:f$,J,,NTED WIv W-. Ep. CA LJID Best Copy Available The following title is missing pages or has damaged text. An Exact duplicate could not be found. Irregularities do exist. NOTES, EXPLANATORY AND PRACTICAL, ON TBB EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS DESIGNED FOR BIBLE-CLASSES AND SUNDAY-SCHOOLS. BY ALBERT BARNES. NINTH EDITION, REVISED AND CORRECTBD. NEW YORK: HARPER & BROTHERS, PUBLISHERS, 82 CLIFF STREET. 1851. ENTERED according to the act of the Congress of the United States, A. D. 1834, by ALBERT BARNES, in the office of the Clerk of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. PREFACE. THE Epistle to the Romans has been usually regarded as the most difficult portion of the New Testament. It is from this cause, probably, as well as from the supposition that its somewhat abstruse discussions could not be made interesting to the young, that so few efforts have been made to introduce it into Sunday Schools and Bible Classes. It will doubtless continue to be a fact, that Sunday School instruction will be confined chiefly to the historical parts of the Bible. In the Sacred Scriptures there is this happy adaptedness to the circumstances of the world, that so large a portion of the volume can thus be made interesting to the minds of children and youth; that so much of it is occupied with historical narrative; with parables; with interesting biographies of the holy men of other times, and with the life of our blessed Lord. But still, while this is true, there is a considerable portion of the youth, in various ways under the instruction of the Bible, who may be interested in the more abstruse statements and discussions of the doctrinal parts of the Holy Scriptures. For suchfor Sunday School teachers; for Bible Classes; and for the higher classes in Sabbath Schools, these Notes have been prepared. The humble hope has been cherished that this epistle might be introduced to this portion of the youth of the churches; and thus tend to imbue their minds with correct views of the great doctrines of the Christian Revelation. This object has been kept steadily in view. The design has not been to make a learned commentary; nor to enter into theological discussions; nor to introJuce, at length, practical reflections; nor to enter minutely into critical investigations. All these can be found in books professedly on these subjects. The design has been to state, with as much brevity and simplicity as possible, the real meaning of the sacred writer; rather the results of critical inquiry, as far as the author has had ability and time to pursue it, than the process by which those results were reached. The design has been to state what appeared to the author to be tie real meaning of the Epistle, without any regard to any existing theological system; and without any deference to the opinions of others, further than the respectful deference and candid examination, which are due to the opinions of the learned, the wise, and the good, who have made this epistle their particular study. At the same time that this object has been kept in view, and the reference to the Sabbth School teacher, and the Bible Class, has given cha racter to the work, still it is hoped that the expositions are of such a nature as not to be uninteresting to Christians of every age and of every class. He accomplishes a service of no little moment in the cause of the church of God, and of truth, who contributes in any degree to explain the profound argument, the thorough doctrinal discussion, the elevated views, and the vigorous, manly, and masterly reasonings of the Epistle to the Romans. Of the defects of this work, even for the purpose contemplated, no one will probably be more deeply sensible than the author. Of the time and labor necessary to prepare even such brief Notes as these, few persons, probably, are aware. TLis work has been prepared amidst the cares and toils of a most responsible pastoral charge. My brethren in the ministry, so far as they may have occasion to consult these Notes, will know how to appreciate the cares and anxieties amidst which they have been prepared. They will be indulgent to the faults of the book; they will not censure harshly what is well-meant for the ri. sing generation; they will be the patrons of every purpose, however humble, t. do good. IV ADVERTISEMENT. It remains only to add, that free use has been made sf all the helps within tle reach of the author. The language of other writers has not been adopted without particular acknowledgment, but their ideas have been freely used where they were thought to express the sense of the text. In particular, aid has been sought and obtained from the following works: the CRITICI SACRI, CALVIN'S COMMENTARY ON THE ROMANS, DODDRIDGE, MACKNIGHT, and ROSENMULLER; and the commentaries of THOLUCK and FLATT-SO far as an imperfect know. ledge of the German language could render their aid available. A considerable portion was written before Professor STUART'S Commentary appeared. In the remaining portion, important aid has been freely derived from that work. The aim of this work is substantially the same as that of the " Notes on the Gospels," and on the Acts of the Apostles; and the earnest wish and prayer of the author is, that it may be one among many means of establishing the truth, and of promoting its advancement and ultimate triumph in the world. Philadelphia, June 14,1834. ADVERTISEMENT TO THE FIFTH EDITION. Notwithstanding the difficulty of correcting a work which is stereotyped, the following Notes have undergone a careful revision, and several alterations have been made. The changes refer to a few phrases which did not accurately express my meaning, and to some entire paragraphs. My desire has been to make the work as little exceptionable as possible. Some expressions in the former editions have been misunderstood; some are now seen to have been ambiguous; a few that have given offence have been changed, because, without abandoning any principle of doctrine or interpretation, I could convey my ideas in language more acceptable, and less fitted to produce offence. The changes (occurring in pp. 94. 95.96. 103. 115. 117. 119. 120. 121. 122. 123. 128. entirely re-written, 146. and 192,) have been made with a wish to make the work more useful, and with a desire to do all that can be done, without abandoningprinciple, to promote peace and to silence the voice of alarm. On some of these passages, as is extensively known to the public, charges of inculcating dangerous doctrines have been alleged against me before the Presbytery of which I am a member. After a fair and full trial the Presbytery acquitted me; and I have taken the opportunity after the trial was passed and I had been acquitted, to make these changes for the sake of peace, and not to appear to have been urged to make them by the dread of a trial. When the work was first published, it was not anticipated that more than two or three editions would be demanded. The fact that, within less than eight months, a fourth edition should be called for, is a source of gratitude, and an inoucement to do all that can be done to make the work as complete as possible, that it may more perfectly accomplish the design for which it was written. Some of the alterations have been nade by the suggestions of friends; some by the cry of alarm which has been raised, but, whether from the one or the other, I hold that an author should he grateful for all the suggestions which may go to improve his works, and sh uld amend them accordingly. ALBERT BARNES, Philadelplia,i Jul/y 15 1835. INTRODUCTION TO THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. THIs Epistle has been, with great uniformity, attributed to the apostle Pau!, and received as a part of the sacred canon. It has never in the church been called in question as a genuine, an inspired book, except by three of the ancient sects deemed heretical-the Ebionites, the Encratites, and Cerinthians. But they did not deny that it was written by the apostle Paul. They rejected it because they could not make its doctrines harmonize with their views of other parts of the Scriptures. Their rejecting it, therefore, does not militate against its genuineness. That is a question to be settled historically, like the genuineness of any other ancient writing. On this point the testimony of antiquity is uniform. The proof on this subject may be seen at length in Lardner's works. The internal evidence that this was written by Paul is stated in a most ingenious and masterly manner by Dr. Paley in his Hore Paulinse. It is agreed by all, that this epistle was written in Greek. Though addressed to a people whose language was the Latin, yet this epistle to them, like those to other churches, was in Greek. On this point also, there is no debate.-The reasons why this language was chosen were probably the following. (1.) The epistle was designed doubtless to be read by other churches as well as the Roman. Comp. Col. iv. 16. Yet the Greek language, being generally known and spoken, was more adapted to this design than the Latin. (2.) The Greek language was then understood at Rome, and extensively spoken. It was a part of polite education to learn it. The Roman youth were taught it; and it was the fashion of the times to study it, even so much so as to make it matter of complaint that the Latin was neglected for it by the Roman vouth. Thus Cicero (Pro. Arch.) says, The Greek language is spoken in almost all nations; the Latin is confined to our comparatively narrow borders. Tacitus (Orator 29) says, An infant born now is committed to a Greek nurse. Juvenal (vi. 185) speaks of its being considered as an indispensable part of polite education, to be acquainted with the Greek. (3.) It is not impossible that the Jews at Rome, who constituted a separate colony, were better acquainted with the Greek than the Latin. They had a Greek, but no Latin translation of the Scriptures, and it is very possible that they used the language in which they were accustomed to read their Scriptures, and which was extensively spoken by their brethren throughout the world. (4.) The apostle was himself probably more familiar with the Greek, than the Latin. He was a native of Cilicia, where the Greek was doubtless spoken, and he not unfrequently quotes the Greek poets in his addresses and epistles. Acts xxi. 37; xvii. 28. Titus i. 12. 1 Cor. xv. 33. This epistle is placed first among Paul's epistles, not because it was the first written, but because of the length and importance of the epistle itself, and A2 5 VI INTRODUCTION. the importance of the church in the imperial city. It has uniformly had this place in the sacred canon, though there is reason to believe that the Epistle to the Galatians, the first to the Corinthians, and perhaps the two to the Thessalonians were written before this. Of the time when it was written, there can be little doubt. About the year 52 or 54 the Emperor Claudius banished all Jews from Rome. In Acts xviii. 2, we have an account of the first acquaintance of Paul with Aquila and Priscilla, who had departed from Rome in consequence of that decree. This acquaintance was formed in Corinth; and we are told that Paul abode with them, and worked at the same occupation. Acts xviii. 3. In Romans xvi. 3, 4, he directs the church to greet Priscilla and Aquila, who had for his life laid down their own necks. This service which they rendered him must have been therefore after the decree of Claudius; and of course the epistle must have been written after the year 52. In Acts xviii. 19, we are told that he left Aquila and Priscilla at Ephesus. Paul made a journey through the neighbouring regions, and then returned to Ephesus. Acts xix. 1. Paul remained at Ephesus at least two years (Acts xix. 8, 9, 10), and while here probably wrote the first Epistle to the Corinthians. In that epistle (xvi. 19) he sends the salutation of Priscilla and Aquila, who were of course still at Ephesus. The Epistle to the Romans, therefore, in which he sends his salutation to Aquila and Priscilla, as being then at Rome, could not be written until they had left Ephesus and returned to Rome; that is, until three years at least after the decree of Claudius in 52 or 54. Still further. When Paul wrote this epistle, he was about to depart for Jerusalem to convey a collection which had been made for the poor saints there, by the churches in Macedonia and Achaia. Rom. xv. 25, 26. When he had done this, he intended to go to Rome. Rom. xv. 28.-Now, by looking at the Acts of the Apostles, we can determine when this occurred. At this time he sent Timotheus and Erastus before him into Macedonia, while he remained in Asia for a season. Acts xix. 22. After this (Acts xx. 1, 2), Paul himself went into Macedonia, passed through Greece, and remained about three months there. In this journey it is almost certain that he went to Corinth, the capital of Achaia, at which time it is supposed this epistle was written. From this place he set out for Jerusalem, where he was made a prisoner, and after remaining a prisoner two years (Acts xxiv. 27), he was sent to Rome about A. D. 60. Allowing for the time of his travelling and his imprisonment, it must have been about three years from the time that he purposed to go to Jerusalem; that is, from the time that he finished the epistle (Rom. xv. 25-29) to the time when he reached Rome, and thus the epistle must have been written about A. D. 57. It is clear also, that the epistle was written from Corinth. In ch. xvi. 1, Phebe, a member of the church at Cenchrea, is commended to the Romans. She probably had charge of the epistle, or accompanied those who had it. Cenchrea was the port of the city of Corinth, about seven or eight miles from the city. In ch. xvi. 23, Gaius is spoken of as the host of Paul, or he of whose hospitality Paul partook, but Gaius was baptized by Paul at Corinth, and Corinth was manifestly his place of residence. 1 Cor. i. 14. Erastus is also mentioned as the chamberlain of the city where the epistle was written; but this Erastus is mentioned as having his abode at Corinth. 2 Tim. iv. 20. From al. this it is manifest that the Epistle was written at Corinth, about the year 57. Of the state of the church at Rome at that time it is not easy to form a precise opinion. From this epistle it is evident that it was composed of Jews and INTRODUCTION. vil gentiles, and that one design of writing to it was to reconcile their jarring opinions, particularly about the obligation of the Jewish law; the advantage of the Jew; and the way of justification. It is probable that the two parties in the church were endeavouring to defend each their peculiar opinions, and that the apostle took this opportunity and mode to state to his converted countrymen the great doctrines of Christianity, and the relation of the law of Moses to the Christian system. The epistle itself is full proof that the church to whom it was addressed was composed of Jews and gentiles. No small part of it is an argument expressly with the Jews, ch. ii. iii. iv. ix. x. xi. And no small part of the epistle also is designed to state the true doctrine about the character of the gentiles, and the way in which they could be justified before God. At this time there was a large number of Jews at Rome. When Pompey the Great overran Judea, he sent a large number of Jews prisoners to Rome, to be sold as slaves. But it was not easy to control them. They persevered resolutely and obstinately in adhering to the rites of their nation; in keeping the Sabbath, &c. So that the Romans chose at last to give them their freedom, and assigned them a place in the vicinity of the city across the Tiber. Here a town was built, which was principally inhabited by Jews. Josephus mentions that 4000 Jews were banished from Rome at one time to Sardinia, and that a still greater number were punished who were unwilling to become soldiers. Ant. xviii. ch. 3, ~ 5. Philo (Legat. ad Caium) says, that many of the Jews at Rome had obtained their freedom; for, says he, being made captive in war, and brought into Italy, they -were set at liberty by their masters, neither were they compelled to change the rites of their fathers. See also Josephus, Ant. xvii. ch. ii, ~ 1. Suetonius' life of Tiberius, 36, and Notes on Acts vi. 9. From that large number of Jews, together with those converted from the gentiles, the church at Rome was collected, and it is easy to see that in that church there would be a great diversity of sentiment, and, no doubt, warm discussions about the authority of the Mosaic law. At what time, or by whom, the gospel was first preached at Rome has been a matter of controversy. The Roman catholic church have maintained that it was founded by Peter, and have thence drawn an argument for their high claims and infallibility. On this subject they make a confident appeal to some of the fathers. There is strong evidence to be derived from this epistle itself, and from the Acts, that Paul did not regard Peter as having any such primacy and ascendency in the Roman church as are claimed for him by the papists. (1.) In this whole epistle there is no mention of Peter at all. It is not suggested that he had been, or was then at Rome. If he had been, and the church had been founded by him, it is incredible that Paul did not make mention of that fact. This is the more striking, as it was done in other cases where churches had been founded by other men. See 1 Cor. i. 12, 13, 14, 15. Especially is Peter, or Cephas, mentioned repeatedly by the apostle Paul in his other epistles. 1 Cor. iii. 22; ix. 5; xv. 5. Gal. ii. 9; i. 18; ii. 7, 8. 14. In these placesPeter is mentioned in connexion with the churches at Corinth and Galatia, yet never there as appealing to his authority, but in regard to the latter, expressly calling it in question. Now, it is incredible that if Peter had been then at Rome, and had founded the church there, and was regarded as invested with any peculiar authority over it, that Paul should never once have even suggested his name. (2.) It is clear that Peter was not there when Paul wrote this epistle. If he had been, he could not have failed to have sent him a salutation, amid the numbers that he saluted in the xvith chapter. (3.) In the Acts of the Apostles there is no mention of Peter's having been at Rome, but the presumption from that history is almost conclusive that he had not been. In Acts xii. 3, 4, we have an Viii INTRODUCTION. account of his having been imprisoned by Herod Agrippa near the close of his reign (comp. v. 23). This occurred about the third or fourth year of the reign of Claudius, who began to reign A. D. 41. It is altogether improbable that he had been at Rome before this. Claudius had not reigned more than three years, and all the testimony that the fathers give is, that Peter came to Rome in his reign. (4.) Peter was at Jerusalem still in the ninth or tenth year of the reign of Claudius Acts xv. 6, &c. Nor is there any mention made then of his having been at Rome. (5.) Paul went to Rome about A. D. 60. There is no mention made then of Peter's being with him, or being there. If he had been, it could hardly have failed of being recorded. Especially is this remarkable when Paul's meeting with the brethren is expressly mentioned (Acts xxviii. 14, 15), and when it is recorded that he met the Jews, and abode with them, and spent at Rome no less than two years. If Peter had been there, such a fact could not fail to have been recorded, or alluded to, either in the Acts or the Epistle to the Romans. (6.) The epistles to the Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, to Philemon, and the second Epistle to Timothy (Lardner, vi. 235) were written from Rome during the residence of Paul as a prisoner; and the Epistle to the Hebrews probably also while he was still in Italy. In none of these epistles is there any hint that Peter was then, or had been, at Rome; a fact that cannot be accounted for if he was regarded as the founder of that church, and especially if he was then in that city. Yet in those epistles there are the salutations of a number to those churches. In particular, Epaphras, Luke the beloved physician (Col. iv. 12. 14), and the saints of the household of Caesar are mentioned. Phil. iv. 22. In 2 Tim. iv. 11, Paul expressly affirms that Luke only was -with him, a declaration utterly irreconcilable with the supposition that Peter was then at Rome. (7.) If Peter was ever at Rome, therefore, of which indeed there is no reason to doubt, he must have come there after Paul; at what time is unknown. That he -was there cannot be doubted without calling in question the truth of all history. When, or by whom, the gospel was preached first at Rome, it is not easy, perhaps not possible, to determine. In the account of the day of Pentecost, (Acts ii. 10) we find, among others, that there were present strangers of Rome, and it is not improbable that they carried back the knowledge of Jesus Christ, and became the founders of the Roman church. One design and effect of that miracle was doubtless to spread the knowledge of the Saviour among all nations. See Notes on Acts ii. In the list of persons who are mentioned in Rom. xvi. it is not improbable that some of those early converts are included; and hat Paul thus intended to show honour to their early conversion and zeal in the cause of Christianity. Thus, xvi. 7, he designates Andronicus and Junia his kinsmen and fellow-prisoners, who were distinguished among the apostles, and who had beel converted before himself, i. e, before A. D. 34, at least eight years before it was ever pretended that Peter was at Rome. Other persons are mentioned also as distinguished, and it is not improbable that they were the early founders of the church at Rome, ch. xvi. 12, 13, &c. That the church at Rome was founded early, is evident from the celebrity which it had acquired. At the time when Paul wrote this epistle (A D. 57), their faith was spoken of throughout the world, ch. i. 8. The character of the church at Rome cannot be clearly ascertained. Yet it is clear that it was not made up merely of the lower classes of the community In Phil. iv. 22. it appears that the gospel had made its way to the family of Caesar, and that a part of his household had been converted to the Christian faith. Some of the fathers affirm that J\ero in the beginning of his reign was favourably impressed in regard to Christianity; and it is possible that this might have been through INTRODUCTION. ix the instrumentality of his family. But little on this subject can be known. While it is probable that the great mass of believers in all the early churches was of obscure and plebeian origin, it is also certain that some who were rich, and noble, and learned, became members of the church of Christ. See I Tim. ii. 9. 1 Pet. iii. 3. 1 Tim. vi. 20. Col. ii. 8. 1 Cor. i. 26. Acts xvii. 34. This epistle has been usually deemed the most difficult of interpretation of any part of the New Testament; and no small part of the controversies in the Christian church have grown out of discussions about its meaning. Early in the history of the church, even before the death of the apostles, we learn from 2 Pet. iii. 16, that the writings of Paul were some of them regarded as being hard to be understood; and that the unlearned and unstable wrested them to their own destruction. It is probable that Peter has reference here to the high and mysterious doctrines about justification and the sovereignty of God, and the doctrines of election and decrees. From the epistle of James, it would seem probable also, that already the apostle Paul's doctrine of justification by faith had been perverted and abused. It seems to have been inferred that good works were unnecessary; and here was the beginning of the cheerless and withering system of Antinomianism-than which a more destructive or pestilential heresy never found its way into the Christian church. Several reasons might be assigned for the controversies which have grown out of this epistle. (1.) The very structure of the argument, and the peculiarity of the apostle's manner of writing. He is rapid; mighty; profound; often involved; readily following a new thought; leaving the regular subject; and returning again after a considerable interval. Hence his writings abound with parentheses, and with complicated paragraphs. (2.) Objections are often introduced, so that it requires close attention to determine their precise bearing. Though he employs no small part of the epistle in answering objections, yet an objector is never once formally introduced or mentioned. (3.) His expressions and phrases are many of them liable to be misunderstood, and capable of perversion. Of this class are such expressions as the righteousness of faith, the righteousness of God, &c. (4.) The doctrines themselves are high and mysterious. They are those subjects on which the profoundest minds have been in all ages exercised in vain. On them there has been, and always will be a difference of opinion. Even with the most honest intentions that men ever have, they find it difficult or impossible to approach the investigation of them without the bias of early education, or the prejudice of previous opinion. In this world it is not given to men fully to understand these great doctrines. And it is not wonderful that the discussion of them has given rise to endless controversies; and that they who have Reasoned high Of Providence, foreknowledge, will, and fate; Fixed fate,free will, foreknowledge absolute, Have found no end, in wandering mazes lost. (5.) It cannot be denied that one reason why the epistles of Paul have been regarded as so difficult has been an unwillingness to admit the truth of the plain doctrines which he teaches. The heart is by nature opposed to them; and comes to believe them with great reluctance. This feeling will account for no small part of the difficulties felt in regard to this epistle. There is one great maxim in interpreting the scriptures that can never be departed from. It is, that men can never understand them aright, until they are willinqg to suffer them to speak out their fair and proper meaning. When men are determined not to find certain doctrines in the Bible, nothing is more natural than that they should find difficulties in it, and complain much of its great obscurity and mys X INTRODUCTION. tery. I add, (6.) That ona principal reason why so much difficulty has Feen felt here, has been an unwillingness to stop where the apostle does. Men have desired to advance farther, and penetrate the mysteries which the Spirit of inspiration has not disclosed. Where Paul states a simple fact, men often advance a theory. The fact may be clear and plain; their theory is obscure, involved, mysterious, or absurd. By degrees they learn to unite tne fact and the theory:-they regard their explanation as the only possible one; and as the fact in question has the authority of divine revelation, so they insensibly come to regard their theory in the same light; and he that calls in question their speculation about the cause, or the mode, is set down as heretical, and as denying the doctrine of the apostle. A melancholy instance of this we have in the account which the apostle gives (ch. v.) about the effect of the sin of Adam. The simple fact is stated that that sin was followed by the sin and ruin of all his posterity. Yet he offers no explanation of the fact. He leaves it as indubitable; and as not demanding an explanation in his argument-perhaps as not admitting it. This is the whole of his doctrine on that subject. Yet men have not been satisfied with that. They have sought for a theory to account for it. And many suppose they have found it in the doctrine that the sin of Adam is imputed, or set over by an arbitrary arrangement to beings otherwise innocent, and that they are held to be responsible for a deed committed by a man thousands of years before they were born. This is the theory; and men insensibly forget that it is mere theory, and they blend that and the fact which the apostle states together; and deem the denial of the one, heresy as much as the denial of the other, i. e. they make it as impious to call in question their philosophy, as to doubt the facts stated on the authority of the apostle Paul. If men desire to understand the epistles of Paul, and avoid difficulties, they should be willing to leave it where he does; and this single rule would have made useless whole years and whole tomes of controversy. Perhaps, on the whole, there is no book of the New Testament that more demands a humble, docile, and prayerful disposition in its interpretation than this epistle. Its profound doctrines; its abstruse inquiries; and the opposition of many of those doctrines to the views of the unrenewed and unsubdued heart of man, make a spirit of docility and prayer peculiarly needful in its investigation. No man ever yet understood the reasonings and views of the apostle Paul but under the influence of elevated piety. None ever found opposition to his doctrines recede, and difficulties vanish, who did not bring the mind in a humble frame to receive all that has been revealed; and that, in a spirit of humble prayer, did not purpose to lay aside all bias, and open the heart to the full influence of the elevated truths which he inculcates. Where there is a willingness that God should reign and do all his pleasure, this epistle may be in its general character easily understood. Where this is wanting, it will appear full of mystery and perplexity; the mind will be embarrassed, and the heart dissatisfied with its doctrines; and the unhumbled spirit will rise from its study only confused, irritated, perplexed, and dissatisfied. THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS CHAPTER I. pAUL, a servant of Jesus Christ, calledb to be an aposa Ac27.23. b Ac.9.15. lCo..l. tie, separated ~ unto the gospel of God, 2 (Which he had promised cAc.13.2. Ga.1.15. - CHAPTER I. 1. Paul. The original name of the author of this epistle was Saul. Acts vi. 58; vii. 1; viii 1, &c. This was changed to Paul (see Note, Acts xiii. 9), and by this name he is generally known in the New Testament. The reason why he assumed this name is not certainly known. It was, however, in accordance with the custom of the times. See Note, Acts xiii. 9. The name Saul was Hebrew; the name Paul was Roman. In addressing an epistle to the Romans, he would naturally make use of the name to which they were accustomed, and which would excite no prejudice among them. The ancient custom was to begin an epistle with the name of the writer, as Cicero to Varro, &c. We record the name at the end. It may be remarked, however, that the placing the name of the writer at the beginning of an epistle was always done, and is still, when the letter was one of authority, or when it conferred any peculiar privileges. Thus in the proclamation of Cyrus (Ezra i. 2), "Thus saith Cyrus, king of Persia," &c. See also Ezra iv. 11; vii. 12. "Artaxerxes, king of kings, unto Ezra the Priest," &c. Dan. iv. 1. The commencement of a letter by an apostle to a Christian church in this manner was peculiarly proper as indicating authority. ~. servant. This name was that which the Lord Jesus himself directed his disciples to use, as their general appellation. Matt. x. 25; xx. 27. Mark x. 44. And it was the customary name which they assumed. Gal. i. 10. Col. iv. 12. 2 Pet. i. 1. Jude 1. Acts iv. 29. Titus i. 1. James i. 1. The proper meaning of this word servant, Jorhoc, is not slave. It is applicable to servants of any kind, and does not necessarily imply that he to whom it is applied is a slave. Comp. notes on Eph. vi. 5. It is often applied to courtiers, or the officers that serve under a king; because in an eastern monarchy the relation of an absolute king to his courtiers corresponded nearly to that of a master and a servant. Thus the word is expressive of dignity and honour; and the servants of a king denote officers of a high rank and station. It is applied to the prophets as those who were honoured by God, o0 peculiarly intrusted by him with office. Deut. xxxiv. 5. Josh. i. 2. Jer. xxv. 4. The name is also given to the Messiah, Isa. xlii. 1, "Behold my servant in whom my soul delighteth," &c. liii. 11, " Shall my righteous servant justify many." The apostle uses it here evidently to denote his acknowledging Jesus Christ as his master; as indicating his dignity, as peculiarly appointed by him to his great work; and as showing that in this epistle he intended to assume no authority of his own, but simply to declare the will of his master, and theirs. ~ Called to be an apostle. This word called means here not merely to be invited, but has the sense of appointed. It indicates that he had not assumed the office himself, but that he was set apart to it by the authority of Christ himself. It was important for Paul to state this, (1.) Because the other apostles had been called or chosen to this. work (John xv. 16. 19. Matt. x. 1. Luke vi. 13); and (2.) Because Paul was not one of those originally appointed. It was of consequence for him, therefore, to affirm that he had not taken this high office to himself, but that he had been called to it by the au11 ROMANS. [A.. D. 65. afore by his prophets in the holy scriptures,) thority of Jesus Christ. His appointment to this office he not unfrequently takes occasion to vindicate. 1 Cor. ix. l, &c. Gal. i. 12-24. 2 Cor. xii. 12. 1 Tim. ii. 7. 2 Tim. i. 11. Rom. xi. 13. T~ An apostle. One sent to execute a commission. It is applied because the apostles were sent out by Jesus Christ to preach his gospel, and to establish his church. Note, Matt. x. 2. Luke vi. 13. ~ Separated. The word translated separated unto,.lov; never the spirit of holiness. mean in power or authority, after his (2.) It stands in contrast with the resurrection from the dead. It is said, flesh. ver. 3, 'According to the flesh, that he was before a man of sorrows; the seed of David: according to the now he was clothed with power and spirit of holiness, the Son of God.' authority. But I have seen no in- As the former refers doubtless to his stance in which the expression in power hunan nature, so this must refer to the denotes office, or authority It denotes nature designated by the title Son of physical energy and might, and this God, that is, to his superior or divine was bestowed on Jesus before his nature. (3.) The expression is altoresurrection as well as after. Acts x. gether peculiar to the Lord Jesus 38. "God anointed Jesus of Nazareth Christ. Nowhere in the Scriptures, with the Holy Ghost, and -zithpower." or in any other writings, is there an Rom. xv. 19. 1 Cor. xv. 43. With affirmation like this. What would be such power Jesus will come to judg- meant by it if affirmed of a mere man A. D 63.] CHAPTER I. 17 (4.) It cannot mean that the Holy Spirit, the third person in the Trinity,,howed that Jesus was the Son of God by raising him from the dead, because that act is nowhere attributed to him. It is uniformly ascribed either to God, as God (Acts ii. 24. 32; iii. 15. 26; iv. 10; v. 30; x. 40; xiii. 30. 33, 34; xvii. 31. Rom.x. 9. Eph. i. 20), or to the Father (Rom. vi. 4), or to Jesus himself (John x. 18). In no instance is this act ascribed to the Holy Ghost. (5.) It indicates a state far more elevated than aly human dignity, or honour. In regard to his earthly descent, he was of a royal race; in regard to the Spirit of holiness, much more than that, he was the Son of God. (6.) The word Spirit is used often to designate God, the holy God, as distinguished from all the material forms of idol worship. John iv. 24. (7.) The word Spirit is applied to the Messiah, in his more elevated or divine nature. 1 Cor. xv. 45, "The last Adam was made a quickening Spirit." 2 Cor. iii. 17, " Now the Lord (Jesus) is that Spirit." Heb. ix. 14. Christ is said to have " offered himself through the eternal Spirit." 1 Peter iii. 18. He is said to have been "put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit." 1 Tim. iii. 16. He is said to have been "justified in the Spirit." In most of these passages there is the same contrast noticed between his flesh, his human nature, and his other state, which occurs in Rom. i. 3, 4. In all these instances, the design is, doubtless, to speak of him as a man, and as something more than a man: he was one thing as a man; he, was another thing in his other nature. In the one, he was of David; was put to death, &c. In the other, he was of God, he was manifested to be such, he was restored to the elevation which he had sustained before his incarnation and death. John xvii. 1-5. Phil. ii. 2-11. The expression according to the Spirit of holiness does not indeed of itself imply divinity. It denotes that holy and more exalted nature which he pcssessed as distinguished from the huB 2 man. What that is, is to be learned from other declarations. This expression implies simply that it was such as to make proper the appellation, the Son of God. Other places, as we have seen, show that that designation naturally implied divinity. And that this was the true idea couched under the expression, according to the Spirit of holiness, appears from those numerous texts of Scripture which explicitly assert his divinity. See John i. 1, &c. and the Note on that place. ~ By the resurrection from the dead. This has been also variously understood. Some have maintained that the word by, i~, denotes AFTER. He was declared to be the Son of God in power after he rose from the dead; that is, he was solemnly invested with the dignity that became the Son ofG 0d after he had been so l ng in a state of voluntary humiliation. But to this view there are some insuperable objections. (1.) It is not the natural and usual meaning of the word by. (2.) It is not the object of the apostle to state the time when the thing was done, or the order, but evidently to declare the fact, and the evidence of the fact. If such had been his design, he would have said that previous to his death he was shown to be of the seed of David, but after-wards that he was invested with power. (3.) Though it must be ad, mitted that the preposition by, i~, sometimes means AFTER (Matt. xix. 20, Luke viii. 27; xxiii. 8, &c.), yet its proper and usual meaning is to denote the efficient cause, or the agent, or origin of a thing. Matt. i. 3. 18; xxi. 25. John iii. 5. Rom. v. 16. Rom. xi. 36, "OF him are all things." 1 Cor. viii. 6, " One God, the Father, OF whom are all things," &c. In this sense, I suppose it is used here; and that the apostle means to affirm that he was clearly or decisively shown to be the Son of God by his resurrection from the dead. But here will it be asked how did his resurrection show this? Was not Lazarus raised from the dead? And did not many saints rise also after Jesus? And were not the dead raised 18 ROMANS. [A. D. 63. ing to the spirit a of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead: a Heb.9.14. by the apostles; by Elijah, by the bones of Elisha, and by Christ himself? And did their being raised prove that they were the sons of God? I answer that the mere fact of the resurrection of the body proves nothing in itself about the character and rank of the being thatis raised. But in the circumstances in which Jesus was placed it might show it conclusively. When Lazarus was raised, it was not in attestation of any thing which he had taught or done. It was a mere display of the power and benevolence of Christ. But in regard to the resurrection of Jesus, let the following circumstances be taken into the account. (1.) Hecame as the Messiah. (2.) He uniformly taught that he was the Son of God. (3.) He maintained that God was his Father in such a sense as to imply equality with him. John v. 17-30; x. 36. (4.) He claimed authority to abolish the laws of the Jews, to change their customs, and to be himself absolved from the observance of those laws, even as his Father was. John v. 1-17. Mark ii. 28. (5.) When God raised him up therefore, it was not an ordinary event. It was a public attestation, in the face of the universe, of the truth of his claims to be the Son of God. God would not sanction the doings and doctrines of an impostor. And when, therefore, he raised up Jesus, he, by this act, showed the truth of his claims, that he was the Son of God. Further; in the view of the apostles, the resurrection was intimately connected with the ascension and exaltation of Jesus. The one made the other certain. And it is not improbable that when they spoke of his resurrection, they meant to include, not merely that single act, but the entire series of doings of which that was the first, and which was the pledge of the elevation and majesty of the Son of God. Hence, when they had proved his resurrection, they assumed that all 5 By whom we have received grace and apostleship, I for obe1 or, to the obedience of faith. the others would follow. That involved and supposed all. And the series, of which that was the first, proved that he was the Son of God. See Acts xvii. 31. "He will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained, whereof he hath given ASSURANCE to all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead." The one involves the other. See Acts i. 6. Thus Peter (Acts ii. 22-32) having proved that Jesus was raised up, adds, ver. 33, " THEREFORE, being by the right hand exalted, he hath shed forth this," &c.; and ver. 36, " THEuEFORE, let all the house of Israel KNOW ASSUREDLY that God hath made that same Jesus whom ye have crucified, BOTH LORD AND CHRIST." This verse is a remarkable instance of the apostle Paul's manner of writing. Having mentioned a subject, his mind seems to catch fire; he presents it in new forms, and amplifies it, until he seems to forget for a time the subject on which he was writing. It is from this cause that his writings abound so with parentheses, and that there is so much difficulty in following and understanding him. 5. By whom. The apostle here returns to the subject of the salutation of the Romans, and states to them his authority to address them. That authority he had derived from the Lord Jesus, and not from man. On this fact, that he had received his apostolic commission, not from man, but by the direct authority of Jesus Christ, Paul not unfrequently insisted. Gal. i. 12, "For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by revelation of Jesus Christ." 1 Cor. xv. 1-8. Eph. iii. 1-3. ~ We. The plural here is probably put for the singular. See Col. iv. 3. Comp. Eph. vi. 19, 20. It was usual for those who were clothed with authority to express themselves in this manner. Perhaps here, however he refers to the general nature of the A.D. 60.1 CHAPTER I. 19 dience a to the faith among all nations, for his name: 6 Among whom are ye also a Ac.6.7. c.16.26. the called of Jesus Christ: 7 To all that be in Rome, beloved of God, called b to be saints: b 1 Cor.1.2. lTh.4.7. -- apostolic office, as being derived from Jesus Christ, and designs to assure the Romans that he had received the apostolic commission as the others had. ' We, the apostles, have received the appointment from Jesus Christ.' ~ Grace and apostleship. Many suppose that this is a figure of speech, hendiadys, by which one thing is expressed by two words, meaning the grace or favour of the apostolic office. Such a figure of speech is often used. But it may mean, as it does probably here, the two things, grace, or the favour of God to his own soul, as a personal matter; and the apostolic office as a distinct thing. He often, however, speaks of the office of the apostleship as a matter of special favour. Rom. xv. 15, 16. Gal. ii. 9. Eph. iii. 7, 8, 9. ~ For obedience to the faith. In order to produce, or promote obedience to the faith; that is, to induce them to render that obedience to God which faith produces. There are two things therefore implied. (1.) That the design of the gospel and of the apostleship is to induce men to obey God. (2.) That the tendency of faith is to produce obedience. There is no true faith which does not produce that. This is constantly affirmed in the New Testament. Rom. xv. 18; xvi. 19. 2 Cor. vii. 15. James ii. I~ Among all nations. This was the original commission which Jesus gave to his apostles. Mark xvi. 15, 16. Matt. xxviii. 18, 19. This was the special commission which Paul received when he was converted. Acts ix. 15. It was important to show that the commission extended thus far, as he was now addressing a distant church which he had not seen. ~ For his name. This means probably on his account, that is, on account of Christ. John xiv. 13, 14; xvi. 23, 24. The design of the apostleship was to produce obedience to the gospel among all nations, that thus the name of Jesus might be honoured. Their work was not one in which they were seeking to honour themselves, 1ut it was solely for the honour and glory of Jesus Christ. For him they toiled, they encountered perils, they laid down their lives, because by so doing they might bring men to obey the gospel, and thus Jesus Christ might wear a brighter crown, and be attended by a longer and more splendid train of worshippers in the kingdom of his glory. 6. Amonog whom. That is, among the Gentiles who had become obedient to the Christian faith in accordance with the design of the gospel, ver. 8. This proves that the church at Rome was made up partly at least, if not mainly, of Gentiles or pagans. This is fully proved in the xvith chapter by the names of the persons whom Paul salutes. ~ The called of Jesus Christ. Those whom Jesus Christ has called to be his followers. The word called (see ver. 1) denotes not merely an external invitation to a privilege, but it also denotes the internal or effectual call which secures conformity to the will of him who calls, and is thus synonymous with the name Christians, or believers. That true Christians are contemplated by this address, is clear from the whole scope of the epistle. See particularly ch. viii. Comp. Phil. iii. 14. Heb. iii. 1. 7. To all that be in Rome. That is, to all who bear the Christian name. Perhaps he here included not only the church at Rome, but all who might have been there from abroad. Rome was a place of vast concourse for foreigners; and Paul probably addressed all who happened to be there..Beloved of God. Whom God loves. This is the privilege of all Christians. And this proves that the persons whom Paul addressed were not those merely who had been invited to the external privileges of the gospel. The import 20 ROMANS. [A. D. 60. ance of this observation will appear in the progress of these Notes. C Called to be saints. So called, or influenced by God who had called them, as to become saints. The word saints, a.,ot, means those who are holy, or thosewho are devoted or consecrated to God. The radical idea of the word is that which is separated from a common to a sacred use, and answers to the Hebrew word, t;i- kadosh. It is applied to any thing that is set apart to the service of God, to the temple, to the sacrifices, to the utensils about the temple, to the garments, &c. of the priests, and to the priests themselves. It was applied to the Jews as a people separated from other nations, and devoted or consecrated to God, while other nations were devoted to the service of idols. It is also applied to Christians, as being a people devoted or set apart to the service of God. The radical idea then, as applied to Christians, is, that they are separatedfrom other men, and other objects and pursuzts, and consecrated to the service of God. This is the peculiar characteristic of the saints. And this characteristic the Roman Christians had shown. For the use of the word as stated above, see the following passages of Scripture. Luke ii. 23. Ex. xiii. 2. Rom. xi. 16. Matt. vii. 6. 1 Pet. i. 16. Acts ix. 13. 1 Pet. ii. 5. Acts iii. 21. Eph. iii. 5. 1 Pet. ii. 9. Phil. ii. 15. 1 John iii. 1, 2. ~ Grace. This word properly means favour. It is very often used in the New Testament, and is employed in the sense of benignity or benevolence; felicity, or a prosperous state of affairs; the Christian religion, as the highest expression of the benevolence or favour of God; the happiness which Christianity confers on its friends in this and the future life; the apostolic office; charity, or alms; thanksgiving; joy, or pleasure; and the benefits produced on the Christian's heart and life by religion-the grace of meekness, patience, charity, &c. Schleusner. In this place, and in similar places in the beginning of the apostolic epistles, it seems to be a word including all those blessings that are applicable to Christians in common; denoting an ardent wish that all the mercies and favours of God for time and eternity, blended under the general name grace, may be conferred on them. It is to be understood as connected with a word implying invocation. I pray, or I desire, that grace, &c. may be conferred on you. It is the customary form of salutation in nearly all the apostolic epistles. 1 Cor. i. 3. 2 Cor. i. 2. Gal. i. 3. Eph. i. 2, Phil. i. 2. Col. i. 2. 1 Thess. i. 1. 2 Thess. i. 2. Philem. 3. ~.andc peace. Peace is the state of freedom from war. As war conveys the idea of discord and numberless calamities and dangers, so peace is the opposite, and conveys the idea of concord, safety, and prosperity. Thus, to wish one peace was the same as to wish him all safety and prosperity. This form of salutation was common among the Hebrews. Gen. xliii. 23, "Peace to you! fear not." Judges vi. 23; xix. 20. Luke xxiv. 36. But the word peace is also used in contrast with that state of agitation and conflict which a sinner has with his conscience, and with God. The sinner is like the troubled sea which cannot rest. Isa. lvii. 20. The Christian is at peace with God through the Lord Jesus Christ. Rom. v. 1. By this word, denoting reconciliation with God, the blessings of the Christian religion are often described in the Scriptures. Rom. viii. 6; xiv. 17; xv. 13. Gal. v. 22. Phil. iv. 7. A prayer for peace, therefore, in the epistles, is not a mere formal salutation, but has a special reference to those spiritual blessings which result from reconciliation with God through the Lord Jesus Christ. ~ From God our Father. The Father of all Christians. He is the Father of all his creatures, as they are his offspring. Acts xvii. 28, 29. He is especially the Father of all Christians, as they have been " begotten by him to a lively hope," have been adopted into his family, and are like him. Matt. v. 45. 1 Pet. i. 3. 1 John v. 1; iii. 1, 2. The expression here is equivalent to a A. D. 60.] CHAPTER I. 21 Grace a to you, and peace, from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ. a lCor.l.3,&c. 2Pet.l.2. prayer that God the Father would bestow grace and peace on the Romans. It implies that these blessings proceed from God, and are to be expected from him. ~ And the Lord.esus Christ. From him. The Lord Jesus Christ is especially regarded in the New Testament as the source of peace, and the procurer of it. See Luke ii. 14; xix. 38. 42. John xiv. 27; xvi. 33. Acts x. 36. Rom. v. 1. Eph. ii. 17. Each of these places will show with what propriety peace was invoked from the Lord Jesus. From thus connecting the Lord Jesus with the Father in this place, we may see, (1.) That the apostle regarded him as the source of grace and peace as really as he did the Father. (2.) He introduced them in the same connexion, and with reference to the bestowment of the same blessings. (3.) If the mention of the Father in this connexion implies a prayer to him, or an act of worship, the mention of the Lord Jesus implies the same thing, and was an act of homage to him. (4.) All this shows that his mind was familiarized to the idea that he was divine. No man'would introduce his name in such connexions if he did not believe that he was equal with God. Comp. Phil. ii. 2-11. It is from this incidental and unstudied manner of expression, that we have one of the most striking proofs of the manner in which the sacred writers regarded the Lord Jesus Christ. These seven verses are one sentence. They are a striking instance of the manner of Paul. The subject is simply a salutation to the Roman church. But at the mention of some single words, the mind of Paul seems to catch fire, and to burn and blaze with signal intensity. He leaves the immediate subject before him, and advances some vast thought that awes us, and fixes us in contemplation, and involves us in Dilficulty about his meaning, and then 8 First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for you all, that your faith b is spoken b c 16.19. returns to his subject. This is the characteristic of his great mind' and it is this, among other things, that makes it so difficult to interpret his writings. 8. First. In the first place, not in point of importance, but before speaking of other things, or before proceeding to the main design of the epistle. 1 I thank my God. The God whom I worship and serve. The expression of thanks to God for his mercy to them was fitted to conciliate their feelings, and to prepare them for the truths which he was about to communicate to them. It showed the deep interest which he had in their welfare; and the happiness it would give him to do them good. It is proper to give thanks to God for his mercies to others as well as to ourselves. We are members of one great family, and we should make it a subject of thanksgiving that he confers any blessings, and especially the blessings of salvation, on any mortals. ~ T'hrough Jesus Christ. The duty of presenting our thanks to God through Christ is often enjoined in the New Testament. Eph. v. 20. Heb. xiii. 15. comp. John xiv. 14. Christ is the imediator between God and men; or the medium by which we are to present our prayers and also our thanksgivings. We are not to approach God directly, but through a mediator at all times, depending on him to present our cause before the mercy seat; to plead for us there; and to offer the desires of our souls to God. It is no less proper to present thanks in his name, or through him, than it is prayer. He has made the way to God accessible to us, whether it be by prayer or praise; and it is owing to his mercy and grace that any of our services are acceptable to God. ~ For you all. On account of you all, i. e. of the en tire Roman church. This is one evidence that that church then was re 22 ROMANS. [A. D. 65. of throughout the whole world. 9 For God is my witness, whom a I serve with 1 my spirit in the gospel of his Son, that a Acts 27.23. 1 or, in. - markably pure. How few churches have there been of whom a similar commendation could be expressed. ~ That your faith. Faith is put here for the whole of religion, and means the same as your piety. Faith is one of the principal things of religion; one of its first requirements; and hence it signifies religion itself. The readiness with which the Romans had embraced the gospel, the firmness with which they adhered to it, was so remarkable, that it was known and celebrated every where. The same thing is affirmed of them in ch. xvi. 19, " For your obedience is come abroad unto all men." ~ Is spoken of. Is celebrated, or known. They were in the capital of the Roman empire; in a city remarkable for its wickedness; and in a city whose influence extended every where. It was natural, therefore, that their remarkable conversion to God should be celebrated every where. The religious or irreligious influence of a great city will be felt far and wide, and this is one reason why the apostles preached the gospel so much in such places. ~ Throughout the whole -world. As we say, every where; or throughout the Roman empire. The term world is often thus limited in the Scriptures; and here it denotes those parts of the Roman empire where the Christian church was established. All the churches would hear of the work of God in the capital, and would rejoice in it. Comp. Col. i. 6. 23. John xii. 19. It is not improper to commend Christians, and to remind them of their influence; and especially to call to their mind the great power which they may have on other churches and people. Nor is it improper that great displays of divine mercy should be celebrated every where, and excite in the churches praise to God. without ceasing b I make mention of you always in my prayers; 10 Making request if by any means now at length I might b lThess.3.10. 9. For God is my witness. The reason of this strong appeal to God is, to show to the Romans the deep interest which he felt in their welfare. This interest was manifested in his prayers, and in his earnest desires to see them. A deep interest shown in this way was well fitted to prepare them to receive what he had to say to them. ~ Whom Iserve. See ver. 1. comp. Acts xvii. 23. The expression denotes that he was devoted to God in this manner; that he obeyed him; and had given himself to do his will in making known his gospel. ~ With my spirit. Greek, iv, in my spirit, i. e. with my heart. It is not an external service merely; it is internal, real, sincere. He was really and sincerely devoted to the service of God. ~ In the gospel of his Son. In making known the gospel, or as a minister of the gospel. ~ That without ceasing, jSc