sin — against which, since the days of the Apostle, the same objections have been repeated which in this chapter Paul combats — those doc- trines are the means which the Holy Spirit employs for the conversion of sinners, and for producing effects entirely the opposite in their hearts. The Bible teaches us that the plan of salvation, wjiich delivers man from sin and from death by the death of the Son of God, which had its origin in eternity in the counsels of God, both as to the choice of its objects, and the manner in which they are justified and sanctified, and as to its consummation in glory, is founded wholly in gracw. " By the grace of God," says Paul, " I am what I am." '" Now unto him that is able to do exceeding abundantly above all that we ask or think, according to- ths power that worketh in us, unto him be glory in the ROMA.NS VII. 281 Church by Jesus Christ, througiiout all ages, world without end Amen." CHAPTER VII. In the preceding chapter the Apostle had answered the chief objection against the doctrine of justification by faith without works. He had proved that, by union with Christ in his death and resurrection, be lievers who are thereby justified are also sanctified ; he had exhibited and enforced the motives to holiness furnished by the consideration of that union ; he had, moreover, affirmed that sin shall not have domi- nion over them ; for this specific reason, that they are not under the law, but under grace. To the import of this declaration,' he now reverts Doth to explain its meaning and to state the ground of deliverance from the law. This, again, rendered it proper to vindicate the holiness of the law, as well as to demonstrate its use in convincing of sin ; while at the same time he proves that all its light and all its authority, so fai from being sufficient to subdue sin, on the contrary, only tend by the strictness of its precepts, and the awful nature of its sanctions, the more to excite and bring into action the corruptions of the human heart. Paul next proceeds plainly to show what might be inferred from the preceding chapter. Although he had there described believers as dead to the guilt of sin, he had, notwithstanding, by his earnest exhortations to watchfulness and holiness, clearly intimated that they were still ex- posed to its seductions. He now exhibits this fact by relating his own experience since he became dead to^ the law and was united to Christ. IJy thus describing his inward conflict with sin, and showing how far short he came of the demands of the law, he proves the necessity of being dead to the law as a covenant, since, in the highest attainments of grace during this mortal life, the old nature, which he calls flesh, still remains in believers. At the same time he represents himself as delighting in the law of God, as hating sin, and looking forward with confidence to future deliverance from its power. In this manner he illustrates not only the believer's real character, but the important fact that the obedience of the most eminent Christian, which is always im- perfect, cannot have the smallest influence in procuring his justification. He had proved that men cannot be justified by their works in their natural state. He now shows by a reference to himself, that as little can they be justified by their works in their regenerated state. And thus he confirms his assertion in the third chapter, that by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified. He might have described ■wore generally the incessant combat between the old and new natures m the believer; but he does this more practically, as well as moro 282 ROMANS VII., 3. efficiently, by laying open the secrets of his own heart, and exhibiting it in his own person. v. 1. — Know ye not, brethren (for I speak to them that know law) , how that the law hath dominion over man as long as he liveth ? Brethren. — Some have erroneously supposed that, by employing tht term brethren, the Apostle was now addressing himself exclusively to the Jews who belonged to the church at Rome. He is here, as in other parts of the Epistle, addressing the whole church ; all its members, whether Jews or Gentiles, being equally concerned in the doctrine he was inculcating. It is evident, besides, that he continues in the follow- ing chapters to address the same persons to whom he had been writing from the commencement of the Epistle. They are the same of whom he had aiSrmed, in the preceding chapter, verse 14th, that they were not under the law, which is the proposition he here illustrates. Brethren is an appellation whereby Paul designates all Christians, Gentiles as well as Jews, and by which, in the 10th chapter, he distinguishes them from the unbelieving Jews. Know ye not. — There is much force in this interrogation, and it j3 one usual with Paul, when he is affirming what is in itself sufficiently clear, as in chap, vi., 16 ; 1 Cor. iii., 16 ; vi., 19. He here appeals to the personal knowledge of those to whom he wrote. For I speak to them that know law. — This parenthesis appears to imply, that, as they were acquainted with the nature of law, they must in the sequel be convinced of the truth of the explanations he was about to bring under their notice ; and in this manner he bespeaks their particular attention. The law hath dominion oner a man. — Man here is not man as distin- guished from woman, but man including both men and women, denot- ing the species. This first assertion is not confined to the law of marriage, by which the Apostle afterwards illustrates his subject, but extends to the whole law, namely, the law of God in all its parts. As long as he liveth. — The words in the original, as far as respects the phraseology, are capable of being rendered, either as long as he liveth, or as long as it liveth. It appears, however, that the meaning is, as long as the man liveth ; for to say that the law hath dominion as long as it liveth, would be saying it is in force as long as it is in force. V. 2. — ^For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband to long as he liveth ; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband. V. 3. — So then if, while her husband liveth, she is married to another man, she shall je called an adultress : but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law ; so that ihe is no adultress, though she be married to another man. The Apostle here proves his assertion by a particular reference to the law of marriage. And no doubt this law of mai-riage was purpose- ly adapted by God to illustrate and shadow forth the subject to which it is here applied. Had it not been so, it might have been unlawful to become a second time a wife or a husband. But the Author of human nature and of the law, by which man is to be governed, has ordained the lawfulness of sa 'ond marriages for the purpose of shadowing forth ROM\^s VII., 4. 283 tlie truth referred to, as marriage itself was from the first a slmdow c f the relation between Christ and his church. Some apply the term law in this place to the Roman law, with which those addressed must have been acquainted ; but it is well luiown that it was usual both for husbands and wives among the Romans to be married to other husbands and wives during the life of their former consorts, without being considered guilty of adultery. The reference is to the general law of marria,gfi as instituted at the beginning. v. 4. — ^Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth iruit unto God. In the illustration it was the husband that died, and the wife remain- ed alive to be married to another. Here it is the wife who dies ; but this does not make the smallest difference in the argument ; for whether it is the husband or wife that dies, the union is equally dissolved. Dead to the law. — By the term the law, in this place, is intended that law which is obligatory, both on Jews and Gentiles. It is the law, the work of which is written in the hearts of all men ; and that law which was given to the Jews in which they rested, chap, ii., 17. It is the law, taken in the largest extent of the word, including the whole will of God in any way manifested to all mankind, whether Jew or Gentile. All those whom the Apostle was addressing, had been under this law in their unconverted state. Under the ceremonial law those among them who were Gentiles had never been placed. It was, therefore, to the moral law, only that they had been married. Those who were Jews had been under the law in every form in which it was delivered to them, of the whole of which the moral law was the grand basis and sum. To the moral law exclusively, here and throughout the re:st of the chapter, the Apostle refers. The ordinances of the ceremonial law, now that their purpose was accomplished, he elsewhere character- izes as " weak and beggarly elements," but in the law of which he here speaks, he declares in verse 22 of this chapter, that he delights. Mr. Stuart understands :the term " dead to the law," as importing to renounce it, " as an adequate means of sanctification." But renounc- ing it in this sense is no freedom from* the law. A man does not be come free from the law of his creditor, when he becomes sensible of his insolvency. The most perfect conviction of our inability to keep the law, and of its want of power to do us effectual service, would not have the smallest tendency to dissolve our marriage with the law. Mr. Stuart entiisly misapprehends this matter. Dead to the law means freedom from the power of the law, as having endured its curse, find satisfied its demands. It has ceased to have a claim on the obedience of believers in order to life, although it still remains their rule of duty. All men are by nature placed under the law, as the covenant of works made with the first man, who, as the Apostle had been teaching in the 6th chapter, was the federal or covenant head of all his posterity ; and it is only when they are united to Christ that they are freed from thi covenant. 284 ROMANS VII., 4. What is simply a law implies no more than a direction and obliga- tion authoritatively enforcing obedience. A covenant implies promises made on certain conditions, with threatenings added, if such conditions be not fulfilled. The language, accordingly, of the law, as the cove- nant of works, is, " Do and live ;" or, " If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments ;" and " cursed is every one that continueth not in all things that are written in the book of the law to do them." It thus requires perfect obedience as the condition of life, and pronounces a curse on the smallest failure. This law is here represented as being man's original or first husband. But it is now a broken law, and there fore all men are by nature under its curse. Its curse must be executed on every one of the human race, either personally on all who remain under it, or in Christ who was made under the law, and who, accord- ing also to the 5th chapter of this Epistle, is the covenant head or rep- resentative of all believers who are united to him and bom of God, For them he has borne its curse under which he died, and fulfilled all its demands, and they are consequently dead to it, that is, no longer under it as a covenant. By the body of Christ. — That is, by " the offering of the body of Jesus Christ." Heb. x., 10. Although the body is only mentioned in this place, as it is said on his coming into the world, " a body hast thou prepared me," yet his whole human nature, composed of soul and body, is intended. Elsewhere his soul, without mentioning his body, is spoken of as being offered. " When thou shalt make his soul an offer- ing for sin." Isa. liii., 10. Dead to the law by the body of Christ, means dead to it by dying in Christ's death. As believers are one body with Christ, so when his body died they also died, chap, vi., 3, 4. They are, therefore, by the sacrifice of his body, or by his death, dead to the law. They are freed from it, and done with it, as it respects either their justification or condemnation, its curse or its reward. They cannot be justified by it, having failed to render to it perfect obedience, Rom. iii., 20 ; and they cannot be condemned by it, being redeemed from its curse by him who was made a curse for them. As then the covenant relation of a wife to her husband is dissolved by death, so believers are released from their covenant relation to the law, by the death of Christ, with whom they died ; for he died to sin, chap, vi., 10, and to the law, having fulfilled it by his obedience and death, so that it hath no further demand upon him. Married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead. — Being dead to the law, their first husband, by their union with Christ in his death, believers are married to him, and are one with him in his resur- rection. Christ is now their lawful husband according to the clear illustration employed by the Apostle respecting the institution of mar- riage, so that, though now married to him, no fault can be found in respecft to their original connection with their first husband, which has been dissolved by death. To believers this is a most consoling truth. They are as completely and as blamelessly free from the covenant of the lav as if they had never been under it. Thus the Apostle fully ?xplaii! s here what he had briefly announced in the 14th verse of the ROMANS VII., 4. 285 preceding chapter, " ye are not under the law, but under grace." Froii the covenant of Adam or of works, believers have been transferred tfi the covenant of Christ or of grace. I will "give thee for a covenart of the people " — all the redeemed people of God. Before the coming of Christ, those who relied on the promise con- cerning him, likewise partook of all the blessings of the marriage union with him, and were, therefore, admitted to heavenly glory, though as to their title to it not " made perfect " (Heb. xii., 23) till he died under the law, and put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. Till that period there was in the Jewish ceremonial law a perpetual recognition of sin, and of a future expiation which had not been made while that economy subsisted. It was, so to speak, the bond of acknowledgment for the debt yet unpaid — the handwriting of ordinances which Jesus Christ, in paying the debt, cancelled and tore asunder, " nailing it to his cross," Col. ii., 14. as a trophy of the victory he had accomplished. Christ, then, is the husband of the church ; and under this figure his marriage relation to his people is very frequently referred to in Scrip- ture. Thus it was exhibited in the marriage of our first parents. In the same way it is represented in the book of Psalms, and the Song of Solomon, and in the New Testament, where Christ is so often spoken of under the character of " the bridegroom," and where the church is called " the bride, the Lamb's wife." What ignorance, then, does it argue in some to deny the inspiration and authenticity of the Song of Solomon, because of the use of this figure.* But though bebevers, in virtue of their marriage with Christ, are no lOnger under the law in respect to its power to award life or death, they are, as the Apostle says, 1 Cor. ix., 21, " Not without law to God, but under law to Christ." They receive it from his hand as the rule of their duty, and are taught by his grace to love and delight in it ; and being delivered from its curse, they are engaged by the strongest addi- tional motives to yield to it obedience. He hath made it the inviolable law of his kingdom. When Luther discovered the distinction between the law as a covenant and as a rule, it gave such relief to his mind, that he considered himself as at the gate of paradise. That we should bring forth fruit unto God. — One of the great ends of marriage was to people the world, and the end of the marriage of believers to Christ is that they may bring forth fruit to God, John XV., 4-8. From this it is evident that no work is recognized as fruit unto God before union with Christ. All works that appear to be good previous to this union with Christ, are " dead works," proceeding from self-love, self-gratification, pride, self-righteousness, or other such mo- tives. " They that are in the flesh cannot please God." " The carnal mind is enmity against God ; for it is not subject to the law of G od, neither indeed can be." We can never look upon the law" with a friendly eye, * On the genuineness and authenticity of the Song of Solomnn, see the author's work on " The Books of the Old and New Testament proved to be canonical, and their Ver- bal Inspiration maintained and established ; with an account of the introduction and nbaraoter of the Apocrypha." Fourth edition, enlarged, 3s. 6d. And also his Work «>f £vidences, &c., vol. i., p. 164. Third edition. 286 ROMANS vir., 5- till we see il disarmed of the sting of death ; and never can bear fin3.it unto God, nor delight in the law as a rule, till we are freed from it as ff covenant, and .are thus dead unto sin. How important, then, is the injunction — " Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin," — and this applies equally to the law, — " but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord," chap, vi., 11. " It is impossible," says Luther, " for a man to be a Christian with- out having Christ, and if he has Christ, he has at the same time all that is in Christ. What gives peace to the conscience is, that by faith our sins are no more ours, but Christ's, upon whom God has laid them all ; and that, on the other hand, all Christ's righteousness is ours, to whom God hath given it. Christ lays his hattd upon uS, and we are }»ealed. He casts his mantle imon Us, and we are clothed ; for he is the glorious Saviour, blessed for ever. Many wish to do good works before their sins are forgiven them, whilst it is indispensable that our sins be pardoned before good works can be done ; for good works must be done with a joyful heart, and a good conscience toward God, that is, with remission of'^sihs." V. 5. — For when we were in Cie flesh, the motions of sins, which were by the laWi did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death. WJien we were in the flesh, that is, in our natural state. — The flesh here means the corrupt state of nature, not " the subjects of God's temporal kingdom," as paraphrased by Dr. Macknight, to which many of those whom the Apostle was addressing never belonged; Flesh is often opposed to spirit, which indicates that new and holy nature com- municated by the Spirit of God in the new birth. " "That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is bom of the Spirit is spirit," .Tohn iii., 6. In these words our Lord points out the necessity of regeneration, in order to our becoming^ subjects of his spiritual king- dom. The nature of man since the fall, when left to itself, possesses no renovating principle of holiness, but is essentially corrupt and entirely depraved. On this accoimt, the word flesh here signifies man in his ruined condition, or that state of total corruption in which aU the children of Adam are bom. On the other hand, the word spirit has acquired the meaning of a holy and divine principle, or a new nature, because it comes not from man, but from God, who communicates it by the living and permanent influence of his Holy Spirit. Hence the Apostle Peter, in addressing believers, speaks of thcffl as " par- takers of the divine nature." The motions of sins, or affections or feelings of sins. When the Apostle and the believers at Rome were in the flesh, the desires or affections forbidden by the law forcibly operated in all the faculties of iheir depraved' nattire, subjecting them to death by its sentence. Dr. Macknight and Mr. Stuart translate this our " sinful passions." But this has the appearance of asserting that the evil passions of our nature have their origin in the law. The Apostle does not mean what, in English, is understood hjthe passions, but the working of the passions. Which t>ere by the law, rather through the law. — Dr. Macknight ROMANS VII., 6. 287 ranslates the original thus, " which we had under the law." But the meaning is not which we had under the law, but that were through the law. The motions of sin, or those sinful thoughts or desires, on our knowing that the things desired are forbidden, are called into action through the law. That it is thus natural to the corrupt mind to desire what is forbidden is a fact attested by experience, and is here the clear testimony of Scripture. With the philosophy of the question we have nothing to do. Why, or how this should be is a question we are not called to resolve. Thus, the law, as a covenant of works, not only cannot produce fruits of righteousness in those who are under it, but excites in them the motions of sin, bringing forth fruit unto death. Did work in our members. — The sinful desires of the mind actuate the members of the body, to gratify them, in a manner adapted to diiferent occasions and constitutions. Members appear to be mentioned here rather than body, to denote that sin, by the impulse of their various evil desires, employs as its slaves all the different members of the body. To bring forth fruit unto death. — In the same way as bringing forth fruit unto God is spoken of in the 4th verse, so here the Apos tle.sj) eaks of bringing forth fruit unto death, that is, doing works whiclTi^e in death. Death is not viewed as the parent of the works. It ' is the desires that are the parents of the works. This is contrasted with fruit unto God, which does not mean that God is the parent of the fruit, but that the fruit is produced on God's account. V. 6. — But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held ; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter. But now we are delivered from the law. — This does not import merely that the Jews were, according to Dr. Macknight, delivered from the law of Moses, but that believers are delivered from the moral law, in that sense in which they were bound by it when in unbelief. Christ bath fulfilled the law, and' suffered its penalty for them, and they in consequence are free from its demands for the purpose of obtaining life, or that, on account of the breach of it, they should suffer death Mr Stuart paraphrases thus, " No longer placing our rehance on it as a means jf subduing and sanctifying our sinful natures." But ceasing to r«jy on the law for such a purpose was not, in any sense, to be delivered from the law. The law never proposed such a thing, and vhereforej ceasing to look for such an effect is not a deliverance from the law. That being dead wherein we were held.— ^By death, whether it be considered of the law to believers, or of believers to the law, the con- nexion in which they stood to it, and- in which they were held in bond- age under its curse, is dissolved. All men, Jews and Gentiles, are hj nature bound to the moral law, under its condemning power and curse, from which nothing but Christ can to all eternity deliver them. Dr. Macknight translates the passage, " having died in that by which we were tied," and paraphrases thus, " But now we Jews are loosed from the law of Moses, having died with Christ by its curse, in that fleshly nature by wliich, as descendants of Abraham, we were tied 1 o the law." 288 ROMANS VII., 7. But this most en-oneously confines the declaration of the Apostle to the Jews and the legal dispensation. That we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter. — This is the effect of being delivered from the law^. The Apostle here refers to the difference in practice between those who were married to Christ, and those who were still under the law. A believer serves God from such principles, dispositions, and views, as the Spirit of God implants in hearts which he renews. Serving in the spirit is a service of filial obedience to him who gave himself for us, as constrained by his love, and in the enjoyment of all the privileges of the grace of the new covenant. Believers have thus, under the influ- ence of the Holy Spirit, become capable of serving God with that new and divine nature of which they partake, according to the spiritual meaning of the law, as his children, with cordial affection and gratitude. It is the service, not of the hireling, but of the son, not of the slave, but of the friend, not with the view of being saved by the keeping of the law, but of rendering grateful obedience to their Almighty De- liverer. Serving in the oldness of the letter respects such service as the law by its lightj authority, and terror, can procure from one who is under it, and seeking life by it, without the Spirit of God, and his sanctifying grace and influence. Much outward conformity to the law may in this way be attai-ned from the pride of self-righteousness, without an,y prin- ciple better than that of a selfish, slavish, mercenary, carnal disposition, influenced only by fear of punishment and hope of reward. Serving, then, in the oldness of the letter, is serving in a cold, constrained, and wholly external maimer. Such service is essentially defective, pro- ceeding from a carnal unrenewed heart, destitute of holiness. In this way Paul describes himself, Phil, iii., as having formerly served, when he had confidence in the " flesh," as he there designates such outward service. Serving in newness of spirit, and in oldness of the letter, are here contrasted, as not only different, but as incompatible the one with the other. V. 7. — What shall we say then ? Is the law sin ? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law : for I had not known lust, except the law had said. Thou shalt not covet. What shall we say then ? Is the law sin ? — In the 5th verse Paul had described the effect of the law on himself and those whom he ad- dressed before conversion, while he and they were under its dominion. In the 6th verse he had spoken of their deliverance and his own from tl\e law, here and in the four following verses he illustrates what were the effects of the law on himself. While he peremptorily rejects the supposition that there was anything evil in the law, he shows that, by the strictness of its precepts exciting the corruptions of his heart, it was the means of convincing him that he was a sinner, and under its condemnation, and was thus the mstrument to him of much good, for He would not have known sin to be sin but by the law. Mr Stuart says this is the language of an objector against the Apos- ROMANS VII., 7. 289 tie. For this there is no foundation whatever. It is a mere figment to suppose that there is here a kind of discussion between the Apostle and a Jewish objector. It is an objection stated by the Apostle in his own name, an objection that will occur to the carnal mind in every age and country, and is therefore properly introduced by the Apostle. If the law occasions -more sin is it not itself sinful ? God forbid. — Literally, let it not be — ^by no means. It is the expression, as formerly noticed, by which the Apostle usually intimates his abhorrence of whatever is peculiarly unworthy of God. Paul now begins to describe his own experience respecting the operation of the law. Nay. — Mr. Stuart says this expression intimates, that the Apostle had some exception to the universal sense of the words translated God for- bid. But this is not the effect here of the word rendered " Nay." There could be no exception to the denial of the consequence in the sense in which the thing is denied. Is it possible that there can be any exception to the denial that the law is sinful ? It is not possible. That the law is the occasion of sin, or, as Mr. Stuart expresses it, though " not the sinful or efficient cause of sin," is no exception to the univer- sal denial in any point of view. An occasion of sin and a cause of sin are two things essentially different. It is no exception to the assertion that the law is not the cause of sm, to say that it is the occasion of sin. The word here translated nay, intimates opposition. So far from the law being sinful, I had not known sin, says the Apostle, but by the law. Known sin hut by the law. — Paul does not say that he would not have been a sinner without the law, but that he would not have known sin as now he knew it, or have seen himself to be a sinner. Now, though no man is without sin, yet a proud Pharisee might think him- self free from sin by his keeping the law, when he did not look to it as extending to the thoughts of the heart. Paul, referring to his state before his conversion, says that, touching the rightepusness of the law, he was blameless, Phil, iii., 6 ; and it was only when he understood the law in its full extent that he became self-condemned. For I had not known lust. — The original word for lust signifies strong desire, whether good or bad. Here it is used in a bad sense. It is that disposition by which we are inclined to evil, — the habit and incli- nation to sin, and not merely the acts which proceed from it. It is evi- dent that the Apostle here speaks of this habit, that is to say, of our inclination to sin and habitual corruption ; for he distinguishes this in- clination from its acts in verse 8th, saying, sin taking occasion by the commandment wrought in me all manner of concupiscence, or lust. Except the law had said, thou shalt not covet. — rWithout the law he would not have known that the desire of what is forbidden is sinful ; that the very thought of sin is known only by the word of God. Indeed, many who hear that word will not receive this doctrine. Tlie Roman Catholics hold that such desires are not criminal, if the mind do not acquiesce in them. Thou shalt not covet. — This implies lusting against the will of God, and extends to the first rise and lowest degree of every evil thought. It is not to be confined to what are called inor- 19 290 ROMANS VII., 8. dinate desires, or desires carried to excess, but comprehends every de- sire contrary to the commandment. V. 8. — ^But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wroi^ht in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law sin was dead. The same word rendered lust in the fotfegoing verse is here rendered concupiscence, which is not so proper a translation, having a more limited meaning generally attached to it. In both verses the original word indicates our natural inclination to sin, and not voluntary sinful acts — not sins produced, which are the acts proceeding from lust, but our innate and vicious propensity to sin producing those acts. In the preceding verse, Paul had shown that the law does not cause sin, but discovers it, stripping it of its disguise, and bringing it to light. Here he asserts that the commandment discovered, to him the sinful nature of evil desires. It laid on him the most solemn obligations to resist them; and the natural corruption of his heart took occasion from the restraints of the law to struggle against it, and break out with more violence. Sin, he says, wrought in him all manner of lust. It excited and discovered in him those corruptions of which he had been uncon- scious until they were encountered and provoked by the restraints of the law. It does iitit appear that it is by feeling the curse and condem- nation of the law, that sin takes occasion by the law to work in us dl manner of concupiscence. By feeling the curse and condemnation of the law, the impenitent sinner is excited to hate the law and to hate God. But the thing to which we are here said to be excited is not this, but we are excited to desire things forbidden by the law. It is quite true that the feeling of the condemnation of the law aggravates the evil of our hearts, but it is lust or concupiscence that is here said to be inflamed by the prohibitions of the law. Nothing can more clear- ly discover the depravity of human nature than the holy law of God, the unerring standard of right and wrong, becoming an occasion of sin ; yet so it is. Whatever is prohibited is only the more eagerly de- sired. So far, then, was the law from subduing the love of sin, that its prohibitions increased the desire of what is prohibited. It may restrain from the outward act, but it excites the evil inclinations of the mind. Without the law sin was dead. — .Some understand this as meaning the same with the declaration, "that where there is no law there is no transgression ;" but the connexion requires that we understand it of the sleeping or doarmant state of sin. The Apostle would not have been without sin, but he would not have felt the action of his unlawfiil desires, if the strictness of the commandment had not become the occa- sion of exciting and making them manifest ; for without the law sin, or the workings of his corrupt nature, encountering no opposition, their operation would not have been perceived. Every Christian knows by experience the truth of all the Apostle declares in this verse. He knows that as soon as his eyes were open- ed to discover the spirituality of the law, he discerned in himself the fearful working of that corruption in his heart, which, not being per- ceived before, had given him no uneasiness. He knows that this cor- ROMANS VII., 9. '-91 ruption was even increased in violence by the discovery of the strict- ness of the lawr, which makes not the smallest allowance for sin, bui. condcnms it in its root, and in its every motion. " The wicked na- ture," says Luther, "cannot bear either the good, or the demands of the law ; as a sick man is indignant when he is desired to do all that a man in health can do." Such is the effect of the law when the eyes of the understanding are first opened by the Spirit of God. A power, formerly latent and inefficacious, then appears on a sudden to have gathered strength, and to stand up in order to oppose and defeat the purposes of the man, who hitherto was altogether unconscious of the existence in himself of such evils as those which he now perceives. v. 9. — ^For I was alive without the law once : but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died. Paul was alive without the law when he thought proudly of his good life, but when the commandment came with the power of the Spirit, then it slew him and destroyed ail his legal hopes. I was aKve. — That is, in my own opinion. Mr. Stuart finds fault with this sense as given by Augustine, Calvin, and many others. But his reasons are without weight. After exhibiting the meaning of the whole connexion in this view, he asks, " Is this then the way in which the law of God proves fatal to the sinner, viz., by convincing him of the true and deadly nature of sin ?" Not fatal to the sinner, but fatal to his view of salvation by the law. Nothing can be clearer than this passage, and no- thing more consistent than this meaning with the whole context. Without the law once. — ^Was Paul ever without the law ? He was in ignorance of it till his conversion ; and this he here calls being without the law. He was ignorant of its spirituahty, and consequently had no true discernment of his innate corruption. Mr. Stuart asks, " But when did the commandment come ? " and answers, " We may suppose it to be in childhood, or in riper years." It cannot have been in child- hood or in riper years, at any time previous to his seeing Christ. For if he had had such a view of the law previously, he would not, in his own opinioh, have been blameless concerning its righteousness. It is obvious that Paul had his proper view of the law only in the cross of Christ. When the commandment came. — That is, when he understood the true import of tiie commandment as forbidding the desire of anything prohibited by the law. He had heard aiid studied it before in its let- ter ; but never till then did it come in its full extent and power to his conscience. All men know that to a certain extent they are sinners, but from this passage and its context in which the Apostle gives an account of his own experience, both in his unconverted and renewed state, we learn that unconverted men do not perceive the sin that is in them in its root, called in the 7th and 8th verses " lust " or " concu- piscence." This is only felt and known when by the Holy Spirit a man is convinced of sin, when as it is here said the commandment comes — when it comes to him with power so that he perceives its real extent and spiritual import. He then discerns sin not only in its 292 ROMANS VII., 10. various ramifications and actings both internal and ejcternal, but also sees that it is inherent in him, and that in his flesh dwells no good thing ; that he is not only by nature a sinner and an enemy to God, but that he is witJiout strength, Rom. v., 6, entirely unable to deliver himself from the power of sin, and that this can only be eflfected by the Spirit of God, by whom he is at the same time convinced of the right- eousness of God — that righteousness which has been provided for those who are destitute in themselves of all righteousness. Sin revived. — It was in a manner dead before, dormant and unob- served. Now that the law was understood, it was raised to new life, and came to be perceived as living and moving. The contrast is with sin as dead, without the understanding of the law. It is true, as Mr, Stuart observes, that sin gathers additional strength in such circum- stances ; but this is not the idea held forth in the context. Idied.-^ That is, I saw myself dead by the law, as far as my own observance of the law was concerned. All Paul's hopes founded on what he was in himself were destroyed, and he discovered that he was a sin- ner condemned by the law ; so that the law, which promised life to those who observed it, to which he had looked for justification, he now saw subjected him to death. The expression by no means imports, as Mr. Stuart understands it, that Paul at the period referred to, was really under the sentence of death as a sinner who had not fled to Jesus. " I fell under the sentence of death," is the explanation that Mr. Stuart gives, which he confirms by " the soul that sinneth shall die." " The wages of sir is death." At the period when Paul died in the sense of this passage, he was really brought to spiritual life. It was then that he through the law became dead to the law, that he might live unto God ; Gal. ii., 19. Then Paul was without the law during all that time when he profited in the Jews' religion above many of his equals ; when, according to the straitest sect of their religion, he lived a Pharisee ; and when as touch- ing the law, according to the common estimation, he was blameless. He was without the true knowledge of it and its spiritual application to his heart ; but, in his own esteem, he was alive. He was con- fident of the Divine favor. Sin lay as dead in his heart. He could therefore go about to establish his own righteousness. He had not found the law to be " a killing letter," working wrath ; so far from it, he could make his boast of the law, and assume it as the ground of his rejoicing before God. But when the commandment came, sin revived and he died. Such is the account which Paul now gives of himself, who declared. Acts xxii., 3, that formerly he had been, and as he affirms in the beginning of the lOth chapter, that the unconverted Jews still were, " zealous towards God." V. 10. — ^And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death. And the commandment which was ordained to life. — Literally, the commandment which was unto life. That is, which was appointei to give continuance of life to' those who obeyed, and which, therefore, it ROMANS VII., 12. 293 •would ha^ e been life to obey, as it is said, " The man that doeth them shall live m them." By the commandment here referred to, the law, in all its parts, appears to be meant, with a special allusion to the tenth commandment, which shows that the desire of what is forbidden is sin. This commandment might well be put for the whole law ; for it could not be obeyed without the whole law being kept. As the law held ©ut the promise of life to those who obeyed it, on this ground Paul had sought and imagined he had attained a title to eternal life. Unto death. — ^The law was ordained to life, but through sin, it was found to be unto death. As soon, then, as it came home to his conscience, Paul found himself condemned by that law from -which he had expected life, for, though it coiild not justify a sinner, it was powerful to condemn him It then destroyed all the hope he had founded on it, and showed him that he was obnoxious to the curse which it pronounces on all transgressors. The law, however, which was ordained to life, will at last be proved to have attained this object in all in whom it has been fulfilled, Rom. viii. , 4, by him who is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth. All such shall, according to its original appointment, enjoy everlasting life. V. 11. — For sin, taking occasion by the conunandment, deceiTed me, and by it slew me. Sin, by blinding his mind, as to the extent of the demands of the law, had led Paul to believe that he could fulfil it, and so obtain justifi- cation and life, and had thus by the law taken occasion to deceive him. Till the commandment came home to him in its spiritual application, sin was never brought to such a test as to make a discovery to Paul of its real power. But when he was enlightened to perceive this, sin by the law slew him. It showed him that he was a transgressor of the law, and therefore condemned by that very law from which he had before ex- pected life. Thus sin, as he had said, revived and he died. All his high thoughts of himself and self-confidence, from supposing that he had kept the law, were swept away and destroyed. V. 12. — Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good. Having now shown that the law is not the cause, but only the occa- sion of sin, Paul here draws the conclusion as to its character and excel- lence. Wherefore. — ^In the 7th verse he had strongly denied that there was anything sinfiil in the law; and in the intermediate verses had shown by its effects, that so far from being the cause of sin, it had been the means of enlightening his mind in giving him to discover the evil nature of sin and its deceitful workings m himself. From these effects he now draws the conclusion here stated, which fully illustrates the above assertion, proving how far the law is removed from sin, namely, that it is holy, and jiust, and good. The two words law and commandment appear to be used to give the greater force to his declaration; thus meaning the law and every precept it enjoins. It is holy, in opposition to whatever is sinful ; holy as embodying the perfect rule of what is 294 ROMANS VII., 13. 'ight and conformable to the character of God and a transcript of hjj perfections. It is just. Can anything be more just than that we should abstain from all that God prohibits 1 It is highly just that we should not only abstain from all that God forbids, but that we should not even desire what is forbidden. The law demands what is equitable, and due to God, and nothing more, and what is just and equitable in regard to man, Mid a just law could demand no less. And good. — ^It is not only just, jt is also good. It is good in itself, and its whole tendency is adapted to maintain perfect order, and to establish in the highest degree the happiness of all who are under its authority. Every commandment of the Decalogue tends to promote human happiness. This is the glory of the law, mid shows that it proceeds from the Giver of every good and perfect gift, from him who alone is good. But this is not the ground of obedience, and those who have endeavoured to place the foundation of morals on the principle of utility or of the happiness of the many, have only proved their short- sighted ignorance, and verified the declaration of Scripture, " professing themselves to be wise they become fools." From the nature of the Apostle's description of the glory and excel- lence of the law, it is clear that he is speaking of the Decalogue, and not of the ceremonial law or the Mosaic institutions. These had a figu- rative excellence " for the time present," but " made nothing perfect," as he himself declares in the Epistle to the Hebrews, but consisted only in " carnal ordinances " intended to continue " until the time of reforma- tion." But the law as embodied in the ten commandments is in itself eternal and immutable, while the words of the Apostle in this verse beautifully accord with those of the Psalmist in the 19th Psalm. " The law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul : the testimony of the . Lord is sure, making wise the simple. The statutes of the Lord are right, rejoicing the heart ; the commandment of the Lord is pure, enlightening the eyes. The fear of the Lord is clean, enduring for ever : the judg- ments of the Lord are true and righteous altogether. More to be desired are they than gold, yea Uian much fine gold, sweeter also than honey and the honey-comb." E God had left men free from the law, it would still be for the happiness of society that they should strictly obey its precepts. V. 13.— Was then that which is good made death unto me ? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good ; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful. Whs that then which is good made death unto me ? — ^This is not, as Dr. Macknight supposes, an objection in the person of a Jew, but an objection put by the Apostle himself, which was likely to occur to every carnal man in every age. It might require an answer even with respect to Christians themselves. If the law is holy, and just, and good, how could it be found by the Apostle to be unto death 1 Could a good law be the cause of death 1 By no means. It was not the good law that was the cause of death. But sin. — ^That is, it is sin which is the trans- gression of the law, that causeth death. That it might appear sin. — ^Dr. Macknight translates, " that sin might appeal- wcrking out death." But the construction evidently is, " But ROMANS TIL, 14. 395 Sin has caused death, that it might appear sin ;" that is, that it migh*; manifest itself in its own proper character. Working death in me by that which is good. — ^It was not the good law that wrought death in him, but sin by means of the good law. Hence the manifestation of the exceeding vileness and hatefulness of sin. How evil must that thing be which works the greatest evil through that which is the perfection of righteousness ! That sin by the commandment might become exceed- ing sinful.— -This again is another form of expression designed to aggra- vate the evil character of sin. There is nothing worse than sin itself. The Apostle then does not resolve it into supposed first principles that would exhibit its guilt. The worst that can be said of it is that it is sin, and is so in excess. Here, and in the precedii^. verses from the 7th, Paul does not speak merely of outward sin, or sjnful acts, but also and chiefly of the sinful and disordered lusts of the mind, or the depraved in- clination to commit sin : nnd this naturally conducts him, in what follows to the end of the chapter, to describe and dwell on the workings of that inward evil disposition which he calls the law of sin in his members. It was by having his attention turned to this inward working of sin, when, as he says, " the commandment came," that be vfas cpnvinced he was a sinner. V. 14. — ^For we know that the law is spiritual : but I am carnal, s.old under sin In the foregoing part of the chapter, the Apostle had illustrated the truth, that believers are dead to the law by the sacrifice of Christ. He had next shown the effects of the law on himself before his conversion, when he was under it, and after his conversion when delivered from it. During the former period he was ignorant of its true nature, and, con- sequently, of himself, supposing that he was righteous. " I was alive without the law." But when he understood its real character, he dis- covered the deceitfulnesa and sinfulness of sin dpsely cleaving to him, and inherent in him. "When the commandment came, sin revived and I died." He had remarked that sin, taking occa.sipn by the com- mandment, had wrought in him all manner of evil desires, and had de- ceived him. He afi&rms, nevertheless, that the