mm' tihvaxy of t:he t:heolo0ical ^eminarjp PRINCETON • NEW JERSEY -a^ti' From the Library of Professor Benjamin Breckinridge War field .LZ74 COMMENTARY ON*EE HOLT SCEIPTUEES: CRITICAL, DOCTRINAL, AND HOMILETICAL, WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO MINISTERS AND STUDENTS. BY JOim PETEE LANGE, D.D., IN CONNECTION WITH A. NUMBER OF EOTNEXT EUROPEAN DIVINES. TRANSLATED FROM THE GERMAN, AND EDITED, WITH ADDITIONS^ BY PHILIP SCHAFF, D.D., IN CONNECTION WI* AMERICAN SCHOLARS OF VARIOUS EVANGELICAL DENOMINATIONS. VOL. V. OP THE NEW TESTAMENT: CONTAINING THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. NEW YORK: CHAELES SCRIBNER'S SONS, 743 AND 745 Broadway. THE ^<^A- '- I. ■ /!' . EPISTLE OF PAUL TO TUB EOMANS. BY J. P. LANGE, D.D., AND THE Kev. F. R. FA?. TRANSLATED FROM THE OEUMAN BY J. F. HURST, D.D., PKESIOENT OF DREW THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY, MADISON, N. J. REVISED, ENLARGED, AND EDITED BY P. SCIIAFF, D.D., AND M. B. RIDDLE, D.D. NEW YORK: CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS, 743 Ai^D 745 Broadway. Entxrgd, according to Aot of Congress, in the year 1889, bj CHARLES SCRIBNER AND COMPANY, In the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the United States for ihe Southern Dlstrtft of New r.rk- Trow's Printing and BooKuiNniNG Company, 205-213 F.llSt 72f/i Si., NtW YORK. LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS TO TIIE CRITICAL, DOCTRINAL, AND HOMILETICAL COALMEN- TARY ON THE BIBLE. GENERAL EDITORS: Rev. JOHANN PETER LANGE, D.D., Consistorial Counselor and Professor of Theology in the University of Bonn. Rev. PHILIP SCHAFF, D.D., LL.D., Professor of Sacred Literature in the Union Theological Seminary^ New Yoi'k, I. CONTRIBUTORS TO THE GERMAN EDITION. Rev. C. A. ATJBEULEN. Ph.D., D.D., Professor of Theolog;}' in the University of Basle, Sivitzerhmd. Kev. KAllL CHR. W. F. BAHR, D. D., Ministerial Counselor at Carl.sruhe. Rev. KARL BRATJXE, D.D., General Superintendent at Altenburg, Saxony. Rev. PAULtrs CASSEL, Ph.D., Professor in Berlin. Rev. CHR. FR. DAVID ERDMANN, D.D., 8«n. Superintendent of Silesia, and Prof. Honorariua of Theology in the University of Breslau. Rev. F. R. FAY, Pastor in Crefeld, Prussia. Rev. G. F. C. FRONMULLER, Ph.D., Pastor at Kemnath, Wiirtemberg. Rev. KARL GEROIC, D.D., Prelate and Chief Chaplain of the Court, Stuttgart. Rev. PAUL KLEINERT. Ph.D., B.D., Professor of Old Testament E.xogesis in the University of Berlin. Rev. CHRIST. FR. KLING, D.D., Dean of Marbach on the Neckar, Wiirtemberg. Rev. GOTTHARD VICTOR LECHLER, D.D., Professor of Theology, and Superintendent at Leipzig Rev. CARL BERNHARD MOLL, D.D., General Superintendent in Kiinigsberg. Rev. C. W. EDWARD NAEGELSBACH, Ph.D., Dean at Bayreuth, Bavaria Rev. J. J. VAN OOSTERZEE, D D., Professor of Theology in the University of Utrecht, Rev. C. J. RIGGENBACH, D.D., Professor of Theology in the University of Basle, Rev. OTTO SCHilOLLER, Ph.D., B.D., Urach, Wiirtemberg. Rev. FR. JULIUS SCHROEPER. D.D., Pastor at Elberfeld. Pnissia. Rev. FR. W. SCIIULTZ, D.D., Professor of Theology in Breslau. Rev. OTTO ZOECKLER, D.D., Professor of Theology in the University at GreifswaltL IL CONTRIBUTORS TO THE ANGLO-AMERICAN EDITION. Bev. CHARLES A. AIKEX, Ph.D., D.D., Frofesaor of Christian Ethics and Apologetics at Princeton, N. J. Rev. SAMUEL RALPH ASBURY, M.A., Philadelphia. Rev. GEORGE R. BLISS. D.D., Professor in Croier Theological Seminary, Upland, Pa. Rev. CHAS. A. BRIGGS, D.D., Piofeseor of Oriental Lansuatr(>s in the Union Theological Seminary, New York. Rev. TALBOT W. CHAMBERS, D.D., Pastor of the Collegiate Reformed Dutch Church, New York. Bev. THOMAS J. CONANT, D.D„ Brooklyn, N. Y. Eev. E. R. CRAVEN, D.D., Newark, N. J. Rev. HOWARD CROSBY, D.D., LL.D., Chancellor of the University of New York. LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS. Rev. JOHN A. BKOADUS, D.D., Professor of New Testament Exegesis at LoulsviUe, Ky. Rev. CHAS. ELLIOTT, D.D., Profes.'^or of Biblical Literature and Exegesis, Chicago, HI. Rev. L. J. EVANS. D.D., Professor of New Test. Exegepis in Lane Theol. Seminary, Cincinnati. Rev. PATRICK FAIRBAIRN, D.D., Principal and Profospor of Divinity in the Free Church College, Glasgow. Rev. WILLIAM FINDLAY, M.A., Pastor of the Free Church, Larkhall, Scotland. Rev. JOHN FORSYTH, D.D.. LL.D., Chaplain and Prof, of Ethics and Law in XJ. S. Military Academy, West Point, N. Y. Rev. FREDERIC GARDINER, D.D., Prof, of the Literature of the O. T. in Berlceley Divinity School, Middletown, Ct. Rev. ABRAHAM GOSMAN, D.D., Lawrenceville, N. J. Rev. W. HENRY GREEN, D.D., LL.D., Professor of Oriental Literature in the Theol. Seminary at Princeton, N. J. Rev. JAMES B. HAMMOND, M.A., New York. Rev. HORATIO B, HACKETT, D.D , Professor of Biblical Exegesis in the Theological Seminary, Rochester, N. Y. Rev. CHESTER D. HARTRANFT, D.D.. New Brunswick, N. J. Rev. EDWIN HARWOOD, D.D., Rector of Trinity Church, New Haven, Conn. Rev. W. H. HORNBLOWER, D.D., Professor of Sacred Rhetoric, etc., in the Theol. Seminary at Alleghany, Pa. Rev. JOHN F. HURST. D.D.. President of the Drew Theological Seminary, Miidison, N. J. Rev. A. C. KENDRICK. D.D., LL.D., Professor of Greek in the University of Rochester, N. Y. TAYLER LEWIS, LL.D., Professor of Oriei;tul Ijnnguages in Union College, Schenectiidy, N. Y. Rev. JOHN LILLIE. D.D,, Kingston, N. Y. Eev. SAMUEL T. LOWRIE, D.D., Philadelphia, Pa. Rev. J. FRED. McCURDY, M.A., A«s't Professor of the Hebrew Language in the Theol. Sem. at Princeton, N. J. Rev. CHARLES M. MEAD, Ph.D., P>ni8B8or of the Hebrew Language and Literature in the XheoL Sem., Andover, Masa. Rev. GEO. E. DAY, D D.. Professor in Yale Divinity School, New Haven, Oona* Rev. J. ISADOR MOMBERT, D.D., Philadelphia, Pa. Rev. DUNLOP MOORE, D.D., New Brighton, Pa. Miss EVELINA MOORB, Newark, N. J. JAMES G. MURPHY, LL.D.. Professor in the General Assembly's and the Qneen'l College at Belfast. Rev. HOWARD OSGOOD, D.D.. Professor of the Interpretation of the Old Test. In the Theol. Sem., Rochester, N. Y. Rev. JOSEPH PACKARD, D.D. Professor of Biblical Literature in the Theological Seminary at Alexandria, Va. Rev. DANIEL W. POOR, D.D., Professor of Church HLstory in the Theological Semlnarj at San Francisco, Cal. Rev. IMATTHEW B. RIDDLE, D.D., Professor of New Testament Exegesis in the TheoL Seminary at Hartford, Conn. Rev. CHAS. F. SCHAEFFER, D.D., Professor of Theology in the Evangelical Lutheran Seminary at Philadelphia. Rev. WILLIAM G. T. SHEDD, D.D., LL.D., Professor of Systematic Theolnsry in the Union Theological Seminary, New York. Rev. CHAS. C. STARBUCK, M.A., Formerly Tutor in the Theological Seminary at Andover, Mass. Rev. P. H. STEENSTRA, Professor of Biblical Literature at Cambridge, Mass. Rev. JAMES STRONG, D.D., I'rofessor of Exegetical Theology in tlie Drew Theological Seminary, Madison, N. J. Rev. W. G. SUMNER, M.A., Professor in Yale College, New Haven, Conn. Rev. C. H. TOY, D.D., Professor of Hebrew and Old Testament Excgesli^ Louisville, ICy. Rev. E. A. WASHTiURN, D.D., LL.D., Rector of Calvary Church, New York. WILLIAM WELLS, M.A., LL.D., Professor of Modern Languages in Union College New York. Rev. C. P. WING, D.D., Carlisle, Pa. Eev. E. D. YEOMANS, D.D„ Orange, N. J. PREFACE TO THE AMERICAN EDITION. The Epistle to the Romans is the Epistle of the Epistles, as the Gospel of John is tha Gospel of the Gospels. It is the heart of the doctrinal portion of the New Testament It presents in systematic order the fundamental truths of Christianity in their primitive purity, inexhaustible depth, all-conquering force, and never-failing comfort. It is the bulwark of the evangelical doctrines of sin and grace against the obscuration of the gospel, whether by judaizing bigotry or paganizing licentiousness. Addressed to the Christians at Rome, and unfolding to them the gospel as a spiritual power of God unto salvation far exceeding in effect, and outlasting in time, the temporal power of the Imperial City, it prophetically anticipates and positively overthrov/s every essential error of Roman- ism, and is to this day the best antidote against popery. No wonder that it was so highly prized by the Reformers. Luther, whom Coleridge regarded "the only fit commentator on Paul," called the Romans " the chief part of the New Testament, and the purest gospel, well worthy to be committed to memory word for word by every Christian man, and to be pondered daily and enjoyed as the daily bread of the soul. It can never be too often nor too well read and considered, and the more it is understood, the better it tastes." Those who have studied it most carefully, are most likely to fall in with the judgment of Cole- ridge, that it is " the most profound work in existence." But it is certainly also the most difficult book of the New Testament, unless we except the Gospel of John and the Revelation. Meyer, the ablest philological exegete of the age, humbly confesses, in the preface to the fourth edition of his commentary, to a growing sense of our inability to do justice to " the grandest, the boldest, and, in all its depths and heights, the most complete composition of the greatest apostle." If St. Peter did not hesitate to state that there are " some things hard to be understood " in the Epistles of his "beloved brother Paul," we need not be surprised that even such divines as occupy the same general platform widely differ in their interpretations. The Epistle to the Romans, more than any other, is a battle-field ; and every chapter, especially the third, the fifth, the seventh, and the ninth, is contested ground. Not a few commentators deal with it ag Procrustes dealt with his victims, in adapting them to the length of his iron bedstead— »ither stretching out or cutting off their legs. But after all, vast progress has been made, especially within the last fifty years, toward an impartial and thorough understanding of this wonderful production of a wonderful man. yi PREFACE. Among the many noble contributions of German learning and industry to this end, Dr. Lange's Commentary— -n-hich is here presented, witli many additions, in an English dress— will occupy an honorable and useful position. It appeared first in 1865, and in a Becond edition in 1868, in a small but closely-printed volume of 289 pages, as part of his Bibehcerk It is evidently the result of much earnest labor and profound research, and presents many new and striking views. These, however, are not alw^ays expressed with that clearness demanded by the practical common sense of the English reader : hence th« difficult labor of translation has been occasionally supplemented by the delicate task of explanation. Dr. Lange prepared the Exegetical and Doctrinal parts, the Rev. F. R. Fay, his son-in- law, and pastor at Crefeld, Prussia, the Homiletical sections. The English edition is the result of the combined labor of the Rev. Dr. Hurst, the Rev. M. B. Riddle, and the General Editor. Dr. Hurst is responsible for the translation (which was an unusually difficult task), and for the valuable Homiletical selections from the best English sources. The General Editor and the Rev. M. B. Riddle, besides carefully com- paring the translation with the original, prepared the text, with the Critical notes, and the additions to the Exegetical and Doctrinal sections. The initials indicate the authorship of the various additions in brackets, which increase the volume of the German edition nearly one half. Upon no other book, except Matthew and Genesis, has so much original labor been bestowed. I am responsible for the General and Special Introduction, and the first six chapters (exclusive of the last few verses of chap, vi.), which cover about one half of the volume. I examined nearly all the authorities quoted by Dr. Lange, from Chrysostom down to the latest editions of Tholuck and Meyer, and also the principal English commentators, as Stuart, Hodge, Alford, Wordsworth, Jowett, Forbes, &c., who are sublimely ignored by continental commentators, as if exegesis had never crossed the English Channel, much less the Atlantic Ocean. The length of some of my annotations (e. g., on chaps, i., iii., and v.) may be justi- fied by the defects of the original, and the great importance of the topics for the English and American mind. I had a strong desire to complete the work, and to incorporate portions of a German Commentary on Romans which I prepared years ago in connection with my lectures aa professor of theology, as well as the results of more recent studies. But a multiplicity of engagements, and a due regard for my health, compelled me to intrust the remaining chap- ters, together with my whole apparatus, including my notes iu manuscript and a printed essay on the ninth chapter, to my friend, the Rev. M. B. Riddle. As an excellent German and Biblical scholar, and as editor of the Commentaries on Galatians and Colossians in the BihleworJc, Mr. Riddle has all the qualifications and experience, as well as that rare and noble enthusiasm which is indispensable for the successful completion of such a difficult and lesponsible task. It is hoped that, by this combination of talent and labor, the Commentary on Roman has gained in variety, richness, and adaptation to the use ol English students. PHILIP SCHAFF. ■^0. 5 Bible House, New York, April 20 1869. THE EPISTLE OE PAUL TO THE R O MAN S. INTRODUCTION. PRELIMINARY OBSERVATION. As the Epistle to the Romans is the most important and prominent of the Pauline Epistles, we must here discuss first the general preliminary questions connected with the life, doctrine, and writings of the Apostle. This introduction, therefore, divides itself into a general and a special introduction. The first connects with the general introduction of the " Bible-Work " on Matthew [p. 20 fi". Am. ed.] for the New Testament, and on Genesis [p. 1 ff. Am. ed.] for the Old ; the second corresj^onds with the introductions to our commentario on the remaining Epistles of Paul. L GENERAL INTRODUCTION TO THE EPISTLES OP PAUL. § 1. THE PAULINE PORTION OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. The apostolic activity of the great Apostle to the Gentiles was so comprehensive and fruitful, that the greater portion of the labors of the original twelve apostles was merged into the historical current of his work. It is only the Coptic Church, and a few other isolated Oriental sects, that, as a portion of the original apostolic territory, have continued isolated from Paul's great field of labor. Since the second centvuy, Paul's peculiar type of teaching began indeed to give way more and more to the forms of ancient and mediaeval Catholicism ; though Catholicism cannot be termed Petrine in that sense, and much less in that degree, in which the Church of Rome claims to be built on Peter. Yet Paul's spirit continued to exert its influence through the middle ages, not only in the heretical form of Paulicianism and other sects, but also in the orthodox type of Augustinism, until it broke forth from the innermost life of the Church as the chief organizing power of Evangelical Protestantism.* * [Dr. T.ANGE {Das ApostoJ. Zeitalter, vol. ii. p. 649) adopts substantially the ingenious view, first suggested by Joachim Floris, and recently more fully developed by the gre;it philosopher Scheluso, and favored by eminent German divines, uch as Neander, Ullmann, Thiersch, that the throe representative apostles, Peter, Paul, and John, are the types of three ucoossire ages of Christianity : Peter the apostle of law and Catholicism, Paul the apostle of freedom and Protestantism, John the apostle of love and the church of the future which is to harmonize authority and freedom, unity and variety. Schelling, sliortly before his death, at Ragatz, Switzerland, Aug. 1854, in a very interesting conversation with the writer of this note, emphatically affirmed his unshaken belief in this view, to which he had given repeated and profound reflection. It is certainly no mere accident that Catholicism professes to be founded on Peter, while Protestantism ha« at all times mainly appealed to Paul, the apostle of faith, of freedom, of independence, and of progress. Even tfac 1 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. As far as the Pauline portion of the New Testament is concerned, it constitutes not only the greatest part of the apostolic epistles, but also a large share of the entire New Testament; especially when we include both the writings of Luke and the Epistle to the Hebrews, which were evidently written under the influence of the Ajjostle of the Gentiles. An eternal triumph of Christianity, an imiierishable sign and pledge of its world-conquer- ing power, lies in the fact that the greatest part of the Christian Church, the greatest portion of the New Testament, and the most powerful expression of Christian doctrine, proceeded from a man who, endowed with a lofty genius and a heroic energy of will, had cast all the enthusiasm of his youth into a fanatical hatred of Christianity, and who had made it the great object of his life to exterminate that religion from the face of the earth. With the conversion of Paul, the noblest prince of Pharisseism was changed from an arch-enemy of Clirist into his most active apostle and witness. This was a prelude to the world-historical change by which the eagle of the heathen power of Rome was converted from the work of a vulture that vexed the fold of Christ, into the service of a dove of peace for the nations of the earth. Sattl became Paul. In this one word all the past triumphs of Christianity over its foes are embraced, and all its future triumi)hs are described in advance. To bend or to break — that is the question ; to bend, like Paul, or to break, like Julian the Apostate. The cause of this wonderful power of conversion and of judgment lies in the universal triumpli of Christ, against whom a Paul was not too great an enemy, nor a Julian too crafty a poli- tician and emperor. Concerning the signification of Pattl in the New Testament, Calmet thus speaks in the introduction to his commentary on the Epistle to the Romans : " Post sacrosnnota etiangelia venerdbile maxime ac ceterorum omnium pretiosissimiim monumentum Pauli epistolce hahendce aunt. Omnia in illis continentur^ qum formandis moribus, sive ad mysteria et religionem constltuendam a Jesu Christo tradita sunt. Tamquam snpplementum et interpretatio eorvm, qucs Jesus Christus docuit, ac veluti alterum evangelium Jesu Ghristi e moi'tuis redivivi jure meritoque reputantur.^'* [H. EwALD, the great orientalist, commences his Commentary on the Pauline Epistles (Gottingen, 1857), with the following striking and truthful eulogy : " Considering these Epistles for themselves only, and apart from the general significance of the great Ajjostle of the Gentiles, we must still admit that, in the whole history of all centuries and of all nations, there is no other set of writings of similar extent, which, as creations of the fugitive moment, have proceeded from such severe troubles of the age, and such profound pains and sufferings of the author himself, and yet contain such an amount of healthfulness, serenity, and vigor of immortal genius, and touch with such clearness and certainty on the very highest truths of human aspiration and action. . . . The smallest as well as the greatest of these Epistles seem to have i^roceeded from the fleeting moments of this earthly life only to enchain all eternity ; they were born of anxiety and bitterness of human strife, to set forth in brighter lustre and with higher certainty their superhuman grace and beauty. The divine assurance and firmness of the old prophets of Israel, the all-transcending glory and immediate spiritual presence of the Eternal King and Lord, who had just ascended to heaven, and all the art and culture amtagonism of ProtestantiBm and Eomanism has its typical antecedent in the temporary collision of Paul and Peter at Antiocb, and the earnest protest of Paul aarainst any compromise with judaiirinp: prinoiplos or customs. The idea of Schel- ling furniBhes a fruitful hint for a comprehensive evangelical Catholic, philosopliy of Church history. But it must be wisely defii.ed and qualified, and, as Lange intimates, it holds good only wilh regard to the elements of truth, and not to the extremes, contradictions, and defects, in the various historical types of Christianity. For in the Kpistles of Peter there is not the faintest trace of hierarchical pretension and judaizing legalism and ritualism ; on the contrary, a striking substantial agreement with the system of Paul. Nor do we find, on the other hand, that Paul gives the le:ist countcnanct to that unhistorical and unchurchly individualism and one-sided intellectiialism into which much of our modem Protest- Uitism has degenerated. It must also be admitted, that in no age or section of Christianity was the spirit of any of th« three leading apostles entirely wanting. There were truly evangelical men and tendencies at work in the bosom ol mediaeval Catholicism, and thi'y are not wholly extinct even in the Roman church of the present day ; while the tendencj to legalism, formality, intolerance, and exclusivism may be found also in the bosom of Protestantism ; and the lovely harmonizing i-pirit of John is alive more or less among true bidievers in all sections of Christendom. So in a similai way the law and the promise, the sacerdotal oflSce and the prophetic spirit, accompanied the Old Testament d'epensatioi through the stages of its development to John the Baptist, the immediate forerunner of the first advent of Christ Comp. below, p. 13, and Schafp's History of the Apost. Churchy pp. 67-4-C78.— P. S.l § 2. PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE GENTILES. HISTORY OF HIS LIFE. ft of a ripe and wonderfully excited age, seem to have joined, as it were, in bringing forth tho new creation of these Epistles of the times which were destined to last for all times." Upo» the whole, St. Paul is, perhaps, the most remarkable man, and his Epistles, next to the Gos- pels, the most important literary production of all ages. Dr. Wordsworth strongly recom mends the reading of the Pauline Epistles in their chronological order, so as to accompany the Apostle, with the help of the Acts, in his missionary career from the call at Damascus to the martyrdom in Kome, and his development of Christian doctrine from the elementary truths of the Thessalonians to the farewell instructions of the Pastoral Letters. The reader will thus trace with growing delight this spiritual river of Paradise from its fountain-head, through Syria, Asia Minor, and Greece, to Rome, diffusing purity and health, flowing onward in a majestic and ever-widening flood, fertilizing the banks, that they may bear the flowers and trees of Christian graces, and terminating at last in the ocean of eternity. — P. S.] § 2. PAUIi THE APOSTLE TO THE GENTILES. HISTORY OF HIS LIFE.* The history of the life of the Apostle Paul divides itself, according to great crises, into the following periods : I. The time of his youthful development to his conversion ; II. The time of his apostolic training, his impulsive and enthusiastic beginnings, and his purifying retreats ; III. The period of the three great missionary journeys recounted in the Scriptures, down to his capture in Jerusalem, and his transportation from Caesarea to Rome ; IV. The termination of his career to his martyrdom. A. The Histmy of the Youth of Paul to his Conversion. Paul appears first before us at the place of execution of the protomartyr Stephen, under the Jewish name of Saul (^''5*'^), Acts vii. 57. He is a young man, who pursues his studies in Jerusalem in the school of the conservative Pharisee, Gamaliel (Acts xxii. 3 ; comp. Acts V. 34) ; but in consequence of his fanatical enthusiasm for the Pharisaic law, which he iden- tified with the ancestral faith (Phil. iii. 5, 6), he became, while a student, the most bitter per- secutor and disturber of the youthful Church of Christ ; for he considered that Church a fatal Jewish heresy, and one which, by virtue"of the rights of zealots for the law, he designed to combat, and hoped utterly to destroy. Probably Moses, Phiuehas, and Elijah were his imaginary prototypes ; while he adjudged Christ to be the greatest of those false prophets against whom destruction was prophesied and appointed (Dent, xviii. 20). From an accom- plice who, being i)resent at the execution of Stephen, took charge of the clothes belonging to his witnesses and executioners (Acts vii. 58), he soon became a servant of the Sanhedrinf ; and having become excited by the martyr-blood of Stephen, he not only continued the perse- cution, and scattered the congregation in Jerusalem, but, being clothed with extraordinary authority, he entered upon a journey to Damascus for the purpose of destroying the Christian congregation in that city. The Sanhedrin did not at that time possess authority over the life and death of the Jews (John xviii. 31), but it was nevertheless at liberty to exercise, in matters of religion, the Jewish authority to imprison, to scourge, and to arrange all the pre- liminaries of a trial for capital punishment. The execution of James the Just, as recounted by JoseiDlms (in his Antiq. xx. 9, 1), explains the martyrdom of Stephen and the subse- quent threats against Paul's life (Acts xsiii. 30), and shows that a tumultuous occasion could lead to the infliction of cajjital punishment. (On the laws of punishment, comp. Wineb, art. Bynedrium [ii. 551, and Smith, iii, 1136, art. Sanhedrim,]). % • In the following section I have borrowed considerably from my own article on Paul, in Hekzoq's Real-EneyetO' jjwrfie [vol. si. 1859, pp. 239-2G9,— P. S.] ; but I have enlarged it according to necessity. Compare also the respective iections in the works of Neander, Schafp, Lange, Thiersch, on the History of the Apostolic Church (Schaff, pp 23&- 947), and Contbeare and Howson : The Life and Epistles of St. Paul. London, 1853, republished in New York. t [The proper spelling is not Sanhedrim, but Sanhedrin (Talm. "|i"lTn:0 , formed from (rvviSpiov), but there » n^ uniformity in this even among scholars. — P. S.] t [The rcidtr will meet in this and all other parts of Dr. Lanqe's Commentary very frequent i efeiences to Wineb'i BibHcal Dictionary {BiOlisches Realworterbuch zum Hundgehrauch fur Sludirende, etc., 3d ed. Leipsic, 1819, 2 ToU. THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. Saul had already taken the lead in Jerusalem in the work of incarcerating the Christians but the apparent result of his efforts, which was only the wider promulgation of the gospe] by means of the scattering of the congregation (Acts viii. 4), exasperated him still more. Therefore he solicited those fatal letters of authority which directed him toward Damascus. A proof of the confidence reposed in the fiery zealof the young Pharisaic student may be Been in the fact that the Council not only gave him full authority, but also an obedient escort The enterprising youth designed to destroy the whole Christian flock in Damascus, and to drag back to Jerusalem even women, and all who were at his mercy. But the Divine visitation came upon him when near Damascus. Saul, by a sudden miracle, became a Paul, as we are accustomed to say ; the greatest and most dangerous of all the persecutors of the Christians (for-he persecuted the Church in its infancy), was transformed into the greatest promulgator of Christianity in the world. Paul was a descendant of the tribe of Benjamin, and a native of Tarsus, the jjolished and venerable capital of Cilicia, situated on the river Cydnus, the home of the great naturalist, Dioscorides, and of other distinguished men, and the burial place of Emperor Julian the Apostate. Jerome {De viris illustrih. cap. v.) mentions the rejjort that Paul had emigrated with his parents from Gishala, but he afterwards declares, in his commentary on Philemon, that it is a fable. As the stock of Levi became gloriously resplendent in John the Baptist, 60, under the new dispensation, did Benjamin, the son of Rachel, receive higher honor than any other tribe save Judali, which had previously risen to the greatest gloiy. And the same mighty energy which the blessing of Jacob ascribed to the character of Benjamin (Gen. xlix. 27), and which was confirmed by later events (Judges xx. 21), found its perfect expression in Paul. He was first a ravenous wolf in the midst of the fiock that ate his prey in the morning ; but in the evening he combined the strength of the wolf and the mildness of the lamb ; and though he sprang like a wolf into the metropolitan cities of heathendom, his purpose was to " divide his spoil in the evening." His jjareuts appear to have been in good circumstances. They were " Roman " citizens, though not as inhabitants of the city of Tarsus (for that city had not then obtained its freedom), but by special conditions with which we are not acquainted. Notwithstanding their high social standing, they strictly adhered to the Jewish faith, and designed their son to be a Pharisaic Rabbi. According to Jewish custom he had learned a trade ; he was a tent-maker (that is, a weaver of a kind of cloth which was applied to tent-making ; a-KrjvoTtows, Acts xviii. 3). The great talents of Saul could be early developed in the schools of cultivated Tarsus, if we may suppose that the rigid Phaiisaic sentiment of his parents (which, however, was often mollified in heathen cities far away from Palestine) permitted him to visit those schools. From Paul's philosophic analysis of heathendom (Rom. I. and ii.), from his discourse at Athens (Acts xvii.), and from other similar expressions, we may very readily infer that his acquaintance with sentences of heathen philosophers and poets (Acts xvii. 28 ; Tit. i. 12 sq.), is not attributable to mere popular intercourse, but to reading and study. When in Jerusalem, he became familiarly acquainted with the Old Tes- tament, rabbinical traditions and dialectics, and probably also with the doctrines of the Jew- ish Alexandrian school. It is probable that he found there some family connections ; at least, he was subsequently supported very earnestly by a nephew (Acts xxiii. 16). As King Saul of old is said to have gone forth to seek she-asses, but found a crown, so with the Apostle ; but he took better care of his crown. The conversion of Saul is one of the greatest miracles of the exalted Saviour— one of the which is justly prized in Germany as a masterwork of ripe scholarship and critical accuracy. The English and American Btudenl who has no access to it, niay in neai ly all such cases profitably consult the same articles in W. Smith's Dictionary of the Bible, large edition, London aud Boston, 18G3, 3 vols. ; large American edition, with many improvements and addi- tions, by Prof. H. B. Hackett and Ezra Abbot, New York, 1868 ff., to be completed in 4 vols. ; and the superb tltird edition of Kitto's Cyclopsedia of Biblical LiUralure, prepared by W. Lindsay Alexander, D.D., etc., London, 1865, 3 »ols. These English works, being the result of the combined labor of many contributors, have less unity and symmetry than thai of Winer, but are more extensive and embody the latest information (especially Hackett and Abbot's edition of Smith unabridged, now in course of preparation and publication, with the help of a number of American Bcholars). A new German Dictionary of the Bible has been recently commenced with a considerable array of coUaboraf toib by ScHENKEi of Heidelberg, and will represent the liberal, semi-rationalistic school of Gennan theology —P. 3.] § 2. PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE GENTILEa HISTORY OF HIS LITE. 5 greatest miracles of conversion in the kingdom of grace. The fact especially that the most earnest zealot for Pharisaic legalism became, by Divine appointment, the chief apostle of a free gospel and faith, and the most successful destroyer of Pharisajism in Judaism, and in the Cliristian Church through all ages, is without a parallel in history. True, some of the greatest opponents of Jesuitism have come out of Jesuit schools. Luther, the former monk was the strongest antagonist of monastic righteousness ; and Luther, the Augustinian, tha strongest antagonist of intolerance, which St. Augustine unfortunately first established in theory in opposition to the Dortatists ; but not one of these contrasts reaches that miraculous transformation in which the glorified Christ, as with an ironical smile, changed the most formidable power of the enemy into His most victorious agency for conquest. And yet this miracle, too, was conditioned by justice and truth. We must not ignore for the miraculous manifestation of Christ all connecting points of prejjaration in the unconscious Bpiritual life of Saul (as Baumgarten has again done). This would be as partial and un- tenable as the opposite extreme of rationalistic writers, who vainly attempt to explain hia conversion by psychological antecedents and extraordinary natural phenomena (see Winer, BeahWdrterluch^ art. Patdus). The history declares positively that the glorified Christ appeared to him ; and we cannot interpret it in any other light. But Paul's own accounta show that the objective manifestation of Christ was mediated by a visionary or ecstatic elevation of Saul himself (Acts ix. 7 ; xxii. 9). [The rationalistic interpretation, after having exploded in Germany, has been ingeniously renewed in France by E. Renan, Les Apotres, Paris, 1866, p. 18L There is a third view on the conversion of Paul, not mentioned by Dr. Lange — the mythical — which resolves the event into a purely subjective process in Paul's own mind, and explains the supernatural light to be Bimply the symbolical expression of the certainty of the real spiritual presence of Christ in the Church and the believer. This view was ably defended by the late Dr. Baur, of Tubingen, in his work on Paul, 1847, p. 68. But after a renewed investigation of the subject, the celebrated historian arrived at the conclusion that the conversion of Paul was an enigma, which cannot be satisfactorily solved by any psychological or dialectical analysis. See the second and revised edition of his work on Christianity and the Christian Church in the first three centuries, which appeared shortly before his death, a. 1860, p. 45, and the second edition of his Paul, edited by Zeller, 1867. The character and apostolic life of Paul, and the very origin and continued existence of the Christian Church, is an inexplicable mystery without the miracle of the actual resurrection of our Saviour. — P. S.] Observations. — 1. On the splendor of the city of Tarsus in culture and institutions of learning, see Winer, article Tarsus. Also the particulars concerning Gamaliel, by the same author [and in Kitto's and W. Smith's Bible Dictionarie.s]. 2. On the life of Paul in general, compare the article Paul in the various Bible diction- aries ; the relevant chapters in Neander, Schaff, Thiersch, and Lange, on the Apostolic Age ; the work, Die BiograpTiien der Bibel, Stuttgart and Leipzig, 1838 ; and Reuss, Die Oesch. der heil. Schriften Muen Testaments [4th ed., 1864], p. 45 ff., where a comprehensive catalogue of literature may be found. For particular references, see below. 3. The literai-y education of the Apostle has been much discussed. Comp. Niemeter, Clmralcteristilc der Bibel ; Thalemann's treatise, Be eruditiaue Pauli Judaica non Grceca (and Winer, Real-Worterhuch, ii. 213). The parents of Paul may have been prevented, by their religious prejudices, from sending their son to the brilliant Grecian schools in Tarsus ; but it does not therefore follow that the vigorous mind of the youthful Paul did not become acquainted privately with the principles of Grecian learning. Possibly his jjarents may have Bent him to Jerusalem for the very reason that they discovered in him a dangerous suscepti- bility for the charms of Grecian literature. — " Paul received a learned Jewish education in the school of the Pharisaean Rabbi, Gamaliel, not remaining an entire stranger to Greek litera- ture, as his style, his dialectic method, his allusions to heathen religion and philosophy, and his occasional quotations from heathen poets show. Thus, a ' Hebrew of the Hebrews,' yet at the same time a native Hellenist and a Roman citizen, he combined in himself, so to speak, the three great nationalities of the ancient world, and was endowed with all the natural qualifications for a universal apostleship. He could argue with the Pharisees as a son of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin, as a disciple of the renowned Gamaliel, surnamed 'the G'.ory of the Law,' and as one of the straitest of their sect. He ccjuld address the Greeks vt 6 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. their own beautiful tongue, and with the force of their strong logic. Clothed with the dig' nity and majesty of the Roman people, he could travel safely over the whole empire with th« watchword : ' Civis Romanus sum.'' " From Pn. Schaff, Ilhtory of Ancient Chrutianiti/, vol. L p. 68. Comp. also Charles Hodge, Commentary on the Ejiintle to the Romans^ revised edition, first section of the Introduction : " His (Paul's) natural character was ardent, energetic, un- compromising, and severe. How his extravagance and violence were subdued by tlie grace of God, is abundantly evident from the moderation, mildness, tenderness, and conciliation manifested in all his epistles. Absorbed in the one object of glorifying Christ, he was ready to submit to any thing, and to yield any thing necessary for this purpose. He no longer insisted that others should think and act just as he did. So that they obeyed Christ, he was satisfied ; and he willingly conformed to their prejudices, and tolerated their errors, so far as the cause of truth and righteousness allowed. By his early education, by his mkaculoua conversion and inspiration, by his natural disposition, and by the abundant grace of God, was this Apostle fitted for his work, and sustained under his multiplied and arduous labors."— P. S.] 4. On the chronology of the Apostle's life, see Winer, Real-Worterlmch, ii. p. 217 ; WiE- SELER, Chronology of the Apostolic Age [Gottingen, 1848 ; also the Chronological Chart in the American edition of Lange's Covimentary on Acts^ and Alford's Commentary on, Ads^ 5th ed., I860, [pp. 'i2-27. — P. S.] On the various suppositions concerning the time of Paul's con- version, Winer, ii. p. 219. 5. On the conversion of the Apostle in particular, see the Commentary on the Arts of the Apostles^ chap. ix. [p. 161, Am. ed.] The objectivity of the appearance of Christ is there justly maintained. But we should, in addition to it, make proj^er account of the element of a vision as the medium of the appearance of Christ. Here belongs also the treatise of C. P. HoFSTEDE DE Groot, PauU conversio, prcecipuus theologim Paulince fons^ Groningen, 1855. (^^ Itaque invent principia gravissima tria., e quibus tota Pauli theologia est orta ; primxim mentis, Jesu mtam novum semper cogitantis, alterum animi, gratiam divinam constanter exjjerti et seiv- tie7itis, tertium vitce, Christi ecclesiam perpetuo spectantis.'''') Also the essay of Paret, The Testimony of the Apostle Paul concerning the Appearance of Christ, in the Jahriilcher far deutsche Theol., vol. iv,, pt. 2. For a full list of literature, see Reuss, 1. c, p. 51, and Wines, ii. p. 214. B. Th^ Preparation of Paul for the Apostolic Office, and his Apostolical Missionary Journeyt to the time of Ms First Captivity in Borne. A man of such mighty genius, notvpithstanding his ajDOstolic call, was not qualified for an evangelist immediately after his conversion. His first zeal would have been too stormy, too powerful, and too much the outburst of immoderate excitement. After his first attempt in Damascus, he had to withdraw to Arabia for a quiet stay of about three years (Gal. i.) — a period over which a veil is drawn. He probably spent it, not in missionary labor, but to greater advantage in contemplative life, although he may have made some single missionary eflbrts during this time (see Lange's History of the Apost. Age, ii. p. 124), After his first attempt in Jerusalem, also, where Barnabas introduced him to the apostles, Paul was again required to retire to private life. But this time he chose Cilicia, his native country. We may infer from his character that he did not remain absolutely passive, but that he occasion- ally testified of Christ ; yet he did not engage in apostolic labors in their strictest sense. Barnabas sent for him to come from Cilicia to Antioch, to cooperate with him in that newly-arisen metropolis of Gentile Christianity (Acts xi. 25). Paul entered into the most intimate relations with the congregation of Gentile Christians living there, and the destina^ tion that he bad received at his call to become the Apostle to the Gentiles (Acts ix. 15), now approached its fulfilment. But it was in accordance with the apostolic spirit that the Gen- tile Church should remain in perfect unity with the Jewish-Christian Church. This tendency toward unity was strengthened by the first mission of Paul to Jerusalem, in company with Barnabas (Acts xi. 30). We may therefore consider this mission as the introduction to the apostolic labors of the Apostle ; and since it also constitutes one of the strongest chrono- logical links in his career, we will now speak of the chronological relations of his life. We pass over, as unreliable points of connection, the government of Damascus by tiiB Arabian king Aretas (Acts ix. ; 2 Cor. xi. 32), and the meeting of Paul with Aquila in Corinth, in consequence of the banishment of the latter from Rome by an edict of the Empe- § 2. PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE GENTILES. HISTORY OF HIS LIFE. •} ror Claudius (see Wieseler, Chronoloyie des ApostoUschen Zeitaliers, p. 167, and p. 125). Tho safest date at tlie beginning of the apostolic career of Paul is the year of the death of Ilerodl Agrippa, A. D. 44 (Joseph., JDe hello Jud. ii. 11, 6) ; and the safest one at the end of the same is the recall of the procurator Felix from Judea in the year 60. The execution of James the Elder took place shortly before the death of Herod Agrippa (Acts xii. 2). About the samt time, Paul and Barnabas went to Jerusalem as bearers of the collection taken at Antioch. If, according to the usual method, we reckon liackward from this date, the year 44 (one year spent in Antioch, about one year in Jerusalem and Tarsus, three years in Arabia and Damas- cus), the conversion of Paul occurred about the year 39. Then, reckoning forward, let us fix the time of the Apostolic Council, under the supposition (which has been vainly contested)* that the journey described in Acts xv. is identical with that of Gal. ii. (see my Gesch. de$ Apost. Zeitalters, i. 99), and that the fourteen years which Paul reckons as occurring previous to this journey are to be numbered from his conversion. This being the case, the Apostolic Council occurred about the year 53.t The first missionary tour of the Apostle therefore tool; place between the years 44 or 45 and 52 or 53. The second and third were made between the years 53 and 59-60. In reference to the more particular dates, compare the already mentioned work of Wie- seler (whose parallel of Paul's journey mentioned in Acts xviii. 22, with that in Gal. ii., does not seem to be warranted) ; the article Paul in Winer ; G. W. Agardh, Von der Zeitrechnung der Lebensgeschichte des Ajjosteh Paulus, etc., Stockholm, 1847. On the time of the ecstasy narrated in 2 Cor. xii. 7, compare my Ajwst. Zeitalter, ii. p. 8. In regard to the credibility of the account of the Acts on the apostolic life of Paul, Bchneckenburger maintained the hypothesis, that the author of that book converted the life of Paul from real historical materials into a parallel to the life of Peter. Baur has outdone this hypothesis, and endeavored to carry out the hypercritical notion that the narrative of the Acts of the Apostles is an unhistorical production, written for the purpose of bringing about a compromise between Jewish Christianity and Gentile Christianity. On this vain attempt to convert the history of the Acts into a myth, or rather a conscious fiction, compare Lech- LER, The A2yostoUc and Post-Apostolic Age, p. 6 ft". There was no doubt a gradual approach of the two sections of apostolic Christianity, iu harmony with the first fundamental principle of the Word made flesh and the working of the spirit of the apostolic history. Conscious of the essential unity of faith and hope, the Gentile Church moved towards the Jewish Church, as the Jewish Church sought and found the Gen- tile Church. It is from this point of view that we must study Paul's journeys to Jerusalem as they alternated with his missionary tours. Every new missionary journey to the heathen world was followed by a renewal of the bond of union with the parent society in Jerusalem ; and the more deeply the Apostle penetrated the heathen world, and the more fully he kept the Gentile Church free from Jewish ordinances, the more decidedly did he afterward show, by his own conduct in Jerusalem, his respect for Jewish customs. Only those who are unable, like Paul, to distinguish between dogmatic and ethical rules, can find a contradiction in this fact, and especially in the diversity of requirements between Gal. ii. 16 and Acta XV. 20. The farthest limit of the first missionary tour of the Apostle was Derbe, in Lycaonia, Asia Minor. The appointment of Barnabas and Saul in Antioch by the direction of the Holy Spirit, their ordination by the united act of the congregation and its leaders, the voyage to Cyprus, the triumph of Paul over the false prophet Bar-jesua, his change of name, the jour- ney to Pamphylia, and the return of Mark, the apostolic attendant, the missionary address of * [By TViESELiE who, in his very learned and able chronology of the Apostolic Age, identifies the visit mentioned, Oal. Ii. 1, with the fourth journey of Paul to Jerusalem mentioned Acts xviii. 21, 22. Ho has defended his view in an Excursus to his Commentary to the Galaiians, p. 552 tf. Compare against his view and in favor of the identity of the journey of Gal. ii. 1 with that to the Apostolic Council, Acts xv., my History of the Apost. Church, p. 245 £f. ; and th< Commentary on Gal. ii. 1. — P. 8.] < I The chronologists of the Apostolic Churcli differ in the date of the Council of Jerusalem from 47-53. "WiNBa, Dk Wbttb, Wieselee, Schaff, and Alfoed, put it in 50 or 51 ; Olshausen, Meyek, Ewald, in 52.— P. S.J 8 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. tlie Apostle in the synagogue at Antiocli in Pisiclia, the persecutions on the jDart of the Jewe in Antioch and Iconia, Paul's miracle at Lystra, and his success in Derbe : these are th« prominent points of the first missionary tour. We must observe especially, 1, That the apostolic men at that time, as well as later, always directed their first attention to the Jews, and consequently entered the synagogue, although at Antioch, in Pisidia, an important crisis occurred in their zeal for Gentile missions (Acts xiii. 46) ; 2. that Paul, the younger messen- ger, appears more and more decidedly in the foreground ; 3. that on their return the societies of converts were organized into fixed congregations, especially by the appointment of elders (Acts xiv. 23) ; 4. that the free spirit with which Paul carried on the missionary work among the Gentiles produced, in all probability, that reaction of the more rigid Jewish Christiana which led to the first Apostolic Council, and Paul's journey to Jerusalem in connection there- with ; 5. that the enmity of the Jews against the preaching of the two men, especially of Paul, became more intense from his expulsion (in Antioch) to the attempt to stone him (in Iconium), and to his real stouing (in Lystra). On the change of Paul's name, various views have been advanced (see "Winer, article Paul ; ScHAFF, History of the Ajjost. Churcli, p. 226 ; comp. Com. on Ch. i. 1.). We are of the opinion that Saul, as a Roman citizen, was already in possession of a Roman name, but that, while at Cyprus, he was induced, not only by the friendship of Sergius Paulus, but especially by his antagonism to the false prophet who called himself Elymas the Sorcerer, the mighty magician, to term himself, as that man's conqueror in the name of the Lord, Paul the small man (so far as David's victory over Goliath had repeated itself here in a New Testament character) ; and particularly, also, because the Apostle, being now about to enter into active intercourse with the Grecian and Roman world, could travel more conveniently under a Roman name. The second missionaiy journey passes over Asia Minor to Europe, and finds its farthest limit in Corinth. It is specially characterized by the following events : (1.) The separation of Paul and Barnabas on account of Mark, and the beginning of a sejiarate and independent mission of Paul, in which he was followed at first by Silas, and later by Timothy and Luke ; (2.) the tour of visitation into the earlier missionary field (Cyprus being passed over, and left to the care of Barnabas), which was changed into a new mission of colossal proportions ; (3.) the harmonization of the body of Jewish Christians and Gentile Christians by means of the ethical principles established by the Church in Jerusalem (Acts xvi. 4) ; (4.) the new stiir tions : Cilicia (before the repeated visit of the elder stations), then Phrygia, Galatia, Troas; after this in Europe : Philij)pi, Thessalonica, Berea, Athens, Corinth ; also the jjersecutions, which varied in strength in proportion to the greater or less results of the preaching of the gospel ; (5.) the miraculous aid and manifestation of the Spirit, which led Paid to Europe (Acts xvi. 6, 7, 9) ; (6.) the contrast between the ministrations of the Apostle in Athens and in Coriuth ; but we err if we suppose that Paul corrected his learned discourse in Athens by his exclusive preaching of the Cross in Corinth ; (7.) the meeting of Paul with Aquila and Priscilla in Corinth, which so greatly afi'ected his subsequent mission ; (8.) the longer stay of the Apostle in Corinth, and the importunities of the Jews against him in the presence of the deputy, Gallio ; (9.) the new journey of the Apostle to Jerusalem for the accomplishment of a vow, during which he touches at Ephesus, and there makes preparation for his mission by leaving behind Aquila and Priscilla. The third missionary tciir is so far an enlargement of the second, as that Paul at this time makes Ephesus, in Asia Minor, his great object, which city he had been comjjplled to jjass by in his journey, and which he could only touch at on his return. ApoUos was his pioneer here, and the silversmith Demetrius became his principal opponent. His victory was, on the one hand, a triumph over the nocturnal magic of this city dedicated to Diana, the goddess of the Moon ; and, on the other, over idolatry. This journey, which was at first suj^plement- jiry in its design, assumed the character of a visitation ; for Paul departed from Ephesus, and again visited the congregations in Macedonia and Greece. The supposition of a third mis- wmai-y visit to the Corintliian church between the second and third missionary tours has § 2. PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE GENTILES. HISTORY OF HIS LIFE. g Dcen shown, in a variety of ways, to rest upon a misunderstanding (see my Apost. Age, i p. 199). The third missionary journey is characterized by the more decided prominence ol the missionary calculation and self-determination of the Apostle (see 1 Cor. xvi. 5 ; 2 Cor. i, 15) ; by his miraculous works, especially in Ej^hesus and Troas (Acts xviii. 11 ; xx. 10) ; by the establishment of a metropolis of the church of Asia Minor, which was destined to become the home of John, and the maternal city of Christian speculation ; by the founding of a larger association and Pauline school ; and finally, by the decided premonition of his cap- tivity which the Apostle felt, as he drew his missionary journey to a close, and entered upcr his pilgrimage to Jerusalem. The performance of a Nazarite vow in Jerusalem (a step counselled by James) grew, fiom a measure of accommodation to the narrow views of the Jewish Christians, into an offence on the part of the Jews. It led to the persecution of the Apostle in Jerusalem, his abduction, and imprisonment in Caesarea, his appeal to the judgment-seat of Cajsar, and his transporta-^ tion to Rome (in the year 62 ; according to Auger and Winer, in the spring of 61). Frona this captivity he was released (in the year 64), not only according to the testimony of tradition (EusEB., ii. 22 : Xoyoy €;(ft, Cyrill. Hieros., Hieronymus, etc. ; see Winer), but also accord- ing to certain hints of the Scriptures, yet only, after a new journey for missions and visi- tation, to fall into a second imprisonment, and to suffer martyrdom under Nero. Observations. — 1. For a statement of relevant literature, see Reuss, 1. c, p. 54, 55, 56 Bqq. [Smith, Diet, of the B., art. Paul, at the close, vol. iii. 763). 2. Ananias at Damascus, a 2Jredecess()r of Barnabas for the introduction of Paul into the Church of Christ, as Stephen had been a predecessor of Paul himself. 3. Paul's three years of instruction in the quiet solitude of Arabia, a counterpart and parallel to the three years of instruction spent by the twelve apostles in intercourse with the Lord. The latter was an external and historical communion ; that of Paul was undoubtedly of a mysterious and internal character, and kindred to the great mysterious fact of his con- version. See my Apost. Age, ii. p. 123. [Schafp, H. of the Ap. Oh. p. 236 : and Com. on Gal. i. 17.] 4. The development of the Apostle's consciousness of his specific call to the Gentiles was gradual, and commensurate with the gradual definiteness of his call to the apostolic office in general. This may be seen from Acts ix. 15, 29 ; coinp. xxii. 21 ; xiii. 46 ; xix. 9 ; xxviii. 17 sqq.; Gal. ii. But this call to the Gentiles did not exclude a purpose to convert the Jews ; for not only must he first seek in the synagogues those heathen who were sa?ceptible hearers of his message, especially the proselytes of the gate (Acts xiii. 48), but Paul also recognized the conversion of the Gentiles, apart from their personal salvation, as a means for the conver- sion of Israel (Rom. xi. 13, 14). The grafiual development of his apostolic knowledge by virtue of continued revelations and illuminations, was not precluded by the Apostle's prepa- ration, derived from a historical knowledge of the Holy Scriptures and of the life of Jesus, and by his great miraculous illumination when his call occurred. 5 On the person of Barnabas ; on Cilicia, Antioch, Asia Minor, etc., see the relevant articles in the Biblical dictionaries. Also the introductions to the resjjective parts of this Counnentary. On Antioch in particular, see my Apost. Age, ii. p. 158. 6. The recii)rocal action between the three missionary journeys of the Apostle, and his pilgrimage to Jerusalem at the close of each of these journeys, are in themselves sufficient to overthrow as an untenable fiction Baxjr's hypothesis above alluded to. 7. On the identity of the fact related in Gal. ii. with that naiTated in Acts xv., see Reuss, p. 55, and Schafp's History of the Apost. Church, p. 245 flF. 8. The relation of the ajjostolic deliberations in Acts xv. to the so-called Nivichian com- mands, is also maintained by Reuss, 1. c, p. 56. See thereon my Apost. Age, ii. p. 184. Reuss maintains that Acts xv. 21 avows the validity of the law for the Jewish Cliristians. But the absence of all dogmatic obligation in the same passage is very plain from the trans- ictions of the apostolic council. Yet, as far as the national and ethical validity of tlie same fi concerned, it was in perfect harmony with the apostolic spirit that the continuance of the AW should not be violently abrogated. For the relevant literature, see Reuss, p. 56. 9. For a catalogue of the friends and followers of the Apostle, see the same, p. 58. 10. The Apostle's missionary method and policy: (1.) A prudent adjustment of his uni- versal mission to the Gentile world, even to Rome, and the western limit of the Old World (Spain), to the primitive historical trunk of Christianity in Jerusalem— that is, the incorpo- ration of the missionary spirit with the vital power of the Church. (2.) Perception of the historical links for communicating the gospel to the world. Therefore he first turned his 10 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. attention to tlie Jews, and rose in their synagogues, but made full account cf tlie prejudice* of tile Jews, and the receptibility of the heathen for Christianity. Therefore he embraced in hi? view, and also seized upon, the ijoints of connection in the Gentile world (see his address at Athens on the inscription of an altar), and with equal clearness he discovered and opposed all real barriers to the truth (rigliteousne?s by works among the Jews ; luxurious life in Corinth, 1 Cor. i. 2; and the gloomy sorcery of superstition in Ephesus). (8.) Mjst careful observance of Divine guidance to go forward or to hold back (Acts xvi. 6, 9 ; xxv. 10 ; Rom. i. 13, etc.). (4.) Careful consolidation of his missionary work, by instituting congregational offices, and the organization of congregations (Acts xiv. 23, 23), and promoting the inner unity of the churches by their community of prayer and love (see especially the Epistle to the Phili^jpians). (5.) A comprehensive and free use of all chosen companions in faith for cooperation in the form of helpers, evangelists, messengers, and pioneers in a general sense. He is surrounded by his helpers ; he sends them out upon new paths ; he leaves them behind in churches already organized. That they may be strengthened and encouraged, tlie spirits of the gospel come and go in his presence, just as the messengers come and go at the court of a, prince ; he sets all the powers of faith in motion, in order to set all the world in motion. (6.) He greatly advances the jjersonal usefulness of himself and of his coadjutors, by his apostolical epistles. (7.) The marvellous concentration, development, and elaboration of his doctrine in a manner adapted to the necessities of the congregations, and in perfect har- mony with a most careful preservation of the fundamental character of his doctrine. The rock-like steadfastness and adherence to the doctrine of free grace, united uith that most faithful devdopment which is exhibited also in his style as a progressive creative power, pro- ducing a rich treasure of ana^ XeyuiJLfva. (8.) The supplementing of his burning activity by Bacred retreats, when he sank even into the depths of visionary contemplation ; likewise his union of apostolic consecration to the demand of the moment (see his Epistle to Philemon) with his all-embracing care for the whole Church and for its whole future. 11. On the three missionary tours and the life of the Apostle, and the particular events of the same, compare the Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles, and the well-known works of Neander, Schaff, Thiersch, and Ewaxd, on the Apostolic Age, and the literatiue referred to by Reuss, p. 59 sqq. C, T'Jie Second Imprisonment and the Martyrdom of Paul. The second imprisonment has been lately discarded even by theologians who accept the authenticity of the Pastoral Epistles, such as W:eseler, Ebrard, Schaff, Thiersch (see my Apost. Age, ii. p. 374). Yet we still hold to the testimony of the old ecclesiastical tradition for the following reasons : (1.) Because the Acts of the Apostles concludes at the time when the first imprisonment of Paul must have come to an end, without taking any cognizance of his death; (3.) because the Apostle himself, about the end of this period, anticipated hia deliverance (Phil. ii. 24) ; (3.) because the Pastoral Epistles— whose Pauline character can- not be doubted if we take into the account an advanced development of Christianity of Bome years' duration — cannot be comprehended in the early career of Paul down to the year 64, without great violence ; and the same is the case still more with the Apostle's stay in Crete (Tit. i.) ; (4.) because the development of the germs of Ebionism and Judaizing Gnosticism, which are taken cognizance of in the Pastoral Epistles, is clearly indicated by the EjJistles of the Apostle written some years earlier, during his imprisonment from 62 to 64, but had not gained the strength which they possessed at the time when the Pastoral Ejiistles were composed ; (5.) because the tradition of the Church distinguishes positively between the judicial execution of Peter and Paul, and the first great persecution of the Christians as a body under Nero ; (6.) the testimony of the Roman Clement (1 Cor. v.), that Paul came f n\ TO T i p fxa r j] s Si'crfcos k ai fj.apTvpi](Tas e tt\ r a v rjyovfievcoi', having been written in Rome, cannot refer to Rome, and supports the tradition, harmonizing with the purpose of the Apostle (Rom. xv. 24), that Paul visited Spain after his deliverance (comp, my ApoHt. Age, ii. p. 386).* * [The passage of Clement of Rome, which has given nse to different interpretations, must be translated thus . " Paul . . . having come to the Hmil (iir\ rb ripjxa, not : before the hirjhesl tribunal, u tt b to ripiia) of the West, and having died a martjT under the rulers (others : having burne witness before the rulers), he departed from the world atid went tc the holy place, having furiiishcil the sublimcst model of endurance." The dispute about the true reading in the passage (somewhat oblitera';ed)— eirl to repua or vno to ripixa. t^s fiuVeu)?— is now settled in favor of eiti by the testimony of Professors Jaconsos and Tischendorf, who have carefully re-examined the only extant and defective MS. of th« § 2. PAUL THE APOSTLE TO TEE GENTILES. HISTORY OF HIS LIFE. U If we may judge from intimations in the Pastoral Epistles, Paul hastened, after his deliv erance, lirst to Ephesus, where the Christian truth was threatened by the first developmen- of Christian heresy. "We cannot decide whether he was permitted to visit Jerusalem one more on this journey, as was anticipated by the Epistle to the Hebrews, and might be ex- pected from the three visits of his earlier missionary tours. From Ephesus he went to Mace- donia and Greece; then over Troas and Miletus to Crete. Afterwards he proceeded to Epirus, where he spent the winter in Nicopolis, and subsequently left Titus. He then directed his course westward, to the zf pfxa riyj Svcreas, where he was jjrobably seized and taken a prisoner to Rome, before being able to found another permanent organization [in Spain]. =• Meanwhile, Peter either came or was brought to Rome, and both suffered martyrdom there together (according to Clement of Rome, Irenaeus, Tertullian, etc. ; see the article Peter, in Herzog's Beal-Encyclopcedie). The Roman Church celebrates the death of Peter and Paul on the same day — the 29th of June. [The views on the year of Paul's martyrdom vary from 64 to 68. This question depends, of course, mainly on the question of the second captivity. Wieseler contends for the year 64, shortly Ixfore the great Neronian persecution (the only one properly authenticated by his- torical evidence), which broke out, according to Tacitus, Annal., xv. 44, in consequence of the conflagration, July 19th, 64 ; but the general tradition of the Church connects Paul's and Peter's martyrdom with this persecution, which probably gave rise to several isolated execu- tions afterw'ards. If we adopt the hypothesis of a second imprisonment, we may arrive at a more definite result by referring the r/yoi'jufi'ot in the famous passage of Clemens Rom. (1 Cor. v., fxapTvprjtriis fnl twv rjyovpevav, siib jjnvfectis martyrium subiens), either (with Hug, Intr. ii. 323, Hefele, Patres Apost., p. 61, 4th ed., and Dollinger) to Tigcllinus and Nymphidiua Sabinus, or (with Pearson) to Helius Csesarianus and Polycletus, who in the last years of Nero, especially during his absence in Greece, a. d. 67, had charge of the government in Rome. In this case we get the year 67 or 68 for the martyrdom of Paul ; and this agrees with the Catholic tradition based upon Eusebius and Jerome (who, in his Catal. Script., says most explicity of Paul : "iZic ergo decimo quarto JV^eronis anno — i. e., a. d. Q%—€odem die quo Petrus Eomce pro CTiristo cnpite truncatus sepultusque est, in Via Ostiensi). The Basilica of St. Paul, in commemoration of his martyrdom, now stands outside the walls of Rome {San Paolo fuori de' muri), on the road to Ostia, and the Porta Ostiensis is called the gate of St. Paul. The traditional spot of his martyrdom, however, is a little distance from the Basi- lica, where there are three chapels, called The Three Fountains {Tre Fontane), in commemora- tion of the legend that three fresh fountains miraculously gushed forth from the blood of Paul's head as it was cut off by the executioner, and leaped three times from the ground Clementine Epistle to the Corinthians in the British Museum. See Jacobson, Patres Apost. in loc. (Oxon., new ed, 1S63), and TisfHF.NDORF, Appendix codicum celeb. Sin. Vat. Alex., etc., Lips. 1867. This sets asMe Wieselee's interpre- tation of Te'p.ua — supreme power, highest tribunal of the West (i. e., the Emperor of Rome), Into which I mj-self was betrayed in my History of the Apostolic Church, p 342 (Am. ed.), and which I nnw retract. Although repfxa in itself may mean supreme power, it can hardly do so in connection with the geographical term Sucriy. At all events inl to repfia r^s Suo-ews must here be rendered : to the limit of the West ; and this, in the mouth of Clement who wrote from Rome, points more naturally, though by no means necessarily, to Spain (or Gaul or Uritnin; than to Rome, especially Ln view of the fact that Paul intended to visit Spain, Rom. xv. 24 ff. Clement therefore may he quoted ^vith tolerably good reason as the first witness to the ancient iradi'ion (first clearly stated by Eusebius, H. E. ii. 25 : k6yo<; fx^i, etc.) of a second Roman ciptivity of Paul ; for before his first captivity there is no room for a journey to Spain. — P. S.] * [There is not the slightest historical trace of the labors of Paul in Spain, much less in Britain. The early tradition of his joui-ncy to Spain is inferred from Clement's repixa Tij! Suo-ew?, and seems to be obscurely implied in the mutilated M\iratoii fragment on the Canon; but it may have originated in a premature conclusion from the Apostle's desira to visit that country, Rom. xv. 24, 28. Keverthelees such a journey, which was certainly intended, may have been exccut-ed, and rendered comparatively fruitless by difficulties thrown in his way, or by a speedy return. Ewald (.Apost. Zeitatler, 2d ed., 1858, p. 631) suggests that Paul, on hearing in Spain of the terrors of the Neronian persecution, hastened "f his own accord back to Rome to bear testimony to Christ, and being seized there, was again brought to trial an(i OOEdemned to death in 65. Howsojj {The Life and Letters of St. Patil, ii. 460 ff., 482 S. ; Lond. ed.), in following and extending the combinations of Neander, assumes that Paul, after his liberation in 63, first visited the East (Philem. ver E2 ; Phi!, ii. 21), then Spain by an unknown route, after about two years again returned to the East (Ephesus, Macedonia, Crete) was arrested at Nicopolis, forwarded to Rome for a second trial, probably on the charge of fca-(-ing instigated the Roman Christians to their supposed act of incendiarism (?) which caused the terrible persecution in 64, and suffered martyidom early in June, 68, shortly before the death of Nero. — P. S.] 12 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. (*' abscissa Pauli capite tripUci saltu sese sustollente^'''' Acta Sand., vol. vii., sub June 29tli.) This legend is less credible than the beautiful legend connected with Peter's death and per- petuated in the little church of Domine quo vadis, on the Appian Way. Comp., on PauVa death and martyrdom, mj History of tlie Apost. Church; Conybeare and Howson, vol. ii. 502 fF. (Lond. ed.) ; also Prudentius, Peristeph. Ihjmnus XII. ; Bunsen, Beschreihung Moms, iii. p, 440 ; Ajlfred von Reumont, Oeschichte der Stadt Bom (Berlin, 1867), vol. i p, 874 f.— P. S.] Observations. — 1. On the treatises for and against the second captivity of Paul, see WiNEB, Real-Lexic, ii. p. 221, and Schaff, Hist, of the Apost. Church, § 87, pp. 328-343. The second captivity is also advocated by the work of L. Ruffet, Saint Paul ; sa double captivite d Rmne. Paris, 1860 ; and by Gams, Das Jahr des Martyrtodes der Apostel Petriis and Paulus, Regensburg, 1867. He puts the martyrdom of Peter in the year 65 ; that of Paul in the year 67. [Van Oosterzee {Com. on the Pastoral Epistles), Ewald {History of Israel, vol. vi., or Hist, of the Apost. Age, 2d ed. of 1858), Bleek {Introd. to the N. T., 1862), Huther {Com. on the Epp. to Timothy and Titus in Meyer's Com., 8d ed. 1866), Conybeare and HowsoN, Alford, Ellicott, Wordsworth, and most of the English commentators on Paul, likewise favor the second Roman captivity. (Wordsworth, in the interest of Anglicanism, defends even Paul's journey to Britain as well as to Spain). On the other hand, C. W. Otto (in his learned and astute work. Die hisforischen Verhaltnisse der Pastoralbriefe, Lips. 1860), ISIiEDNER {Kirchengeschichte, 1866, p. 114), Meyer {Pom. p. 13 fF.), and again Wieseler (in his learned article on the Epistles to Timothy and Titus, in the last supplementary vol. of Herzog's Encycl., 1866, vol. xxi. p. 276 ff.), oppose the hypothesis of a second Roman cap- tivity of Paul. Adhuc sub judice lis est. — P. S.] 2. Further on the necessity of admitting a second captivity of Paul, see in the Bible- Worh, The Pastoral Epistles, by Dr. Van Oosterzee, 2d eel., Introduction (Am. ed. vol. viii.), diiid mj Apost. Zeitalter, ii. p. 386. Critical prejudices are often propagated, while the original motives and reasons are lost sight of, although such reasons, sprung, as they frequently are, from original misconceptions, have lost their apparent importance in the course of time. Foi example, the criticism against the second part of Zechariah has very clearly arisen from a mis- understanding. Thus many negations in the department of New Testament exegesis have arisen from some caprice of Schleiermacher, some fancy of De Wette, some rationalistic short-sightedness or some fixed idea of Baur, produced by the Hegelian theory of an ofiicious construction of history. [The question of the second Roman captivity of Paul is simply a historical problem, which has no doctrinal or ethical bearing, and which, in the absence of sufficient data, can never be solved vnth mathematical certainty. Those who, like Wieseler, Thiersch, Nied- NER, Otto, and others, hold fast to the Pauline origin of the Pastoral Epistles, lose notiiing by denying a second captivity and trial ; they save the whole extent of Paul's hioicn labors, and only compress them into a smaller immber >f years, thus intensifying rather than dimin- ishing his activity. It must be admitted, however, that the hypothesis of a second captivity oflers a considerable advantage in the defence and exposition of the Pastoral Epistles ; for it is much more dilficult to find a suitable place before than after the first Roman captivity of Paul for the composition of these epistles, and a number of historical facts therein assumed (such as a missionary journey of Paul to Crete, Tit. i. 5 ; a visit to Troas, 2 Tim. iv. 13 ; a pretty advanced state in the development of church organization, and of heresy, 1 Tim, iii.-vi.), and to understand their farewell tone and general spirit, as compared with the earlier writings of the Apostle. — P. S.j D. Th£ Character of the Apostle. The character of the Apostle reflects itself in his work, as in his Epistles, and appears before us in the energetic and harmonious contrasts of a great apostolic spirit. He was as frank in his deep humility as the sincerest penitent (Phil. iii. 6), and equally joyous in his acclamations over the all-prevailing faith unto salvation (2 Cor, xii. 10) ; steadfsist in adherence to his convictions (Gal. i. 16), and at the same time cautious, considerate, and master of the finest and purest policy (Acts xxiii. 6, 7) ; full of enthusiasm, able to speak wondrously in tongues, and to rise to visionary and ecstatic states of mind (1 Cor. xiv. 18 comp. my Apost. Zeitalter, i. p. 199 sqq.), and yet unwearied in active practical labors ; specu lative, profound, and at the same time a man of the people and a servant of the congrega- tion ; heroically strong and outspoken, and yet as tender and refined in feeling and taste as a virgin (comp. his Epistles to the Philippians and to Philemon) ; eagle-like in his universal i 2. PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE GENTILES. HISTORY OF HIS LIFK 1^ view and work, but not less considerate in his regard and care for the smallest details ; an imperious and commanding character, and yet the most dutiful servant of the Church ; a cul- tivated rabbinical theologian, and at the same time a modest workman at a trade ; burning iu his love for the Lord and his brethren, and for this very reason overpowering in his mora 'udignation and rebuke of all that was opposed to the honor of his Master ; a great Je^ nflamed by a tragic sympathy with the Jewish people (Rom. ix. 2 fiF., comp. 2 Cor. xii. 7), and nevertheless the most bitter oi)p<)nent of all Pharisaeism, old and new ; of all the apos- tles the most hated, and yet the most beloved and i^opular ; the most misinterpreted and mis- conceived (by Antinomians, Marcionites, Paulicians, etc.), and at the same time the most studied and expounded. Thus Paul has developed the most magnificent life of a hero, whom the world could neither bend nor conquer, but whom Christ overcame with a miraculous glance of his glorious revelation. (Comp. Schafp's Hist, of tJte Apost. Church, p. 441 f.) Concerning the apostolic position of Paul, two points are to be observed in particular. First of all is the fact that he did not belong to the apostles of the first foundation of Chris- tianity, but that he was charged with the apostolate of the first historical growth and expan- sion of Christianity into a universal character as the religion of the whole human race. He therefore has become, in an emphatic sense, the Apostle of evangelical reform in all succeed- ing periods of the Church. Secondly, the great opposition presented by the Pauline apos- tolate to all external legalism and stagnation in Christianity, is expressly declared in his calL He was not of the number of the historical disciples, witnesses, and chosen ones of the his- torical Christ ; not a member of the apostolic college established by Christ during his pil- grimage on earth. Hurled down as an enemy by the risen Lord in a heavenly vision, he arose at once as a witness of faith and as one of the apostles, and received his apostolic authority only in heavenly voices from the Church (Acts ix. 15) ; in his visions (Acts xxii. 31) ; in hia commisssion from Antioch, the mother church of Gentile Christianity ; in the living epistles which the Holy Spirit wrote in the form of vigorous churches of his planting (3 Cor. iii. 3 fi".) ; and in the decided recognition by the first apostles of the Lord (Acts xv. ; Gal. ii.). His apostolate remained doubtful to a great number of traditional Jewish Christians ; the most rigid Jewish Christians rejected it, and persecuted him ; and the later Ebionites loaded his memory with scorn, as an errorist and a heretic. The legalistic Christianity of the Mid- dle Ages, while professing the highest respect for the name of Paul, has persecuted his doc- trines as they have been exhibited in the principles of the Reformation, in the form of Jansen- ism, in the history of Port Royal, and in many other ways. Even in the Protestant evangelical Church there obtains a legalistic high-churchism, which, while it adheres to external legiti- macy, traditionalism, and legalism, is opposed to the principles of Christianity, and especially to the apostolate and doctrine of Paul. But, on the other hand, the antinomianism of all Christian ages has been based on a mis- understanding and misinterpretation of his doctrines. Amid these opposite extremes, there courses the mighty stream of pure blessings with which the Lord, by His Spmt, has sealed the testimony of the great Apostle to the Gentiles, and with which He will seal it to the end of time. Thus Paul will still maintain his position with the other apostles in the Church of Christ. Yet we would not deny the measure of truth in the viow of Schellikg, that, as far as the prevailing type of the Church is concerned, the Petrine Church of the Middle Ages was fol lowed by the Pauline Church of Protestantism, and that the perfection will hereafter appear in the Church of the Johannean type. It would be a great misunderstanding, however, to conceive of this type as a syncretism of Judaizing legalism and Pauline freedom. The higher synthesis of the genuine Petrine and the genuine Pauline theology can only be found in th« deeper ideal development of the revelation of the law and the Spirit, as set forth by John. Observations. — 1. The natural disposition of the Apostle must be characterized as »n even harmony of various temperaments and gifts in genial fulness and strength, and inspired by a heroic energy and vitality of soul. By virtue of this energetic vitality the same mac could always remain consistent and true, and yet become all things to all men ; he could 14 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. stand and shine first in this and then in that pole of his wondciful endowments; at this moment in ccsttisy, at the next as a practical man of action ; now reminding us of the con- templativeness of a John, then of the fiery energy of a Peter ; now musically lyrical in style, then acutely dialectical even to the subtlest distinctions ; though possessing a tragical national sympathy for his people in his heart — the depth where his natural melancholy was reflected and transformed — he was as suscejjtible of joyous sentiments as a child, or rather aa a man in Christ, in whom the freshest imijulses of a sanguine temper were consecrated to God. And how powerful he was in holy indigniition and wrath ! If the phlegmatic tem- perament consisted in cold indiS"erence and dulnoss of sj^irit, Paul would be entirely free from it ; but if we understand by it a natural clisioosition to perseverance, and tough tenacity, we must see that in this resjject also he was richly endowed. His endowments reciprocally equalized and attempered themselves in his person as charismata^ or gifts of the Spirit, as ha himself desired (1 Cor. xii.) that all the various endowments should harmonize and concen- trate in the Church. 2. The rich literature m connection with Paul and his theology is enumerated in the bibliographical' works of Walch {Bihl. Theol., iv. p. 663 sqq.) ; Winer {Handhuch der theol. Literatm\ i. p. 252 fl'., pp. 294, 567; Supplement, p. 39); Datsiz {Lrmersalworterhuch der theulog. Literntttr, p. 740 ff. ; SupiDlement, p. 30) ; in the well-known Introductions to the New Testament [by De We'.tte, Credner, Reuss, Bleek, Guericke, Davidson], a- well as the approjjriate commentaries. Besides, we must also compare the works on the Apostolic Age by Neander, Schaff, Thiersch, Lange, Lechler, Ritschl, Ewald ; also the works [of Schmidt, Van Oosterzee, etc.] on the Biblical theology of the New Testament. Against Baur's Apostle Paul [2d edition, by Zeller, 1867, in 2 vols.] is especially directed the work of Lechler, already referred to [also, in great part, Wieseler, on the Chrotiology of the Ajjost. Age]. Of the many pj'actmil works on the Apostle Paul, we may mention : Menken, Glances into the Life of the Apiostle Pavl and the First Christian Congregation (Bremen, 1828) ; Ad. MoNOD, Tlie Apostle Paul, Five Sermons (2d ed., German, Elberfeid, 1858 [also in English]) ; Naumann, Paulus — Hie First Victories of Christianity (Leipzig) ; Besser, Paul (Leipzig, 1861); M. Kahler, Paul, the Servant and Messenger of Jesus of Nazareth (Halle, 1862); Oswald, The Missionary Work of Paul (2d ed., Stuttg., 1864) ; Hausrath (semi-ratinnal- istic), The Apostle Paul (Heidelberg, 1865). The life of the great Apostle has also been illus- trated by poems, songs, and dramas. [Of English works, besides those already mentioned, Paley's Uoroi Paulince, Lord Lyttleton on the Conversion of St. Paul, and James Smith's Voyage and Shiptwrech of St. Paul (London, 1848), deserv^ special mention as illustrating ])ar- ticular points, and strongly corroborating the historical onaracter of the Acts and the Epis- tles. The instructive and entertaining descriptive v-ork of Conybeare and Howson is generally known in America as well as' in England, and admirably adapted for the theo- logical lay reader. Comp. also the literature at the close of the article Paul in Smith's Dictionary of the Bible. — P. S.] S 3. THE EPISTLES OF PAUL. A. Their Historical Order. If we except the Pastoral Letter of the Apostolic Council of Jerusalem about the year 53 [50], the two Epistles to the Thessalonians are the oldest New Testament epistles. They were written from Corinth in the year 54 or 55, not long after the establishment of the con- gregation, and in consequence of the chiliastic excitement of the same during the second missionary journey of the Apostle. The Epistle to the Galatians was written about 56-57, in Ephesus, during the third missionary journey. The two Epistles to the Corinthians were written by Paul from Ephesus and Macedonia, about the year 58 ; and soon afterwards, about the year 59, he composed the Epistle to the Romans, from Corinth. Between the years 62-64, if not a little earlier, the Epistles to ^he Ephesians, Colossians, and Philemon were vritten; and toward the close of the first Ro aan caj^tivity, the Epistle to the Philippians. A -ittle later still, the Epistle to the Hebrews proceeded from the company of Paul, about contemporaneously with the Gospel of Luke and the Acts of the Apostles. The First Epistle to Timothy and the Epistle to Titus must be assigned to the interval between the first and second captivity, 64-66. The last of the Pauline Epistles, the Second to Timothy, was writ- ten about the year 67. As to the untenableness of the hypothesis of a Third Epistle to the Corinthians, as well as of an Epistle to the Laodiceans, diflferent from the Epistle to the Ephesians, comp. my Apost. Zeitalter, i. p. 205 [and Dr. Wing, in Com. ost. Zeitalter, ii. p. 211). Certain critics have missed also another Epistle to the Philipi^ians (De Wette, p. 271). Compare the article in Herzcg's Heal' EncydopcBdie, Pseudepigraphen des Neuen Testaments. The false Acts, which have been attrib- uted to Paul, are : Acta Petri et Pauli ; Acta Pauli et Theclrn. The Ebionites, moreover, have caricatured the portrait of the Apostle Paul in the most shameful manner, and stamped him with the likeness of a heresiarch (see Neander, Kirchengesch., 3d ed., i. 198). Appendix. — The criticism of the school of Baur proceeds really on two pre-suppositions, with which the founder has alienated himself from the Christian standpoint, and surrendered himself fully to a pantheistic philosophy. Baur has evidently designed to compensate for his want of respect for the matter and spirit of revelation, by a superstitious yielding to the masters of !-cience ; and his success was facilitated by the fact that his great learning and subtle acuteness, or his mere scholarly attainments, have served to hide his far greater inca- pacity of judgment concerning the phenomena of actual life ; and that gravity of his inquiry and method has blinded the readers to his frivolous undervaluing of the religious and even of the moral spirit of the Biblical writings. His superstitious veneration for the mere method and forms of science was already apparent in his Symbolik iind MythuJogie, whfch he wrote while yet a follower of ScHLEiEifMACHER, in the year* 1824-'25. To whom else than to him could it ever have occurred to divide such a historical work after the scheme of Schleier- macher's Dogmatics, and to describe, first, " the pure and universal feeling of indepen- dence," and then " the antithesis of sin and grace which enter into the religious conscious- ness ? " Such a disciple of Schleiermacher, after he had become a follower of Hegel, nmst, with the same slavish superstition for science, and with the same want of perception of the peculiarity of the object pervert, by his Ebionitic hypothesis, the evangelical and apostolic § 4. THE CHARACTER OF THE PAULINE EPISTLES. 17 history, according to the Hegelian misconception of the development of life and history. Under such circumstances there could, of course, be no proper discrimination of the ditl'ereut conceptions of imperfection and jjerfection, nor any true appreciation of original and new historical principles and factors. But his yielding was only a partial one, so long as he was not fully immersed in the pantheistic view of Hegel ; or rather, it appeared only partial so long as he did not, with SxitAra.? and his school, apply this view to tbe evangelical histoiy and its witnesses, in order to md/^e them upon the principle that miracles arc impossible, lu the end, his superstition, wliich Le bad transferred from SciiLEiERMACiiKR to Hegel, led hLn\ to tbe belief that his own science and sch'jol were infallible. Sucli a spirit of scliolastic superstition, which gradually arose to fanaticism, was naturally connected with a great want oi' practical common sense, and an incapacity of judgment con- cerning the real facts of lifj. We pass by the first indication of the same, the entire absence of faith ; for " taith is not given to every man." We do not speak, therefore, of a defect of religious, but of scientific and moral judgment. As far as the scientific appreciation of objective facts is concerned, we ask once mori3: How can a scholar write a history of mytliolixjy and religion according to the classification of Sciileiermacher's Bogmatua f Further, bow can a scholar, endowed with sound judgment, write a history of tbe Chriatian Gnosis, and make an unheard-of leap from the old Gnostics clear over the whole Middle Ages (Scholastics and Mystics), down to Jacob lioihni, with a very superficial touch on Manichseism and on Augustine ? How can one write a history of the doctrine of the atonement, which should have its point of departure in the Gnostic dualism, and its aim in the Hegelian system ? If this can be accomplished, then truly can tbe history of the doctrine of the Trinity, as well as of tbe inmrnation of God, be made to run out into the desert of Hegelian pantheism. If tliis be possible, then can one easily interpret historical deeds allegorically (the Epistle to Philemon, for example), and, on the other hand, explain literally what is really an allegorical composition (the Apocalypse). Tbe worst of all inadequacies are moral ones. It betrays a very perverted taste, when one can regard tbe Gnostics as a central force of development in tbe conflict between the Pauline and Johannean theology ; and likewise, when one so far misconceives the old distinction between apocryphal and canonical writings as to think that a religious romance of later date, falsely called the Clementine Homilies, is made a proper standard for the adjudication of the Biblical writings. But it is worst of all to attribute to the Biblical books studied and inten- tional tendencies of human parties, and even crafty fabrications. In this respect, Baur and his school have far transcended even Strauss. This is a psychological phenomenon, which can only be saved from the charge of immorality by the largest stretch of charity, and the assumption of an excessive scholastic fanaticism in the treatment of difficult critical problems. On these premises the value and probable fate of Baur's criticism of the New Testament writings, which has spread like an avalanche in Eastern Switzerland, France, and Holland, is easily determined. This false system has arisen from a diseased, superstitious worship of modern philosophy and criticism, and developed into maturity. But it is doomed to utter destruction, since it has no root in the objective facts of revelation and of the kingdom of God, but is chiefly grounded in the pantheistic and abstract idealistic conceptions of modem culture. We do not say, in the sound culture itself. The only plausible occasion and excuse of this false system is the fact that the ideality and the universality of the historical Christ, togetlier with His roots and ramifications throughout the whole human race, have not always been sufficiently appreciated in the orthodox theology of the Church. The beginning of a Detter appreciation does not certainly belong to tbe school of Baur, but only the heretical perversion and defacement of the same.* % 4. THE CHARACTER OF THE PAULINE EPISTLES.— HERMENEUTIC HIXTS. According to Tholuck {Epistle to the Homans, p. 22), strength, fulness, and fre are the spiritual characteristics of the Apostle, and they are reflected in his style. He adduce* two statements from the early Church concerning the Apostle's manner of speech. The first * [Ttis appendix is condensed in the translation, with unessential omissions. In the preface to the second edition^ and in self-defence against Schenkel, Dr. Lange suppoits this severe judgment by a number of quotations from Baur's work on Paul, which it is uiinecessaiy to insert here. Baur and the Tubingen School are not likely ever to acquire the importance which they enjoyed in Germany for a brief period. This school is simply a modem phase of Gnosticism (i//ev6w>T)fios vviats, 1 Tim. vi. 20), and, like the Gnosticism of the second century, it lias been overruled for a good purpose, in stirring up the Church to a deeper investigation and defence of the primitive records of Christianity, which have already come out triumphant, with new gains of knowledge, of this as of every other trial. I say tbia with all due respect for t*ie genius and learning ot Baur, and the value of his masterly historical criticism, where it iocs not touch matters of faith which he did not understand (1 Cor. ii. 9-16). — P. S.J 2 18 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. Is by St. Jeuome, Epist. 48 ad Pammacldum^ c. 13: '•'■ Paulum profemm^ quern quotieacumqut lego, videor mihi non verba audire sed tonitrua. Videntur quidem verba simjdicia, et quasi inno* centis Iwminis ac rusticani, et qui nee facere nee declinare noverit insidias, sed quocunque respexeris, fulmina aunt. Scei'et in causa; capit omne, quod tetigerit ; tergum vej'tit, ut sujjeret ; fwjam simulate ut occidat. The second statement, from Chrysostom, De Sacerdotio, i. 4, 7, comjjarea the Apostle to an iron -wall, which surrounds, with liis Epistles, the churches of the whole world ; and to a noble military chieftain, who leads captive all modes of thought, and brinpfs them into subjection to faith, etc. Thollxk adds, that Paul is lauded as a master of eloquence in a fragment of the heathen critic Longlnus. though critics have declared the passage doubtful (see Hug, Einl. iri's N. T., ii. p. 334). TuoLUCK then proceeds to say : " With these oratorical gifts there are connected also defects ; namely, an excessive conciseness and pregnancy of expression, and carelessness in the formation oi' sentences, which produce those numerous anacolutha (?). This leads us to the hermeneutical question, which has an important doctrinal bearing, whether these pecu- liarities of form are at all detrimental to the clearness and definiteness of the thought. In this respect, no commentator has uttered more severe complaints against the Apostle than RucKERT (comp. his ChristUche P/iilosophie, ii. p. 401, and the introduction to the first edition of his Commentary on the Romans)." t Tholuck very justly remarks against Ruck- ERT, that defects of style do not nectjssarily arise from obscurity of thought on the jiart of the author, " least of all with intuitire, and at the same time fervid characters. The think- ing of Paul is intuitive, but coupled with acute penetration, which was refined and sharpened by rabbinical culture almost to the excess of subtlety ; therefore, when there is a want of logical clearness in his writings, we must seek the cause partly in the overflow of his abun- dant ideas, and partly in the impatience of his vivacity." We must distinguish, he says, difficulty from obscurity. But when Tholuck advances the opinion, that no writer of later times stands so near the Apostle in excellencies and defects as Hamakn, we must hesi- tate to accept the conjunction. Paul's obscurity proceeds from a fulness of vital energy, and is really only the result of a quick movement, of a clear profundity, and of a perfect origi- nality ; and must certainly be distinguished from the obscurity of a one-sided scholastic taste and defective and perverted style. Tholuck maintains the perfection of the Pauline thought, while he acknowledges an imperfection of expression. Against this view, R. Rothe, of Heidelberg [died 1867], has raised his voice in his acute essay, JSfew attempt to elucidate the Pauline passage^ Rom. v. 12-21. " According to Rothe, the apparent irregularity of Paul's style arises solely from the depth and acuteness of his thoughts, fi'oni the carefully-wrought elaboration of bis purpose, and from that preciseness of expression which, the more studied it is, the more easily it approaches abruptness." Tholucx cites a similar expression of Baur (p. 24), but endorses, on the contrary, the view of Calvin: Quin potius singulaj'i Dei procidentia J attum est, ut suh contemptibili verborum humilitate altissima hoEC mysteria nobis traderentur, ut non humanae, eloquentice potentia, sed sola spiritus efficacia niteretur nostra fides. In favor of this interpretation, Tholuck makes use of the Apostle'a own declaration, 1 Cor. ii. 1 ; 2 Cor. xi. 6. The second passage does not belong here at all, and the first has an ironical sound, and does not prove what Tholuck designs to estab- lish by it. In the treatment of this question the following points must be especially taken into consideration : 1. The New Testament idiom generally is now no longer regarded merely as the lowly * [The oricinal Psammachiam, even in the second edition, is evidently a double error of the printer; the one if borrowed from Tholuck, \. c. Pammnchius was a Roman senator and fiiend of Jerome.— P S \ \ [In this presumptuous disposition to ci-iticise St. Paul, RftKEET lias found an Kngleh imitator in Professoi JowBTT, who thinks it necessary to qualify what he considers to be a blind anil undiseriminating .idmiration of tha ■postle, and who misrepresents him as a confused, though profound thinker, who uttered himself " in broken words anj hesitating forms of speech, with no beauty or comeliness of style." But such paradoxiodi views are quite isolated, especially in England and America, and are not likely to unsettle the established estimate which Christendom, Greeks tiatln, and Evangelical, has set upon the great apostle of the Gentiles for these eighteen hixndred years.— P. S.] S 4. THE CHARACTER OF THE PAULINE EPISTLES. 19 " form of a servant " (Phil. ii. 7), compared with the classic language ; hence there is no more reason why the Pauline expression and style should be regarded in this light when comparec with the classic method of composition ; provided we do not apply here the standard of the taste and judgment of the world. The New Testament idiom in general is a pneumatic development or transformation of the Grecian language. The apostolic expression has tliu? the prerogative of its special peculiarity, conditioned by its new spiritual life. This peculiarity may be regarded in the main as the free commingling of Hebrew directness and Hellenic accommodation ; or, in other words, as the primitive Christian style, whoso characteristics are the highest simplicity and vivacity in coiijujiction with the liighcst penetration and consecration of soui. 2. Down to tlie present time the comijrehension of the Biblical books has been essentially retarded by regarding them too little as original creations, and by inquiring too little into their fundamental thoughts. Several critics have applied to them the conception of ordinary book-making and book-writing, and even of book-patching— a conception which is utterly antagonistic to all understanding of the historical books of the Old Te.^itament and of the New Testament Gospels, and which also prevents a proper comprehension of Biblical insi^ira- tion. "We should conclude thus : The fundamental thought of the book is inspLi-ed by the Spirit of revelation, according to the measure of the degree of revelation in the Old Testa- ment, and of the link of revelation in the New Testament ; but all the single portions of the book are immediately inspired — that is, animated and controlled by its fundamental thought ; therefore, also mediately inspired by the Spirit of revelation. But among the prevailing conceptions, the Rabbinical, lifeless, atomistic, scholastic view of the book, is reflected in the picture of the book. The dead conception casts its dark, spiritless shade upon the living object. So long, therefore, as we do not here ajjply the conception of single spiritual organ- isms, we cannot distinguish the whole from the paits, nor the parts from the whole. Most of our definitions, divisions, and anatomical dissections of Biblical books furnish the proof that our theology has not yet reached the scientific staniipoint which Cuvier attained in natural science (palaeontology) ; for he knew how to construct the whole figure of the animal from a single fossil bone. In support of this opinion, we need only to recall the opinions of Schlei- ERMACHER ou the Epistlc of James, De Wette's view of the Epistle to the Ephesians, and Baur's representation of the Ejiistle to the Romans, which he made to lie comjwehended in chapters ix., x., and xi. Ruckert likewise professes to find in the Epistle to the Romans, and in other books, certain obscurities and confused statements — in which charges Fritzschb justly recognizes the obscurities of the critic himself. The acceptance of numerous digres- sions on the part of Paul is well known ; and even Tholuck does not regard the Epistle to the Romans quite free from them. As far as the organic unity of the Pauline Epistles is concerned, we would make the fol- lowing statements as a guide : (a.) Every Pauline Epistle has a clearly-defined fundamental idea which controls the entire lontents of the Epistle. (b.) This fundamental thought shapes not only the division, but also the introduction and conclusion, and even pervades all the slender threads. (c.) The introduction is determined by the Apostle's method, which seizes the appropriate point of connection with a congregation or a person, in order to develop the argument into its full proportions. (d.) The introduction is followed throughout by a fundamental or didactic theme (propo- sition), which the Ajjostle proceeds dogmatically to elaborate. (e.) This elaboration arrives at a final theme, from which the practical inferences are care- fully drawn. (/.) The conclusion corresponds so exactly to the fundamental thought of the Epistle, that it is reflected in all the single parts. We shall illjMtrate these principles by presenting our analysis of the Epistle to the 20 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMAXS. Romans, But we must first be allowed to make some observations ou the remaining Paulim Epistles.* The fundamental theme of the First Epistle to the Corinthians is a determination of the proper condition of a Christian congregation, as made one by the name of the Lord Jesui Christ, in opposition to the character and shades of partisanship ; chap, i. 9-12, The finaJ theme is, accordingly, a recommendation of stability and of a sound growth in conscioua hope ; chap. xv. 58. In the first part of the execution Paul shows that he, with his funda- mental preaching, would yet not have the church become Pauline in any sectarian or partisan sense ; chap. i. 13-iv. 20. He furnishes at the same time, in an apologetic form, a polemical argument against the partisan attachment to Apollo. The second part opposes the different forms of antinomianism that arose mainly from a misconception of the Pauline doctrine of freedom, chap. v. 1-xi. 1. (Disorderly marriages. Heathen tribunals. Whoredom. Mixed marriages. Meals made of idolatrous offerings. True and false freedom. Meat offered to idols.) In the third part those errors are discussed which prevailed chiefly among the Petrine Judaizing Christians, chap. xi. 2-chap. xiv, (The dress of the synagogue in tlie congrega- tion. Separatism at the communion. Jewish self-boasting, especially with regard to the gift of tongues.) The fourth part teaches the real resurrection in opposition to the spiritualism of the " Christ-Party " (^tle to the Corinthians, the true unity of a Christian congregation endowed with the gracious gifts of the Spirit, he portrays, in the Secokd Epistle TO the Corinthians, in form of self-defence, the proper official functions in relation to a con- gregation. The fundamental theme, chap. i. 6, 7. The unity of the Apostle with the congre- gation in all his official sufferings and joys with reference to the visit which he designed to make to them. The final theme is a demand that the congregation should be so built up by the Apostle's word, that his visit to them might be a source of joy and not of sorrow, chap. xii. 19-21. 1. The Apostle's official sufferings, chap i. 8-chap. ii. 13. (His sufferings in Ephesus, and their prayers for him. His distress at being prevented from visiting the Corinthians forthwith to do them good. His affliction at the previous letter, an evidence of his love. Removal of the sorrow by the restoration of the penitent. His care for them.) 2. The Apostle's official joys, chap. ii. 14-chap. iv. 6. (His triumphs in Christ. His epistle of com- mendation, the Corinthian Church. The splendor of the New Testament office, and it3 glorious strength which supports the official incumbents themselves. The enjoyment which his office afforded.) 3. Official sufferings and joys in close conjunction, chap. iv. 7-chap. vii. 16. (The life of the apostles in its contrasts. Their death the life of the Church. Their pil- grimage below, their home with the Lord. Their zeal in the love of Christ. Their condition in the new life. Their message of reconciliation. The conduct of the Apostle in his service of God should bless the Church by awakening and encouraging it to holiness. Certainly thia should be the case, after the cheering report that the Apostle had received from Titus of the effect of his First Epistle.) 4. The common sufferings and joys of the office and the congre- gation, and their effect in creating sympathy and benevolence, chap. viii. 1-chap. x. 1. (The example of the Church in Macedonia. Official tenderness and prudence in suggesting and encouraging a collection, and in the institution of the diaconate. Encouragement and ♦ The harmonious fundamental thoughts of the Epistles everywhere result from a combination, of the funlamenta' •od final themes in conuection with the introduction and conclusion. 8 4. THE CHARACTER OF THE PAULINE EPISTLES. 2f promises.) 6. The defence of the office in opposition to the charges made against it vhicli threatened to sunder the office and the congregation, chap. x. 2-chai3. xii. 18. (Pnidence in the official or self-defence of the Apostle. The epistolary form is the expression of forbear- ance, but not of cowardice or inequality in conduct. Enforced expression of self-rei'pect in contradistinction from vain self-praise. Tlie liability of congregations to be misled by falsfl apostles. The unselfishness of the Apostle in contrast with their selfishness. The painful self-defence that was wrung from him. His works and his weakness. His contemplation and ecstacies, and the thorn in his flesh. His signs and wonders in the midst of them, Hia self-denial and readiness to be ofi'ered for the Church. Also in the sending of Titus.) The final theme, chap. xii. 19, 20. The execution : a demand of the congregation that they be so equipped as not to need the painful exercise of his official discipline, chap. xiiL 1-10. The introduction : the point of connection. Praise to God for a common comfort in a common sorrow. The conclusion : a reminder to reciprocal consolation in harmonious action. The fundamental theme of the Epistle to the Galatians is the solemn establishment of the Pauline gospel for the Galatian Church, in view of its departure from the same, by a conditional anathema pronounced against those who preach a heterogeneous gospel, chap, i. 0-9. The admonition made in the final theme corresponds to this — chap. v. 1— to stand fast in the liberty, and not to be entangled again in the yoke of legal justification. Develop- ment of the fundamental theme. The Apostle proves the worth of his gospel : 1. By hia divine apostolic call and independence, chap. i. 10-24. 2. By the recognition of the con- gregation at Jerusalem, and of the " pillar " apostles, chap. ii. 1-10. 3. By the yielding of Peter to his evangelical principle, chap. ii. 11-21. 4. By the personal experience of the Galatians, chap. iii. 1-5. 5. By the character of the Old Testament itself, namely, by the relation between Abraham with the promise, and Moses with the law, chap. iii. 6-24. 6. By the proof that the law, as a schoolmaster, has been abrogated by the coming of Christ, chap, iii. 25-chap. iv. 7. Paul then makes an application of these arguments : 1. To the aberra- tion of the Galatians, chap. iv. 8-16. 2. To the false teachers, vers. 17, 18. 3. To himself, and his disturbed relation to them, vers. 19, 20. 4. His address to the sticklers for the law, and his conviction of them by the law, chap. iv. 21-27. 5. His ad(bs30 to the brethren in the faith. Reference to the contradiction between the bond and the free, vers. 28-31. — De- velopment of the final theme : Stand fast in the liberty of Christ, a. The consequences of legal circumcision maintained as a doctrinal principle, chap. v. 2-13. l. Warning of a mis- conception and abuse of freedom. The law, in its truth, is transformed into the law of love and of the Spirit, chap. v. 14-24. c. The evidence of the life in the Sijirit as the law of freedom, in the practice of the virtues of love, humility, meekness, etc., for the restoration of true conduct by all. The antagonism between sowing to the flesh and sowing to the Spirit, chap. v. 25-chap. vi. 11. The conclusion, vers. 11-18 : A reminder of his grief which expressed itself also in a repeated warning, preaching of the cross, and a conditional invoca- tion of blessing. Reference to the last word, ver. 17. Appeal to their spirit, ver. 18. There is no need of showing how perfectly the short exordium — where the point of connection significantly disappears or is clothed in the expression of surjirise, ver. 6 — corresponds to the whole epistle. The Epistles to the Ephesians and Cot ossians represent the absolute unity in Christ, to which all the faithful, and with them all humanity and the world, are called. Their diffier- ence, however, consists in this : the Epistle to the Colossians derives this unity from the fact that Christ is the principle, the npxhi of all life, as well of creation as of resurrection ; and this is done in opposition to the Colossian errorists who, with Christ, would also honor the 'angels as vital agents and mediators, and who constructed a dualistic antagonism between spirit and matter. The Epistle to the Ephesians, on the other hand, represents Christ as the re'Xoy, the glorified head, in whom all things are comprehended after the eternal purpose of God. Accordingly, these Epistles, though possessing great external resemblance, yet stand in an internal harmonious contrast, as the Alpha and Omega in Christ, which is highlj 22 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS adapted to explain tlie relation of the elementary points of agreement and disiigreemeni among the synoptical evangelists. The Ejiistle to the Colossians institutes as its fundamental theme, the truth : Christ, aa the imago of God, is the dpxrj, the npcoToroKos, the author both of the first creation and of the second — the resurrection, chap. i. 15-18. To this the final theme correspond.s : Having risen with Christ, look forward toward the heavenly riches in the glorified Christ, chap, iii, 1, 2. Development of the fundamental theme : In Christ there is all fulness. Absolute reconciliation, even of the heathen, for the evangelization of whom the Apostle sutlers and labors, being deeply concerned that they might become one in Christ. Consequently, ha warns them against false teachers who make divisions between Christ and the angels, Jewish Christians and Gentile Christians, sjiirit and body, and who, by a false spirituality, fall into carnal lusts, chap. i. 19-chai). ii. 23. The final theme : Looking for the unity with the heavenly Christ in expectation of the revelation of his future glory. Inferences : Laying aside of fleshly lust. Unity in the life of the new man. The virtues of the life in Christ. Sanctificatiou of the domestic life, of a home to the unity in Christ. Communion of prayer, also with the Apostle and his work. The proper course toward the world in accordance with this prayer, chap. iii. 1-chap. iv. 6. Conclusion : Sending of Tychicus. Recommendation of Onesimus. Greetings. Occasion of community of life with the Ephesian circle, vers. 7-18. The conclusion as well as the introduction is also here in full accordance with the fundamental thought. The connecting point of the introduction lies in chap i. 4, 5, together with t; e praise of Epaphras and the invocation of blessing, as well as the common thanks- giving for the redemjjtion which has established a new standpoint. Th-^ fundamental theme of the Ej^istle to the Ephesians represents the risen and glorified Christ as the object eternally appointed, and openly declared such by the calling of the faithful, and as the head of the congregation for the comprehension and unity of all things, chap. i. 20-23 (a truth designed to console and cheer the Church of Asia Minor). To this the final theme corresponds, chap. iv. 1-6. The unifying power of Christ declared in the fuiadamcntal theme has shown itself; (a.) In the heathen becoming with the Jews one house- hold of God. (&.) It exhibits itself in the joy with which Paul, in conformity with the mani- fes'ation of the eternal mystery of their election, invites them to the gospel salvation and sufifers for them. It should, therefore, manifest itself also in the joy and hope of the Ephe- sians, Accordingly, the Ephesians, chap. iv. 1-6, should preserve the unity of the Spirit, (a.) The gracious gifts of the individual, as an assigned endowment, is a bond of unity and not a ground of separation, vers. 7-10. (k) The oflicial organism is appointed to train up all to the perfect manhood of the body of Christ, vers. 11-16. (c.) This unity requires the separation from the heathen sinful lusts by the renewal of the life, chap. iv. 17-chap. v. 14. (1. Proper conduct toward every man, truth, meekness, justice, chastity of speech, spirituality, free- dom from passion, kindness and philanthropy, love. 2. Avoiding of heathen vices.) (d.) It demands prudence, redemption of the time, caution, and a zeal which does not come from exciting stimulants, but by spiritual songs and thanksgiving, chap. v. 15-20. (e.) It demanda reciprocal submission and a sacred harmony of domestic life, chap. v. 21-chap. vi. 9. (/.) It demands watchfulness, energy, equipment, self-defence, and war against tlie kingdom of Satan, chap. vi. 10-17. On the other hand, the advancement of the kingdom of God in all saints and in the work of the Apostle by prayer and intercession, vers. 18-20. The conclusion characterizes this sermon on Christian unity as a message for solace and encouragement by Tychicus, in connection with the sufferings of the Apostle. And in the same sense must we understand the magnificent doxology of the introduction, with its invocation of blessings. In the Epistle to the Philippians the difterence between the didactic and parenetic word appears but slightly, since the entire Epistle is pervaded by the feeling of the personal com- munity of the Apostle with the Church at Philippi. Nevertheless, even here it may be observed. In the words, chap. i. 8-11, he speaks of his heart's desire that his dear Church Bhould become perfect in e^ ery respect unto the day of Christ ; that it might abound more and more, be purified, and be filled unto the glory of God. To this the final theme cone § 4. THE CHARACTER OF THE PAULINE EPISTLES. 2S BponJs, chap. iv. 1. The call : that they might continue to he his joy and crown in the Lord The fundamental thought, the principal theme, discloses itself first in the communication of bis experience at Rome, and of his state of mind in consequence thereof, because he designee" that the Philippians, by virtue of their wider unity with liim, should avail themselves of it ia their own experience, chap. i. 12-30. Then he exhorts them to improve their unity by means of the humility of every individual, in imitation of the example of the humble self-humiliation of Christ — a passage which gives this Epistle a specifically christological character, though it is viewed in its ethical aspect and bearing, chap. ii. 1-11. Next to humility, the Church should increase its inner spiritual tension and efforts, vers. 13-16, stimulate the members to rejoice with him, — for which purpose he will also send Timothy to them, as he sends Ej^a- phroditus, chap. ii. 17-chap. iii. 1. But then, too, the experience which he had madb m Rome concerning the opposition of the Judaizers (chap. i. 15) causes him to warn tflein decidedly, — after the intimation of chap. i. 28, — against their plots, with reference to hi» own relation to them, chap. iii. 2-6. Then follows the declaration how far he had left the legalism of these opponents behind in his knowledge of Christ, his faith in justification by free grace, and his struggle after perfection, unto the resurrection of the dead and the life in hearten ; in •which respect they, too, should be his companions against the enemies of the cross ot Christ, chap. iii. 7-21, The explication of the final word indicates pointedly to that wnich the Apostle had occasion to censure. A disagreement between Evodias and Syntyche must be removed ; elements of oppression, bitterness, anxiety, and division must disappear; the mem- bers must be like the Apostle in continual striving after what is good, chap. iv. 2-9. With this reminder the Apostle also connects a high recognition of the Church's Chiistian life of love, which it had shown, now as before, by contributing to his support — a privilege which he, in his keen sense of independence, granted to no other congregation, vers. 10-20. The conclusion corresponds, with his invocation of blessing (ver. 19), to the fundnmeittal thought, and with his greeting, to the Tcey-note^ of the Epistle. The connecting point is found in ver. 6. The Epistles to the Thessaloniaks.— The First Epistle is pervaded by the fundamental thou :ht : The Lord will come speedily ; the Second, by the thought : The Lord will not yit come speedily. Both of these are in accordance with the truth ; because, in the first part, the question is concerning the coming of the Lord in his dynamic rule in a religious sense ; and in the second part, concerning the coming of the Lord in a definite historical and chronologi- cal sense. The theoretical theme of the First Epistle is contained in the words, chap. 1. 9, 10 (comp. chap. ii. 12, 16, 19, etc.). Accordingly, the whole of Christianity, particularly that of the Thessalouians, is eschatological : a waiting for the coming of the Son of God from heaven, ai the Saviour from future wrath, (a.) The labors of Paul among them have corresponded to this waiting, and their conduct amid the persecutions of the times should also correspond to it, chap. ii. 1-16. (5.) The Apostle has been careful of the condition and steadfastness of the Church, as he was so soon separated from it. His propositions to visit them again. The sending of Timothy. He has been encouraged by the account of Timothy, chap. ii. 17-chap. iii. 13. (c.) Admonition of the true course of conduct in that expectation (the true " sainta of the last day "). No polygamy, or lust of the flesh ; no separation ; no excited wandering about, instead of quiet labor, chap. iv. 1-12. (d.) Instruction concerning the relation of those who are asleep to the coming of the Lord, chap. iv. 13-18. (e.) The question after the timea and seasons. Answer : As a thief in the night, chap. v. 1-3. The practical theme : Watch, chap. V. 4. Development : According to your spiritual nature ; your daily life ; your calling ; your relation to Christ. Inferences : chap. v. 5-22. Conclusion : The invocation of blessing in harmony with the fundamental thoughts, ver. 23. Connecting point of the introduction. The Thessalouians are successors of the apostles and of the Lord by the joy of their faith, according to their hope amid many tribulations, chap. i. 8-6. In the Second Epistle to the Thessalonians the fundamental thought appciars : that the judgment of the Lord upon the world will first be matured — in consequence of the per- secution of the Christians ; and the worthiness of the faithful must be assured before th« 24 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. Lord will come for the execution of the final judgment and for the redemption of his chil- dren, chap. i. 5-8. («.) Fuller declaration as to how the maturing of the judgment is con- nected with the maturing of the faithful, chap. i. 9-12. {b.) Warning against chihastic de lusions. as if the day of the Lord were at hand in a chronological sense, chap. ii. 1, 2. (c.) Ilovi the whole development of unbelief and apostasy must precede the ajjpearance of Antichrist (comp. Matt. xxiv. 24 ; the Revelation), chap. ii. 3-14. The final word, chap. ii. 15 : Stead- fastness, according to his instructions. Inferences : Prayer for the mission of the gospel ; love and patience, discipline, industry, beneficence, and stability. The handwriting of Paul him- self as a warning against chiliastic delusions. The connecting point of the introduction : The endurance of the Thessalonians in their faith, in the midst of the persecutions, chap. i. 4. The Pastoral Epistles constitute so far a parallel to the Epistles to the Corinthians, aa that the First Epistle to Timothy, and the Epistle to Titus, teach, according to the analogy of the First Epistle to the Corinthians, how the congregation should be oflBcially watched, directed, and further developed. In the Second Epistle to Timothy, on the contrary, Paul, in anticipation of his martyrdom, instructs his puj^il to become, in his official work, his spiritual successor, and thus to reproduce the life-ijicture of the apostolic office which is portrayed la the Second Epistle to the Corinthians. The theme of the First Epistle to Timothy is the renewed scriptural ti ansmissio j of the Divine commission which the Apostle received when he was called to establish the rija] life of faith and of the Church, to Timothy, his substitute in Ephesus for that special 'sphere, chap. i. 18. Acco-rding to the measure of this commission he expresses a wish in tne preeting that he might possess a rich measure of grace, chap. i. 1, 2. Accordingly, he should remain in Ei^hesus and watch over and protect the pure doctrine against Judaistic errors and the germs of Gnosticism. The object of the preservation of orthodoxy was the edification oi the Church in piety and pure love. The pure doctrine should maintain a pure heart, a pure conscience, and a pure faith, ver. 5. The immediate occasion was chiefly the Judaizing Christian zealots for the law. Therefore the Apostle characterizes his relation to the law. If he lays great stress on the fact that he, too, had once been a blasphemer and a persecutor, he at the same time gives his true estimate of that zeal for the latter, and declares how he has been led beyond it, by the mercy of God, to become an exami^le of faith, whose ilefence he now gives over by letter to Timothy. This official call is a call (a.) to conflict, because the apostates oppose the faithful, vers. 18, 20. (5.) To the demand for universal lo\e and inter- cession for all sorts and conditions of men {in opposition to Jeivish particuJarisni), chap. ii. 1-7. (c.) To the furtherance of universal custom, according to which the women i5bv)uld not dare to announce themselves as (Judaizing) prophetesses, vers. 8-15. (d.) To the promotion of the true organization of the congregation. 1. The bishop, or, which is the tiame thing, the presbyter and his house. 2. The deacon and the deaconess. 3. The management of the house of God in general, according to its divine nature, chap. iii. (e.) i'or the settlement and fighting of the germs of error which might ripen in the future. Gnostic errors and principles, chap. iv. 1-11. (/.) For the self-guidance of the ecclesiastical officer, chap. iv. 12-16. (g.) For the proper conduct toward every one, especially according to the distinction of old and young with reference to the service of the congregation (the men, women, and widows). Special direction on the treatment of the widows in general, especially on the employment of the old widows for the good of the congregation. Special direction on the proper treatment and distinction of the elders, as well as on the proper prudence at the appointment and ordination for offices. Care over his own deportment and health (chap. v. 24, 25, is said with reference to the trial, ver. 22). Care of the sei-vants in the Church, chap. V. 1-vi. 2. The final statement, chap. iv. 3-5. Inferences : Doctrinal disputes, and then worldly motive, vers. 5-10. Renewed inculcation of the command (commission), vers. 12, 16. Concluding word, vers. 17-21. The Epistle to Tittjs. The commission which the Apostle gave to Titus for Crete, ia differently expressed from that given to Timothy for Ephesus. His chief task was the ►ppoiutment of presbyters in the single congregations, together with a further developmenl § 4. THE CHARACTER OF THE PAULINE EPISTLES. 28 of the Church at Crete, chap. i. 5. Accordingly, the Apostle describes first of all the requisites of elders, with reference, no doubt, to the new experiences at Crete, and also the intrusion of Judaizing seducers, chap. i. 6-16. Then the proper care of the congregation, and pastoral work of Titus, with reference to special relations, ages, and classes of society, chap. ii. 1-15. Finally, the guidance of Christian Cretans into proper conduct, especially in regard to the avoiding of a disturbing, quarrelsome, and passionate spirit with reference to the goodness of God in Christ, chap. iii. 1-7. The Apostle confirms this direction by his final tlieme, chap. iii. 8. It is in accordance with his statement of the requisites of the pres- byters, chap. i. 9, 10, that he forbids him from meddlhig with the scholastic controversies of the errorists, especially the legalists ; and admonishes him first to deal i^ractically with secta- rian men, and then to avoid them, vers. 9-11. The concluding word : The sending of Tychi- cus, special appointments, and greetings. The introduction is an expression of the Apostle's authority, and of the authorization of Titus. The Second Epistle to Timothy was designed, as has been already said, to conduct Timothy further into his official life, so that he, as the favorite spiritual son of the Apostle, might enter into the footsteps of the latter after his departure from this world. This is expressed by the fundamental thought, chap. i. 6-8. The Apostle strengthens this funda mental thought, first, (a.) By God's call to be saved, vers. 9, 10. (b.) By his own call to be the Apostle to the Gentiles, vers. 11, 12. (c.) By Timothy's relation as a scholar to him, vers. 13, 14. (d.) By reference to the unfaithful and the true, vers. 15-18. He then develops the fundamental thoughts, (a.) He must be strengthened by faithful co-workers, chap. ii. 1, 2. (b.) His readiness to sufler, and his endurance, after the example of Paul in imitation of Christ, vers. 3-13. (c.) Shunning the spirit of controversy. The injurious fruits of the same must be perceived (Hymeuseus, Philetus) ; and oppositions and distinctions in God's house must be rightly understood. Timothy must avoid impure persons, and all lusts and fruitless scholastic controversies ; he must honor, instruct, and restrain in the proper spirit, chap. ii. 14-26. The Apostle exhibits, finally, the fundamental thought by contrasting the future condition of the errorists and that of the apostolic disciple. The latter shall stand fast in the tradition of Paul— that is, in the New Testament, and in the Holy Scriptures— that is, the Old Testament, chap. iii. The final proposition, chap. iv. 1, 2, is a solemn transfer of his commission to the beloved disciple. Exposition: The future of the errorists and of the errors requires true apostolic men. Timothy must stand firm in the critical times, because his teacher is about to depart, vers. 3-9. But Timothy must soon come to him, since he is almost isolated. Account of his condition, vers. 9-18. Concluding word, invocation of blessings, supplements, and greetings. The introduction is in harmony with the Epistle ; an expression of intimate relationship between the teacher and the disciple, and of reliance on the inner call of the latter. As a legacy in anticipation of early death, the Second Epistle to Timothy is related to the Second Epistle of Peter. The single portions of the Epistle to Philemon group themselves about the recommenda- tion that Onesimus be received again, vers. 10-13. The preceding parts are chiefly introduc- tory to this central point ; the subsequent verses are the amplification. The conclusion, like the introduction, refers to the call of Paul and the congregation at Colosse. The directness of the Apostle, which is peculiar to him as a religious and also as a truly Hebrew genius, may be regarded as resulting from an intuitive state of mind ; yet, iii this respect, he stands below the festive contemplation of John, for the reason that he, being endowed with greater energy, exhibits a more fervent zeal and a more practical turn. The etyle of John reminds us, therefore, of the most spiritual poesy ; that of Paul, on the other hand, of the most fiery eloquence. The culture of the latter conforms to this view. Already in the school of the rabbis he had learned the rabbinical, reflective form of thought — a system of dialectics which proceeds by questions, objections, and answers, and by dedttctiones ad absurdum from the history of theocracy. But by his intercourse with the Greeks he had also learned the Grecian method of reasoning, which meets us, for example, in 1 Cor. xv. Hia own manner of expression was, however, modified by two elements, which must be taken intc 2G "THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS, proper account, if one would get rid of the unfounded prejudice concerning the aUcged burdened periods and obscure abruptness of the Apostle. The first element is the liturgical, -which arose in part from devotional reminiscences, and in part from prayerful attitudes of unusual depth, and from a lofty, adoring condition of Ms lieart. The liturtrical form frequently transcends the historical and dialectical structure of the periods, and tliis, too, in consequence of that continuity of devotional feeling which moves through a succession of rhythmic pauses. We may refer to Psalms cvii. and cxxxvi. aa specimens. The most important form of this character is the long sentence at the beginning of the Epistle to the Ephesians, vers. 3-14, which has often been misjudged by the Grecian standard, and caused so many glosses. We read it liturgically as follows : Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ : "Who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places (things) in Christ : Aeeordiug as He hath chosen us in him, before the foundation of the woild : Tliat we should be holy and without blame before Him in love : Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to Himself: According to the good pleasure of his will— to the jjraise of the glory of his grace — Wherein (in which grace) He hath made us accepced (called) in the Beloved : In whom (the Beloved) we have redemption through his blood, the iorgiveness of sins : Accoiding to the riches of his grace (—justification — ) ; Wherein (in which grace) He hath abounded toward us in all wisdom and prudence ( — the glorifica- tion on the intellectual side — ) ; Having made known unto us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure — ■\Viiich ("ood pleasure) He hath purposed in himself, in the dispensation of the fulness of times (epochs, KCUpoi) '. That He might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which (all things) are in heaven, and which (all things) are ou earth, even in Him : In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of Him who workcth all things after the counsel of his own will : That we should be to the praise of his glory, who first trusted in Christ : In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation : In whom also, after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that Holy Spirit of promise ( — which was effective also in the Old Testament promise — ): Which is the earnest of our inheritance ( — the common inheritance of God's people — ) until the re- demption (full liberation) of the purchased possession ( — from among the Jews and Gentiles — ) : Unto the praise of his glory I In the exposition of the Epistle to the Eomans, we shall make the observation that the difficulty in its concluding words can only be solved by viewing them as a liturgical form (already indicated in our statement of its contents) ; just as the difficulty in Rom. ix. 5 can only be explained by the assumption of a litiu-gical reminiscence. In the place of the burdened periods, therefore, we substitute lyrical expressions which are liturgically simple, and in i^lace of most of the supposed anacolutha, vital and vigorous brevities. As the former arose from the religious school and sentiment of the Apostle, so the latter came from his fervid vivacity and his rapid, ecstatic feeling in the midst of his daily work. In the preceding doxology we must supply a brief statement in jalace of an apparent want of connection (ver. 13). Such abridged sentences are especially noticeable in the second chapter of the Epistle to the Romans, where, in vers. 28 and 29, the expressions 'hwSmos and TTfpiToixrj have to be repeated. Therefore, with Cocceius, in Rom. v. 12, we simply take the i\a,3()fjifv from ver. 11, and put it into ver. 12, in order to explain the much-discussed anaco- luthon (Sta ToiiTo fX(i/3o/xfi') ; whereby it is to be observed that Paul used the word Xafx^dveiv emphatically in the sense of a personal, moral ajipropriation, to which the (cf) J TrdvTfi rjixaprov in ver. 12 corresponds. We can, in the main, only repeat here the characteristics already referred to. As far as the Apostle's method of representation is concerned, the peculiar feature of the so-called Pauline rhetoric must be found in the union of the strictest methodical progress of thought with the richest concrete expression ; the union of a wonderful, intuitive de])th with the most versatile dialectics, of an exalted contemplation with the most mighty practical tendency, of the § 6. THE PAULINE THEOLOGY. 27 most compreliensive view with the most minute observation, of a flight of diction ofter lyrical and festive with the severest didactic distinctions, of the most original power ol creating language (vid. the ana^ Xcov rrji roAeois elpxOrivat., ovk sfrj Kaire /nev, tuj ie 5ij naTpita i-d/aa) (Sim xP<»'/"-f>'Oi'S 6/ceAeu(re /tiij a-vvaBpoi^eaOcu), unless wa assign this decree (with Meter and Lechler, ad Act. xviii. 2) to an earlier date. At all events, the edict, if it applied to the Christians at all, can only have had a temporary effect ; for we find, a few years afterwards, a large Christian congrega- J2 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS, At the time when the Apostle wrote his Epistle to the Komans, there were in Rome manj converts who openly professed Christ (chap, i.), and met for worshij) in several liouses (chap, xvi.). [The congregation, moreover, must have already existed several years lefore 58, since Paul "these many years" {anb rrc'KXtcv tVcbr, Rom. xv. 23, comp. ver. 23 and i. 13) had a desire to visit them, and since he mentions, among the Christian teachers in Rome, such as had been converted before him, xvi. 7. — P. S.] The stock of this Christian community was no doubt of Jewish descent (iv. 1) ; but the Gentile Christian element also was considerable (Rom. xi 13 ff., 25), as we may expect in view of the large number of Jewish proselytes in Rome. W may safely assume that the Church was just as much founded by Gentile Christians from Antioch, as by Jewish Christians who witnessed the fiist Pentecost at Jerusalem. We learn, moreover, from chap, xvi., that the most prominent members of the Church were adherents of Paul, And there is every probability that Paul, in a comprehensive church policy, had prepared the way for the proper founding and organization of a united congregation in Rome, as in Ejihesus, by previously sending out faithful disciples — Aquila and his wife Pris- cilla. As these were his pioneers in Ephesus, so were they in Rome. Says Meyer [on Horn., p. 21, 4th ed.] : " As Paul had been so eminently successful in Greece, it was very natural tliat apostolic men from his school should bear evangelic truth further westward, to the metropolis of heathendom. The banishment of the Jews from Rome under Claudiua (StJETON., Clavd. 25 ; Acts xviii. 2) was a special occasion made use of by Providence for that end. Fugitives to neighboring Greece became Christians, and disciples of Paul ; and, after their return to Rome, were heralds of Christianity, and took part in organizing a con- gregation. This is historically proved by the example of Aquila and Priscilla, who, when Jews, emigrated to Corinth, lived there over a year and a half in the comjiany of Paul, and subsequently appeared as teachers in Rome and occupants of a house where the Roman congre- gation assembled (Rom, xvi. 3). Probably other individuals mentioned in chap. xvi. were led by God in a similar way ; but it is certain that Aquila and Priscilla occupied a most impor- ,tant 2)osition among the founders of the congregation ; for among the many teachers whom ;Paul greets in chap, xvi., he presents his first greeting to them, and this, too, with such flattering commendation as he bestows upon none of the rest." The much-disputed question concerning the national and religious constituents of the Roman Church is intimately connected with the question as to the occasion and aim of the Epistle to the Romans. In discussing this point, we must start with certain clear distinctions. The diflerence between Jewish Christians and Gentile Christians must not be confounded with the diflerence between non-Pauline and Pauline Christians. Aquila and Priscilla, for example, were Jewish Christians, but they belonged decidedly to the school of Paul. On the contrary, there were in the Galatian congregation Gentile Christians who permitted themselves to be estranged irom tlie Apostle Paul by the Judaizing jiarty spirit. Likewise, those weak brethren or Jewish Christians who were entangled in legalistic anxiety (daSfvels), must be distinguished from the false brethren, or heretical Ebionites, who gradually come into view ; and so must we distinguish, among the Gentile Christians, those who were genuine disciples of Paul from those who proudly advocated an antinomian freedom of conscience. Even among the rigidly legalistic Christians there arose very early an antagonism between the adherents of Pharisaic legality and Essenje holiness. It is clear, not oaly from historical relations, but also from the present Epistle, that tht national Jewish elcmieiit in the Roman Church must have been very important, and that il constituted the first basis of the Church ; see chap. ii. 17 flf. ; iv. 1 flf. ; vii. 4 S. tlon at Rome, composed of converls from the Jews and Gentiles, as is evident from the Epistle to the Romans, from the return of AauiLA and Pitiscit-LA (Item. xvi. 3), from Acts sviii. 17 ff., and from Tacitus's account of the Ncronian persecution in July, 64. Claudius issued several edicts concerning the Jews, first favorahle ones in the year 42, men- tioned by JosF.PHUs, Anclf]. xix, 5, 2, 3; then the edict of expulsion, a. d. 52 (Sueton., Claud. 25; Acts x\iii. 2), with which probably the one mentioned by Dion Cassius, Ix. (i, is identical. The silence of Josephus concerning the latter edi;t is the more easily explained from th£ fact that, like the contemporary edict de vxalhematicis Italia pelkndis (noticed by Taoitus, Annal. xiL 52). it was never fuUv executed, or else speedily recalled,— P. S.T THE ROMAN COXGKEGATIOX. 3J, At the same time, however, the Gentile Christian element in the Roman Church had become very strong, and was perhaps predominant. This we must infer from the historical relation. " Christianity, -which took root first among the Jews, found an easier entrance in Rome among the heathen, because, in Rome, the popular heathen religion had already incurred the contempt of both the cultivated and ignorant classes (see Gieselkr, Ch. Hist. i. § 11-14) ; therefore the inclination to Monotheism was very common, and the multitude of those who came over to the Jewish faith was very large (Juvenal, Satyr, x. 9G ff. ; Tacit., Ann. XV. 44 ; Hist. v. 5 ; Seneca in Augustine, De Civ. Dei, vii. 11 ; Joseph., Antiq. xviJi. 3, 5). But how much more must this liberal religion, so elevated above all the bonds ot a repulsive legal rigorism, as it was preached by Aquilas and other Pauline teachers, receive attention and support at the hands of those Romans who were discontented with heathen- dom." (Meyer.) That this was really the fact in the Roman church, is evinced by the many appeals addressed to the Gentile Christian portion, chap. i. 5, 6, 13 ; chap. xi. 13 flf. Both elements in the Church must have been strong, as appears from the fact that the Apostle places together, throughout the Epistle, Jews and Gentiles, Jewish Christians and Gentile Christians, in order to bring thera into union and harmony, as, from a different funda- mental thought, he did in the Epistle to the Ephesians. In the greetings and introduction we find Jewish and Gentile Christians spoken of with equal regard. The theme of the Epistle, chaj). i. 14-17, exj^ressly applies the gospel alike to Jews and Greeks. In the ex- position of the unrighteousness of the human race, the Gentiles and Jews are j^laced together in the light of searching truth, chap. i. 18 ; iii. 20. Likewise, justification by faith is applied in the most positive manner to Jews as well as Gentiles, chap. iii. 21-v. 11. Also the liartici- pation in the death of Adam and in the new life in Christ, chap. v. 12-viii. 39. So, likewise, the two economies of judgment and mercy in the historj^ of the world, chaps, ix.-xi. Even in the exhortation the distinction again appears ; the weak in faith and the free ; the severe and the scornful ; the weak and the stong, chaps, xiv.-xv. 7 ; yet here the other O2)position between the non-Pauline and the Pauline Christians is also taken into account. Though we cannot say with absolute certainty that the Gentile Christian portion of the Roman church was predominant, yet it is plain that the Pauline type did jaredominate in such a measure that the Apostle looked upon the church, in spirit, as his church. If we look at the single congregations in private houses, which the Apostle greets in chap, xvi., we find Aquila and Priscilla at the head of the first mentioned, which was probably the most promi- nent ; and these were Jewish Christians, and yet decidedly Pauline. Likewise the warm and friendly terms with which he greets the most of the others, prove that he could regard them as his spiritual companions in the strictest sense of the word. This can be seen here and there from the contents of the Epistle. As the Apostle regarded himself, with justice, in the most si^ecific sense, as the chosen AjDostle to the Gentiles (chap. i. 5 — a consciousness which, according to Gal. ii., involved neither a conflict with the apostles of the Jews, nor a neglect by Paul of the Jewish synagogues), he must have looked very early to the Roman metropolis as a sphere of labor designed for him. Accordingly, he designed at a very early period to establish a mission in Rome (Acts xix. 21 ; Rom. i'. 13). He also made timely preparations for the execution of this design by sending in advance his friends Aquila and Priscilla, and many other companions— among them the deaconess Phoebe, of Corinth — to Rome. For this very reason he could depart, with regard to the Romans, from his usual practice of making his personal apostolic labor jjrccede a written communication. This time he coul-d send an epistle first, and write to the Roman Christians ToKix-qporipmi uno fxepovs (chap. XV. 15) without being embarassed by the thought that he was entering upon a foreign field of labor (chap. xv. 20). Nevertheless, that delicacy with which he regarded the rights and independence of others, especially of believers, induced him to characterize his visit to Rome merely as a journey through that city to Spain. He could expect, with tolerable certaintj-, that Rome would be his principal station; but in case the prevailing peculiarities of the church should prevent this, he could not be denied in Rome the rights of Christian bo?pitality, by the aid of which he could proceed further. But the Judaizing element in 3 54 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE EOMANS. the church was not important nor fiir advanced, as appears from tlie fact that he found it necessary only to oppose legalistic anxiety- in reference to fast-days and the eating of food — not arrogant Judaistic dogmas. The congregation being composed of Jewish and Gentile Christians, it could easily occui that the theological ojiinions at one time leaned to one side, and then to another. According to Paley, Henke, Koppe, Krehl, Baitmgarten-Crusius, and Thiersch, the Jewish Christian element predominated in the church ; and Baur, favoring his well-known Ehionitic hypothesis, has attributed to the church a mild form of Ebionism.* For an txtended refutation of this view, which is sustained by a distortion of different i:)assages, see Tholuck's Eomans, p. 3 ff. Meyer, in his introduction, passes lightly over the attacks of Baur. We have no right to judge the character of the congregation at the time of Paul by the Judaizing tendencies which subsequently gained the ascendency there in conformity with the constitutional proclivity of the Roman nationality. And even in the second centuiy the Roman church, as such, cannot be charged with Ebionism (see Tholuck, p. 7). According to Neander, Ruckert, De Wette, Olshatjsen, and Meyer, the Gentile Christian element was predominant. But even Meyer confounds this view with the prepon- derance of Pauline Christianity in Rome. We must discriminate thus : The Gentile Christian element was strong, but the Pauline element was evidently preponderant. This was also the case still later, when Paul wrote his Epistle to the Philippians during his captivity in Rome, although here, as elsewhere in the churches after the year 60, the Jewish element increased in strength (Phil. i). Subsequently, the short stay of Peter in Rome, as well as the larger elective afiinity between Jewish Christianity and the Roman nationality, gradually weakened the Pauline type, and, in fine, obscured it. If there had been already a large number of Jewish Christians in Rome, how could the chiefs of the Jews speak to the Apostle when he came to Rome just as they did, according to Acts xxviii. 21, 23 ? Their answer was plainly evasive, in which they adhere to two points : that no writing of complaint against Paul had been sent to them from Jerusalem ; and that the Christians were everywhere opposed by the Jews as a sect. Batjr and Zeller have endeavored to derive from this apparent " contradiction " between the Acts of the Apostles and the Epistle to the Romans, a decisive proof of the unhistorical character of the Acts. For a refutation of this argument, see Kling, Studien und Kritiken for 1837, p. 301 ff, i Tholtjck, Comment.^ p. 10 ff. ; Meyer, p. 20 ; my Apost. Zeitalter, i. p. 106, and others. [The argument of the late Dr. Baur, and Zeller (his son-in-law), is this : The flourishing condition of the Christian Church at Rome, as described in the Epistle to the Romans (i. 8, 11, 12 ; XV. 1, 14, 15 ; xvi. 19), is irreconcilable with the tone used by the leading Roman Jews (oi npcoToi. Twv 'lovSoioji') in their answer to Paul, Acts xxviii. 21, 22, where they plead ignorance of the antecedents of the Apostle, and contemj^tuously characterize the Christian religion as a sect (mpea-n) which met everywhere with contradiction {Travraxov avriXtyeTui) ; consequently the author of the Acts must have misrepresented the real state of things in the interest of his doctrinal design, which was to effect a compromise between the Jewish Christian or Petrine, and the Gentile Christian or Pauline sections of the Church, by bringing Paul down to the Petrine or .Jewish Christian standpoint, and by liberalizing Peter, and making both meet halfway. But, in the first place, the author of the Acts (which were certainly not written before 63 or 64 — i. e, six or seven years after the Romans) must have known the Epistle to the Romans, and felt the contradiction, if there was any, as well as we, the more * [The Bame view as to the preponderance of the Jewish element has been ably defended since by W. Mangold, Der Rome.rbnef und die Arifangc der Rom. Gcvieiiide, 1S66, p. 35 ff. ; but lie justly denies the hypothesis of Daur, that the Jewish Christians in Rome were FMonites. Schott, on the contrary, differs from Bai'r and Mangold in assuming Uiat the Epistle to the Romans was mainly intended for Genlile Christians. All three agree as to the aim and ohjed ftl the Epistle, which was to justify Paul's apostolate to the Gentles, by explaining the peculiar features of his doctrine and removing the objections to it, and thus to prepare the way not only for a personal visit to Rome, but also for a new missionary activity in the West, with Pvome as the centre (comp. Mangold, I. c. p. 141). But Mangoli. abject! to SiHOTT that such a justification was ■innecessary for Genti!e Christians, and hence he presupposes Jewish ChTi» ttans.-P. S.] § 3. THE CERTIFICATION OF THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 90 as lie himself had previously mentioned the existence of the Christian congregation ii; Rome (xxviii. 15). Hence, the apiaarent contradiction, far from exposing a wilful perversion of history, only proves the simplicity and veracity of the narrative, and tends, like so many similar instances, to confirni ratlier than to weaken our faith. (3.) The verj maimer in which the Jews speak of Christianity as a sect everyuhcre spoken against, implies its general spread at that time, and so far corroborates the statement of Paul. (3.) The Jews did not say that they had never heard of Paul at all (which would be inconsistent with their own statement concerning the contradiction raised everywhere against Christianity), but only that they had received no (official) information from Palestine which affected his moral character, or waa unfavoral)U' to him personally (n n^pX aov irovrjpau). And this was no doubt true ; for the Sanhfdrin of Jerusalem could have no reason to send official communication to the Jewish community in Rome concerning the case of Paul, before he had appealed to the tribunal of Cagsar, and after this ajjpeal they could not well anticipate the arrival of the Apostle ic Rome, as he left Ciesarea soon after the appeal, at an advanced season of the year, shortly before the mare clausum (comp. Acts xxv. 13, 13 ; xxvii. 1, 9), and, in all probability, before his enemies could even make out the necessary official papers. (4.) We must not forget the diplomatic and evasive character of the answer of the Jews, who, as j^i'udent men, were reluctant to commit themselves unnecessarily before the trial, in view of the imperial court and authority, and the complicated difficulties of the case. The leaders of the Jewa appeared on this occasion in an official caj)acity, and very properly (from their own stand- point) observed an official reserve. — P. S.] 5 3. THE CERTIFICATION OF THE EPISTLE TO THE EOMANS. ITS AUTHENTICITY AND INTEGRITY. The Epistle of Paul to the Romans belongs to the most indisputable books of the New Testament. Its authenticity is certified in the strongest manner by the unanimous testimony of the ancient Church, by the harmony of its contents with the historical character of Paul, by its internal weight, and its great influence upon the Church. Even the criticism of Bauk, which rejects the most of the New Testament books, acknowledges the authenticity of this Ejjistle (with the exception of the last two chapters), besides the Epistles to the Corinthians and that to the Galatians. But here, as elsewhere, the testimony of this criticism is not of much account. Significant allusions to the Epistle can be found in the (first) epistle of Clement of Rome ; in Ignatius, Polycaef, Justin Martyr, etc. Marcion, the Gnostic, acknowl- edged it. A decided testimony in favor of this EjDistle is rendered by the three great witnesses of the Church and of the New Testament in its principal parts — Iren^us, Tertullian, and Clement of Alexandria. Origen wrote a commentary on this Epistle. Even the fact that the Judaizing sects rtgected it, sjDeaks indirectly in its favor ; they hated the Pauline doctrine contained in it.* On the other hand, the integrity of the Ejjistle has been variously opposed. Marcion rejected chaps, xv. and xvi. on doctrinal grounds. Heumann, in his exposition of the New Testament, maintains that the Epistle closed, as a first epistle, with chap, xi., and that the subsequent part is a new work of Paul. Semler wrote : De duplici adpcndice Ejnstolce Fauli ad Romanos. According to Paulus of Heidelberg, chap. xv. is a special epistle to the enlightened Christians in Rome ; chap. xvi. is a special writing to the officers. Diverse, and, in fact, very strange conjectures have been advanced by ScnuLZ and Scuott on chap. xvi. J. C. Chr. Schmidt denied the genuineness of the doxology, chap. xvi. 35-27, because it is wanting in Codex F. etc. ; because it is erased in other corlices ; and because, in Codex J., and in almost all the Minuscule MSS., it stands after chap. xiv. 23, Reiche supposes that the * More recentlj-, the Englishman Evanson, in his book on the Viscrepnncies of the Four Gospels, has incidentally attacked the genuineness of the Epistle to the Romans, with trMiug remarks unworthy of refutation ; besides him, Bri/NO Bauer [a half-cracked pseudo-critic of Berlin, not to be confounded with the £xr superior Dr. Ferdinand CBai» riAN Badb of Tubingen.— P. S.] 36 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. public reading of the Epistle sliould only extend to chap. xiv. 23, because what follows is oi less practical importance, and for this reason the former part has been concluded by the dnx ology, which subsequently was made to conclude the whole Epistle. It would have been mora appropriate to reason : Since the i^ublic reading was often concluded with chap. xiv. 23, the doxology was transferred from the end of the. whole Epistle to this place. This would explain the fact that it is to be found, in later codices, after chap. xiv. 23. Baur, in hi? treatise on the Purpose and Occasion of the Epistle to the Romans, declares chaps, xv. and xvi. of the Epistle to be ungenuine. Certainly these chapters interfere with the aiiplicatioD of his Ebionitic hypothesis to the condition of the Roman church. He was refuted by Kletg in the Studien und Kritilcen (1837, No. 2), and by Olshausen (1838, No. 4). Even the circumstance that the pseudo-Clementine Homilies seem to present a diflfereut picture of the Roman Church was made by Baur a decisive argument against the authenticity of the last two chapters of the Epistle ! As far as the language of the Epistle is concerned, many Roman Catholic theologians have made use of the note of the Syrian scholiast on the Peshito : Paul wrote his epistle in Roman., in order to assert that it was originally written in Latin. GROTrus, and others, with good reason, have understood the word Roman in the wider sense, as applied to the Greek language. "The Greek composition," says Meyer, 'corresponds perfectly not only to the Hellenic culture of the Apostle himself, but also to the linguistic relations of Rome (see Credxer, Einl. ii., p. 383 if.), and to the analogy of the remaining early Christian literature directed to Rome (Ignatius, Justin, Iren^us, Hippolytus, and others)." Bolten and Berthold assert that the Epistle was originally written in the Aramaean language. For further information, see JIeyer, Reiche, and others, especially also the Introductions to the New Testament.* § 4. OCCASION, PURPOSE, AND CONTENTS OF THE EPISTLE. The origin of the Epistle to the Romans must be traced to the close connection between the call and consciousness of Paul as the Apostle to the Gentiles, and Rome as the great metropolis of the Gentile world. But the contents of the Epistle are determined by the fact that a church made up of both Jewish and Gentile Christians already existed in Rome, and that he had long ago prepared the way for his personal labors in Rome, and further west, by sending out his missionary assistants and companions. His Epistle starts with this preparation as a preliminary reflexion of his personal labors ; that is, as the promulgation of tlic gosi^el both in its theocratic purpose and in its universal constitution. In other words, he exhibits the gospel in its eminent fitness to comprehend Jews and Gentiles in a common necessity of salvation, and to build them up, on the common ground of salvation, into a community of faith which would combine in perfect harmony both a theocratic purpose and a universal sisirit. It was natural that Paul, in view of his call to the Gentile world, should, very early in Ms career, look to the metropolis of Rome as his great aim. He longed and strove to go to Rome, ch. xv. 23 ; i. 11. The order of his apostolic labors required him first to exercise hia apostolic ofiice in the East, chap. xv. 19 ; Acts xix. 21. Accordingly, his three Oriental missionary journeys had to be undertaken first, though in them he gradually approached the "West; and besides, after each of these missionary tours, he had to secure the connection of his work with the metropolis at Jerusalem by a return to this city ; but, in addition to all this, he experienced many vexatious annoyances, and therefore he could well speak of the great hindrances to the execution of his design (chap. i. 13 ; xv. 22). Since it was his pur- * [On the general use of the Greek lanjTuage m the age of the apostles, within the limits of the Roman Empire, comp. especially the learned work of Dr. Alexander Robeets, Discussions on the Gospels, Cambridge, and London, 2d ed. 1864, pp. 1-;;16. Dr. Robehts endeavors to prove, from the undeniable facts of the New Testament, that even in Palestine, at the time of Christ, Greek was the common language of public intercourse, and that Christ and the apostlet spoke for the most part in Greek, and only now and then in Aramaic. If this bo so, we have, in the Gosjele, not > tranelation, but the original words of our Saviour as Ho spoke them to the people and to the Twelve.— P. S.] § 4. OCCASION, rURPOSE, AND CONTENTS OF THE EPISTLE. 31 pose, after his third missionary journey, to proceed from Jerusalem to Rome, his arrest in Jerusalem and imprisonment in Ca3sarea contributed to carry out this design, although it waa for a time a uew obstacle in his way ; and his appeal to Csesar (Acts xxv. 10) was not only a requirement of necessity, but a great step toward tlie consummation of his wishes. But in "Rome, too, there had arisen a hindrance in the establishment of an important society of Christians without his cooperation. He removed this hindrance in a threefold way. First, by sending his spiritual friends, Aquila and Priscilla, in advance to Rome, in order to prepare a place of abode for him ; secondly,' by his letter ; thirdly, by the extension of his missionary purpose to Spain ; so that, at all events, he might visit the congregation in Rome without doing violence to his apostolic principle (chap. xv. 20). His imprisonment set aside the last diflSculty, since it even compelled him to stay two years in Rome ; although he did not givo up his plan of going further to Sjjain. The occasion and purpose of tlie Epistle to the Romans has been very much and very difiei'cntly discussed both by commentators and in si^ecial treatises.* " The dogmatic exposition of earlier times," says Tholuck, " which was not at all interested in inquiring after the real historical purposes, mostly identitied the aim and the argument of the Biblical books ; in that which the Divine Spirit directed the writer to record, there lay the purpose for Christendom in all ages. The historical exposition of mod- ern times seeks, by comparing the contents with the historical situation from which the writ- ings arose, to disclose the nearest purpose to the original readers, although some writers of the rationalistic school put external cause in the place of the internal, and contented themselves with merely accidental causes, such as the good opportunity to send a letter to Rome by the dei^arture of Phoebe, the Corinthian deaconess ; the sight of the Adriatic sea from the high coast of lUyria, and the desire thereby awakened to go to Rome (Paulus of Heidelberg)." The further account by Tholuck, however, does not fully harmonize with the assumption that earlier writers had in view only a doctrinal occasion, while the more recent commenta- tion start from an historical one.t * Among the essays on this subject are those by Christ. Feied. ScHMro (Tubinger Wcinachtsprngramm, 1834, De Paulinx ad Romanos Epiniolse consilio et argumenlo) ; by Bauk (^Zwec'c unci Vcranlassung des liomerhriefs, in the Tubinger Zeitscltri/t, 1836, No. 3), and his followers (see Tholuck, p. 16) ; by Olshausen (in the Sludien und KntiAen, 1838, p. QW) ; by IIuther {Zweclc und Inhall der zwolf erslen Kapitel dcs Ronx'trbriefs, 1840; ; and Theod. Schott (.Der R^merbrief, seinem Endzweck und Gedankengang nach ausgelegt, Erlangen, 1858).— [Since then appeared D. Wilbeui Mangold, The Epislle to the Romans, arid the Beginnings of the Roman Congregation: A critical Investigation, Marburg, 1866, pp. 1S3 ; and W. Beyschlag, The Historical Problem of the Epislle to the Romans, in the Studien zmd Kritiken for 1867, pp. 627-665. The views of the late Dr. Baur on the Aim and Occasion of the Epistle to the liomans, were first published at Tubingen, 1836, and substantially reproduced in his work on Paul, 1S45, p. 332 ff., as well as in his Church History of the first three Centuries, 2d ed., 1860, p. 62 fl". ; but In this last work, and in the second edition of the moucH graph on St. Paul (1 867), he moderates the alleged antagonism of the Jewish Cliristians at Rome against Paul, and no more insists on the opinion that chapters ix.-xi. constitute the doctrinal essence of the whole Epistle, to which the rest was made to serve merely as an introduction and an application. It rau-ft be admitted that Dr. Bauk, by striking critical combinations, broke a new fitld of investigation conceming the character and condition of the primitive Chris- tians in Rome, and the aim and occasion of the Epistle to the liomans. Theodor Schott, of Erlangcn, agreeing with Baur as to the central significance of chaps, is., s., and xi., but differing from his untenable assumption of the pre- ponderance of the Jewish element in the Eoman congregation, represents the Epistle as an apology of the Geiitile apos- tolate of Paul before Gentile Christians of the Pauline school. But these did not need any such apology. Mangold, in the able treatise just referred to, substantially renews the view of Baur as to the essentially Jewish Christian character of the Church of Rome, and the importance of chaps, ix.-xi., but he moderates its supposed antagonism to Paul. Baur, Schott, and Mangold agree in giving the Epistle an apologetic aim, viz., the defence of PauJ's apostolate of the Gen- tiles (Die Rechtfertigung des paulinischen Heidenapnstolats). In this, Beyschlag differs from them, and, witb.out denying this apologetic aim, he yet subordinates it (with Tholuck, Olshausen, De Wette, and others) to the general dogmatic aim of a systematic exhibition of the gospel salvation to a prevailingly Gentile Christian congregation in the metropolia •)f the world. In doing this, however, the Apostle had evidently his eye mainly upon the settlement of the difficult problem touching the relation of God's ancient people to the recently-engrafted Gentile world on the broad basis of God's infinite wisdom and mercy in the unfolding of His plan of redemption. Thus, chaps. ix.-xi. receive their proper position as an outline of a philosophy of church history, instead of being merely regarded as a parenthetical section. Compare Dr. liANGE's views in the text. The English commentatorB do not trouble themselves much with this introductory question. — P. S.] t [There were attempts at historical exegesis among the Greek fathers of the Antiochian school, Theodoee of Mopsuestia, Chstsostom, Thkodoret, and among a few Latin fathers such as Jerome, Pseudo-Ambbosius, and I'ELAOiot en the other hand, with some of the Tnodern commentators the doctrinal and practical element predominates. — P. S.J 38 THE EPISTLE OF PArL TO THE ROMANS. As far as the historical (more properly definetl, special dogmatico-historical) occasions aw concerned, AsrBROsiASTER, AuGUSTl^'E, Bullingek, and Eucer have ascribed to the Epistla a polemical attitude against the Jewish Christians (Pellican likewise, though only in the way of caution) ; and in modern times, EiCHnoRN, Schmid, Baur, Schwegler, Zeller, KosTLiN, Lutterbeck, Dietlein, and Thiersch have, with many modifications, regarded the Epistle chiefly as a rectification of Jewish and Judaistic principles. Chrysostom and Theodoret would find, on the contrary, in the Epistle decided polemic references to Gentile Christian Antinomian errors such as we find among the Marcionites, Valentiuians, and Manichaeans. But those are nearer right who suppose that the Epistle was designed for the conciliatory counteraction both of Jewish Christian and Gentile Chiistian perversions. This view has been defended especially by IIelanchthon, Du Pin, Hug, and Bertholdt. Melanchthon says " It can be seen that Paul wrote this Epistle from this cause : that the Jews would appropriate to themselves redcuiiition and eternal life by their own righteousness through the works of the law ; and again, the heathen insisted that the Jews were cast off for having rejected Christ." In opposition to the historical (or better, the special dogmatico-historical) view concern- ing the occasion of the Epistle, we find the theory of a dogmatic, or, more proj^erly, a uni- versal dogmatico-historical occasion. When the Apostle Paul, in this view, without special references to particular embarrassments in the Roman church, would give to this church an outline of the first elements of the whole gospel — according to his conception of it — he did it under the steady conviction of his universal calling as the special Apostle to the Gentiles, who must extend his labors to the specific city of the Gentiles. On this side belong Luther's Preface to his Commentary on the Romans, Heidegger's Enchiridion, p. 535, Tho- liUCK, in the earlier editions of his Commentary, Olshausen, Rcckert, Reiche, Kollner, Glockler, and Philippi. On the diflerent modification? of this view, see Schott, p. 17. That of Olshausen is the most clearly defined. " We can affirm," says he [Commentary on the Romans, Introduction, § 5, p. 58, Germ, ed.], " that the Epistle to the Romans contains, so to say, a Pauline system of divinity, since all the essential tojjics to which the Ajjostle Paul, in his treatment of the gospel, is accustomed to give special prominence, are here developed at length." Philippi : " The Ej)istle w^as designed to take the place of the personal j)reacli- ing of Paul in Rome ; therefore it contains a connected doctrinal statement of the specifically Pauline gospel, such as no other contains." Schott declares : " I must oj^pose decidedly, with Baur, all these views." Yet his pro- test dili'ers from that of Baur. By his supposition concerning the Ebionitism of the Roman church, Baur was misled to the monstrous conclusion, that the theme of the Epistle to the Romans first appears positively in the section from chaps, ix. to xi. (in direct opposition to Thoi.uck, who, in his former editions, would find in the same part only a historical corol- lary). " The ever-increasing number of the Gentile Christians received by Paul must have so far excited the j)retensions of the Judaists, that even the reception of the heathen, on con- dition of circumcision, was no more acceptable to them, and the reception of the heathen was regarded by them as an usurpation, so long as Israel was not converted." Schott contro- verts the opinion that " the cause and object of the Epistle must be determined from its entire contents," and confines himself to the introductory remarks of the Aj)ost!e concerning the purpose and cause of his Epistle. The result of his inquiry into the Prooemium is the fol- lowing : " As Paul sets out to proclaim his gospel for the Gentiles to the nations of the West, he designs to visit the Christian congregation at Rome, and to enter into a closer personal relation to it by reciprocal acquaintance, with a view to make this congregation of the metropolis of the West a solid base of operation for his Gentile mission work, which was now to begin in the West." But that understanding with the Roman church could be reached in no other way than by " a full exposition of the nature and character of his apoa tolic office, and the principles by which he was governed in his conduct." Schott finds, therefore, in the Ejnstle, " not an exposition of the Pauline theory of Christianity, but a description and vindication of the Pauline system of raissionaiy labors. § 6. PLACE AND TIME OF THE COMPOSITION OF THE EPISTLE. Sp We object to this view, on tbe whole, that it jouts the historical motive aud the doctrinal in a strong contrast which is untenable. Then in particular : 1. The distinction between the East and the West, by which the former is described as the sphere of Jewish Christianity, and the latter, on the other hand, is the sphere iu which the Apostle's purely Gentile Christian labors began (p. 102 If.). 3. The supposition that th-j Apostle desired, in his Epistle, to lay before the church in Rome a conqjlete apologetic iirogramme of his missionary policy, in order to gain their rocog* nitioii, aud thereby find in them a point of support ; but not to proclaim to the church ic Rome the gospel as he understood it. 3. He would place the church in Rome, \>j means of his admonitions, in such a conditioE that it could become a basis for his Western missionary labors ; but he did not intend that Rome itself should be his final object, but merely serve as a point of support for his labors in the West, above all in Spain. It is above all things improper to separate the historical and the doctrinal cause, or to bring them into opposition. The Apostle to the Gentiles was under no obligation to legitimatize himself before the Roman church concerning his missionary labors in the West ; yet, accord- ing to the principle of Apostolic order, he had to justify himself when he wrote to the Romans roX/iT^pi^T-epaJv (which certainly does not mean by way of defence, but, with more than usual boldness), and proclaimed to them the gospel. Plainly, the first fundamental thought of the Epistle is this : The call of the Apostle to the Gentiles is a call for Rome, and therefore the Apostle had long made the city of Rome his object. But the second fundamen- tal thought, which limits the first, is the idea of apostolic regulation. The Apostle cannot laj claim to the church as exclusively his own, since it had already long existed without hia cooperation. Therefore he describes his anticipated journey as one to the heathen West — to Spain, the limit of the Western pagan world — in which he designs that Rome should furnish him a hospitable stay. Nevertheless, the Apostle was filled with the confidence that he could venture to address Rome as his church, and assuredly as the church in which he had to per- fect the imiversal union of .Jewish Christianity and Gentile Christianity, of Jerusalem and Antioch. Accordingly, he unfolds the religious and moral strength of his gospel, as fully adapted to save Jews and Greeks, and therefore to unite them, since, with the same evidence, it (a.) makes Jews and Gentiles sinners alike ; (p,) presents salvation in Christ with equal certainty to both ; (c.) leads both from the same death to the new life, as the elect ; (d.) makes plain their mutual dependence in the same divine economy of salvation (chaps, ix.-xi.) ; (e.) the gospel proves itself to be a power of sanctification for Jews and Gentiles, which can make both cajiable of being reciprocally sympathetic, and of setting them free from their Jewish and pagan prejudices (chap. xii. S.). By these combined considerations the Apostle furnishes to the Christians in Rome a real and practical proof that he, as the universal Apostle to the Gentiles, was also called to be indirectly the Apostle of Israel (chap. xi. 13, 14), and of the unity of the Jewish and Gentile Christians ; and that Rome, the iniversal church of Gentile Christians, was called, as such, to become the union church of Jewish and Gentile Christians. And this is to be brought about by the strength of the uni- versal gospel, which unites all the elect, and which, after first announcing it by letter, he hopes soon to present orally, so as to make Rome the point of departure for this universal Christian Church. The matter stands, therefore, thus : The Apostle, who began his labors as the Apostle to the Jews (Acts ix. 23, 28), and who was afterwards in a special sense the Apostle to the Gen- tiles (Acts xxii. 21 ; Gal. ii.), now enters ui:)on the third stage of his activity as the Apostle to all nations, and devotes his attention to the development of a union Church, which should smbrace in one Jewish Christians and Gentile Christians. § 5. PLACE A^T) TIME OF THE COSrPOSITIOX OF THE EPISTLE. It is a very general opinion, and one sustained by various indications, that the Apostl< 40 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. wrote the Epistle to the Rouiaus from Corikth, during his stay there, -^N'hile on his third mi* Bionary journey. According to Rom. xv, 25 ff., the Apostle, when he wrote this Epistle, was about to depart for Jerusalem in charge of the collection from Macedonia and Achaia. But he brought this collection to an end in Corinth, when on his third missionary tour, according to 1 Cor, xvi. 1-3 ; 2 Cor. ix. This combination refers to the last three months' stay of the Apostle ic Achaia (Acts xx. 2),- and especially in Corinth ; since this city was the metropolis of the church of Achaia, and the Apostle desired to tarry here, according to 1 Cor. xvi. 1-7 ; 2 Cor. ix. 4 ; xii. 20 ; xiii. 2. It is also in favor of Corinth, that the Apostle sent the Epistle by the deaconess Phcebe from the Corinthian seaport Cenchrese (chap. xvi. 1, 2) ; that he greets the Roman Christians for his host, Gaius (cliap. xvi. 23), whom we may identify with the Corin- thian Gains (1 Cor. 1. 14) ; and also for Erastus, the treasurer of the city, who, according tc 2 Tim. iv. 20 (comp. Acts xix. 22), had bis home in Corinth. Dr. Paulits has no ground whatever for arguing from chap. xv. 19, that the Epistle was written in a city of lUyria. Meyer justly supposes that the Ejjistle was written before the Apostle — who first had the purpose of travelling dii-ectly from Achaia to Syria and Jerusalem — was compelled by Jewish persecution to return through Macedonia (see Acts xx. 3) ; for he mentions, chap xv. 25-31, nothing of this important matter. The TIME of the composition of the Epistle was therefore about the year 59 after Christ. The notice. Acts xxviii. 21, which seems to imply that the Roman Jews knew nothing of an Epistle of Paul to Rome, by no means justifies the inference (drawn by Tobler) that the Epistle was written at a later time ; comp. against this Flatt and Meter. The Epistle was dictated by Paul to Tertius, an assistant (chap. xvi. 22). " The cause why Paul did not write his Epistles with his own hand, is not to be found in his want of practice in writing Greek, — which has no support whatever,— but in the apostolic condition, when others were ready to aid him." Meyer. See Gal. vi. 11, and the note of the Bible- WorTc in he. § 6. The Meaning and Import of the Epistle to the Romans. Olshatjsen divides the Pauline Ei)istles into three classes : First, dogmatical didactic Epistles, then practical didactic Epistles, and ^n&WY , friendly expressions of his heart. This division is untenable, as appears from the fact that he includes the profound christological Epistles to the EiDhesians and Colossians, together with the Epistles to the Philippians and to Philemon, in the class of " letters of friendship." It is also very insufiicient to say that the Epistle to the Romans belongs to the dogmatic didactic class. Olshaxjsen remarks correctly, that the Epistle to the Romans is most nearly related to that to the Galatians ; yet he does aot go quite to the point, when he says : " Both Epistles treat of the relation of law and gospel ; but while, in Romans, this relation is viewed altogether olyeciively, the Epistle to the Galatians, on the contrary, is altogether polemical against the Judaizing Christians. Besides, the Epistle to the Galatians is limited solely to this relation, and treats of the same more briefly than is the case in the Epistle to the Romans. In the Epistle to the Romans, on the other hand, the relation of the law and gospel is developed didactically, and scientifically in the strict sense of the word," etc. We have already remarked that the two Epistles are to be distinguished as specifically Boteriological in the narrower sense of the word ; but as the Epistle to the Romans describes justification by faith in Christ in antagonism with universal human depravity, the Ejiistle to the Galatians, on the contrary, is directed against false justification from the works of the law. At the same time, the Epistle to the Romans is constructed on a broader basis than that to the Galatians, since it deals both with heathenism and Judaism. The Epistle purposes to show, that neither the Gentiles were saved by God's revelation in nature and in the con- science, nor the Jews by the written law of the Old Testament ; and he extends human depravity and the counteracting redemption through three stages of development in the mos* § 6. THE MEANING AND IMPORT OF TEE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 4 universal and exhaustive contemplation, to whicli an equally comprehensive practical appli cation must correspond. Altliough the Epistle to the Romans belongs, in the chronological order, in the middle of the Pauline Epistles, yet its primacy has been recognized in manil'est opposition to the alleged primacy of the Roman Bislioj). The Epistle to the Romans, in its Pauline type, opposes, by its doctrine of justification by faith without the works of the law, the system of Rome ; so that even to-day it can be regarded as an Epistle especially directed " to the Romans." The early Church, in its disposition of the New Testament canon, especially the so-called " Apostdos [as distinct from the " Oospel "], placed the Epistle to the Romans, because of its importance, and v«nth regard, at the same time, to the high standing of the Roman congrega- tion, at the head of the Pauline Epistles. Still more did the Reformation bring it into its proper light. " It was," says TnoLUCK, " from the fundamental truth developed in the Ejiistles to the Romans and Galatians, that the Reformation took its start in its opposition to the Judaism which had crept into the Christian Church. Thus the doctrine of justification by faith became its dogmatic centre. Hence the importance attached to this Epistle by the Protestant Church. The exposition of this Epistle was Melanchthon's favorite course of lectures, which he repeated again and again almost without interruption ; and, as Demosthenes did with Thucydides, he twice transcribed this Epistle with his own hand, in order to impress it more deeply on his memory (Strobel, Literaturgeschichte der Loci Melanchthori's, p. 13). Since he here found a development of the chief articles of the Christian faith, he based on the Epistle to the Romans the first doctrinal system of the renovated Church, Melanchthox's I^ci Communes, 1531. Henceforth the Epistle was regarded as a compendium of Biblical dogmatics, and under this point of view, Olshausen also advises to begin exegeticul studies with the same. But following the succession of thought from chap. i. 11, we would rather find in it a Christian Philosophy of Universal History (comp. Baur, Pavlus, p. 657)." By the latter construction, however, the christological dpxrj, as well as the eschatological r^Xoy, would receive too little attention. The soteriology is certainly pictured forth with its opj)osite, ponerology, in the most comprehensive way ; and both heathendom and Judaism are described under a point of view which comprehends them both. Olshausen is of the opinion that Luther commented only on the Epistle to the Galatians, because the relation between the law and the gosjDel are treated exclusively in it, and because he would avoid discussion on the mysterious doctrine of predestination (Rom. ix. fi".). But Luther certainly expressed himself pointedly enough elsewhere on predestination. [Be servo arNtrio, against Erasmus.] The Epistle to the Galatians lay nearer to his purpose, because this Epistle brings out the doctrine o^ justification by faith in the strongest and clearest contrast to the false justification by works. From Luther's own preface to the Epistle to the Romans we learn how highly he appreciated that Epistle. On the importance of the Epistle for the Church in its inclination to legalism, ftud in its relation to the personal experience of Paul, and on its difficulties, see Olshausen, p. 54 fi". [S. T. Coleridge, in his Table-Talh (June 15, 1833), calls St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans " the most profound work in existence," and says : " The only fit commentator on Paul was Ltjthkb. — not by any means such a gentleman as the Apostle, but almost as great a genius." — P a] % 7. THE CONTENTS AND DIVISION. A. TJie Contents. The Epistle to the Romans — ^in its sixteen chapters the most comprehensive of the Pauliiio Epistles— unites most intimately the character of a dogmatic epistle of instruction with the character of an ecclesiastical address in a specific, personal relation. Proceeding from the Btandpoint of his apostleship to the Gentiles, and after a satisfactory conclusion of his ipostolic labors in the East, the Apostle designs to prepare the Christian church in Rome to 42 THE EPISTLE OF FAUL TO THE ROilAXS. be the centre and starting-point of labors reaching to the farthest West (Spain). His work in the West should be universal, not merely as it united the West and East in Christ, but also as it constituted in Kome the peculiar type for the united church of Jewish Christians and Gentile Christians. The Apostle to the heathen is, in his consciousness, perfectly ripened into the apostle for the nations ; and in this sense he intends to clothe the church at Rome witt the prestige of a church of the nations, which he might regard as of his own institution, and make use of as the home of his universal activity. To this purpose, the change of the Roman church from uncertain authority int«» a fixed institution of Pauline authority, corresjionds the universal soteriological doctrine of the Epistle, as related to the universal ecclesiastical call of Paul. All men, viewed under the antagonism of Jews and heathen, are, in consequence of the prostitution of the living Divine glory, regarded as sinners, destitute of righteousness and merit before God ; and all men have a common mercy-seat for pardon in Christ ; all should pass from the old. life of death in sin, or in the flesh and under the law, to the new life in Christ, in the spirit and in liberty ; all were included under the judgment of unbelief, and all should exj^erieuce Divine compassion. On this dogmatic foundation the church at Rome should be completely based; and in accord- ance therevdth, it should regulate its internal relation between Jewish Christians and Gentile Christians, as well as its external relation to the world ; but it must also, in accordance with this principle, perceive that its call as the central city of the Western Church can only be actualized by first acknowledging the call of Paul, and committing itself to him, as a point of departure in his universal work. This Epistle has a unique character in relation to the Apostle, since he wrote it to a church which he had not established, and had not even once visited. But the anomalous char- acter of this fact may be thus explained : The church was, on one hand, still perfectly vacant from all apostolical authority, and it was thus far not yet fully organized as a church ; and, on the other hand, it was not only naturally related to the Apostle to the Gentiles as the church of the world's metropolis, but had been long previously visited by him in spirit, and was accordingly taken possession of by his pupils and assistants as his sphere of labor (see ■chap. xvi.). The case was similar with the Epistle to the Colossians, though the Apostle may be regarded as the indirect founder of this church (by Epaphras). In its dogmatic aspect, the Epistle to the Romans possesses a decidedly soteriological char- .acter. As to its form, it resembles, in its cautious tone, the Epistle to the Galatiaus ; for the Apostle probes the former church, and asks whether it be ulready his church ? and of the latter, he asks whether it still be his church ? (Rom. xv. 15, 16 ; Gal. iv. 19, 20). [The Epistle to the Romans, and that to the Galatians, treat of the same theme, viz., justification by free grace through faith in Christ, or rather, the deeper and broader doctrine of a personal life-union of the believer with Christ ; but the latter is apologetic and polemic against the Judaizing pseudo-apostles, who labored to undermine Paul's authority, and to enforce the yoke of legalism upon a church of his own planting ; while the former, written to strangers, opposes no particular class of men, but only the corrupt tendencies of the human heart. Both supplement each other, and constitute the grand charter of evangelical freedom in Christ.— P. S.] The Epistle to the Romans has this in common with the Epistle to the Ephesians, that it shows how salvation in Christ transforms Gentiles and Jews into one Church of God ; but in the Epistle to the Ephesians he establishes this unity on the christological principle, while in the Epistle to the Romans, it is efiected by the soteriology. The relation of the Romans to the Colossians is similar to the one just described. [But with this difference, that the christo- logical element prevails in the Epistle to the Colossians, the ecclesiological in that to the Ephesians.— P. S.] In its ecclesiastical and practical character the Epistle to the Romans resembles those to the Corinthians. But in the former case the Apostle has yet to establish an authority and nstitution, while in the latter he has to maintain them. In the section from chap. ix. to xi., this Epistle approaches the eschatological contents of § 1. THE CONTENTS AND DIVISION. 43 the Epistles to the Thcssalonians. The greetings in chap. xvi. remind us of the Epistle to th« Philippians ; the practical portion reminds us of the Pastoral Epistles. In this Epistle the idea of piety or of righteousness, as a living worship of God, is peculiarly prominent ; perhaps produced by the decided j^redominance of the practical element in th« Roman conception of cultus. The fall of man commenced with the gi-Qnt peccatum omissimis: Men, regardless of the natural revelation of God, forsook the living worship and 2)raise of Go^ chap. i. 31). Therefore the development of corruption among the heathen is shown in ac xternal symbolism, which more and more sinks into a mythical idolatry, and results in a growing perversion and decay of morals (chap. i. 22-32) ; but among the Jews, in the fearful caricature into which even its religious zeal is turned by its fleshly fanaticism (chap. ii. 17-24). Therefore is salvation for faith represented by the mercy-seat in the Holy of Iloliea (chap, iii. 25), and faith is a priestly free access to grace (chap. v. 2), which converts the whole subsequent life of the Christian into a song of praise (vers. 3-11). Therefore the crown of the new life is a revelation of the glory of the children of God, whicli is guaranteed by the spirit of prayer on the part of the faithful (chap, viii.). Therefore, finally, must the economi- cally limited judgment of God on Israel, and the whole economy of salvation in reference to the dark history of the world, contribute to the glory of God (chap. xi. 36). The new life ia consequently represented as the direct contrast to the fall of man. As the living service of God ceased with the latter, so now is the true spiritual service of God restored in the lives of Christians, since they dedicate their bodies as living sacrifices to God (chap, xii, 1 fF.). Th« temporal authority (chap. xiii. 1 ff.) stands in a subservient (ver. 4) and liturgical (ver, 6) relation to the living divine service of Christians, In its great moral significance, which also requires a moral and free recognition (ver. 5), it is unconsciously subject to the highest aim and goal of human history — the glory of God through Christ. The Church must be con- formed to this glory ; it must be an instrument for the object that all nations should praise God (chap. XV. 11). The Epistle is directed to this end : it is a priestly work to make the heathen an acceptable offering of God (chap. xv. 16), It finally corresponds to this concep- tion of the kingdom of God as a restored and real worship, that the Apostle concludes with a liturgical doxology, in which faith in the promises and announcements of the gospel responds to the living God of revelation with an eternal Amen (chap. xvi. 25-27) — a passage which may be explained by a comjiarisou with 1 Cor. xiv. 16 ; 2 Cor. i, 20 ; Heb. xii. 22 ; xiii. 15 ; Rev. iv. 10. The church at Rome must, therefore, in accordance with its call, become a focus for the restoration of the living, real, and universal worship of God by the nations, as the institution of Paul, the universal Apostle of the nations. It must become the point of departure of the Church of the Western nations, in the sense in which the word catholic had been originally used ; that is, in harmony with the religious and moral necessities of humanity, in harmony with the moral significance and mission of the state, in harmony with the free as well as with the anxious consciences of the faithful on the basis of justification by faith without the worka of the law. B, The Arrangement. THE INTRODUCTION AND FUNDAMENTAl THEME. The apostolate of Paul appointed for the glory of the name of God by means of the gospel of Christ, and of the revelation of the justice of God for faith throughout the whole ^orld, among Jews and Gentiles, chap, i. 1-17. 8t Section. — The inscription and greeting. The Apostle ; his call ; his apostolic oflSce ; his greeting of the saints in Rome, vers. 1-7. 2d Section. — The point of connection. The fame of the faith of the Christians at Rome in all the world ; and his desire and purpose to come to them to announce the gospel to them, vera. 8-15. J 4 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS, id Section.— The fundamental theme. The joyful readiness of the Apostle to proclaim th« gospel of Christ, since it is the power of God to save Jews and Gentiles— as a revelation 0/ the justice o*" God by and for faith, vers. 16, 17. Part First. The doctrine of righteousness by faith, as the restoration of the true worship of God chap, i. 18- chap. xi. rrRST DIVISION. Sin and grace in their first antagonism. The real appearance of corruption and salvp.tion. Righteousness by faith. The wrath of God on all injustice of men ; that is, the actual cor ruption of the world in its growth for death hastened by the judgment of God ; and the antagonistic justification of sinners by the jiropitiation or pardon in Christ, through faitt chap. i. 18-v. 11. Ut Section. — The beginning of all real corruption in the world, and of the Gentiles in par- ticular, and God's judgment on the same ; the neglect of the general revelation of God by the creation, in the omission of the real worship of God by praise and thanksgiving, chap. i. 18-21. 2(1 Section. — The development of heathen corruption under the judicial abandonment on God's side (the withdrawal of His Spirit). From symbolism to the worship of images and beasts ; from theoretical to practical corruption ; fiom natural sins to unnatural and abominable ones, to the development of all vices and crimes, to the demoniacal lust for sin, and to evil maxims themselves, chap. i. 22-32. 3c/ Section. — Transition from the corrujition of the Gentiles to the corruption of the Jews. The genuine Jeics. The higher universal antagonism aliove the antagonism of heathendom and Judaism : striving and op2)osing men. The universality of corruption, and, with the uni- versality of guilt, the worst corruption : judging the neighbor. The guilt of this uncharita- ble judgment is intensified by the continuance of a general antagonism of pious, striving men, and of stiff"-necked enemies of the truth throughout the world, wdthin the general corruption, over against the righteous and impartial government of God ; this, too, by virtue of the continuance of God's general legislation in the conscience. The revelation of the antagonism of Gentiles true to the law, and of Jews who despised the law on the day of the proclamation of the gospel^ chap. ii. 1-16. ith Section. — The real Jews. The increased corruption of the Jew in his false zeal for the law (a counterpart of the cori-uption of the heathen in his symbolism). The fanatical and wicked method of the Jews in handling the law with legal pride, and of corrupting it by false ai^plication and unfaithfulness, an occasion for defaming the name of God among the heathen, chap. ii. 17-24. ith Section. — The use of circumcision : an adjustment of the need of salvation by the knowl- edge of sin. The circumcision which becomes the foreskin, and the foreskin which be- comes circumcision ; or, the external Jew can possibly become an internal Gentile, while the external Gentile can become an internal Jew. It is not the dead possession of the law, but fidelity to the law, that is of use. It does not produce a pride of the law, but knowledge of sin — that is, of the necessity of salvation. The advantage of circumcision consists herein : that to the Jews are committed those declarations of God, that law, by which all men are represented under the penalty of sin. Sin represented as acknowledged guilt over against the law, chap. ii. 25-iii. 20. ^th Section. — The revelation of God's righteousness without the law by faith in Christ, for all sinners without distinction, by the representation of Christ as the Mediator (Propitiator); the righteousness of God as justifying righteousness, chap. iii. 21-26. ?;/( Section. — The abrogation of the vain glory (or self-praise) of man by the law of faitk § 1. THE CONTEiNTS AND DIVISION. 45 Justification by faith without the worlcs of the law. First proof from experience : God ii the God of the heathen as well as of the Jews ; wliich fact is shown by the fiith of th< Gentiles, as well as by the true renewal of the law by faith, vers. 27-31. BiA Section. — Second proof of the righteousness by faith : from the Scriptures, and this from the history of the faith of Abraham, the ancestor of the Jews themselves. Abraham is the father of faith to the Gentiles as well as to the Jews, Ijecause he had been justified in the foreskin as a heathen, and because he had received circumcision as a seal of justification by faith. David is also a witness of righteousness by faith. Abraham in his faith in the word of the personal God of revelation, and esj^ecially in the promise of Isaac, a type of all believers in the miracle of the resurrection of Christ, chap. iv. BfA Section. — The fruit of justification. Peace with God a)id the development of new life to the fulfilment of Christian hope. The new worship of God by the Christians. They have free access to grace in the Most Holy, Therefore they boast of their hope in the glory of God ; and glory even in the afflictions they sufl'er, by which this hope is perfected. The love of God in Christ as the guaranty of the realization of Christian hope. Chi-ist's death our reconciliation : Christ's life our blessedness. Its bloom : the joyous glorying that God is our God, chap v. 1-11. SECOND DIVISION. Sin and grace in theu* second antagonism (as in their second power), according to their operations in human nature and in nature generally. The sinful corruption of the world proceeding from Adam and made the common inheritance of man ; and the life of Christ aa the internal vital principle of the new birth for new life in single believers, in all hmnanity, and in the whole created world. The principle of death in sin, and the principle of the new life ; as well as the glorification of all nature in righteousness, chap. v. 12-viii. 39. ist Section. — The sin of Adam as the mighty principle of death, and the grace of God in Christ as the mightier princij)le of the new life in individual human nature, and in whole humanity. The law as the medium of the completed consciousness of sin and guilt, chap. V. 13-21. 2d Section. — Call to the new life in grace. The contradiction between sin and grace. The vocation of the Christians to new life, since they, by baptism in the death of Christ, are changed from the sphere of sin and death into the sphere of righteousness and life, chap, vi. 1-11. Sd Section. — The essential emancipation and actual departure of Christians from the service of sin unto death into the service of righteousness unto life, by virtue of the death of Christ. Believers should live in the consciousness that they are dead to sin, vers. 12-23. i.th Section. — The essential transfer and actual transition of Christians from the service of the letter under the law to the service of the Spirit under grace, by virtue of the death of Christ. Believers should live in the consciousness that they (by the law) are dead to the law, chap. vii. 1-6. 5th Section. — The law in its holy appointment to lead over, by the feeling of death, to new life in grace. The development of the law from the exterior to the internal. The exijerience of Paul a life-picture of the battle under the law as the transition from the old life in the law to the new life in faith, vers. 7-25. 5^^ Section. — The Christian life, or life in Christ as the new life according to the law of the Spirit, as walking in the Spirit. The fulfilment and exaltation of the law to be the law of the Spirit in Christ. The law of the Sjnrit as principle of the new life of adoption, and of the exaltation of the faithful and of humanity to the liberation and glorification of the creature, to the new world of life in love, chap. viii. a. The Spirit as the Mediator of the atonement and witness of adoption, vers. 1-16. J). The Spirit a surety of the inheritance of future glory. (1.) The subjective certaintj 46 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO TEE ROMANS. of future i)erfection, or the spiritualization and glorification of Christian life, vera 17-27. (2.) The objective certainty of future perfection in glory, vers. 28-39. THIRD DIVISION. Sin and grace in their third antagonism (in their third power). The hardness of heart and the economical judgment on hardness of heart (the historical curse on sin), and the turning of the judgment to the rescue by the power of Divine sympathy at the progress of universal history. The historical development of sin to the execution of the judgment, and the revela* tion of salvation in demonstration of mercy. The intimate connection of God's acts oi judgment and rescue ; the latter being conditioned by the former, chaps, ix.-xi. 1st Section. — The dark mystery of the judgment of God in Israel, and its solution, chap. ix. a. The painful contrast of the misery of the Jews in opposition to the portrayed hap- piness of the Christians, who, for the most part, came from the Gentiles. The sorrow of the Apostle at the evident failure of the destiny of his people, chap. ix. 1-5. i. The ecstasy of the Apostle in the thought that the promise of God would neverthe- less hold good for Israel. The proofs therefor, chap. ix. 6-33. 2d Section. — More decided explanation of the mysterious fact : The unbelief of Israel. The faith of the Gentiles, already foretold in the Old Testament, chap. x. a. The fact is no fatalistic destiny, vers. 1, 2. i. It rests rather on the antagonism between the self-righteousness as the supposed righteousness from the law, and the righteousness which is by faitk, vers. 3-5. c. The righteousness by faith, although joroceeding from Israel, is nevertheless, accord- ing to Old Testament prophecy, accessible to all men because of its nature. Proof; The unbelief of the Jews as well as the faith of the heathen is foretold already in the Old Testament, vers. 6-21. Bd Section. — The concluding gracious solution of the mystery, or the turning of judgment to the rescue of Israel. The judgment of God on Israel is not a judgment of reprobation. God's economy of salvation in His Providence over the chosen of Israel and of the multi- tude — Jews and Gentiles — over the intertwining of judgment and rescue, by which all Israel should come, through the fulness of the Gentiles, to faith and happiness. The universality of judgment and compassion. Doxology, chap xxi. a. Israel is not rejected ; the elect (the kernel) are saved, vers. 1-6. i. The hardening of the hearts of the remainder becomes a condition for the conversion of the Gentiles, vers. 7-11. c. On the other hand, the conversion of the Gentiles became also a means for the con- version of Israel, vers. 11-18. d. The fact itself is a conditional one. The Gentiles can yet individually become unbelieving, and the Jews, on the other hand, believing, vers. 19-24. e. The last word, or the mystery of Divine Providence in its economy of salvation. All will contribute to the glory of God, vers. 25-36. Fart Second. The practical theme : The vocation of the Roman Christians, on the ground of theu accomplished salvation or of the mercy of God (which will be extended to all) to represent the living worship of God in the consummation of the real burnt oflFering, and to constitute a universal Christian church-life for the realization of the call of all nations to praise and glorify God ; so that they may also acknowledge and maintain the universal call of the Apostle. The recommendation of his companions, assistants, and friends, in the sending of his greetings tc them for the purpose of the true development of the Chm-ch, and as a coun § 1. THE CONTENTS AND DIVISION. 41 teipart, his -waining against Judaiziug or paganizing errorists. Greetings, invocation of blessings, chap. xii. 1-xvi. 27. FIRST DIVISION. The ceP of the Roman Christians to a universal Christian deportment, chap. xii. 1-xv. 18. let Section. — The practical theme, vers. 1, 3. The proper conduct of the Christians toward the community of the brethren for the establishment of a harmonious church life, chap. xii. 1-8. 2d Section. — The true conduct of the Christians in all personal relations. For their own life, toward the brethren, toward everybody, and even toward enemies, chap. xii. 9-21. dd Section. — Christian universalism (Roman Catholicism in Paul's sense) in the proper conduct toward those in authority (the heathen state), which also possesses an official and liturgical service in the household of God. The object and aim of government, chap. xiii. 1-6. 4th Section. — Proper conduct toward the world in general. Legal fellowship with the world. The recognition of the rights of the world in the justice and also in the strength of the love of our neighbor. The separation from the ungodly nature of the old world (the dark character of heathendom). The universality and its sanctification by the true separation, vers. 7-14. 5t?i Section. — The true practice of the living worship of God in the management and adjust- ment of the difl'ereuces between the weak or perjilexed (the slaves of the law) and the strong (inclined to disregard, and Antinomian transgression in freedom). The Christian universality of social life (to tale and give no ofl'ence), chap. xiv. 1-xv. 4. a. Reciprocal regard, forbearance, and recognition between the weak and the strong. Special warning against giving ofience to the weak, chap. xiv. 1-13. h. Of giving oifence, and desi)ising forbearance to the weak, chap. xiv. 13-xvi. c. Reciprocal edification in self-denial after the example of Christ, chap. xv. 2—4. 6t7i Section. — Admonition to the harmony of all the members of the congregation to the praise of God on the ground of the grace of God, in which Christ has accepted Jews and Gentiles. Reference to the vocation of all nations to praise God even according to the Old Testa- ment, and encouragement of the Roman Christians to an unbounded hope in this relation, in agreement with their call, chap. xv. 5-13. SECOND DIVISION. The call of the Apostle to a universal apostleship, and his consequent relation to tne Roman church, as the point of departure for the universal apostleship in the West, chap. xv. 14-33. a. The Apostle declares, almost apologizingly, that his writing to the Romans was the result of his caU to make the heathen in priestly operation an acceptable offering to God ; and he gives information on the general completion of his work in the East (to Illyria), and the results of the same, vers. 14-19. &. His principle not to invade the sphere of others (a conduct opposite to that of all sect-makers). The consequent impediment to come directly to Rome, where Chris- tian congregations already existed. Nevertheless, his desire to labor for them, which was in harmony with his call. His hesitation not being completely removed, he describes his anticipated visit to Rome as a temporary stay for the better prosecu tion of his journey through Rome to Spain ; that is, to the limits of the West, without doubt in expectation that the church will welcome him and commit itself to his direction, vers. 20-24. e. His last hindrance from his journey to Rome. The mention of the collections, a proof of his love to the believing Israelites, an expression of the proper conduct of Gentile Christians to Jewish Christians. Another announcement of his journej 48 THE EriSTLE OF PAUL TO TDE ROMANS. tlirougli Rome and of his visit in the spirit of apostolical refinement. Foreboding reference to the animosity of the unfaithful in Judsea, and a request for prayer that he might be permitted to accomplish his purpose of coming to them, vers. 23-33. THIRD DIVISION. The recommendation of his predecessors, companions, and assistants, in a succession ot greetings, united with a vrarning against separatistic heretics (Jews and Gentiles), who could hinder and even destroy Rome's destiny and his apostolic mission. Tet the Ood of jjeace will ehortly Iruise Satan under their feet. Invocation of blessing, chap. xvi. 1-20. a. The deaconess Phoebe, vers. 1, 2. I. The greetings, vers. 3-16. The warning, and the invocation of blessing, vers. 17-20. CONCLUSION. The greetings of the Pauline circle to the church at Rome, and the invocation of blessings by Paul himself. His doxological sealing of the gospel of the justifying grace of God in Christ for all nations, vers. 21-27. a. The greetings. J. The doxological sealing of the gospel for eternity in accordance with the funda- mental devotional thought of his Epistle. The Amen of the Church thi'ough Christ, as the response to the gospel of Christ, vers. 25-27. Now to Him that is of power (in the gospel) to stabiish you According to my gospel, etc. According to the revelation of the mystery, etc. According to the commandment of the everlasting God, To God only wise, Be glory thi'ough Jesus Christ For ever ! Amen ! APPENDIX. — Tablk of Pericopes, or Scripture Lessons for the Year, in the Epistle to tut EOMANS. 1. Advent Rom. xiii. 11-14. 2. " Eom. XV. 4-13. Eom. xii. 1-6. Eom. xii. 7-16. Eom. xii. 17-21. Eom. xiii. 8-10. Ist Sunday after Epiphany. . 2d " " " ... 3d " " " ... 4th '« » "... Ti-inity Eom. xi. 33-36. 4th Sunday after Trinity Rom. viii. 18-23. (Visitation of Mary.) 6th Sunday after Trinity. . 7th " " " 8th " " " 27th Eom. xii. 9-16. . . Eom. vi. 3-11. .. Eom. V). 19-23. . . Eom. viii. 12-17. . . Rom. iii. 21-25. § 8. LITEEATURE ON THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE EOiEANS.* See the foregoing catalogues of Pauline literature in general. Also the catalogues in Lilienthal's Bill. ArcMvarius^ p. 247 ff., where there is a rich catalogue of the older works on single passages of the Epistle ; Fuhrmann's Handlmch der theol. Llteratiir, ii. p. 326 ; "Winer, Handlmch der theol. Literatur, vol. i. p. 255 ff. ; ii. p. 121 ; Supi^lement, p. 39 ; Danz, in his Universalicorterhuch der theol. Literatur, p. 346, and in tlie supplementary number, p. 93, who gives an extensive catalogue of literature, not only to the entire Epistle, but on single divisions and chapters ; Guericke, Neu-testamentliche Isagogilc [3d ed., 1868, pp. 276 and 309] ; Reuss {History of the Holy Scriptures of the Neio Testament, 4th ed., 1864, j). » 3J ; Rkiche [Commentary on the Romans, 1833, vol. i.] p. 95 ff. [Comp. the catalogue of English works on all the Epistles, and on the separate portions of the same, in Darling, Cyclopcedia BMiographica (subject : Holy Scriptures), London, 1859.] * [In the oriRinal, this section is 6 7, and precedes the o;io en the Contents and Division. — P. 8.] § 8. LITERATURE ON THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 49 CoMMENTAUiES. — Tholuck enumerates, p. 26 flF., as expositors : * 1. Among the Church fathers : Okigen [fSol, only in the mutihited Latin version ol RuFiNTJS, Orig. Opera^ ed. Dehirue, torn. iv. — P. S.], Chrysostom [t405, Homil. xxxii. in ep. ad Bom. Opera, ed. Bened. torn, ix., an English translation in the Oifoi'd Lihi-ary of the Fatliers, vols, vii., 1841], Theodoret [t457, Comment, in ep. ad Rom.'], Theodore of iIopsvESTiA [t429, Fragments, collected by Fried. Fritzsche, in Tlicod. Mops, in N. T. Comm., 1847], Theophylact [eleventh century], CEkumenius [tenth century], Greek scholi ast of the Moskoto Codd. in Mattluci [and in J. A.. Cramer's Catenm in 8. PauU ep. ad Rom., Oxon. 1844]. Among the Latin fathers: Augustine [t430],t Pelagius,! Hilarius (the Ambrosiaster).§ 2. Expositors of the Middle Ages : Herveus [middle of the twelfth century], IIugo of St. Victor [tll41], Ab^lard [tll42], Thomas Aquinas [tl274, ignorant of Greek, but very profound and acute]. 3. Roman Catholic expositors since the Reformation : Erasmus [tl536], W. Este [tl613], a number of Jesuit expositors, among whom Ben. Justinian [1612], Cornelius a Lapidk [1614, 14th ed., Lugd. 1683], Calmet [11757], are prominent. For later ones, see below. 4. Protestant ex^DOsitors down to the beginning of the seventeenth century : a. Reformed (Calvinistic) commentators : Calvin [new ed., Halle, 1831], " a model of simple and precise exposition " (German translation by E. W. Krummacher and L. Ben- der, Franklurt-am-Main, 1837), || Beza [4th ed., 1598], Zwingli {Opera, torn, iii.], Pelli- CANUS, Bullinger [1537], Bucer [1536], Aretius [1603], Pareus [1608], Piscator [1601]. &. Lutherans : Luther (his celebrated Preface to the Epistle to the Romans), Melanch- THON {Annotationes, 1522 ; Commentarii, 1532),! Bugenhagen, Brenz, Camerakius, Hun- Nius, Balduln. 5. Protestant expositors to the middle of the eighteenth century : Reformed: Drusius [tl612], Db Dieu [tl642], Heinsius [11655], the two Capellus, Hammond [1653], Clericus [1698], Cocceius [tl669], (very prominent). * [The dates and editions are added by the American editor.] t [St. Augustine has only commented on the first seven verses of the Epistle to the Romans, in his Iiichoata exposilio ep. ad Rom. Opera, ed. Bened., torn. iii. p. 9i6 s-iq., and on some select passages, in expos, quarundam proposiliomim ex ep. ad Rom., 1. c, p. 903 sqq. It is a remarkable fact that Augustine, who, of all the fathers, came nearest the Protes- tant evangelical doctrines of sin and grace as taught by St. Paul, held essentially the Roman Catholic view of justifica- tion as being identical with sanctification, while bis antagonist, Pelagius, like the Refonneis, explained Paul's justi- fication as a forensic act that consists in the remission of sins. Comp. my History of the Chrislian Church, vol. iii. p. 81-', 815. In his anti-Pelagian writings, Augustine makes fiequent use of the Epistle to the Romans, and the other Pauline Epistles, which contributed much to his conversion. But he was a profound theologian rather than a learned commentator, and had a very imperfect knowledge of the Greek, and no knowledge whatever of the Hebrew. Upon the whole, the Epistles to the Romans and to the Galatians in their true genius and import remained a sealed book to the Church at large till the Reformation of the sixteenth century. The sense of the Scriptures unfolds itself gi-adually to the Inind of the Church, and every book has its age in which its peculiar power is felt in the life, and brought out in the knowledge and exposition of congenial divines more clearly and forcibly than ever before.— P. S.] X [The commentary of the heretical Pelagius on the Pauline Epistles is brief and superficial, but betrays no mean talent for plain, popular, and practical common-sense exposition of the Scriptures. By a singular irony of history, the commentaries, together with some other writings of Pelagius in which he develops his heretical system (.the Epislola ad Demelriadem, and his libellus fidei addressed to Pope Innocent I.), have been preserved as supposed works of his bitter antagonist, St. Jeuome (in the eleventh tome of Vallarsi's edition ; comp. my Cliurch Hisl., iii. p. 791 and p. 9s5). The 002121611 laries, however, have undergone some emendations by the hand of Cassiodorus (comp. Cass., De insUlul. divin. titer., c. 8).— P. S.] § (The commentary of Ambuosiasteb, so called, or Pseudo-Ambeosius, on the Pauline Epistles, is incoi-porated in the works of Ambeose, and is generally ascribed to a Roman deacon, Hilaey, of the foiurth centm-y (about 380). Augus- tine refers to it twice under this name, Contra duas Epp. Pelag. iv. 7, Opera, s. p. 472. Ambrosiaster exhibits some talent for historical exposition (like Pelagius), but is obscure and inconsistent. Upon the whole the patristic exegesis was not grammatical and historical, but dogmatical and practical. — P. S.J \ [English translation of Calvin on the Romans, by Cheistopeee Rosdell, F. Sibson, arx. Johx Otven. Edint, Calvin Transl. Soc, 1844 and 1849.— P. S.] H [Meter (Preface to the 4th ed. of his Com.) calls Melanchthon's " Enarratio" of 1556, " his ripest exsgetieal fruit." The " Commentaries " of Melanchthon appeared also in 1540, and in a new edition by Nickel in 1861. liAxa* following Tholuck, ref'jrs to older editions.— P. S.] 4 50 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. Lutherans of the seventeenth century : Erasmus Schmid [tl637], Calixtus [Posthumous Lectures, 1664], Calovius [tl688, author of the Bihlia Illustmta, 1673, against GkotiusJ Speneu [tl705], Christ. Wolf [Cwra PUUlogko} et Criticce, 1732], Bengel's Gnomon N. T. (1742) ; " on account of its great worth, lately edited several times, both in the original Latin, and in German and English translations." )* Armiuians: Grotius [Annotationes in Nov. Test, 1645], Limborch [tl712], TuB- KETINE [tl737], (numbered by Tholuck in this school, though perhaps unjustly), "VVetstein (in his edition of the Greek Testament, with parallel passagess from the classical authors, 1751). Sociuiaus: Crell [tl633], ScHLicnxiNG [11661], Przipzov. 6. Evangelical expositors, from the middle of the eighteenth century down to the present time : Period of transition : Heumann [tl764], Mosheim [tl770], Joh. Benj. Carpzov (" th6 fourth of this name," 1758), Morus [11794], Christian Schmid [tl774] ; above all, Semler [1791]. KoppE [3d ed., 1824] also belongs here. Latest period : Tholuck (1st ed., 1824),t Flatt [1825], Stenersen (Danish, 1829), Klee [Roman Catholic, 1830], Eenecke [1831], Ruckert [2d ed., 1839], Paulus, Moses Stuart [Andover, Mass., 1832], Charles Hodge [Princeton, New Jersey, 1835], Reiche [1834], Kollner [1834], Glockler [1834], Olshausen [2d ed., 1840, English translation, Edinburgh and New York, 1860], De Wette [4th ed., 1847], Stengel [Roman Catholic, 1836], Fritzsche [8 vols., in Latin, 1836-43, very thorough and critical], H. A. W. Meter, J Oltramare (French), Nielsen (Danish, in German by Michelsen), [1843], Baximgarten- Crusius [1844], Reithmayer [Roman Catholic, Regensb., 1845], A. L. G. Krehl [Leipzig, 1849], Adalb. Maier (Roman Catholic), Philippi [a strict Lutheran, 1848, 2d ed., revised, 1856 ; 3d ed., 1867]. On the merits of the most important later commentators, see Tholuck, pp. 32, 33. — • [Fritzsche and Meyer are the best ijhilological commentators ; De Wette excels in jjower of condensation and good taste ; Tholuck, Olshausen, Philippi, and Hodge in doctrinal exposition. — P. S.] This catalogue may be enlarged, among others, by the following commentaries : Bispinq (Rom. Cath.), Der Brief an die Homer, 2d ed., Miinster ; Beelen (Rom. Cath.), Commentariui in Ep. St. Pauli ad Homanos, Lovani, 1854 ; Vinke, Be Brief van den Apostel Paulus an den Bomainen, 2d ed., Utrecht, 1860 ; Mehbing, Der Brief Pauli an die Homer, Stettin, 1859 Schott, Ber Bbmerlrief seinem Endzweck und Gedankengang nacli ausgelegt, Erlangen, 1858 Van Hengel, Interpretatio Epistolce Pauli ad Bomanos, Ley den und Leipzig, 1 vol. 1854 2d vol., 1859 ; Haldane, Auslegung des Briefes an die Edmer, mit Bejnerhungen ilher die Com- mentarc Macknighfs, Stuarfs, und TholticFs, from the English, Hamburg, 1839-'43 ; Umbreit, Der Brief an die Bomer, auf dem Orunde des Alien Testaments ausgelegt, Gotha, 1856. [H. EwALD, Die Sendschreihen des Ap. Paulus ulers. und erTcl., Gott. 1857. — P. S.] Theological-Exegetical Monographs on the Epistle to the Romans. — See Reuss, p. 95 ; Jager, Der Lehrgehalt des Rumerhriefs, Tub. 1834 ; Winzer, Adnotatt. ad loca qucedam Epist. P. ad Rom., Leipzig, 1835 ; E. G. Bengel, Rom. ii. 11-16, Tiib. ; Michelsen, i>« Pauli ad Rom. Ep. dudbus priniis capitibus, Lubeck, 1835 ; Matthias, The Third Chapter of * [Thoi.tjck (p. 31) says of Bengel's Gnomon, that it was prepared with the devotion of an enthusiastic lover, whose searching eye noticed and tidmired even the most unseemly feature of the helovcd, and carried out with a precision which Weighed even the smallest particle. — P. S.] t [The first edition of Tholuck's Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, which appeared in 18'24, when the author was but twenty-five years of a2;e, created quite an epoch in the exegetical literature of Germany, by breaking the way for a return to a reverent treatment of the New Testament as the revealed word of God, and l)y reopening the exegetical treasures of the fathers and reformers. In the subsequent editions it has been repeatedly rewritten and gained in ripe scholarship. The last edition is the fifth, Halle, 1856. Between the first and the fifth edition, about forty commentaries on tlie same Epistle have made their appearance. An English translation of Tuoltjck by the Rev. Robeet Menzies was published in London, 1842, 2 vols. ; but this is superseded by the later editions of tlie original. — P. S.] 1 [Fourth edition, 18G5, improved and enlarged (by thirty pages). Dr. Lange has used the third, whicii appeared Vn 1859. Th-; American editor has throughout compared the last edition of this important work. — P. 8.] § 8. LITERATURE OX THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 5] Bomans, Cassel, 1857 ; Seylee, Dissert. Exeg. in Ep. P. ad Rom.., c. IV., Halle, 1824 ; Greeh on Chap. V. 1-11, Amsterd., 1855 ; R. Rothe, Ncuer Versuch einer Auslegung dcr puuliniachen Stelle, Bom. V. 12-21, Wittenberg, 1836 ; Mangold, Exeget. Versuch uher Rim. V. 11-21, Erfurt, 1841 ; Kauffer, Examinatur novissima Brctschneideri de loco Rom. V. 12 senterdia, Dresden 1834 ; Hdgenholtz, IHsp. de Cap. VI. Ep. P. ad Rom., Utrecht, 1821 ; Kohl- BiiiJGGE, Das siebente Kap., etc., Leyden, 1840 ; Fischer, Ad loc. Rom. VIII. 18-34, Wit- tenberg, 1806 ; Grimm, De vocuhulo ktIo-h Rom. VIII. 19 commentatio, Leii)zig, 1812 ; Reicue, De natura gemelunda, Rom. VIII. 19, Gottingen, 1830-'32 ; Gadolin, Rom. VIII. 28-30, Helsingfors, 1834; Beck, Versuch einer pneumatisch-hermeneutischen Entwickelung des IX. Kap., Stuttgart, 1839 ; Ranfft, Deutliche Erhlarung des IX.-XI. Kap. der Epistel Pauli an die Burner, Leipzig, 1750 ; E. Krummacher, Das Dogma von der Onadenwahl {iielst Auslegung des IX.-XI. Kap.), Duisburg, 1856 ; on the same chapters, Steudel, in the Tiihinger Zeitschrift, 1836, i. ; Baur, in the same, iii. ; Haussert, in Pelt's Mitarleiten, 1838, iii. ; Meter, in the same ; Hofmann, Schriftbeiceis, i. p. 212 [in the 2d edition, vol. i. p. 238 ff.— P. S.] ; Borger, De parte Epist. ad Romanos piarcenetica, Leyden, 1840 ; Phil. Schaff, Das neunte Kajntel des Bdmerh'iefs I'lhersetzt und erldart, Mercersburg, 1852 (in Schafp's Kirchenfreund, vol. v. p. 878 ff., and p. 414 ff.) ; Wangemann, Der Brief an die Bomer nach Wortlaut und GedanTcen- gang, Berlin, 1866 ; [W. Mangold, Der Bomerhrief, und die Anfdnge der RlJmischen Oemeinde, Marburg, 1866. A valuable critical essay. For a very large number of English essays and sermons on special chapters and verses of the Epistle to the Romans, see James Darlikg^s Cyclopedia BihUograpUca, Lond. 1859, pp. 1263-1313.— P. S.] Practical Commentaries and Homiletical Literature.* — Among these we mention the works on the Romans by Anton (1746), Spener (new ed., by Schott, 1839), Storr (1823), Kraxtssold (1830), Geissler (1831), Lossius (1836), Kohlbrugge (1839), Roos (new ed., 1860), Winkel (1850), Diedrich (1856), Besser (Bibelstunden, vol. vii., 1861) ; the Bible-Works of Gerlach, Lisco, Caxw., and Bpnsen (vol. viii., 1863) ; Heubner's Prac- tical Exposition of the N. T. ; Ortloph, Epistle to the Boraans, Erlangen, 1865-66. [This list of commentaries on the Romans, by Drs. Tholuck and Lange, is almost exclu- sively Continental, and must be supplied by Anglo-American works, of which only three are mentioned by Dr. Tholuck — the commentaries of Hammond, Stuart, and Hodge. Comp. Darling's Cyclopoedia Bibliographica, London, 1859, p. 1236 ff. We notice the most impor- tant: I. General English commentaries on the whole Bible : Matthew Poole {Synopsis Critico- rum, etc., 4 vols, in 5 fol., Lond. 1669-78, and Francof. ad M. 1712, 5 vols, f. ; Annotations upon the Holy Bible, 4th ed., 1700, new ed., Lond. 1840, reprinted by R. Carter in N. T.) ; Patrick, Lowth, Arnold, Whitby, and Lowman {Critical Commentary and Paraphrase »n the Old and New Testaments, and the Apocrypha, a new ed., Philad. 1844, in 4 vols.) ; M. Henry (in many editions of 3, 4, and 6 vols., the most original, interesting, and edifying among the popular and practical commentators) ; John Gill (first ed., Lond. 1763, in 9 vols., full of rabbinical learning and ultra-Calvinism) ; Thos. Scott (several editions, in 6 vols, or less) ; A. Clarke (new ed., Lond. 1844, in 6 vols.) ; D'Oyly and R. Mant (Lond. 1845 ; gives the comments of the Anglican bishops and divines) ; Comprehensive Commentary (com- piled from Henry and Scott, and other sources, by W. Jenks, Philad. 1855, in 5 vols.). n. Commentaries on the New Testament, including the Epistle to the Romans : H. Ham- mond (4th ed., Lond. 1675) ; D. Whitby (4th ed., Lond. 1718, and often since) ; W. Burkitt (Lond. 1704, and often since ; very good for practical and homiletical use) ; P. Doddridge {Family Expositor, Lond. 1739, in 7 vols., and often) ; Albert Barnes {Not-es Explanatory and Practical, New York and Lond. 1850, and often, 11 vols., prepared for Sunday-school teachers, and circulated in many thousands of copies) ; S. T. Bloomfleld {The GreeTc Testor- ment, with Notes Critical, Philological, and Exegetical, first published in 1839, 9th ed., Loud * tWe have omitted or abridged the Gcrmaii titles of these books.— P. S,^ 52 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 1855) ; II. Alford {Greek Testament, with a critically revised text, a digest of various read ings, marginal references to verbal and idiomatic usage, prolegomena, and a critical and exe- getical commentary; first published in 1849, 5th ed., Lo)id. 1865, in 4 vols.; in the 5tl3 edition, the Codex Sinaiticus has been collated. Dean Alfokd follows in the track of TiscH- ENDORP as to the text, and De Wette and Meyer in the exposition, yet vrith indei^endent judgment, good taste, and reverent spirit) ; Webster and Wilkinson {N. Test. Gr., with brief grammatical and exegetical Notes, Oxon., 1851, in 2 vols.) ; Csr. Wordsworth (canon of Westminster, high- Anglican, patristic, devout, and genial, but given to excessive tyiDologizing and allegorizing, and avoiding critical difficulties : G7'eeh Testament, ■with Notes, 1st ed., Lond. 1856 ; 4th ed., Lond. 1866, in 3 large vols.). Of these English commentators the American editor has especially compared the latest editions of Alford and Words WORTH. Ellicott, who is more critical than either, has not yet reached the Romans. III. Commentaries on the Epistles of St. Paul : W. Paley (Horce PaulinoR, or the truth of the Scripture history of St. Paul evinced by a comparison of the Epistles which bear hig name with the Acts of the Apostles, and with one another, in many editions) ; John Feli. {A Paraphrase and Annotations upon all the Epistles of St. Paul, 3d ed., Lond. 1703) ; John Locke (A Paraphrase and Notes on the Galatians, Corinthians, Romans, and Ephesians, Lond. 1742, and in Locke's Works) ; G. Benson (Lond. 1752-56, 2 vols.) ; James Macknight (A new literal translation, from the original Greek of all the apostolical Epistles, with a com- mentary, etc., Lond. 1795, and other editions of 1, 4, or 6 vols.) ; T. W. Peile {Annotationi on the Apostolical Epistles, Lond. 1848-'52, 4 vols.) ; Abp. Sumner {Apostolical Preaching con- sidered in an Examination of St. PauVs Epistles, 9th ed., Lond. 1845); Conybeare and HowsoN {Life and Epistles of St. Paul, Lond. 1852, rejjrinted in New York in several editions) ; B. Jowett {The Epistles of St. Paul to the Thessalotiians, Galatians, Romans, with critical notes and dissertations, Lond. 1855) ; Vaughan {Tlie Epistles of St. Paul, for English Readers, Lond. 1864). IV. Special commentaries on the Epistle to the Romans : A. Willet {Hexapla : that is, a sixfold commentarie upon the most divine epistle of the holy Apostle St. Paul to the Romans, etc., Lond. 1620) ; Bp. Terrot (Lond. 1828) ; R. Anderson (3d ed , Lond. 1837) ; Bp. Parry (Lond. 1832) ; Moses Stuart (Congrcgationalist, 1st ed., Andover, 1832 ; 2d ed., 1835, 6th ed., Lond. 1857) ; Charles Hodge (O. S. Presbyterian, 1st ed., Philad. 1835, new edition, enlarged and revised, 1866) ; Thomas Chalmers {Lectures on the Epistle to the Romans, Glasgow, 1837, 4 vols. 12mo.) ; R. Haldane (new ed., Lond. 1842, in 3 vols.) ; Abp. Sumner {A Practical Exposition of the Epistle to the Romans and 1 Corinthians, Lond. 1843) ; W. Walford {Cune Romance, Lond. 1846) ; W. W. Ewbank {Commentary, etc., Lond. 1850- '51, 2 vols.) ; S. H. Turner (Episcopalian, The Epistle to the Romans, in Greek and English ; with an analysis and exegetical commentary, New York, 1853) ; Robt. Knight {A Critical Commentary, etc.. Loud. 1854) ; E. Purdue (Dublin, 1855) ; A. A. Livermore (Boston, 1855); John Gumming {SdUbath Evening Readings on the Romans, Lond. 1857) ; John Brown {Ana- lytical Ecposition of the Epistle of Paul to the Romans, Edinb. 1857) ; James Ford {St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans, illustrated from Divines of the Church of England, Lond. 1862) ; John Forbes, LL.D. {Analytical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, tracing the train of thought Iqi the aid of Parallelism Edinb. 1868). The work of Forbes is based upon the dis- covery that Parallelism is not confined to the poetry of the Bible, but extends also to many portions of its prose. It is not a full commentary, but an illustration of those passages alone which Parallelism seems to place in a new and clearer light. — P. S.] SAINT PAUL. 59 [SAINT PAUL. Christ ! I am Christ's ! aud let the name suflBce yottj Aye, for me, too, He greatly hath sufficed ; Lo, with no winning words I would entice you ; Paul has no honor and no friend but Christ. Yes, without cheer of sister or of daughter — Yes, without stay of father or of son, Lone on the land, and homeless on the water, Pass I in patience till the work be done. Yet, not in solitude, if Christ anear me Waketh Him workers for the great employ ; Oh, not in solitude, if souls that hear me Catch from my joyance the surprise of joy. Hearts I have won of sister or of brother, Quick on the earth or hidden in the sod ; Lo, every heart awaiteth me, another Friend in the blameless family of God. Yea, thro' life, death, thro' sorrow and thro' sinning, He shall suffice me, for He hath sufficed ; Christ is the end, for Christ was the beginning, Christ the beginning, for the end is Christ. From a poem by Fbedehic "W. H. MrsBa, I99fc , THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THS ROMANS. THE INSCRIPTION, INTRODUCTION, AND FUNDAMENTAL THEME. Chap. I. 1-17. niE APOSTLESHIP OF PAUL, APPOINTED POR THE GLORY OF THE NAME OF GOP THP.OUGH THE GOSPEL OF CHRIST, AND FOR THE REVELATION OF THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD FOB FAITH IN ALL THE WORLD, AMONG THE JEWS AND GENTILES, AND ESPECIALLY ALSO IN HOME. Inscription and Salutation. Chap. L 1-7.* TO THE ROMANS.* 1 Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ,^ called to he an apostle [a called, chosen apostle, xXrirog dnoGzolog], separated [set apart, dcpcoQixy^trog] unto the gospel of 2 God (Which he had promised afore [which he promised beforehand, n()omt\y j'f<'?v«7o] by [through] his prophets in the holy Scriptures ') \om.u parenthesis], 3 Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord [om/niere the words : Jesus Christ our Lord, and transfer them to the close of ver. 4], which [who] was made [born "] of [from, 4 fx] the seed of David according to the flesh ; And \fmii And] declared to he [who was installed] * the Son of God with [in] power," according to the Spirit of holiness, by [from, fi] ' the resurrection from [of] the dead ' [ — Jesus Christ our 5 Lord] • B.y [through] whom we have received [we received] grace and apostle- ship, for [unto, £;V, '• «•) for the purpose of, with a view to, in order to brine; about] obedicUCe tO the faith [of faith] ^ among all [the] nations, for his name [name's sake] : 6 Among whom are ye also the called [, the chosen ones] of Jesus Christ : " V To all that be in Rome," beloved of God [To all the beloved of God who are in Rome], called to he [chosen] saints : [.] " Grace to you," and j)eace, from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ. TEXTUAL. > [Hpo? "PM/xaiovs. This is the oldest and simplest title of Codd. S. (Sin.) A. B. C, and has been adopted by Lachmann, Tischendorf, Alford, Lange, &c., in the place of the title of the ttxlui receptus: navAov toO an-oo-rdAo* ) irpbs 'Pwfiaiovs €7ria.h was sutliciently defined by ayCan to lie uiidcr.stood by the readers as referring to tli« Old Testa- ment. So is nvevixa aytoxrvi'Tjv, ver. 4, and irveO/iia oyio;' repeatedly withimt the article. Comp. "Winer, Gr. o/ !>v Jf. T., $ 19, 2 b. (p. 113, tiUi ed., p. ll'J, 7th ed., liy Luncmanu). Meyer insists tliat the omission of the article (toIs) indicates that only those portions or passaircs of the Old 'I'estnmi nt were meant here, which contain Messianic prophecies, and ha refers in proof to ypa.(^u>v npo(f>riTi.Kuiv in cliap. xvi. 26 (where, liowever, t/n: prophetical portions of tlie Old Testament are meant). Bui Fritz^c!lC, De Wette, Tholuck, I'hilippi, Alloril, Lans;c.(Ex'/;. JV'dis), ami most commentators regard ypaa.l ayiai as a proper nuiui for the whole Old Testament. And, in fact, it is the whole Bihle, as an organic unit, from Genesis to Malaehi, which bears witness to Christ, comp. John v. 40. — P. S.l * Ver. 3.— [76 I'D fie vov can only be said of the liuntaii nature of Christ which began in time, while His divine, nature is without begiuaius and without end. ilark the ditference between eyecero and ?iv in John i. 1, 3, 6. Comp. also GaL iv. 4: efanetTTe I Kev 6 Sebj rbv vi'ov avToi, yevoiievov eK yvvaiKOi , yevofjifvov vno vofi^ov . Some Minus- cule MSS. reail yevvmixivov for yivoiJ-ivov. — P. S.] * Ver. -1. — [6pt pi. opinio. The translation of the Vulgate : qui prxdeslinatus est Filius Dei, rests on a false reading or gloss : n pooptcr9tv7o<;.—P. S.] * Ver. 4.— [€»< SvvdpLii may be connected adverbially with opto-SeVros (= toC iv Svv. op.), with power, powerfully, effeclunlly, IcrufUgllch, ge.waWg (Luther, Olshauscn, De Wette, Meyer, Alford, Hodge), or better adjectively with the preceding noun vtoO deov, i« />';«)(?(• (Melanchtlion : " Declaratus est esse Fdius Dei poteiis,'' Philippi, Ilofmann, Lange). In the former case, the words refer to the resun-eetion as an exhibition of the Divine power ; in ths latter, they contrast the majesty and power of the risen Son of God with the weakness of His human nature, the aaBeveta, implied in adpi.^ P. S.] ' Ver. 4.— [Dr. Lange translates ef von-aus, from, out of, as indicating the origin, corresponding to ck crn-epjitaToj, ver. 3. Bengel : " e/c non modo tempus, sed nexwm rerum deiiotat." The iireijosition ex marks in both cases, vers. 3, 4, the source from or out of which the relation springs. The seed of David is the source of the human nature of Christ ; the resurrection is the starting-point of His divine nature, not in its preexistent state, of com-se, but in its oljccttve his- torical manifestation and public recognition among men. Comp. Exeg. Notes. — P. S.] ^ Ver. 4.— Idvao-Tao-is viKpSiv, the resurrection of the dead, Todten-aaferstehuiig, is not identical with ava(rTo<7i9 e/t v€Kpiav, resurrection from the dead (E. V.), but is a stronger summary expression which comprehends the resurrection of Christ and the believers as one connected whole or single fact, inasmuch as the resurrection of Christ, who is "the Eesurrection .and the Life" itself, implies and guarantees the resm-rection of all the members of His mystical body; comp. John xi. ^5 ; Acts iv. 2 ; xvii. 32 ; xxiii. 6 ; xxvi. 23 ; 1 Cor. xv. 12. Alford : " We must not render as E. V. 'the resurrect ioa/zoTO the dead,' but ' the resurrection of the dead,' regarded as accomplished in that of Christ." Comp. also Philipid and Wordsworth. — P. S.] " Ver. 5.— [etj iin-aKorji' Trio-rews (without the article) occurs once more, Eom. xvi. 26, and may be translated as a compound noun: Glaubensgiliorsam. The words express the design and object of Paul's apostleship, viz., that through its instrumentality all the nations be brought to a saving faith in Christ. The different views on the meaning of TTi'o-Ti?, whether it be objective faith, fides qux credilur, or subjective faith, fides qua creditur, do not alfect the trans- lation. See Exig. N'otes.—i'. S.] 10 Ver. 6. — [The E. V. and Dr. Lange make a comma after vjieit, and regard (t\7)Toi 'I. Xp. as being in apposi- tion to Ujaeis. So also the New Testament of the Am. Bible Union, which, however, omits the article before called, and renders : among ivhom are ye also, called of Jesus Christ. But Lachmann, Tischendorf, De Wette, Meyer, Alford- omit the comma and connect icArjToi as the predicate with ia-ri : " AiiioDg tokom ye also are called (f Jesus Christ;" Meyer : " Unter welchen auch ihr Berufene Jesu Ckristi seid." Alford thinks that the assertion among whom are ye, with a comma alter vp.el%, would be fiat and" unmeaning. This, however, is not the case. See Exeg. Notes.— V. S.] " Ver. l.—[iv 'Vuip.Tg, ver. 7, and toi? iv 'Pui/ixTj, ver. 15, are omitted in Cod. G. Born, and Schol. Cod. 47, but this omission is too isolated to nave any critical weight. Comp. Meyer against Reiche's inference.— P. S.J '2 Ver. 7. — [According to the usual construction still adhered to by Wordsworth, who makes a comma after ayt'otj, the first seven verses foi-m but one sentence, in which case we would have a double subject, viz., HauAos and x^P's fo-l eip^vj) instead of X"pii' ««"' dprivriv (Aeyei), and a repetition of the persons addressed, viz., rois iv 'Poiiaj) and ijp.lv. But it is impossii'le tiiat such a gross grammatical irregularity should occur not only here, but in all the Pauline Kpistles, as also in 1 and 2 Peter, Jude, and Apoc. i. i. The nomina'tive x«P<-s fiid «'p>?>'';> ^i-s well as the i)if-lv, cle irly indicate that the second clause of ver. 7 (which should be divided into two verses) foi-ms a complete !-entonce by itself and contains the salutation proper, while the preceding woids form the iiiscript.Ofi. Hence there should be a period before x<^P'?- So Knapp-Gocschen, Lachmann, Tischendorf, Theile-Stier, Alford, in their editions, as well as most of the modern com- mentators. Tholuck is wrong when he says that Fritzsche was the first to suggest this division. Beza already did it: " Novam hie periodum incipio, adscrijHo puncto pist dyi'ots." — P. S.] 13 Ver. 1.— [Grace to you, without be, is iu accordance with the Greek and the Vulg. (gratia vobis et pax) and preferable. The E. V. is inconsistent, sometimes inserting be and sometimes omitting it. The verbal form to be sup- plied after x, Cicero Attico), frequently with the addition of the wish for health and pros- perity, by the words nl n()dxTn,v, more usually yai^nv, or ■/aii>fi.v /f'/ft, saiuton, or st]hy.i, /ui(ji-i.v), and twice in the Christian sense, namely in the circular letter of the Apostolic Council of Jerusalem, which was probably written by James, Acts xv. 23 (oi dnoa- ro).oi> . . . rot.; . . . ddf/.qoti; roti; ii sOrl^n' ■/aii>n,r), ind in the Epistle of James, chap. i. 1 { Jc'iAofioi; . . rati; da'idr/.a (pt').aiq . . . /ai^fiv).* From 2 John, ver. 10 {•/ai^n.v avrto /lij Uyfrf), it appears that Greek Christians were in the habit of greeting one anotlier with the usual xai()f (Vulg., are, comp. Matt. xxvi. 49 ; xxvii. 29 ; xxviii. 9 ; Mark xv. 18 ; Luke i. 28 ; John xix. 3). But the heathen formula, as implying a prayer to the gods, had in it a taint of idolatry, or, at all events, it referred only to tem- poral prosperity, and had to give way before long to a change in accordance with Christian feeling. The Hebrew (and Arabic) form of salutation is Dibd , fi^rjvrj, Peace, or Tjb Oib'j, LXX., fi()ijvtj jot, Peace be leilh yon ; c'omp. Gen. xxix. 6 ; xliii. 23 ; Ex. xviiL 7 ; Judges vi. 23 ; 1 Sam. x. 4 ; Dan. X. 19 ; Luke x. 5, 6, &c. (With the later Jews the usual formula was "I'CJ"'''). The risen Saviour greeted ■Jius the assembled disciples, John xx. 19, 26, bring- Bg the true peace of the soul with God, which He, * [Outside of the New Testament the salutatory xi'.pf'f is also found in several epistles of Ignatius, in tue epistle of (pscudo-) Barnabas, and in other ancient Christian docu- neats ; comp. Eusobius, H B. v. 4; iv. 26.— P. S.] the Prince of Peace, had bought by His atoning deatli and triumphant resurrection (comp. John xiv. 27 ; xvi. 33 ; Matt, x, 12, 13). Conihining the Grajco-Roman inscription and thr. Hebrew salutation, we would iiavc this form: "PaM* to the Romans. Health and peace be with you.'''' But Paul translbrins the Greek /ai(jn.v and the Helirew shatorn from tlie prevailing idea of phyi^ical health and temporal comfort, into the deep mean- ing of the saving grace and peace of God in Christ, and comprehends in the two words xu.ol<; and !titi]i'>i the richest blessings of the gospel ; yuiJt,t; being tlie objective cause of the Chri.^tian salvation, and fi(j'';vr; its subjective efl'ect in the soul of man. At the same time, there is, no doubt, a reference in this epistolary greeting to the Mosaic, or rather Aaronic benediction. Num. vi. 25, 26 : " The Lord make His grace shine upon thee, and be gracious unto thee ("Sn^'i, from "iin, gratiosus fuit, hence "(n, yra.iJi,i;), the Lord lift up His countenance upon thee, and give thee peace (cibll" , LXX., ft(jr'ivijv).''^ We find this salutatory grace and peace not only in the Epistles of Paul, but also in those of Peter and of John in the Apocalypse. In the Pastoral Epistles, 1 Tim. i, 2 ; 2 Tim. i. 2, and Titus i. 4 (fext. rer.), Paul, with reference probably to the Greek version of the Aaronic benediction. Num. vi. 25 (i/.ftj(Tfi, ai for Tl?'?^; )) ^^'^^ to tlie prayer for grace aad pence that of mercy (* Afoc), whicli ministers of the gospel need more than any other class of men. This threefold blessing, corresponding to the threefold Aaronic benediction, we find also in 2 John 3.* In the Epistle to the Romans, where Paul, con- trary to his habit, addressed a congregation which he had not founded, or even visited, he amplifies the Grajco-Hebrew inscription and salutation still more, and inserts pai'entheticnlly some of the fundamental doctrinal ideas of the Epistle, as suggested by the mention of " the gospel of God," namely : (1.) The connection of the gospel with the Old Testament revelation, ver. 2 ; (2.) the divine-human nature of Christ, who is the subject of that gospel, vers. 3, 4 ; (3.) his call to the apostleship of all the Gentiles by Christ, which gives him a right to address liimself also to the Romans, ver. 5. In the richness of this salutation we see the overflowing fulness of Paul's mind, and the importance he attached to this Epis- tle. Calvin : Epistola tola sic methodica est, ut ipsum quoque exordium ad rationem artis composi- turn sit. — P. S.] f Ver. 1. — Paiil. — Saul as Paul, i. e., the Small, in opposition and contrast to Bar-Jesus, Eltmab THE Sorcerer of Cyprus, Acts xiii. 8. [Saul and Paul. Paulos is the Hellenistic, Paulus the Latin form for the Hebrew Saul, though differing from it in meaning. It was chosen as the nearest allusive and alliterative equivalent, and as a name already * fin post-apostolic literature, Clement of Eome wishes the Coiiiithians x«P'« f^' €ip>)nj. Polycarp, ad P/jiV., in- stead of this, ha« c A e o s (cat c

)n) (comii. Gal. vi. 16 : cipiji^ eTr' avToii? ical cAeoj). The Mariyr.vm Pahjcnrpi, in its inscription, prays lor eAcos, eipijuj koX a-ydn-Tj, which corresponds with the formula in Jude 2. In the epistle of the conyTcgations of Simtliem Gaul, A. T>. 107 (Eufeliue, H. E. V. 1-4). we have tip^i-T) koX x<»P'S "ai l>6(a. — V. S.] t [Besides the commentaries, comp. J. B. Bittinger : 27)1? Greetings nf Paul, in the Am. Presh. and Theol. Re- view for Jan. and April, 18G7 ; and especially J. C. Theo. Otto: Ueher dm opuflulischen S gnuyruss x«P'5 i> y-lt Ka't. etp^vi), und x°-P''^^ sAeos, eipjivT), in the Jahr' hucJi'i- fur Deutsche Tluologie, vol. xii. No. 4 (Gotha, 18C7X pp. 078^697.— P. S.l f)8 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROifAXS. familiar to the Greeks; while Saul, as a proper name, was unknown to them. The name Saul—the most distinguished name in the genealogy of the tribe of Benjamin, to wiiieh Paul belonged (Rom. xi. 1 ; Phil. iii. 5 ; comp. Aets xiii. 21) — the Apostle used among the Jews, the name Faul among the Gentiles, and in the later part of his life exelusively. The Jews and early Christians often had two names, either shnilar in sound and identical in meaning, as Silas and Silvanus (the former occurring uniformly in the Ajts thirtceu times, the latter four limes in the Epistles), Luotn and Lucanus * (Col. iv. 14 ; 2 Tim. iv. 11; Philcra. 24); or similar in sound but different in meaning, as Jcmu and Justus (Col. iv. 11), Saul and Paul, lUllel and Pollio ; or diJferent in .soimd but identical in meaning, as Cephas (He- brew) and Peter (Greek) ; or different both in souinl and meaning, as Jacob and Israel, Simon and Peter, Bartholomew and Nathanacl^ John and Mark (Aets xii. 12, 25), Simeon and Nirfcr (xiii. 1), Parsnbas and Justus (i. 23). It is possible that the Apostle Paul, as a Roman citizen, received this name in early youth in Tarsus (Lightfoot), or inherited it from •^orae ancestor, who may have adoi)teil it in becom- ing a freedman, or in acquiring the Roman citizen- ■ ehip ; Paul being the well-known cognomen of sev- eral distinguislied Roman families, as the ffens Emilia, Pallia, Julia, Sergia, &c. It is more prob- able, however, tiiat he chose the name himself after he entered upon his labors among the Gentiles, as a part of his missionary policy to become a Greek to the Greeks, in order to gain them more readily to Ciirist (1 Cor. ix. 19-23). At all events, the name Paul is first ntentioned during his first great mis- sionary journey, when lie, taking henceforth prece- dence of Barnabas in words and in acts, struck Ely- mas the sorcerer with blindness, and converted Ser- gius Paulus, tlie pro-consul of Cyprus, to the Chris- tian faith (Acts xiii. 8), After this striking fact, he is uniformly called Paul in the latter chapters of the Acts, and in all the EpistleS. But we have no right, for tliis reason, to infer (with Jerome, Olshausen, Meyer, Ewald, and others) that the name Paul was a memorial of tlic conversion of Sergius Paulus as his first-fruit. For (1.) he may have converted many Jews and Gentiles before that time ; (2.) pupils are called after tlieir teac'.iers and benefactors, and not vice vcrsl ; (3.) Luke gives no intimation to that effect, and connects the name Paul, not with that of the proconsul of Cyprus (xiii. "i, 12), but with that of Elymas the sorcerer (ver. 8). The last circinn- stance favors the ingenious hypothesis of Dr. Lange, that the name expresses the symbolical significance of the victory of Paul, the small man of God, over Elymas, the might;/ mag'cian of the devil, as a Xew Testament counterpart of the victory of David over Goliath, or of Moses over the sorcerers of Egypt. Dr. Lange, however, admits the prol)ability that Paul had his Roman name before this occasion. At all events, the change of name has notliing whatever to do with his conversion ; and all allegorical interpre- aiUions of Chrysostom, Augustine, Wordsworth, and others, which go on tliis assumption, are merely pious fancies, which are suflieiently refuted by the fact that the Apostle is repeatedly called Saul long * [LiiC'imis does not occur in the Greek Testament, out in sevcrril Latin MSS. the tliir.l Gospel is inscribcil : Ell infji'limn srcundnm. Luconum. Tlie (Uoek Aoukos is, no loitlit, a contraction of tlio Liitin Liicnnus, as Si'Aaj is of S Iv'iiius. Some commentators, however, identify the names liucas and Lucius (Aota xiii. 1 ; Itom. xvi. 21.) — I'. S.] after his conversion, as in Acts ix. 25, 30 ; xii 25 ; xiii. 1, 2, 7, y ; and tliat it is said of Saul in one passage (xiii. 9), that he was " filled with the llolv Ghost."— P. S.] * A servzmt of Jesus Christ. — "in^ 1^? . This is not merely the general designation of the pious man (Fritzsche : (Jhrisli cultor, Eph. vi. 6), but the designation of his office (Tholuck) ; 1 Cor. iv. 1 ; Phil. i. 1 ; James i. 1. Reiche : Tiie word implies unlimited obedience. Schott : " fVor/.o? de- notes the Christian, so far as he, in the discliargc of a special Christian calling, surrenders himself completely to God's will, and excludes his own preference." Here the Christian call in its uni- ver.sal character is meant, just as it appears in the apostleship, after the absolute service of the one great servant of God, Is. liii. Never- theless, there is no tautology in the addition : ca'led to be an aposfle. Calvin : Apostolatas ministerii est species. The same office, related to Christ, makes the SoT'^-oc, in the absolute sense (comp. Is. liii.); but, related to the world, it makes the anomoloq. [A servant, literally bondsman {do''- }.oc, from i)ift), to bind), denotes generally, like the corresponding Hebrew nirr^ T2" , a relation of de- pendence on God, and cheerful obedience to His will. Paul glories in this service, which is perfect freedom. The more we feel bound by the authority of Christ, the more we are free from the bondage of men. Deo servire vera libcrias est (Angustitie). In a wide sense, the terra applies to all believers, who are both cliildren and servants of God (Is. Ixv. 13 ; Dan. iii. 2() ; Rom. vi. 22 ; xiv. 4 ; Eph. vi. 6 ; 1 Cor. vii. 22 ; ] Peter ii. 16 ; Rev. xix. 2, 5) ; in a special and emphatic sense, it is used of the chosen ofiice-bearers in the kingdom of God, as Moses, the prophets, and kings in the Old Testament (Deut. xxxiv. 5 ; Josh. i. 1 ; Is. xlix. 5 ; Jer. xxv. 4), and * the ministers of the gospel in the New, particularly the apostles (so here ; Phil. i. 1 ; Tit. i. 1 ; Col. iv. 12; James i. 1 ; 2 Pet. i. 1; Rev. i. 1). Hodge: " Sernant is a general official designation, of which, in the present ease, apostle is the specific explanation." Paul " rejects all human authority in matters of faith and duty, and yet professes the most absolute* sulijection of cimscience and reason to the authority of Jesus Christ." Wordsworth : " Other men, in the beginning of their epistles, especially those which they addressed to the Roman people, recited their own titles as rulers, kings, or conquerors ; but the apostles claim to be heard as (iov'/.oi,, bondsmen^ * [I add, as a curiosity, a quotation from T)r. "Words- worth, who, in his Com. on Acts xiii. 9, uncritically com- hines all the various interpretations of the name (except Dr. Lango's, whicli wns then not yet known to him), and assigns no less thnn eight rensons for the chnnee of Saul into Pinil : (1.) Because SauAos was a puioly Jowisli name. (2.) Beciuse amonp: the Greeks it mislit expo-^e him to con- tempt, as havinjr the same sound as - nov), but by Jesus Christ," &c. The word refers to the liistorical call, not to the eternal election. Cal- vin : Kiqiie mi lit iis assentior, qf i earn de qua loqni' litr vovritioiiem. od efernam Dei clectioncin rcfenmi. — P. S.J The expression, apostle^ has here its widest tignificanee. Christ, tiie Risen One, has called him ; he is therefore, in the most positive sense, a witness of His resurrection, and this implies the apostolic witness of the whole of His miraculous person and work. \_ApiSlle is a title of dignity, signifying the highest order of servant ; every apostle being a ser- vant of Christ, but not every servant an apostle of Christ. The one brings out the dependence of Paul on Christ, the other his authority over the congrega- tions, and the latter is conditioned by the former. The term apostle may designate, ctymologically, any delegate, commissioner, or missionary, but more par- ticularly, as here, and in most passages, a chosen eye and ear witness of the life of Christ, who was personally instructed and selected by Ilim for the work of laying the foimdation of the Christian Church, and teaching her through all subsequent generations. The apostles were inspired messengers of Christ, not to a particu- lar chirge, but to the whole world. The term is therefore generally restricted to tlie twelve (Luke vi. lo), and to Paul, who was likewise directly called by the Lord (Cal. i. 1, 12 ; Acts ix. 15 ; xxvi. 11). The sudden call of the persecuting Paul to the apostle- ship of the Gentiles corresponds to the sudden call of the Gentiles to Christianity, just as the gradual instruction of the Jewish apostles accords with the long training of the Jewish nation for the gospel. — P.S.] Separated, set apart. — Not equal to chosen of God (De Wette), nor to appohited b>/ /he Church (with reference to Acts xiii. 2 ; Olshausen),* but directed to and appointed for this particular calling, through the whole providential course of his life (<;omp. Gal. i. 15). An oKfOfJi^faOai, first took place with him [at his birth, comp. Gal. i. 15 : 6 a.(io()l Trpoa-Ke/cATjjiiai avTou?, so th.it he was both kAijtos and ii^iopicr/u.ei'o;. Paul was not only cat'ed liy God, but wa- also visibly sii aporl for the ^ipostolic office hy an outward mis- sion and Didiiiaiion at His command. But Acts xiii. 2 sviilentlv refer!) to a special and joint mission of Barnabas and Saul— P. aj lical o^tcfn' must be distinguished from n (^ o Y i,v(ii(T x ( iv or £ X A i ;' f (T a ^ , as well as Iron! xaAfif ; it denotes tiie Divine detcrmiiKUion of the historical career of the man (see Acts xvii. '2.6), [Meyer refers cii/.w^nff/a'rot; to the historical call I'.t Damascus, and compaies nxiTo^ h./.oyT^c. Acts ix. 15 ; xxvi. 1(5 ff. The word is an explanation of y./.z/TOs ctnonrohti;, and gives us the additional idea of destination. It implies that Paul was selected from the world, singled out, consei;rated to, and des- tined for the gospel iservico, at tiie time of his con- version. It refLfs to the Divine p.ppointnieiit for (lie apostolic office in (/enei'oJ, ■■■viiilc >xiioai'9€VTO^^ KpiOii/TO^^ b^oXoyrjQevTO^ napa T^s aTravTOJV yvaip-Tj^ Kai ij/rjipov. So Tlieophylact. I.uther : eriotesen. Meyer agrees with this as to the senso, hut mi?ists that here as elsewhere opi'fei;' with the djutle accusative means to appoint, desic:iiMte, institute some one for something (Acts x. 42). Philijipi (3d ed.) : " Clir^slus isl als Solin Guiles dargethjin, erwie- SEN, insofern cr vm den Menschf.n, oder in dir L'kber- ZECGUNG DEU MENscHkN, durcli die AufKisteliuiig vnn den Todtaii dazu dngeseJzl ist. Ganz paraliel ist der G danlce, Acts siii. 3o." Alford : " The opilnv here spoken of is not the ohjictive • fixing,' ' appointing' of Christ to be the Son of God, but the subjt, i. e., the sensuous, susceptible, vital fulness of corporeity, as distinct from and sub- jected to the s;)irit, or, in a more general sense, the " earthly man," avfJ^iiionoi; y;o'i*6i; (1 Cor. xv. 47 ; Gen. ii.). Still less has flesh heie the second mean- ing, viz., sinfid sensuousness and susceptibility, as opposed to the spirit, and without it ; or, in the more general sense, tlie " natural man," u.vO{>(onoii H'lyi^ KOt; (John iii. G ; 1 Cor. ii. 14). But (T«(jJ has here its third meaning, and expresses the physical human nature under the influence of the spirit (John i. 13 ; vi. 51), yet in historical relations, or man in his his- torical finileness, limitation, and qualification (Gal. iv. 4). For Christ's incarnation, and the growth of His physical nature, evidently involved no opposition to the " Spirit of holiness," but took place under its consecrating influence. [Flenh (ff«((i, ~i^3 ) is here, and in all the pas- sages where it is used of the incarnation (Kom. ix. 5; 1 Tim. iii. 16; John i. 14; 1 John iv. 2), a strong Hebraizing term for human nature, with the im])lied idea, perhaps, of weakness and frailty, though not necessarily of .sin (somewhat analogous to the occasional use of the German der Sterbliche, and the English mortal, for man). It is as correct to say : Christ became man {Menschwerdunf), as to say : Christ became _/?es/i {incarnatio, incarnation, Fleisch- werduwi), but the latter expression is more em|)hatic ; it exhibits more strongly the condescension of Christ, the identity of His nature with our own, and the universahiess of His manhood. The word aaiit, therefore, when applied to Christ, must not be un- derstood in an Apollinarian sense, as if Christ merely assumed a human body with the animal soul, but not the rational soul, whose place was supplied by the divine Logos. It implies the entire human constitu- tion, body, soul, and spirit, sin only excepted, which does not originally and necessarily belong to man. It is not the flesh, as opposed to the spirit, that is here intended, but the human, as distinct from the divine. The flesh, as an organized system of life, is the out ward tabernacle and the visible representative of the whole man to our senses. The adiit of Christ was the seat of a human i/t//;, with its attections, and of a human vo\% or TTVH/ta, with its intelligence (comp. Matt, xxvii. 50 ; John xi. 33 ; xix. 30), but not of the diia()ria. He was subject to temptation, or temptable (Heb. ii. 18 ; iv. ISV but neither au(i/.ix6(i (Rom. vii. 14), nor \fr/ix6q (1 Cor. ii. 14). He a|> peared not " in the flesh of sin," but only " in the likeness of the flesh of sin " (Rom. viii. 2). At the same time, the limitation, xarot ffoe^xa, plainly im plies the divine nature of Christ. " Were He a mere man," says Hodge, " it had been enough to say that He was of the seed of David ; but as He is more than man, it was necessary to limit His descent from David to His human nature." — P. S.J Yer. 4. According to the Spirit of holiness, X a T n ;t r f r /( a a ■■ i lo a i' r r^ c . — We acce pt. with Bengel, against Tholick, that the ayi.o)avvi] a '(/ueis iv TauTjj rfj jii(~>i', ver. 4, in apposition with toT; vioTi OtoTi, anticipated in the E. V. ver. 3]. Thia expresses the relation of the exalted Son of God to t^e Apostle and the Roman Christians as tlie ground and bond of their union. They togetiier accepted Jesus as tlie Christ of God, and served Him as their common Master. [Alfbrd : " Having given this de- scription of the person and dignity of the Son of God, very man and very God, he now identifies tliie divine person with Jesus Christ, the Lord and Master of Cliristians — the historical object of their faith, and (see words following) the Appohiter of himself to the apostolic office." De Wette: "^]tja. X^. beseichnet den iSohn Gntles als hi^orixeh-kirch- liche Ersclieiimnij^'' So Tlioluck, Pliilippi. Jcsus is the personal, Christ the official name ; the former expresses His true character and mission and relation to the world, the latter His connection with tlie Old Testament and the promise of God. Jesus, i. e,, Saviour, was the Hebrew name, announced by the angel before His birth. Matt. i. 25 ; Luke i. 31, and given at His circumcision, Luke ii. 21 ; Christ, tlie Greek equivalent for the Hebrew J/essiah, i. e., the Anointed, exhibits Him as the fulfillcr of all the prophecies and types of the Old Testament, as the divinely promised and anointed Prophet, Priest, and King of Israel, who had for ages been the desire of all nations and tlie hope of all believers. Lord ia hero, and often, applied to Christ in the same sense in which the Septuagint uses -/.rQioi; for the Hebrew ■'jiiX and nin". See the Lexica. Christ is so called as tlie supreme Lord of the New Dispensation, or the sovereign Head of Christendom, to whom all believers owe allegiance and obedience. — P. S.] Ver. 5. Through Tvhom w^e received. — After stating the common relation of believers to Christ, there follows the account of tlie S[)ecial relation of the Apostle to Him. It is plain that neither ver. 5 nor ver. 6 can be parenthetical ; but here is prepared the whole treatment of the Epistle on the lelatiou between the call of the Apostle and the call of the church at Rome, di,^ ov. Christ is the personal means of (lommunicating his call on God's part [or the mediatorial agent in conferring grace from God to man, comp. Gal. i. 1 ; 1 Cor. i. 9. — P. S.J. i).a /ioii fv (received) denotes not only the free divine gift, but also the living religious and moral appropriation by faith. It is plain that the plui'al here has reference to the call of Paul alone (not to the apostles in general, according to Bengel), from the following signature of his apostleship, by which he is the Apostle to the Gentiles.* * [Comp. the note of Meyer in locn against Reiche, and of Ali'ord against Peile, who infers that the subject of eAa« CHAPTER I. 1-7. 6S Qrace [ia general] and apostleship [in particu- lar. — F. S.]. G^ace, as the operative call to salvation and to the full experience of salvation in justifica- lion, is ilie preliminary condition for every Christian office, and, above all, to the apostlesliip. Tiie grand unfolding of his apostlesliip was therefore preceded by an extraordinary degree of grace [in his conver- sion]. The explanation, /d()i,v d;ro(TTO/./yC, / race of apos'les/iip (Hendiadys, so Chrysostoni, Beza, Phi- lippi, and others), obliterates the force of that pre- liminary condition ; * but when the i/race is regarded merely as pardoning grace (Augustine, Calvin), the fundamental part is mistaken for the whole. Thus, also, the extraordinary apostolic gifts {/citjicTfiaia) to which Theodoret, Luther, and others refer /d()i,v, presuppose grace (/aoic) already. Meyer under- stands the expression to mean Divine grace in general ; that is, the translation into the com- munion of the beloved of God. Unto obedience of faith [f Ic; {> naxoTj v TtiartMc, zum Glauhensgehorsain, comp. Rom. xvi. 26. — P. S.]. That is, for the purpose of estab- lishing obedience to the faith. The f it; denotes not merely the purpose, but also the operation of the apostleshi|) ; — an instance of Pauline conciseness. It may be a^^ked here, whether the genitive tt i (t r f m >; indicates the object, or must be read as apposition : the faith which consists in obedience [to the Word and Will of Ciirist.— P. S.].f But this question is limited by the second, whether niari,^ can stand in the objective sense as fides qDjE credi.tur [quad ere- dendum est, doctiina..Chr'.i'iana. — P. S.] ? Meyer denies this, and asserts that TT-joTtc, •» the New Testament, is constantly subjective faith [fi'des qua creditnr, ndes credens. — P. S.], though it is often made objective, as here, and is regarded a power, or controlling principle. |: But this would give us the idea of obedience toward the faithful. The obedience here meant is either identical with faith (the obedience which consists in faith, according to Theophylact, Calvin § ), or it is obedience to faith in its objective form. The latter interpretation is sup- ported by the expressions vna/.oi] tor A'^nffTor, 2 Cor. X. 5 [i^na/.otj rJ^q d).tj&tlai;, 1 Peter i. 22], and particularly Acts vi. 7 [" a great company of priests vTi/jxot'ov it] tt'igth,, became obedient to the faith," comp. Rom. i. 16 : Int'j/.ovaav rm tvay- yfUio.—P. S.]. Comp. 1 Peter i. 2, 14. But this ^ojaei' must be the same as the pTeo.eding riiJ.o>v, overlook- ing the formulary characttr of the phrase 6 xupio; ijniav. — P. S.] * [Alford : " Keep the xdpiv koL ajroo-roA^i' separate, and strictly (^onseputive, avoiding all nonsensical figures of Hendiadys, Hyp'illage, and the like. It was the general bestowal of grace whicli conditioned and introduced the special bestowal (ical, as so otten, coupling a specific portion to a whole) ot aptjstlesUip; cf. 1 Cor. xv. 10."' Augustine: " G ratio m cum omnibus fideHbits, aposlolnlum autem non eum omnibus communem Jwhl." — P. S.] t [Or rather : the obedience which consists in faith, in the act of beiioving.— V. S.] t [Meyer, 4th ed. 1865, p. 43 : "7riie hifr, OBJErTiviRT, als Pnlruz g'dtichl. Vrgl. xvi. 26; Gal. i. 23. Dif jTto-Tts isl, nach P., die Vebrrzugung und Zumr- t'cht (assensus itrid FiDi:ciA) vnn Jesus Christtis als d'vi ein- tige.n und voUkiimmenen Vrrmitthr di'r gbtthchin Gnad'' und d^seujig-n L bens, durch sein Versbhiiungswirk." — P. S.] § [So also Hodge : " The obedience of faith is that obeuience whicli consists in faith, or of which faith is tlie contvolliiig principle." 'Wordsworth : " That I miaht bring bU nations to that faith which manifests itself in hearken- ing to the "Word, and in obedience to the Will, of God "- E.S.} nlari^ cannot mean only doclrina fidei. Even obe dience to the gospel (Rom. x. 16) does not expres. the most definite form of the objective niaToi : thi is Christ Himself. An Ei)istle, sent to Rome by the ambassador of a Lord and King, who declared him- self a|)p()inted to call all the [jcoples of the Roniau Empire to obedience or allegiance, nmst have bees planned in full consciousness of the antitheses, aa well as of the analogy, between the earthly Roman Empire and tiie Kingdom of Christ. Therefore the Apostle expresses the analogy when he characterizea himself as an ambassador who appeals to the nationa to be obedient to his Lord. But the antithesis lies in his denoting this obedience as an obedience to the faith. We must ailmit that the idea of the subjec- tive faith also ha;t here a good sense in itself. Faith is not at all arbitrary, but an obligatory obedience incumbent upon the inmost soul and conscience ; yet its obedience is not slavish, but the joyous act of free faith, as it is assensus and fi ucia. And if we accept this, the expression would be an oxymoron, like the expression : law of the Spirit. But since the question is concerning a characterization of the apostleship, the fuller idea must be expected : obe- dience toward the object of faith, especially as the freedom of faith is thereby also declared. Even the Christian's hope can be used in an objective sense (Col. i. 5). Among all the nations {sv num-v toi? tf>vf(Ti-v). — Since this expression constitutes one definition with the preceding, it is an improper alter- native to refer it either to i/.dp. (Beza) or to m's Inay.. nlcnKOi; (Meyer [Hodge]). We translate here, amo7ig all (he nations (with Riickert, Reiche, Baur) ; not amo>i(/ all Gentiles (Tholuck, Meyer), because, from the Ibllowing salutation, the Jews are included in the designation, and because it is in har- mony with the purpose of the whole Epistle to estab- lish a united congregation from among Jews and Gentiles. With this view, the subordinate idea of heathen nations is immediately introduced, yet not clearly before vers. 13, 14, &c. [Hodge : " The apostles were not diocesans, restricted in jurisdiction to a particular territory. Their commission was gen. eral. It was to all nations," — yet with an amicable division of the immense field of labor ; comp. Gal. ii. 9 ; Rom. xv. 20 ; 2 Cor. x. 16.— P. S.] For the sake of his name. — (See Acts v. 41). Not for " the good " of His name ; nor for the glorifying of the same (Meyer), which would have been expressed in the form of a doxology,* but for the spread of His name (Phil. ii. 10). There- fore the words are not an addition, but an explana- tory parallel to the expression, '■'■for obedimce to the fah/i,^' &c., and relate, in common with this, to the antecedent. His name is the object of the faith to which the nations should render obedience in His name. Ver. 6. Among -whom are ye also. — We place here a conmia, and read the words, the called, the chosen ones of Jcsns Christ, as an address (with Riickert, Philippi, &c.) ; but not, amoncj vhom are ye also called oj Jesus Christ (with Lachmann, Mey- er [Alford], aiid others). For the principal weight * (Xot necessarily; comp. Acts ix. 16; xv. 26; xxi. 13, where the same phrase, vTrep toO bvofiaro^ too Kvpiov 'IrjaoC, occurs in the sense : for the glory of Christ. Mey- er's interpretation is also adopted by Alford and ilodge. The words aptly express the final end of Paul's apostle- ship, which was, to promote the knowledge and glory ol Christ. In the " name " of Ch^i8^■ is summed up all thai He was, did, aud sulVered.- P. S.l 64 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. reata on the thought, that the Roman Christians were included in the totality of nations to which the Apos- tle was sent. He did not need to say first to them that they were the called of Jesus Christ. Thus we have the beautiful antitiiesis: I am the ciiosen Apos- tle for all nations : you are the chosen believers iu the midst of all nations : we are therefore directed toward each other. The called of Jesus Christ. — Not, whom Christ has called (Luther, Kiickert, and others) ; but who, as the called [by the accepted call of God through the gospel], belong to and are subject to Him (the genitive of possession ; Erasmus [Calvin, De Wette], Meyer, and otiiei's).* Paul refers the call (through Christ) to God (Rom. viii. 30, &c. ; see Meyer). The Apostle seems, by this address, to an- ticipate the salutation itself; but the address must prepare the way for the salutation by the reminder that he can salute them as pertaining to him. [Hodge : " 01 yJ.tjroi, the called^ means the effectu- ally called ; those who are so called by God as to be made obedient to the call. Hence the yJ.rjrm are opposed to those who receive and disregard the out- ward call. . . . Hence, too, yJ.tjroi and i/.h/.Tol are of nearly the same import; ymto, nqofii-auv y./.tjrol, Rom. viii. 28 ; comp. Rom. ix. 11 ; 1 Cor. i. 26, 27. We accordingly find yJ.tjTol used as a familiar desig- nation of believers." This is not quite correct. K/.tjToi and i/.hy.rol (a paronomasia in Greek, like the German erwdJilt and auserwiihlt) are clearly dis- tinguished, Matt. XX. 16 and xxii. 14 : 7io)j.oi yd^) flai,v yJ.^rol, o/.iyoi' lU exP.f jtroi, many are calle/, but few chosen; in the last passage they are even put in antithesis. All the members of the visible Church are yJ.tjrol, though they may ultimately be lost ; but only the members of the invisible Church, or the true believeis, are i/.h/.Tol, or y.hjToi /.at a tt^o- Sktw (Rom. viii. 28). Comp. the notes on Matt. XX. 16, in vol. i. p. 352 and 354 f. — P. S.] Ver. 7. To aU that are in Rome. — The ad- dress and the salutation. f The Epistle is addressed to all Christians in Rome. Residence in Rome and connection with the body of Roman Christians are certainly presupposed (see ver. 8). But the Roman Christians are saluted according to the condition of things, as an incipient church not yet fully organ- ized, but destined to become so — an end to which this very Epistle was directed. The Apostle ex- presses himself otherwise in the Epistles to the Corinthians, Galatians, and Thessalonians. There he salutes the Christians as a church, or churches. [The Christians residing at Rome, whether born there or not, are viewed as one community, however imperfectly they may have been organized at the time ; but they no doubt worshipped in different parts of the city, and were thus divided into various domestic congregations, h./.hjaiai, xat oly.ov, xvi. 5. The population of tlie city of Rome at the time of Christ is vaiiously estimated from one to two mill- lon.s. In his earliest five epistles, Paul addresses himself t-Tj f/././.tjain, x.t.A. ; in all the others, Toti; eiy/on;. — 1 . f^.] Beloved of God, called to be saints. — The * [Alford takes 'IrjcroO XpioroO not as tlie gi'nil. posses- vonis, but. :is equivalent tn b?/ Jesus Christ. But the call of believeis is uniformly referred to the Father. Alford quotes John v. 2.) and 1 Tim. i. 12 ; hut these passages are not to the point. — P. S.] t [The salutation Commences with X"-P'-^t and should form a verse hy itwelf. The first clause of ver. 7 connects with ver. 1 and indicates the readers. Sec Text. Note ". — P. fl.l root of their Christian faith is, that they itnow them selves beloved of God by the experience of Hi£ reconciliation ; the goal and crown of their Chris- tian faith is holiness. But they are not merely called to be saints (De Wette). As truly called, they are actually saints first in this sense : that, according to the analogy of theocratic holiness, they are separ rated from the ungodly world and consecrated to God ; secondly, in the sense that Christ dwells in them as the principle of increasing holiness, and that they are characterized according to the ruling principle of their new life (1 Cor. vii. 14). Thia general designation does not imply that the Apostle could say it of every individual, still less that he should ascribe to individuals a personal holiness of life. [yJ.ijToi has the same relation to ayt-ot as zA;/t6s has to anoarolot;, in ver. 1, and expresses the vocation of the Roman Christians to holiness, which is both au actual possession as to i)rinciple, and a moral aim to be realized more and more by daily growth in Christ. — P. S.] Grace to you and peace. — Ti)e Greek /ai- (tnv (Acts XV. 23 ; James i. 1), and the Hebrew csb ciSlT, are here reflected unitedly in the infinitely richer Christian salutation. The grace which, as the cause of peace, has its source in (Jod and Clirist ; the peace, as the operation of this cause, which becomes the source of new life in believers. The more definite Christian conception is destroyed if we substitute (with Meyer, against Olsliausen, Philippi, and many others) Sivlvation instead of peace, and kindness instead of grace, [Grace and peace are related to each other as cause and effect, and constitute the chief blessings of Christianity, embracing all that we need. The profound Chri.-^tian meaning of /k^k; — the redeeming love of God in Christ — and of lisj/jrtj — the peace with God by the redemption — compared with the ordinary meaning of the Greek /a/^ftr and the Hebrew shalom, affords a striking example of the transforming power which the genius of Christianity exercised over ancient lan- guage and custom. See the General Remarks on p. 57.— P. S.] From God our Father. — The expression of the specifically Christian consciousness of God. The experience of pardon through Christ producea the consciousness of the v'loOiaia (sonship, adop- tion) as a result. And [from] the Lord. — [Kv(}iov 'J. Xq. ia not dependent on ]Inrij6<; and parallel with >jii(7)v, but is ruled by dno and is coordinate with 0tou }[aT(iQi;. God is nowhere called " owr «?/f/ Christ's Father," and Christ never addresses God " our" but " Ml/ Father," owing to His peculiar relationship which is rooted in the b/iooi'dia, or equality of essence. This frequent coordination of Christ with the Father, as equally the object of prayer and the source of spiritual blessing, implies the recog nition of the divinity of Christ. No Hebrew mono- theist could thus associate, without blasphemy, the eternal Jehovah with a mere man. So also Philippi, Hodge, and others. — P. S.] Not of the Lord (Eras- mus, GliJckler). Nevertheless, we would not read, with Meyer: y.al dnb xr()iov, and not merely view Christ as causa medians, in distinction from the Father, as the causa principalis. For the dominion of the exalted Saviour must be distinguished from the mediatorship of Christ as causa medians. [God the Father is the author, Christ the mediator and procurer, the Holy Spirit the applJer or imparter, of CHAPTER I. 1-1. 6A grace and peace. The Spirit takes tliem from Ciirist and shows them to the believer (comp. John xvi. 14). The hitter may be the reason why the Uoly Spirit is not especially mentioned in the epistolary salutations, except 2 Cor. xiii. 13, 14 ; 1 Peter i. 2. - P. S.j DOCTRINAL ANB ETHICAL. 1. The Epistle of the Apostle to the Romans on the righteousness of faith is still in a special sense a new nicssiigo to the Romans, and a witness against Roniaiiists. [It connects admirably with the con- cluding verses of the Acts, ciiap. xxviii. 30, 31, as a specimen of Paul's preaching in Rome, and to the Ronians.— P. S.] 2. The significance of the Epistle to the Ro- mans : (1.) As the first of the New Testament Epis- tles ; (2.) in the group of the Pauline Epistles ; (3.) as an original record of the missionary activity of the Apostle, and as an example for evangelical missions ; (4.) as the central point of the Christian doctrine of salvation, and thus as the starting-point of the Western (Latin) Church, and especially of the Protestant Evangelical Church (see the Intro- ductioii). 3. The epistolary inscription of ancient writers contrasted with the subscription of recent ones. The former characterizes the Epistle as a substitute for personal intercourse ; the latter has become an independent form of personal communication. Frankness predominates in the former, courtesy in the latter. 4. Servant of Jesiis Christ, called to he an apos- tle. The extent of one idea is determined by that of the other. — Gospel of God: glorious unity. — Connection of the Old and New Testaments. — The apostles, unlike the Pharisees, acknowledge no tra- ditions in connection with the Old Testament. — Grace and office must not be separated. — Just as lit- tle can we separate the experience of God's love and the beginning of sanctification. — Neither can grace and peace be separated ; nor the paternal authority of God and the authority of Christ. 5. The importance of the inscription of this Epistle. The importance of the salutation. The adaptation of the great Apostle of the Gentiles and of the Christian congregation of the great metropo- lis to each other. See the Exeg. Notes. 6. The antithesis : Christ born of the seed of David, and appointed (he Son of God in majesti/ and honor (also over the Roman world), is an eco- nomical antithesis, at the foundation of which lies the ontological antithesis : that Christ is the tem- poral Son of David and the eternal Son of God. 7. The resurrection was historically accomplished and essentially finished in Christ. As the ideal and dynamical productive energy of the Logos, its roots and im{)ulse pervade the whole history of the world and of man, and especially the history of the king- dom of God, The same may be said of the Spirit of holiness. See the Exeg. Notes. The Logos lighteth every man that cometh in.o the world (John i. 9). 8. I'aul, as the ambassador of Jesus Christ, the Son of God in regal power, announces to the believ- ers of the imperial city of Rome that it is his busi- ness to call the world to obedience to the faith and to subjection to Christ, HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. An apostolic salutation : 1. From whom doe« it come ? 2. what is its import ? 3. to whom is it addressee' ? (vers. 1-7). — Tlie one gospel of God : 1. Pron sed by His prophets ; 2. fulfilled by Hid Son (vt.rs. 3, 4). — The mis.^onary preaching among the Gentiles was a preaching of obedience to the faith for the glorifying of the name of Jesus Christ (ver. 5). — Every office is a gift of grace. The ser- vants of Christ must remember this : 1. For their humility ; 2. for their elevation and encouragement (ver. 5). — IIow can preachers of tiie gosi)el guard against bitterness toward the members of their con gregation? By considering that the congregation are: 1. Beloved by God ; 2. called by Jesus Christ (ver. 7). — Grace and peace : on one side diiferent in manifestation, but, on tlie other, one in origin. Luther: — The Spirit of Cod was given after Christ's ascension, since wliich time He sanctifies Christians and glorifies Chiist in all tlie world as the Son of God in power, in word, miracle, and sign (ver. 4). Stakke : — The preachers of the gospel must preach both the law and the gospel in their respec- tive order, and especially the gospel (ver. 1). — He who does not become a saint on earth, will not be numbered among the saints in heaven (ver. 7). QuESNEi, : — Every thing that comes to light is not therefore new : the oldest errors are continual novel- ties, and the newest truths are ever old. OsiANDRi Bibl. : — Christ, according to His hu- man nature, is our brother. great consolation ! (ver. 3). Cramer : — Worldly peace is a great treasure, but, after all, it is not sufficient for us. When Christ communicates His peace to us (John xiv, 27), it is grace in God ; and then have we peace with God (ver. 7). Bexgkl : The Gospel of God is also the Gospel of Christ (ver. 1). — Jesus Christ is the Son of God (vers. 3, 4). This is the ground of all legitimate address of Christ to His Father and God, and of our legitimate address, through Him as our Lord, to His Father and our Father, His God and our God, who hath made us His own. He was Son of God before His humiliation ; but His Sonship was veiled during His earthly life, and not fully unveiled till after His resurrection. On this rests His justifica- tion, 1 Tim. iii. 16 ; 1 John ii. 1, and this is the ground of our justification, Rom. iv. 25. Gerlach : — According to the flesh, the Son of God belonged to the Jews alone. But by the com- pletion of His atonement, through the resurrection. He became the universal King of the human race, Lord of heaven and earth, according to the Spirit which dwelt in Him, and has perfectly pervaded Hia human nature (vers. 3, 4). Heubner : — Prophets and apostles had one call- ing, one work (ver. 2). — The apostoUc benediction — of what fulness of spiritual gifts, of what a holy heart, does it give witness ! It is grand to express such a wish for a church ; it presupposes the per- sonal possession and appreciation of these gifts, but also a serious zeal to apply them to the congregation (ver. 7). Roos : — If the theme of Paul's preaching had been only virtue, and a supreme Being whom wo call God, he would have pleased the Greeks ; and if he had preached on a Messiah yet to come, and on THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. the works of the law, the Jews would have been contented with him. But he preached on the Son of God. That was the voice of his gospel (vcr. 4). Besser : — The Spirit of holiness is the very force |»y whieli Christ hns taken away the power of deatli, and has destroyed mortality, tlirough tlie triumph of His imperishable life (ver 4). J. P. Lange : — How Christ exhibits His power as Tiord by the Spirit of sanctification : 1. As the Risen One ; i. as tlie Son of God (vers. 1-4). — The same : Like man, like salutation. — The Joy witli which the Apostle announces tlie majesty of Christ in imperial Rome : 1. How foolish this joy appeared ; 2. how gloriously it was justified ; 3. how it must be fulfilled once more. — The internal connection between the power of the resurrection and tlie Spirit of holiness in Christ. [BtJRKiTT : — Paul declares : 1. The person from whom he received authority to be an apostle, name- ly, Christ ; 2. how free and undeserved a fovor it was ; 3. the special duty and office of an apostle ; 4. how he puts the Romans in mind of their con- dition by nature before the gospel was revealed to them and received by them ; hence it is the duty of both ministers and people to be mindful of what was their condition by nature. — ^V/u/ is the Holy Ghost excluded in the S'llulation of ver. 7 ? He is not ex- cluded, though He be not named ; but is necessarily hnplied in the forementioned gifts. Besides, in other ealutations the Holy Ghost is expressly mentioned ; 1 Cor. xiii. 13, 14. — Henry: — The Apostle de- Bcribes : 1. The person who writes the Epistle ; 2. the gospel itself; 3. the persons to whom it is writ- ten ; and 4. pronounces the apostolic benediction. — DoDDRincE : — We are called to partake of the privi- leges of God's people ; we belong to the society of those who are eminently beloved of God, and who lie under great obligations, as they are called a holy nation, a peculiar people. May we not dishonor the eacred community to which we belong, and may we finally enjoy the important privileges of that state of everlasting glory in which the kingdom of the Son of God shall terminate 1 — Clarke : — The Apos- tle invokes upon the Romans all the blessings which can flow from God as the fountain of grace ; pro- ducing in them all the happiness which a heart filled with the peace of God can possess ; all of which are to be communicated to them through the Lord Jesus Christ. — Comprehensive Comm. : — The Christian pro- fession is not a notional knowledge, or a naked as- sent, or useless disputings ; but it is obedience to the fiiith. The act of faith is the obedience of the; understanding to God revealiiig, and the product of that is the obedience of the will to God command- ing. — Barnes : — From Paul's connecting the Lord Jesus Christ with the Father, we see : 1. That the Apostle regarded Him as the source of grace and peace as really as he did the Father ; 2. he intro- duced them in the same connection, and with refer- ence to the bestowal of the same blessings ; 3. if the mention of the Father implies a prayer, the same is implied by the mention of Christ, and hence was an act of worship to the latter; 4. all this shows that Paul's mind was familiarized to the idea that Christ was divine. — These seven verses are a striking instance of the manner of Paul. While the subject is simply a salutation to the Roman church, his mind eeeras to catch fire, and to burn and blaze with sig- nal intensity. He leaves the immediate subject b» fore him, and advances some vast thought that awel us, and fixes us in contemplation, and involves us in difficulty about his meaning, and then returns to hia subject. — HoriGE : — God is called our Father, not merely a.-> the author of our existence and the source of every blessing, but especially as reconciled toward us through Jesus Christ.- -If Jesus Clirist is tlie great subject of the gospel, it is evident that we can- not have right views of the one v.-ithout liaving cot- rect opinions concerning the other. — J. F. H.] [SciiAFF: — The epistolary addresses generally bear on the doctrine of the ministerial office and ith relation to tlie eongnigation, and furnish suitable texts for ordination and instailation. sermons. — Ver. 1. Paul, a model for a Christian minister: I. In his humili/i/ — a servant (bondsman) of Jesus Christ. II. In his dignity — a chosen apostle. His sense of dependence on Christ (servant) precedes and underlies his sense of authority over the congrega- tion (apostle). — Only the true serviint of Christ can be a true servant of the people. — Ministers derive their authority from Christ, wot from the people, but for the people. — A sertant of Christ. The service of Christ is perfect freedom, John viii. 36. St. Augus- tine : " JJeo servire vera libcrlas csty — A chosen apos- tle. The apostle and the ordinary minister : I. The unity : (a.) Both are called by God ; (6.) both are servants of Christ ; (c.) both labor for the same end — the glory of God and the salvation of souls. II. The difference : {a.) An apostle is called directly by Christ ; a minister, through the medium of church authority ; (6.) an apostle is inspired and infallible ; a minister is only enlightened, and liable to err; (c.) an apostle has the world for his field ; a minis- ter is confined to a particular charge. — Chosen, set apart. The necessity of a Divine call for the min- istry : I. The inner call by the Holy Ghost. II. The outward call by the authority and ordination of the Church. — The regularly called minister contrast- ed with the self-constituted minister and fanatic— Skt apart unto the gospel. The preaching of the gospel : I. The chief duty of the minister, to which all others must be subordinated. II. The highest work, in which Christ Himself and all the apostles engaged. III. The inconsistency of connecting any secular calling with the holy ministry. — Ver. 2. The close connection of the Old and New Testaments. Christianity a new, and yet an old religion. — The historical character of Christianity — in opposition to the Gnostic and fanatical theory of a magical, abrupt descent from the clouds. — Vers. 3, 4. Jesus Christ the great theme of the gospel. His double nature, the human, earthly, liistorical, and the divine, heav- enly, eternal — both inseparably united in one per- son. — The importance of tlie resurrection as an argument for the Divinity of Christ. — Ver. 5. Christ, the mediator of all grace. — Ver. 7. The Christians are saints — i. e., separated from the world and con- secrated to the service of God ; holy in principle, and destined to become more and more holy and perfect in their whole life and conduct. — Tlie re- deeming GRACE of God in Christ — the fountain of peace with God and with ourselves. — First grace, then peace. — No grace without peace ; no peace without grace. — Tlie coordination of Christ with God the Father in the epistolary inscriptions— at indirect proof of the Deity of Christ.] CnAPTER I. 8-15. CT II. The Introduction. Chap. I. 8-15. 8 First [of all]/ I tliank my God tlirougli Jesus Christ for [coucerning] * you all, that your faith is si)okeu of througliout the whole world [in all the woildj. 9 For God is my witness, whom I serve with [in] my spirit in tlie gospel of hia Son, that [how, w,,'] ^ without ceasing I make mention of you [how unceasingly 10 I remember you ;] always in my prayers ; Making request, [ ; always asking in my prayers,] * if by any means now at lengtii [if ha])ly now at last] ' I might have a prosj^erous journey [I may be prosj^ered] ° by the will of God to come 11 unto you. For I long to see you, that I may impart unto you [shaie with you, fitzaScol some spiritual giit, to the end ye may be established [in order that ye 12 may be strengthened] ; ' That is, that I may be comforted together with you, by the mutual faith both of you and me [among you by each other's faith, both 13 yours and mine].* Now [But] I Avould not' have you ignorant, brethren, that oftentimes [often] I purposed to come unto you (but w^as let '" [hindered] hitherto) " tliat I might have some fruit among you also, even as among other 14 Gentiles [the rest of the Gentiles]. I am debtor both to the Greeks, and to the Barbarians ; both to the wise, and to the unwise [Both to Greeks and to Barba- 15 rians ; both to wnse and to unwise, I am debtor]. !So,'^ as much as in me is [as far as lies in me], I am ready '^ to preach the gospel to you [also] that [who] are at Rome also {j^mu also]. TEXTUAL. ' Ver. 8.— [n- p M T V iJ-ev, pri'mum quidem, ztivbrderst, first nf a'l. The elra Se is omitted in the pressure ol thought and flow of speech, as in Acts i. 1 ; Eom. iii. 2 ; 1 Cor. xi. 18. Comp. Winer, Grammar, p. 508 ((itii ed), and Alex. Butt- maun, Graminatik des N. T. Sprachpebraiichs, p. 313. Alford tinds the corresponding 6e' in vir. 13, and connects thus: " Ye indeed are prosperiuLC in the faith ; but I still am anxious. /wrW/er to advance that fruitfulness." But this anxiety was already expressed in ver. 10, and the 5e in ver. li is simplj' ixeTafiaTiKov. — P. S.] - Ver. 8. — irept is best supported in opposition to vrrip. [The prepositions wept and UTre'p both occur in this conneo* tion (1 Cor. i. 4 ; Col. i. 3 ; 1 Thess i. 2 ; 2 Thess. i. 'i), th"ugh vnep more rarely (Eph. i. 16 ; Phil. i. 4), with sulistan~ tially the same meaning; the difference is, that irepi, concerning, implies simply that the Roman Christians are the suhjccl. of thanks ; while vnep, for, in behalf of, fur the sake if, gives the idea of intercession and ;dd. But jrepi has also the latter meaning. They are often confounded by the MSS., but the best codices (St. A. B. C. D*. K.) and critical editors (Grieabach, Lachmann, Tischendorf, Meyer, Alford, Wordsworth) are here in liivor of wept against the imip of the text lis rece.pt us. — P. S.] " Ver. 9. — [ws differs from on and expresses the mode or degree. Comp. Phil. i. 8; 2 Cor. vii. 15; 1 Thess. ii. 10; Acts s. 28, and Meyer and Philippi in luc.—'P. S.] * Ver. 10. — [The translation depends here upon the punctuation, which is left to critical conjecture, the ancient MSS. having no punctuation. I make a comma or semi-colon after TrotoC^oi, and connect Travrore, k.t.A., with ieo/otei/os. So Meyer, Philippi, Alford (in his notes). Dr. Lange, however, in his version and Exeri. Nules, follows Ti.-^chcndorf, who makes a comma after npocrevxlav p-ov, like the E. V. In this ease TrayTOTe must be taken as an intensification of aSia- Aetn-Ttos = assidue semper, assidii^ssime ; but this would roixuiic a different position of the words, viz., ojs d5iaAet'7rTo>« irdvTOTe, k.t.A. As it is, jrdvTOTe eirl rwi' Trpo(revxiav /xou 6e6/aeyos is better taken as an explanation of aStaAetVTtos fiveiav vp.oiv wotoOjotai, so as to mark at the same time a progress of the idea, the incessant remembrance of the Komaue cul- minating in direct prayer. — P. S.] * Ver. 10. — [et J7(09 riSri ttotb, ob elwa endhch einmal (Meyer, Olshausen, Lango, &c.) ; Alford: if by avy means b'fnre lonij. ttois, haply, p>issib'y, implies the possibility of new delays and hindrances. riSr), already, may mean finally or at last, with reference to things long hoped for and delayed, and in coniiection with n-orc, tandnn nhrjUiiido. See Ilartmig, Partih-illfhre i. 238. The Apostle's desire in this respect was granted about three years afterward^, a. d. 61. —P. S.] * Ver. 10.— [Or succnd, evoSuiB^aopiai.. The original meaning of oSds, tvny, journey, is lost in the verb. See Ex^g, Pfotes. But the parting wish in Greece to travellers is even now koAoc Kareuofitoi', as in Italy, buou viaggio, a luippy journey. — P. S.] ' Ver. 11. — [Dr. Lange inserts after gift: personal, peculiar grace, and after established: for your world-historical calling. See his explanation below, which I cannot adopt. — P. S.] * Ver. \i.—[ Ver. 13.— [The verb to lej, is used here, and 2 Thess. ii. 7, by the E. V. in the race sense to hinder, to forbid, tc prevent {km^vsiv, KaTe'xeti'), as in Tennyson's lines : " Mine ancient wound is hardly whole, And lets me from the saddle." Put the word is now generally used in the opposite sense, to alloio, to permit. On the contrary, the verb to prevent, in th« E. V. (and in the Anglican Liturgy), means to precede, to anticipate (prx-venire) ; while in modern English it bi(:niric( tne reverse, to hinder, to obstruct. — P. S.l 68 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. " Ver. 13. — [The words koI €Ko>\vdr]v axpi- rou Sevpo, area parenthesis, since 'iva. must depend upon irpotdi/jL-qv, &c It is not necofisavy on this account to tiike zeal in the adversative sense, to which Fritzsche and Meyer object. fieOpo it only here in the N. T. .1 particle of time, .ilthough often in Plato and later writers.— P. S.] " Ver. 15. — [Or : And so, Hence. The force of oiirios is ; Since I urn a debtor to all the Gentiles, &c. — P. S.] '" Ver. 15.— foi/Ttos to, Kar e^ie, irpoOvixov (t^C. e« ng sn (outuj;), '/» /"" is, on my pail, or, as f xal XarQfi'd), 1 Cor. i. 4 ; Phil. i. 3 ; iv. 19 ; Pliile- nion 4. — P. S.]— Through Je.sus Christ. [Not to be connected with fiov (Koppe, Glockler), but with iv/

tj(Tiiol, words of revelation, Acts vii. 38 ; Heb. v. 12 ; 1 Peter iv. 11) can by no means denote the Old Testament word of God in its general aspect (Coc- ceius : quidquid Deux habntt dlcenduin), but this word only in the specific direction in which the most of the Jews were unbelieving in respect to it. What is meant, tlierefore, is not the law alone and as such (Theodoret, Gicumenius, Beza) ; for the law, accord- ing to Paul, was also a typical gospel (which Tholuck Beems to overh)ok, when he says : The contents of the ).6yia divide into the twofold part, 6 v6/io(; and ai inayyi-liai,) ; nor the Messianic prophecies alone (Grotius, Tholuuk, Meyer), but properly botli (De Wette), as one was the condition of the other, and both constituted a covenant of Jehovah with the people (Calvin, Calov [Hodge], and otliers). The unity of these elements lay chietly in tlie patriarchal promises ; and as the people of Israel were made a covenant people, these were committed to them a? the oracles of God establishing the covenant, which Israel, as the servant of God, should proclaim to the nations at the proper time. [The Ajjostle, ia calling tlie Old Testament Scriptures the oracles of God, clearly recognizes them as divinely inspired books. The Jewish Church was tlie trustee and guardian of tliese oracles till tlic coming of Christ. Now, the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament are committed to the guardianship of the Cliristian Churcii. — P. S.] " Eni,aT iv& ijaav. They wevf cntni-sted with. Jh(Trfi''ft.v ttvi Tt in the passive ; comp. Winer, § 40, 1 [§ 39, 1, p. 244, 7th ed. ; alsc Gal. ii. 7 ; 1 Cor. ix. 17.— P. S.] They were federally entrusted by the faithfulness of God {nidni;, ver. 3) with God's promises, or were autltenticaled in their faitJi in order that they might exercise it with fideU ity to faith. Ver. 3. What then ? If some were faithless, &c. In these words the Apostle intimates that the Jews, in the main, still have the advantage just men« tioned. The statement is therefore neither an objec- tion nor a proof, but it establishes the previous point against doubt. In view of the certain fulfilment of the Divine promise, even the mass of the apostate people is only a poor crowd of individuals, some; though these some may grammatically be tnany. Meyer, taking ground against Tholuck and Philippi, disputes the contemptuous and ironical character of the expression rn'ts'. The contempt and irony lies, of course, not in the word, but in the idea. Un- belief has scattered and divided Israel. According to De Wette and Fritzsche, the expression has an alleviating character. Since the great mass of the unbelievers was known to the readers, tlie expres- sion has rather a palpable sharpness. Meyer's trans- lation : "If many did refuse to believe {Glaube), their unbelief ( Unglaube) will not annul the credi- bility [Glaubhaftiykiit) of God," expresses the cor- respondence of the different designations, but it ia not satisfactory to the sense. The Apostle forces us, by the tt/oth; &fov, to bring into promi- nence here the moral force of a7ii.(TTta ; and the assertion of Meyer, that aj-narnv and anvaria mean always, in the New Testament, unbelief not ww- faithfulness, rests upon a false alternative.* Edll- ner refers the anvarla to the unfaithfulness of the Jews in the ante-Christian time. De Wette like- wise : " They have been unfoithful in keeping the covenant (Theodoret, (Ecumenius, Calvin, and oth- ers) ; not, they have been unbelieving toward the promises and the gospel (Tholuck, Olshausen, Mey- er)." This view is very strange, since he correctly observes that in the word ani^UTflv there lie two meanings ; as ni(TTi<; is at the same time fidelity and faith. Meyer's objection to De Wette is equally strange : " tu'e'i,- would be altogether unsnited, for the very reason that it would not be true. All were disobedient and unfaithful." This is against history and the declarations of the Bible (see the discourse of Stephen, Acts vii.). If we distinguish between the ideas, to be a sinner and to be an apo»- * [Hodge: That an-io-Teiv may have the sense to b» unfaitliful, is plain from 2 Tim. ii. 13, and from the sense of aiTKTTia, in Heb. iii. 12, 19, and of aTrio-ro?, in Luko xii. 4G ; Kov. xxi. 8. To understand the passage as leferiing to want of fiiith in Christ, seems iucousistent with tlu whole context. — P. S.] CnAFTER III. 1-20. ir tate, then it fullows that, according to the Scrip- tures, the numerical majority of apostates was always oflset by a i/ynaniical majority of persons faithful to the covenar.t, by whom the covenant was continued on the ground of the ;r/rTTni (-JfoTi ; and it would have been very strange if Paul, in view of this oft- repeated history, which was first really consum- mated in his time, should have quite ignored the present. But as intarfi'crav elsewhere (for exam- ple, John viii. 80) means, they became believers, so is >]ni(TTijiTai' here, they have become unbelieving, not, they fiave been. The niarni of God is His fidelity ; His fidelity to the covenant certainly in- volves " credibility." (2 Tim. ii. 13 ; ni-aroi; 6 ©fot, 1 Cor. i. 9 ; x. 13, &c.) ^ Ver. 4. Let it not be, firj yivoirn. [Comp. Textual Note ".] Tliis expression of impassioned repulsion [solenm and intense deprecation], also common to tlie later Greeks, is, in the mouth of the Hebrew ( nbibn , ad pro/ana), at the same time an expression of a religious or moral repug- nance or aversion. Therefore the Apostle repels the thought, as if the Ti.veq could annul the nlaru; of God, and therefore also nullify the realization of the eternal covenant of grace in the heart of Israel and in a New Testament people of God. — But let it be : God (is) true, but every man false. [Lange : So abcr seVs : Gott ist wahrhaftig, je lev Jleu.sch aber fulsch.'] Since yivoi/xo relates to one sentence, the antithetical yi,ve. plicated in the grossest self-contradictions (see chap, ii. 21-23). Unbelief is not only a characteristic of apostates, but also a tendency and manifold fault of believers; and so far all men are liars through unbelief. Whenever the covenant between God and man is shaken or broken, absolute faithful- ness is always found on God's side ; He is a rock (Deut. xxxii. 31, &c.), while all the vibrations, aa well as all the breaches of faithfulness, arc on the side of men. Also, in Ps. cxvi. 11, all men are rep. resented as liars, in opposition to the faithfulness of God ; and by troul)ling believers they oppose faith. As it is written (Ps. Ii. 4). — The application of the passage quoted from the Psalms gives evi. dence of the most profound insight. The original, according to Hupfeld's translation, reads thus : " To Thee alone I have sinned. And done what is wicked in Thy sight. In order that Thou mayest be just in Thy say. ings. Pure * in Thy judging." The Septuagint translates, " In order that Thou may- est be acknowledged just (cytxauoflijc,) in Tiiy words (in Thy sayings), and mayest conquer (rtitjyo-rc, instead of n^tri) in Thy y.^inaQai, (TjuJECa)." Paul quotes from the Septuagint. The sense of the origi- nal text is, that David placed himself before the judgment of God and His revelation. Viewed ac- cording to the custom of Oriental despots, Nathan had condemned him too harshly ; but when he re- garded his sin in all its depths as a sin against God, and before His eyes, he perceived the justice of the prophet's charge, and the holiness of his judicial declaration of the guilt of death. The translation of the Septuagint, " that Thou mayest be justi- fied, declared just" [dtzatwO-Jjc; for the Hebrew p'n^r) ], is exegetical. [In using the word di/.uioliv here evidently, like the hiphil of pn^I, in a declara- tor;) sense (for God is just and cannot be made just, but only declared or acJcnowledffed as just), Paul fur- nishes us the key to the proper understanding of his doctrine of justification by faith, see below, ver. 28. — P. S.] The change rtxrar^c, kc, is a peri- phrasis. ''Thou mayest be pure' in Thy judgment," means properly, " Thou wilt be recognized as pure ; therefore Thou overcomest, since Tliou wilt be jus- tified in Thy judgment." The Septuagint has am- plificd the slight antithesis, " in Thy sayings, in Thy judgment," so that the distinction can be diawn be- tween God's word and His judgment. The chief point is the canon : If God is to be t)iorov(jldii kiioiun and recognized as just and holy in Hix word and in His judgment, then must sin, which stands commit- ted aijahixt Him, be known in all its breadth and depth. The defect in our knowledge here is what casts a shade in part upon God's word and in part upon His judicial government. Paul's employment of the quotation from the Psalms corresjionds to this * [ pis indicates the righteousness, HST (properly, tl bepure), the holiness of God. — P. S.l 118 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. canon ; much sooner shall all men be liars, than that A shadow be cast on God's truth or fidelity to His covenant. Tlie vi^xciv is frequently used in the judii'ial sense (see Meyer). lieza, Piscat., and re- cently Tholuck and Philippi [also Meyer and Ewald], would take /.(jivKrOcu in the middle setise, for to liiir/ate. But the Apostle could not exi)ect tliat his expression would be understood iu any other sense than in the Septuagint. [Conip., however, Textual ^^ote \—?. S.] [That thou mayest, otto)? av, '?^V in Ps. li. 6 (ver. 4 in tiie E. V.), to the intent that, in order that {rth-MK). This seems to mean that God caused David's sins to take this aggravated form for the Very purpose that He miglit appear to be entirely juftt, when He pronounced condemnation of it. But such an interpretation would imply the contradiction that God condemns His own act. Hence most com- mentators (even Calvin) take "?^^ here, and often, like tVa and ottw? in tiie New Testament, of the effect or consequence {iyifiariy.iixi) = so that. But "S'Tab and (Va grammatically always, or nearly always, in- dicate the d(;sign or purpose (see Gesen., Thes., s. v., and Winer, Gramm,, p. 420 ff., 7th ed.) ; and where this seems inapplicable, as here, we must assume a logical rather than a grammatical latitude. Design and eftoct often coincide. The Bible no doubt teaches the absolute sovereignty of God, yet never in a fatalistic or pantlieistic sense so as to ex- clude the personal freedom and responsibility of man. Hence it represents, for instance, the harden- ing of Pharaoh's heart, as the judicial act and pun- ishment of God (Exod. iv. 21 ; vii. 3), and at the same time as Pharaoh's own act and guilt (ix. 34). David certainly could not mean to say that he sinned with tlie intention of glorifying God — which would have destroyed the sincerity of iiis repentance, and exposed him to the just condemnation of Paul in ver. 8 — but tliat his sin was overruled by God for the greater manifestation of His justice. God never does evil, nor wills any man to do evil, in order that good may come out of it, but He exercises His power, wisdom, and love in overruling all evil for good. It is not the sinner wlio glorifies God through his sin, but God who glorifies Himself through the pinner. Comp. also the remarks of Hupfeld and Hengstenberg on Ps. li. 6. — P. S.] Ver. 5. But if our unrighteousness, &c. [A new objection which miglit be suggested by the ontDq in ver. 4 ; namely, if man's sin redounds to the glory of God, and sets His righteousness in a clearer light (as in tlie case of David), it is a means to a good end, and hence it ought not to be pun- ished. Paul admits the premise, but denies the con- clusion, ver. 6. — P. S.] Meyer takes here adi,/.ia in a very general and comprehensive sense, without regard to the legal element contained in it, and ex- plains: "an abnormal ethical disposition."* By this definition the wicked, the unholy, the bad, can be denoted ; but unrighteousness is misconduct in oppo- Bition to the lav/ and the right. On (rvwardvai,, gee the Lexica ; also Rom. v. 8 ; 2 Cor. vii. 11, &c. I dilso Textual. Note "]. What shall we say? Ti eQov/niv. A * [Comp. Hodge : " aSixla is not to be taken in the re- Jtricted sense of injuHio', nor as equivalent to aTria-ria in the proceding verse, but in the oomprchcupive sense of xn- rifjIi'coHxne.as, wickedness. It is the opposite of SiKaioa-vvri, rrrtiliiilc, righli'.nusncss, which includes all moral excel- lo.ice."— P. 8.] form which often occurs in Paul (chap. iv. 1 ; vi. 1, &c.). It is peculiar to rabbinical dialectics, and ii very common in the Talmud {quid est diccndtan *), It is a formula of meditation on a dilficulty, a prob« lem, in which there is danger of a false conclusion. It was also in use among the classics. [See Tho- luck.] The sentence, if our unri nor proves nothing against inspiration. The Apostle here puts himself into the place of other men, using their thoughts and arguments, but expressly rejecting them. — P. S.] Ver. 15. For then how shall God judge the world? This does not mean : God would then not be able to judge the world ; but, according to the usual explanation : Since it is universally agreed among religious people that God will be the Judge of the world, the conclusion alluded to must be rejected. The argument is therefore a reductio ad ahsurdum,.\ (Rackert : tlie proof is weak !) Coc- ceius [Reiciie], Olshausen, and others, refer y.6(T/toq (according to rabbinical usage of language) to the Gentile world, and the proof is thus conceived : Even Gentile idolatry must bring to light the glory of the true God ; and yet God will judge the Gen- tile world. Therefore the unbelief of some Jewa cannot escape the judgment, even though their un- righteousness corroborates the righteousness of God. But there is no proper foundation for this explana- tion in the text ; and besides, it would only remove a smaller difficulty by a greater one, and in a way that would commend itself only to Jewish jirejudice. The New Testament idea of the general judgment is universal. Even the antithesis of xofT/foq and y9a- adfla TO?) &toTi cannot be applied here. With the * [.■iB'Eb n2"'N "^X^ ] t [ M r) aSticos 6 deds ; in nrgative interrogations uri (luifrt, dnch iiiclilf) is used when a negative, ov {iiounc) when a positive answer is expected. See Winer, p. •ITG ; Hartuag, Purlik. ii. as ; and Meyer in loc. ; against Hiickort and Pliili])pi. I'aul does not ask: Is not God unjust? but, le God imjust? espectini; a negative reply; and he apolo- gizes even for puiting the question in this form. — P. S.J t [Calvin : " Suinit 7iov ).iyM to y.6(T/io(; (ver. 6) should be read, according to riiilipjii, parenthetically, as a pre- liminary outburst of apostolic indignation, liy this means, the dialectics assume the shape of an in- volved controversy, in which the A{)ostie prema- turely interrupts the opponent. Tholuek believes that he can ])roduce similar examples in proof of this (chap. vii. 25, and Gal. iii. 3, 4). (2.) Meyer : " The cTTi-i TTMi; y.iiivtl 6 Oto(; tbv x6. But if we read n di, we must regard ver. 7 as introducing a new ob- jection, as in a dialogue between the Apostle and an interlocutor — an objection which is indignantly resented by Paul as a blasphemous slander. But see the remarks under the next heads. — P. S.] (3.) Even if we find here, according to Thodoret, the language of a Jew in dispute with the Apostle, the sentence does not appear to be the contiimation of the thought of ver. 5. Then the Jew has first drawn the conclusion from ver. 5 that God is mijust if He punish sins by which He is glorified. Here he would deduce the conclusion, from ver. 4, that the man, who by his xfu'ff/iat, contributes to the glory of God, is neither a sinner, nor punishable ; rather, that he may do evil that good may come. Thus two cases, wliich would constitute a parallel to chap. ii. o, 4 — the first case denoting fanaticism, the other, antinoniianism. But there are considera- tions presented by the text itself against this view. First, the yd(} at the becinning of ver. 7 ; which, for tills reason, has been removed by many Codd. (B. D., &c., the Vulgate, &c.) as an impediment to the proper understanding of the passage. Then the aorist, Inii^iian tvcnv, which Meyer thinks should be understood from the standpoint of the general judgment (Tholuek regards it as present, with Lu- ther). Further, Meyer must interpolate a ri before the fiij in ver. 8 {ri /iij, quidnl?). Also, if Paul be not permitted to speak in the name of the un- believing Jew and interrupt himself, an jjfifit; must Etand before i'j/m(T(i tifiot\iif&a. We are therefore of the opinion that tlic hypothesis of the interlocu- tion of the obstinate Jew is not correct. (4.) Our explanation is contained already in the translatioa [See T(xlaal Notes '" and ".] The Apostle sayj first, God docs not declare wrath on all who havt (/lorijicd his faithfulness by their unfaithfulness. Granted that His covenant faithl'ulness has, by nieani of my unfaithfulness, shown it.self more powtrfu) and coiis/.ivuous to His glory (chap. v. 8), that is, that I have finally become a believer — how? arci I also still jvidged as a sinner ? Answer : No. And therefore we would by no means continue in un- belief, as those rn't'c in ver. 3, in order, by wicked conduct, to accomplish a good purpose, God's glorj — which is the jirinciple laid by some to our charge. Men who act tlius (and the roriti do act thus) are justly eondemned. Here the d/.t'iOua of God is the agent, and ^'fva/ia is the object. In ver. 5 there was the reverse, the ddi-xia of man being the agent, and God's righteousness the object. In ver. 7 the question is concerning the predominance or conquest (see v. 20) on the side of the d/.t'jO fia for the honor of God ; in ver. 5, the question is merely concern- ing the bringing of the truth to light. The solution of the ditticulty lies in the intftlffafiafv. — On the different exitlanations of y.dyo), see Tholuek. I as well as others [De Wette, Alford] ; even I, a Jew [Bengel] ; even I, a Gentile [Coccej., 01s- liausen] ; even I, Paul [Fritzsche] ; even I, who Iiave added to the glorification of God [De Wette, Tholuek], Ver. 8. [As we are blasphemously (not, slan- derously) reported. The blasphemy refers not only to Paul, but in the last instance to God, whose holy and righteous character is outraged by the im- pious maxim, to do evil that good may come.] — In reference to the on., we must observe that, in con- sequence of attraction, the noi^t'/ao)/! tv is united with }.eyit,v. — The y.aOox; I'^Z-aarfiTj /i ovf fS a leads us to conclude that the Jews charged the Apostle, or the Christians in general, with the alleged principle : The end sanctifies the means (Tholuek, Calvin). Usual acceptation : the doctrine of superaboundiiig mercy (chap. v. 20) is meant (see Tholuek). Meyer : " The labors of the Apostle among tiie Gentiles could occasion such slanders on the part of the Jews." According to the view of the Jews, the Christians converted tlie Gentile world to Monotheism, by betraying and corrupting the covenant of tlie Jews. — Whose condemnation is just. The i'dv does not refer directly to the slan- derers as such, since this is an accessory notion, but to the principle, let us do evil that good may come., and to the fact lying at its root, the hardness of the J. ivs in unfaithfulness, as they more clearly showed the coiHuant faithfulness of God. But, indirectly, the charge of those slanderers is also answered at the same time. Ver. 7 favors our explanation, [wv refers to the subject in noifjaw/t fv, to those who speak and act according to this pernicious and blas- phemous maxim. — P. S.] Third Paragraph, vers. 9-20, The transition of the covenant of law to the covenant of grace is already indicated in the preced- ing paragraph. This is brought to pass in part by the constant unfaithfulness of individuals, and in part by the transitory unfaithfulness of others. In every case Israel's sin is manifested in this covenant. Ver. 9. What then ? It must not be read, with CEcumenius [Koppe, Hofmann, Th, Schott], t( ovv TT^of/ofif&a [omitting the interrogation sigr 120 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. after ovv] ; against wliicli is the ol. The introduc- tion of the result refers to the foregohig section under the point of view tliat Israel certainly has advantages on tlie objective side, but none on the subjective. This is now extended lurther. ]l()oe- yofifOa. Explanations: 1. The middle voice liere lias tlie signification of tlie active : Have we [the Jews] the i)reference ? do we excel? have we an advantage? (Theo[)hylact, fficunieuius, tlie old com- mentators in general.) Also De Wette, who says : This is the only suitable sense.* Therefore the read- ing 7T()oxaTi/oit,H'. Meyer urges against tliis view : (a.) Tlie usage of language ; f (6) tlie previous ad- mission of Israel's advantage [ver. 2, no/.l< xara navrci t^onov, which seems to conflict with ov TTctrrwv, ver. 9. — P. S.]. 2. The middle voice in the signification of: to hold before, to hold for one's protection. Herasterlmys, Venema, &c. (Fritzsche, figuratively : Do we need a pretext ?) Meyer : Have we a protection ? That is, have we something with which to defend or screen ourselves ? Agiunst this, Tholuclc raises the objection tliat the verb, in this case, sliould have an accusative. [Have we any i\ov<; ; ver. I), oiirLa(Tdiif fl a . Namely, in the previous part of the Eiiistle [i. 18 ff., with reference to the Gentiles ; ii. 1 tf., witli reference to the Jews. — P. S.]. The n^oanMnOcu [from airt'cK, motive, reason, and in a forensic sense, charge^ ground of accxsitlon] is a compound word without example.* — Under sin [('7' diia()riav dvai'\. Not merely, are sinners (Fritzsche). Meyer: are gov- erned by sin. He denies, against Ilofniann, that the question here is concerning the punishableness or guilt of sin [wliicli is to hQ inferred afterwards from the fact of vip diiafJTiav flvav\. But this is implied in aindaOav. The airia is the ground of the charge. Veivs. 10-19. As it is written. [yty^wTr- rav occurs nineteen times in this Epistle. — P, S.] Paul had previously proved the guilt of the Jews from their living experience, with only a general allusion to the Scriptures ; he now confirms his declaration in the strongest way by Scripture proofs. Under the presupposition of exact knowledge of the Old Testament, rabbinical writers also connect various testimonies without specifying the place where they may be found. At the head there stands Ps. xiv. 1-3, from ver. 10 to ver. 12, where we have a de- scription of universal sinfulness as well of the Jews as of the Gentiles. There then follows a combina- tion from Ps. V. 9 and cxl. 3 and Ps. x. 7, in vers. 13, 14, as a description of sins of the tongue. Then Isa. lix. 7, 8, quoted in vers. 16, 17, as a delineation of sins of commission. Finally, Ps. xxxvi. 1, in ver. 18, as a characterization of tlie want of the fear of God lying at the root of all.f Tlie quotations are free recollections and applications from the Sep- tuagint [yet with several deviations]. Finally, in ver. 19, there follows the explanation tliat these charges were throughout just as applicable to the Jews as to the Gentiles, and indeed chiefly to the Jews. [The passages quoted describe the moral corruption of the times of David and the prophets, but indirectly of .all times, since human nature is es- sentially the same always and everywhere. In Pa xiv. the genertd application is most obvious, and hence it is quoted first. — P. S.] Ver. 10. There is none righteous. [Paul uses di/.ai-oq for ^ilSTl'iJS' , LXX. : nomv xq>i(!t6' T//Tct, doer of good.^^ Refers the nomv xsjijaTOTfiTa of the Septuagint to the law. 7'Ae wani of right- eousness is the inscription of the whole ; not aa Paul's word (KiJllner, «&c.), but as free quotation from Ps. xiv. Ver. 11. There is none that understandeth. While 6 (Tvvui'n'X represents the jv^-e/j^iV/i// of the religious understanding, ext'yT wr § denotes the de- * (The Greek classics use TrpoKonjyoperv instead ; Meyer. -P. S.] + [Meyer: L Sinful condition (vers. 10-12); 2. sisfii] maniftst'itions, in word (13, 14), and in deed (15-17) ; 3. the soMiccof sin (18).— P. 8.1 t [ ).i,oTi(j av* denotes continuous action ; they have become deceivers for tlie future ; that this is their settled character. — The poison of ar,ps. Behind the cunning of false- hood there is deadly malice. Ver. 14. Full of cursing. The gross, passion- ate form of ungddly speech, alternating with double- tongued, false language. The bitterness or ani- mosity of their hateful selfishness is the standing ground of their cursing. [Paul here condenses the translation of the Septuagint, omitting the " deceit," as he had already mentioned it in ver. 13. — P. S.] Vers. 16-17. Their feet are swift. The sym- bol of their excited course of conduct. [On the slightest provocation they commit murder. Paul here again condenses the sense of Isa. lix. 7.1 Their many ditt'erent ways, full of destruction \^(tvv- rsji/ifia, literally, concussion, bruising together, then calamiti/, destrucAon] and misery [raA at- 7T ID (; I a ], {destruction the cause, misery the re- sult) are, as the ways of war of all against all, contrasted with the one way of peace \6()i)v fijjt'ivtji;]. By this we must undoubtedly under- stand not merely a way in which they should enjoy peace (Meyer), but an objective way of peace in which they should become the children of peace. [The way that leads to peace, in opposition to the ways which lead to ruin and misery.] ()i,y. eyno- aav, Grotius: Hebrceis nescire aliquis dicitur, quod non curat (Jer. iv. 22). [Ver. 18. This quotation from Ps. xxxvi. 1 goes back to the fountain of the various sins enumerated. The fear of God, or piety, is the beginning of wis- dom and the mother of virtue ; the want of that fear, or impiety, is the beginning of folly and the mother of vice. — P. S.] Ver. 19. Now we know. The Jews, indeed, would not readily admit this, but were inclined to refer such declarations exclusively to the Gentiles. [But the passages above quoted from the Psalms and the Prophets, speak not of heathen as heathen, but of follen men as such, and therefore are applica- ble to Jews as well. — P. S.] — The law. This is the Old Testament, especially in its legal relation [as a norm or rule to which they sliould conform their faith and conduct ; John x. 34, where our Lord quotes a Psalm as in " the law," and other pas- sages]. — Who are under the law. That is, the Jews ; also particularly from the legal standpoint. Cilov and others have understood, by the law, the * [An Alexandrian and Hellenistic form for iSoXiovv ; Jee Siurz, Dial. A'tx., p. Ul, and Winer, p. 74, where simi- lar examp;es are quoted : as el^oo-av for fixo"-! fSCSoplementary thought, that it is just this knowledge whicli is the preliminary condition for the removal of sin. [Tlie law, being the revela- tion of the holy and perfect will of God, exhibits, by contrast, our own sinfulness, and awakens the desire after salvation. Tliis sentence of Paul, together with his declaration that the law is a nau'tayioyo^ to lead to Christ (Gal. iii. 24, 25), contains the whole phi- losophy of the law, as a moral educator, and is the best and deepest thing that can be said of it. Ewald justly remarks of our passage : ^'Mit diesen Worten * [If SticaitoflrjTi ert should be the true rpiidinff, against fcrbio.Vi. see, howevev, Lachmann and Tischendorf. — P. S.j trifft Paidus den ticfsteu Kern der Sache ;" i. e. with these voids Paul hits the nail on the head, and peneti'ates to the inmost marrow of the thing, yap is well explained by Calvin : "-4 co7Urario ratiocu natur . . . quando ex eadcm scatebra non prodcuvU vita et mors." — P. S.] DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAl. 1. Chap. ii. 25-29. The elder theology baa properly regarded circumcision as a federal sacra^ ment of tlie Old Testament, and as the preiiiiiinary analogue or type of New Testament bafitism ; just as the Passover feast was an Old Testament type of the Lord's Supper. And thus far did the 7Tt(JtToni] represent the whole of Judaism, which is proved by the fact that Paul used this term to designate the Jews (see also Gal. v. 8). But it is easy to go astray on the biblical meaning of circumcision, as on the law of the Sabbath, if we do not bear in mind that we have to deal with institutions whicli comprehend many points of view. Thus, the Sabbatic law is first a religious and moral command of God among the Ten Commandments (Exod. xx. 8 if.). But it is likewise a religious and liturgical, or Levitical command on worship (according to Lev. xxiii. 3). In the latter sense, it is abrogated as a mere Old Testament form, as far as Christians are concerned ; or, rather, it has been supplanted by the divine- human creation of a new day " of the great congre- gation " — the Lord's Day. But the religious and ethical command of the Sabbath in the Decalogue has become a religious and ethical principle, which, in its educating and legal form, has connected itself with Sunday. In the same way is circumcision a synthesis. The foundation of it was a very old, sporadic, oriental custom (Epistle of Barnabas, chap, ix.*). It was made to Abraham, according to chap, iv. 11, a symbolical seal of his faith ; which is cer- tainly the sacrament of the covenant of promise. But then Moses also made it, in a more definite sense, an obligation of the law (Exod. iv. 25 ; Jos. V. 2 ff.). The law was the explication of circum- cision, and circumcision was the concentration of the law. While, therefore, the law was annulled in re- gard to Christians by faith, circumcision was also aTinulled ; or, j'ather, the New Testament symbol took its place, and the fulfilment of the Abrahamic promise — tlie new birth of faith — was connected with it. Tholuck tiiinks (p. 114) it is a contradiction, that, according to the elder theology, f faith in the Messiah was the condition of the Divine promise in circumcision ; while, according to Paul, the fulfil- ment of the law was this condition. But Paul cer- tainly knew of no other fulfilment of the law than that in the Messianic faith, which became, finally, faith in the Messiah. On p. 117, Tholuck himself refers to the inward character of the requirementa of Judaism.- 2. Tlie great importance which the Apostle at * [Pseudo-Barnabas says, I. c. : "Thou (addressinp the Jew) wilt say, ' Yea, verily the people are circumcised for ^a seal.' But so also is every Syrian aud Arab, and all th ^priests of idols : are these, then, also within the bond of this covenant (or, according: to the reading of Cod. Sin. : their covenant)? Yea, the Egyptians also practise circum- cision."— P. S.J t [Tholuck means "the old Lulheran conception of cir- cumcision," and refers to Gerhard (Loc. Tlienl., vol. ix., pp, 12, 30), who teaches that circumcision was a sacrament of grace, in which the verhale elfmenliim of Divine promisi was connected with the material element. — P. S.] i24 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE EOMANS. taclies to wliat is within— 'to the sentiment of the neart — is plain from liia bold antitheses. Notwith- Btanding liis unciruunacision, the Gentile, by virtue of his state of mind, can become a Jew, and vice versd. 3. The witnesses adduced by the Apostle on the universality of corruption in Israel, neither preclude the antithesis in chap. ii. V, 8, nor the degrees on both sides. 4. On chap. iii. 3. The covenant of God is always perfect according to its stage of develop- ment. If it generally fails to become apparent, the fault always turns out to be man's. The covenant of God is surely no contrat social — no agreement between equal parties. It is tlie free institution of God's grace. But this institution is that of a true covenant, of a personal and ethical mutual relation ; and whenever the hierarchy, or a Romanizing view of the ministry obliterate the ethical obligation on the part of man in order to make the sacraments magical operations, their course leads to the desecra- tion and weakening of the covenant acts. 5. Chap. iii. 4. For our construction of the pas- sage in Ps. li. 4 f., see the Exeg. Notes on chap. iii. 4. For another view, see Philippi, p. 81, with refer- ence to Heugstenberg, Psalms, vol. iii., p. 19. [Both take "i^'P?, oTiMi;, in the usual strict sense {nh- y.(~)^, not i/.pazvy.Mi;\ as does also Gesenius, Thes., p. 1052 : " cum in Jimm peccavi, ut illustretur justitia tua;" and they make the old distinction between the matter of sin, which is man's work, and the foriii of sin, which is in the hands of God. — P. S.] Hupfeld also refers the passage to the holy interest of God's government in human offences, but at the same time has definitely distinguished tlie relative divine and human parts. Without contending against the thought per se, we would refer the on on; not to sin itself, but to the perception and knowledge of sin. Hence we infer the proposition : All want of a proper knowledge of sin on the part of man obscures the word of God, and leads to the miscon- ception of His judgments (as in the talk about fanat- ical ideas of revelation, gloomy destiny, &c.). 6. On the truth of God, see the Exec/. Motes on ver. 4. 7. On iii. 20. By the law is the knowledc/e of sin (see Gal. hi. 24). This purpose of the law ex- cludes neither its usus primus nor the usus tertius* But the three usus mark the developing progress of the law from without inwardly, as well in a historical as in a psychological view. The first stage [msms politicus] has also its promise. The Jew who lived according to the law is justified in the tribunal of his priesthood, and has also his earthly blessing (" that it may go well with thee," &c.). But the subtilty of the law — not to speak of its first and last commandment — and its symbolical transparency and spiritualization, impel him, if he be upright, further to the pajdagogical standpoint, which looks to Christ. And with this, he receives the whole power for the tertius vsus [in regulating his life of bith]. 8. While the elder theology separated the three * [The old Protestant divines speak of a threefold use of the law: 1. Vsu/t politiciis, or ci'vilis (in the st;ite, which can only be go-erncd by laws) ; 2. us«.s- elciicldicim, or pm- dagogieiix (leading to a knowledge of sin and misery) ; 3. USHS dirladir.us, or nnnnntiviis (rosulating the life of the believer). Comp. the Formnln Onu-Drdim, p. 594 sq. Sim- ilar to this is the German sentence, that the law is ZiigrI, Spii'Qfl, and Riegd, a restraint, a mii-ror, and a rule. — P. S.] parts of the law (morals, worship, polity) too fu from each other, at present the idea of the law as a unit is often so strongly emphasized as to lose sight of the fact that, botli in the Old Testament as well as in the New, cognizance is taken of the difference of the parts (see Matt. xix. 17 ; Rom. vii. 7). Th* view to the unity of the law, however, prevails is the Mosaic and legal understanding of the Old Tes. tament revelation, as represented by the letters of the two tables. 9. The inca' actty of the law to make man riglit- eous lies chiefly in this : First, it is a demand on the work of the incapable man, wlio is flesh (no flesh sliall be justified) ; but it is not a Divine promise and work for establishing a new relation. Then it meets man as a foreign will, another law ; by which means his false autonomy is inclined to resistance, because he is alien to himself and to the concurring law within his inward nature. Finally, it meets him in analytical form and separateness. Man only be- comes susceptible of Divine influences : 1. As they are founded in the grace and gift of God ; 2. in the spontaneous action of voluntary love ; 3. in sya« thetical concentration. HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAI,. (From Chap. ii. 25 to Chap. ni. 20.) Either, or. As this applied to the Jew accord- ing to his position in the Old Testament, so does *< apply to the Christian according to his position in the New (ver. 25). — It is not the external possession of a saving means that produces blessings, but faith- fulness in its application (vers. 25-29). — How the fact, that the Jew becomes a Gentile, and the Gen- tile a Jew, can be repeated in our time in various contrasts (vers. 25-27). — The Jew, proud of the let- ter and of circumcision, below the condemnatory sentence pronounced on the illegal and uncircum- cised Gentile — a warning for evangelical Christiana (ver. 27). — Inner life in religion ; already the prin- cipal thing in Judaism, and much more in Christian- ity (vers. 28, 29). — He who is inwardly pious, re- ceives praise, not of men, but of God. — God's pleasure or praise of inward faithfulness in piety. Herewith it must be seen ; 1. How this praise can be acquired ; 2. In what does it consist? (ver. 29).— The praise of men and the praise of God (ver. 29). What advantage have the Jews ? This question, and its answer, exhibit to us the infinitely great blessing of Christiartity (chap. iii. 1-4). — How Paul never ignores the historical significance of his peo- ple, but triumphantly defends it against every charge (comp. chap. ix. 4, 5).-— The historical feeling of the Apostle Paul (vers. 1-4V On chap. iii. 2. God has shown His word to Jacob, his statutes and judgments unto Israel (Pa. cxlvii. 19). Why has God spoken to Israel ? 1. Be- cause He chose this people, out of voluntary com- passion, for His inheritance; 2. Because by this peo. pie, specially appointed by Him for tlie purpose. He designed to prepare salvation for all the nations of the earth. — Do not complain too much at the un. belief of the world ! For, 1. The unbelievers always remain in the minority in real significance, let their number be ever so great ; 2. Not only docs their un. belief not make the faitli (faithfulness) of God with, out effect ; but 3. Rather contributes there to, bj CHAPTER II. 25-III. 20. 125 radiantly showing God's truthfulness, in contrast with all hiinian falsehood (vlts. 3, 4). Ou chap. iii. 5-8. Why is it im[iossible that God Bhould have desired our unrighteousness for His glory ? 1. Because God could not then judge the world ; 2. IJeeauso ve would be condemned as sin- ners by an unjust method. — How far does our un- righteousness prove the righteousness of God ? — God cannot be the author of sin ! This was ac- knowledged, 1. By Abiaiiam, the father of all the faithful (Gen. xviii. 2a) ; 2. By Paul, the Apostle of all the faithful. — Through God's providence, good continually comes out of evil ; but wi? should never gay, Let us do evil, that good may come ! — He who says, Let us do evil, i*cc., 1. Blasphemes (Jod ; and therefore, 2. Receives rigiiteous condemnation. — The principle of the Jesuits, that the end sanctifies the means, is nothing else than a hypocritical cloaking of the plain words : " Let us do evil, that good may come." Ou vers. 9-18. The sinfulness of all, both Jews and Cireeks: \. Proved by Paul himself in his de- scription of their moral depravity ; 2. Corroborated by the proofs of Holy Scripture from the Psalms, Proverbs of Solomon, and tiie Prophet Isaiah. — As Paul appeals to the Old Testament, so should we, in order to authenticate truths appeal to the whole Bible, though first and contmually to the New Tes- tament. — Every doctrine must be scriptural. — Paul a master in tlie application of Scripture : 1. So far as he grasps tiie fulness of the scriptural expression ; but, 2. He does not thoughtlessly arrange quotations from the Scriptures ; but, 3. He skilfully connects kindred passages into a beautiful whole. On vers. 18-20. The severe preaching of the law: 1. To whom is it directed? 2. What does it accomplish ? — How far does the law produce knowl- edge of sin ? LcTiiER : Spirit is what God supematurally effects in man ; letter is all the deeds of nature without spirit (chap. ii. 29). — " God is a sure support ; but he wiio trusts in man will want " (chap. iii. 4). — David says (Ps. li. 4) : " Against Tliee, Thee only, have I sinned," &c. These words would seem to mean that man must sin in order that God might be ju.st, as Paul would also seem here to say. Yet this is not the case ; but we shall acknowledge the sin of which God accuses us, that He might thereby be confessed truthful and just in His law. Starke : A true Clu-istian must not despise the means of grace : as, attending church, making con- fession, and partaking of the Lord's Supper ; nor should he speak derisively of them because they are misu.sed by most persons as a false hope (chap. ii. 25). — He who will be comforted by the consid- eration that he has been baptized in the name of Christ, must examine himself whether he has also been newly born, and walks after the new man : where this is not the case, holy baptism is of just as little use to him, as circumcision was to the un- believing Jew; 1 Peter iii. 21 (chap. ii. 29). — In worldly courts, injustice often rules ; but God will judge the world in the justest manner (chap. iii. 6). I — When our misery is properly uncovered, com- passion is near ; and when we are truly compas- sionate ourselves, compassion is not far from us (chap. iii. 12). — The way to grace is open when we stand dumb before God (chap. iii. 19). — There is only one wiiy to salvation, by which men, before, at the time of, and after Moses, can be saved (chap, iii. 20). — Lange : Oh, how many Christians are put to shame at this day by bonoi-able lieathen ! And how the latter will ri.se up against the former on the judgment-day! (chap. ii. 26). — Hkding£u: The new creatui'e must be all in all. If this be not the case, there is no godly soirow, no faith, no Christ, no hope of salvation (chap. ii. 25). — There is only one way to salvation, yet God is at perfect liberty to say in what people He will build His Church, and what Uicasure of grace and gilts He will give (chap. viii. 2). — Here stands the pillar of the evangelical Church, the test and corner-stone of the pure, saving gospel (chap. iii. 20). — Qcksnkl : A strong proof of origi- nal sin, because no one who comes into the world is righteoiis, or without sin (chap. iii. 10). — Let love bo in the heait, then will loveliness be also in the mouth (chap. iii. 14). — Ckamer : Learn to distinguish well between true and false Jews, true and false Chris- tians ; the external profession does not constitute a true Jew or Christian (chap. ii. 28). — It is not ali gold that glitters, and not all show is wisdom. AL though the natural reason can devise many conclu- sive speeches and subtleties, these must not be re- garded as wisdom in divine things (chap. iii. 5). — Nova Bill. Tub. : The dead members of the Church depend upon its external advantages, take their com. fort in them, and make their boast of them, without remembering that they can derive no good from them without penitence and faith (chap. iii. 1). — Though we be unfaithful, God remaineth faithful. Oh, let us therefore rely upon His faithfulness and promise, and take comfort in the flict that we alwaya have a ready entrance to the faithfulness of our God (chap. iii. 3). — Osiander : If God is truthful, but men false, why do some men believe folly sooner than the word of God ? But to God alone belonga the praise of righteousness and truth (chap. iii. 4). — Those who boast of their righteousness before God, know neither God's will nor themselves (chap, iii. 19). Gerlach : The usefulness of the covenant of grace extends on all sides and encompasses all the relations of life (chap. iii. 2). — God's wisdom, om- nipotence, justice, and love, are glorified either in the punishment or conversion of the sinner ; the more wicked the sinner, the greater the glory. But this glory consists precisely in the death of the sin- ner, since he either dies to sin, having once lived to it ; or, with all other sinners, suffers eternal death in perdition (chap. iii. 4.). — Description of men of malignant feeling, who strive to injure others by their language. Throat, tongue, and lips — three in- struments of speech, which utter the words from within (chap. iii. 13). — The more complete and deep the command, the stronger is its declaration of con- denjnation, and the less can it awaken in us faith and hope for salvation (chap. iii. 20). Lisco : The Christian is aided by the sacraments only when he lives in faith (chap. ii. 25). — On what the moral worth of man before God depends (vers. 25, 26). — Israel's advantages (chap. iii. 1-4). — He who adopts the principle : " Let us sin, that good may come," will receive righteous condemnation ; for God desires to be glorified only ty our obedi- ence ; all disobedience is dishonoring His majesty, but terminates also with the sinner's destruction^ and likewise extends to the justification or glo- rification of the holy and righteous God (chap iii. 8). Hecbner : External eccle.siasticism and confes- sion has value only when it leads to religion of th« heart and life ; otherwise, it is only the same at 126 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. heathenism (chap. ii. 25).* — The great d.fiference between outward and inward Ciiristiaiiity. True Christianity is intfrnal (chap. ii. 28). — Tlie true worshipper of God is inward, is concealed from the world, and is known only to God (chap. ii. 29). — The wortli and merit of the pious person is exalted above all opinion of the world: 1. Because true piety by no means i)asses in the world for the high- est good, Ijut only that which is profitable, and shines ; 2. Because men cannot discern this inner, pure condition of heart, neither can they credit it to others ; 3. Because the world cannot reward this piety (chap. ii. 29). — God's word is committed to us ; use it aright, supjjort it, propagate it. In many places it has disajjpeared through the fault of men (in Asia and Africa), chap. iii. 2. — God's honor cannot be touched. Nothing can be charged against God ; it would be blasphemy to charge Him with blame of any kind (chap. iii. 4). — God's righteous- ness becomes the more apparent in proportion to the manifestation of man's unrighteousness (chap, iii. 5). — Every feeling of hatred is the root for a willingness to shed blood (chap. iii. 15). — Every man is guilty before God, and subject to His pun- ishment ; but he should also know and confess it (chap. iii. 19). — The law requires obedience to all its commands (chap. iii. 20). Spknkr: When people are wickedly taught to sin, so that God may be lauded because of the for- giveness of sins, it is the same slander which the same old slanderous devil charged at that time against the apostles, and which is still cast against the doctrine of the grace of God (chap. iii. 8). Besskr : Circumcision of the heart is real cir- cumcision (chap. ii. 29). — The evangelical theme of joy in the Epistle to the Romans is, that God, in grace, is just in His words to sinners whom He has justified by faith in Jesus (chap. iii. 4). Lange, on vers. 16-24. The fearful picture of warning in the fall of the Jews. — How this picture was again presented in the Church before the Ref- ormation, and now appeal's in many forms. — Vers, 25-29. Comparison of this passage with Matt, xxiii. 21-28. — The great vindication here for the believer — that God, in His word, confides in him in a cer- tain measure. — God, in His faithfulness to His cove- nant, a rock. — How unbelief is against God, and yet must serve God's purpose. — Chap. iii. 1-S. To have an advantage, and yet not to have one. — The testi- monies of Scripture on the sinful depravity of man. —Vers. 8-19. How vain is the effort to be justified by the law : 1. Because " by the deeds of the law," &c. ; 2. " For by the law," &c. [BnPtKiTT: (condensed) ii. 25. The heathen have abused but one talent, the lic/Jit of iiature; but we, thousands ; even as many thousands as we have slighted the tenders of offered grace. What a fear- ful aggravation it puts upon our sin and misery ! We must certainly be accountable to God at the great day, not only for all the light we have had, but for all we might have had in the gospel day ; * [Comp. Archbishop Tihotron, Sermon on 2 Tim. ii. 19 (quoted hy James Ford on Rnmansi): "Baptism vrrily prajlteth, if we obey the go.-'pel ; but if we walk contrary to the precepts of it, our baptism is no baptism, and our Cliris- lianity is hcatheiiismr" We would say: wrse Wton no bap- tism, jcoiS''. llinii heathenism. Fur in pmportion to the bless- ing intended, is the cui-se incurred by abuse. The case of an apostate Christian is far more hopeless than the case of an unconverted heathen. The one has Christianity behind him, the othsr before him ; the one has deliberately cast it 9S, the other may thinkfully embrace it. — P. S.] and especially for the light we have sinned undei and rebelled against. — Chap, iii. 1. Great is thai people's privilege and mercy who enjoy the word of God — the audible word in the Holy Scriptures, the visible word in the holy sacraments. It enlight* eueth the eyes, rcjoiceth the heart, quickeneth the soul. It is compared to gold for profit, to honey for sweetness, to milk for nourishing, to food lor strengthening ! — Chap. iii. .3-7 : God is never in- tentionally, but is sometimes accidentally glorified by man's sins. There never was such a crime aj crucifying Christ, but nothing by which God haa reaped greater glory. — Chap. iii. 10. T/ie unrigi-'' eoiisness of man : 1. There is none orifjinally right- eous ; 2. None effic enllfi righteous ; 3. none nierU toriously righteous ; 4. None perfectly righteous.— Matthew Henry : The Jews had the means of sal- vation, but they had not the monopoly of it, — On the righteousness of God, observe : 1. It is mani- fested ; 2. It is without the law ; 3. It is witnessed by the law and the prophets ; 4. It is by the faith of Jesus Christ ; 5. It is to all, and upon all them that believe. — Doddridge : We pity the Gentiles, and justly so ; but let us take heed lest those ap- pearances of virtue which are to be found among some of them do not condemn us, who, with the letter of the law and the gospel, and with the solemn tokens of a covenant relation to God, transgress His precepts, and violate our engagements to Him ; so turning the means of goodness and happiness into the occasion of more aggravated guilt and misery. — Clarke : The law is properly considered the rule of rigid ; and unless God had given some such means of discovering what sin i.s, the darkened heart of man could never have formed an tidequate concep- tion of it. For as an acknowledged straight edge ia the only way in which the strai'ihtness or crooked- ness of a line can be determined, so the moral obliquity of human actions can only be determined by the law of God, that rule of rigid which pro- ceeds from His own immaculate holiness. [Hodge : When true religion declines, the dis- position to lay undue stress on external rites is in- creased. The Jews, when they lost their spirituality, supposed that circumcision had power to save (iu 25). — Paul does not deny, but asserts the value oi' circumcision. So, likewise, the Christian sacramenta, baptism and the Lord's Supper, are of the utmost importance, and to neglect or reject them is a great sin (ii. 25 ; iii. 1). — It is a mark of genuine piety to be disposed always to justify God, and to condemn ourselves. On the other hand, a disposition to self- justification and the examination of our sins, how- ever secret, is an indication of the want of a proper sense of our own unwoithiness and of the Divine excellence (iii. 4, 5). — There is no better evidence against the truth of any doctrine, than that its ten- dency is immoral (iii. 8). — Speculative and moral truths, which are self-evident to the mind, should be regarded as authoritative, and as fixed points in all reasonings (iii. 8). — Barnes : If all men were willing to sacrifice their opinions when they ap- peared to impinge on the veracity of God ; if they started back with instinctive shuddering at the very suppos'tion of such a want of fidelity in Iliii) ; how soon would it put an end to the boastings of error, to the pride of philosophy, to lofty dictation in re. ligion ! No man with this feeling could be a Uni- versalist for a moment ; and none could be an in. fidel. [On chap. ii. 29, see Wesley's sermon Tlie Cir CHAPTER III. 21-31. l^^ij eumcision of the Heart; on chap. iii. 1, 2, Pat- bon's sermon on 7'/ie Oracles of God; Mklvillk's on The Advantages resulthir/ from the Posscssicm of the Scriptures ; and Canon Wordsworth's Hulsean Lecture on What is the Fo-urulation of the Canon of the New Testament? On chap. iii. 4, see Dwight'b sermon on God to be Believed ratJier than I/an ; and C. J. Vauguan's on Tlie One Necessity. On chap, iii. 9-19, see Chalmers' sermon on The Imporianct of Civil Government to Society.— J. F. H.J Sixth Section. — The revelation of God^s righteousness without the law hy faith in Christ for all sinnett without distinction, hy the representation of Christ as the Fropitiaior (" mercy-seat "). The right' 'ousness of God in Christ as Justifying riyhieousne^s. Chapter III. 21-26. SxVENTn Section. — The anmdling of man's vain-glory {self-praise) hy the law of faith. JtiSiification 5y faith WITHOUT the beeds of the law. First proof : from experience: God is the God of tlie Gen- tiles as locll as of the Jews — proved by the actual faith of the Gentiles, True renewal of the law bii faith. Verses 27-31. 21 But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested [But now, apart from the law/ the righteousness of God hath been made manifest ^], being 22 witnessed [testified to, attested] by the law and the prophets ; Even' the right- eousness of God which is by [by means of, through] faith of Jesus Christ 23 unto all and upon all * them that believe ; for there is no difference : For all have sinned [all sinned, i. e., they are aii emners],^ and come [fall] short lyGT^Qovvrai, 24 in the present tense] of the glory of God ; Being justified freely by his grace 25 through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus : Whom God hath [<>mit hath] set forth [TTQOid^no] to he a propitiation [mercy-seat] " through [the '] faith [,] in his blood, to declare [for a manifestation (exhibition) of, elg ndtthv t^g ^Vx.] his righteousness for tl)e remission of sins that are past [because of the pretermis- sion (n on- visitation, passing by) of the former sins, 8ia ri^v (not t/%-) nuQtaiv (not acfhciiv) ZMP 77 Q oy ty or or (x)v ufiuQirjiutcov^ * through [in, iV] the forbearance 26 of God ; To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness ; that he might be just, and the justitier of him which believeth in Jesus [with a view to the manifestation (exhibition, n Qog t i^v^ k'rdti^iv) of his righteousness at this present time, in order that he may be (shown and seen to be) just and (yet at the same tune) be justifying him who is of the faith of (in) Jesus, tig zo ehai avzov biy,aiov Kai dixaiovrza zhv fn niozecag ' Jriaov].^" 27 Where is [the] boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? [By the 28 laio\ of works ? Nay ; but by the law of faith. Therefore [For] '' we con- clude [judge] that a man is justified by faith ''^ without the deeds [without 29 works] of the law." [Or, jy] Is he the God of the Jews only? '* is he not also 30 of the Gentiles ? Yes, of the Gentiles also : Seeing '^ it is one God, which shall [who will] justify the circumcision by faith, and uncircuracision through faith. 31 Do we then make void the law through faith ? God forbid : [Far be it !] yea, we establish " the law. TEXTUAL. 1 Ver. 21.— [Or: inclrpendrnily of the law. liuther : ohne Zuthnn des Gesetzes. ;(ci>p(s vdfiov, opposed to Ai« }f6iiov, ver. 20, is emphatii-ally put first and belongs to the verb. The transposition in the E. V. obscures this connec* Hon and destroys the parallelism.— P. S.] * Ver. 21. — [itiipia, but no iAacrrijpiot. The choice lies between propiiiatory sacri- fice, and iih7xy-sfal. See JEx ff. iV'ofis. — P. S.] ' Ver. 25. — The article t^? before wt'oreios is supported by Codd. B. and A., Chrysostom and Theodoret. [The text rec. also reads t^s ; out Codd. N. C*. D*. F. G. Orig., Eus., Bas., &c., Lachmann, Tisohendorf, Alford, omit it. Meyer thinks it may have been omitted in view of 5ta Tri'o-Teio?, ver. 22. — P. S.] * Ver. 2.i. — [Or as Alford translates : on arannil nf the oxitrlonking of the sins which had passed, in the forbearance, nf Ood, Conybeare and Howson : hicausi: in His forbearance God had passed over tha former sins (f men. Lange : von wegi'n dir Vnrbeilassuitg {Niclitheiiiisurliiing) der vorher gesclnheiirn Siinden. The Authorized Version here, following Beza (^er rcnusxidtieiii), is a inistranslati;>n. Trdpecis (from Trapi'ij^it), which occurs but once in the N. T., differs fiom ai^eo-Lj (from a^iij/xi), which occurs seventeen times, in this, that it is, 1. a teiiipeo-is removes tiie gielt and remits the punishment. The same idea Paul expresses. Acts xvii. 30: tous ixiv ovv xpovov^ t% ayvoi'as vtt epiStav (having overlooked) 6 Seds, &o. 6ta with the accusative cannot mean through, by means of or fa; Imt on accnuat if ; for Paul clearly distinguishes (even Kom. viii. 11 ; Gal. iv. 13) Sl6l with the accusative and Sid with the genitive. The Vulgate correctly reuders Sid propter, but mistakes Trdpeais for iL^eais, remissio. So also Luther ; in, dcm, dass er SUnde vergiM. — P. S.] ' Ver. 26. — rrjv [before ei'Sei^ii/] in Codd. A. B. C. D. [D*. N. Lachmnnn, Tischendorf, Meyer, Alford. The article was omitted to conform to eis ivSei^iv, ver. 25. But the article distinguishes the erSeifis of ver. 26 from the former "as the fuller aud ultimate object." Dr. Lange ingeniously distinguishes between eis eV^eifii/ and wpos tij;' ecSeif h/. See Exeg. yoles.—V. S.] 1" Ver. 26.— The addition 'Itjo-oO is found in. Codd. A. B. C. K. [and Sin.], Lachmann [Alford. Omitted by F. G. 52, It., Fritzsche, Meyer, Tischendorf ; while other authorities read Xpiarov 'Irjo-., or toD Kvpiov rjixlav 'I. X. A usual insertion. The force of toj' ex jricrTews is weakened by the E. V. The ex indicates that jticttis, or Christ rather a3 apprehended by jriVrts, is the root or fountain of his spiritual life ; comp. the e/c in i. 17 ; ii. 18. Conybeare and How- eon : "It means 'him whose essential characteristic is faith,' 'the child of faith;' c>P's epyiov vdinou, without or apart from law ('.egal) works {Gesetzeswerke) or works of the law. — P. S.] '« Ver. 29. — Lachmann, with Codil. A. C. F. [Sin.l, and many others, declare for ja dvov. Tischendorf, with B. ana ancient fathers, favor p-oviav. [This is too poorly supported and can easily be accounted for by the preceding 'lovSaiiav. — P. S.] '5 Ver. 30. — eneivep [recepta], instead of eiirep, which probably arose because the former occurs only here in the N. T. (sec Meyer). [But ei^n-ep is better supported by A. B. C. D^. Sin'., &c., and preferred by Alford. — P. S.] '" Ver. 31.— [io-Tunef (indicative from io-TctM. a less usual form for to-Ta/uei/, from 'ia-Ttjixi.) is the reading of N'. D'. E. I. K. and Elz., and is defended by Fritzsche, for the reason that it closes the sentence with more gravity and power, and corresponds more harmoniously to the preceding KaTa.pyovp.ev. But io'Tdvop.ev (a late form of the same verb) k better supported by N'. A. B. C. D'^. F. Orig., &c., and is recommended by Gricsbach and adopted by Lachmann, Tischendorf, aud Alford. The sense is the same : to make stand fast, to establish, to confirm, = ^e^aiovc, stabilire.-» P. 8.] rf^bes arranges the important section, vers. 21-26, in this way, which may assist somewhat in the exegesia : 21. Nuvi Se xtopX^ vSpov AtKaioaurr) ®eoO W€({>av4p 8>) CHAPTER III. 21-31. 121 EXEGETICAL AND CEITICAL. FiMT Paeagbaph, Chap. hi. 21-26. Contrast between the saving time of justification and the old time of sin and death. Ver. 21. But now, vvvl Si. — Explanations of vvvl : 1. Contrast of times [«< this time, under tlie gospel dispensation, = Iv no vZv y.cuQm, ver. 26] ; ((irotius, Tlioluek, Philippi [Olshausen, Wordsworth, Ilodge], and others) ; 2. contrast of circuiiistaneos [•38 thinffs are] : earlier dependence on the law, now independence of the law [()t« ro/ioc — •/utQi(; 7'6/(oi'], (Parens, Piscat., Meyer, De VVette [Fritzselic, Alford. In this sense the classics use only rrr, not vwi, but the latter is so used repeatedly in Hellenistic Greek] ) ; 3. in soteriology the two contrasts of time and condition coincide. — Apart from the law [of Moses, •/u)(ili; v6^^ov']•. 1. It is referred to Tini'avtijiiiTai, (Luther, Tholuck, Meyer, and oth- ers) ; 2. to dy/.aioavv)] (Augustine, Wolf [Reiclie, Hodge], and others) : the rigliteousness of God which the believer shares without the law [or rather, ■without works of the law, /w^/<,- 'iijymv v6/(ov, Gal. ii. 161. The latter view is not correct. [Comp. Sm voiiav in ver. 20, which likewise belongs not to the noun tTrlyvwffic, but to the verb to be supplied. Also 2exf. Note \—V. S.] [The righteousness of God. Comp. the Exeg. Notes on chap. i. 17. It is the righteousness which proceeds from God {gen. auctorii), which per- sonally appeared in Christ, " who is our Righteous- ness," and which is communicated to the believer for Christ's sake in the act of justification by ftiith. It is both objecdtie, or inherent in God and realized in Christ, and subjective, or imparted to man. It is here characterized by a series of antitheses : inde- pendent of the law, yet authenticated by the law and the prophets (ver. 21) ; freely {Sioqkxv) bestowed on the believer, yet fully paid for by the redemption price (()kt rTjq aTtof.vTQd'xTfox;) of Christ (24) ; intrin- Bically holy, yet justifying the sinner (26) ; thus uniting the character of the moral governor of the universe, and the merciful Father who provided a free salvation. — P. S.] Has been made manifest, n ((pavig Mxai,. This is now the complete revelation of righteousness ; as John i. 17 represents the complete revelation of grace and iru h ; and as Eph. i. 19 represents the complete revelation of omnijwfence. All are single definitions of the completed New Testament revela- tion itself. The expression does not absolutely pre- suppose " the previous concealment in God's coun- cil " (Meyer).* For the Old Testament was the increasing revelation of God, also in reference to righteousness. But compared with this completeness, the growing revelation was still as a veil. — Being testified to [^(w^Tciooi'/tf v;/, put first with reference to ymQi<; vofiov, which it qualifies] by the law and the prophets [«. e., the Old Tes- tament Scriptures; Matt. v. 17; vii. 12; xxii. 40, &c. ; just as we now say the Bible, voftov has here, 98 Bengel remarks, a wider sense than in the preced- ing /(ij^«,- vo/iov. — P. S.] There is therefore no con- tradiction bet^veen the Old and New Testaments. * [So also Hodge : " This righteousness which, bo to ■peak, had long been buried under the types and indistinct utterances of the old dispensation, has now in the gospel been made clear and apparent."— P. S.J 9 The Old Testament is in substance a pro^ihetic wifc n(«s of the New, and therefore also of the righteous, ness of faith (see chap, iv., and x. 6 ; Acts x. 43 ; chap. XV.). And not only do the prophets (Isa xxviii. 16 ; Ilaljak. ii. 4) testily to this rigliteous. ness, but so does the law also in its stricter senM (the patriarchs, &c.) ; yea, even its strictest aense ; for example, the law of the sin-offering (Lev. xvi.), [Augustine: Novum Testamentum in Vet(re lattt ; Vetus T. in Novo patet. See the proof in chap. iv. from the case of Abraham and the declarations of David.— P. S.] Ver. 22. Through faith of Jesus Christ.* The usual explanation is, through faith in Jesus Christ [genitive of the object]. f Meyer produces in its favor the usage of language (Mark xi. 22 ; Acts iii. 16 ; Gal. ii. 20 ; iii. 22 ; Eph. iii. 12, &c.), as well as the essential relation of the TTtam; to the thxawavvrj. [These parallel passages, to which iriay be added Gal. ii. 16 ; Eph. iv. 13 ; Phil. iii. 9 ; James ii. 1 ; Rev. xiv. 12, seem to me conclusive in favor of the usual interpretation that our faith in Christ is meant here ; com p. also t 6 r iy. tt icrrf m q ' J -tj a or, ver. 26. But Dr. Lange etrongly fortifies his new interpretation : Curist's faithfulness to us, taking '/// (TO Ti A'() KTTo r as the genitive of the subject.^ P. S.] The explanation of Benecke, the faithful' ness of Christ, is overlooked even by Tholuck. We make it, Chrisfs believing faithfulness \^Glaubens- treue]. Reasons: 1. The nicrrn; Otov (chap. iii. 3), and the coherency of the ideas, nt^arfiroQcu, ma- TfVHv, and tt/o-tk,- d^to'; in opposition to the ideas: aniortio, aniatm, and corresponding with the ideas : righteousness of God, righteousness of Christ, righteousness by faith. 2. The addition in this pas- sage of tiq Ttdvrcii; y.al tni ncivraq ; with which we must compare chap. i. 17, ly. nlarfMc; fiq iriart'V. 3. The passages. Gal. iii. 22 ; Eph. iii. 12 ; comp. Heb. xii. 2. As to His knowledge, Christ of course did not walk by faith, but hy sight ; but as regards the moral principle of faith — confidence and faith- fulness — He is the Prince of faith. 4. We cannot say of the righteousness of God, that it was first revealed by faith in Christ. The revelation of God's righteousness in the faithfulness of Christ is the ground of justifying faith, but faith is not the ground of this revelation. 5. So also the ()^« rT.q niarfoiq iv no ainov a'lfian, ver. 25, cannot be regarded as substantiating the D.aropri!itinp: organ anij subjective condition, not the ground and cause of our justi- fication.— P. S.] t [Berlage, Scholten, V. Hengel, take 'Iijo-oO Xpio-roO aa gen. of the author : fides qux auclnre Jesu Chrisln Dk« hahelur. See against this Meyer in loc. footnote.— P. 8.J 130 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. neitber a difference between Jews and Gentiles, nor, in reference to the necessity of justification, is tliere a diftVrence between tliose who have shown thein- Bclves, according to chap. ii. 1 fi'., doers or transgress- ors of the law. Ver. 23. For all sinned [they are all sin- ners ; Luther : sie sind allzuinal ISilnda-]. Tliey sinned, in the sense that they luive become sinners. Therefore aor. (II.), and not prr/ect. They sinned in such a way that they are still sinning.* But their right- eousness was altogether lost when their transgression began. — And fall short of the glory [{'an- poi'VTai,, in the present tense. All tinned, and consequently they come short], xTji; ()6ttii;. Ex- planations : 1. Glorying before God, c/loriatio f (Erasmus, Luther, Rosenniiiller, and others). 2. The doia 5-for as the image of God (FLtcius, Cliemnitz, Riickert, Olsliausen ; see 1 Cor. xi. 7). 3. The glory of eternal life [as in ver. 2], (G3cumenius, Gljckler, &c., Beza, Bengel, as sharing in the glory of God). 4. Honor before God, i. c, in the estima- tion of God (Calvin [r/lorla qiue coram Deo locum liabei], KiJllner). 5. Tlie honor which God gives, i. e., tlie approbation of God (the ffenit auct.); Piscat., Grotius, Philippi, Meyer [Fritzsche, De Wette, Alford, Hodge]. Tholuck : Tlie declaration of h(jnor, like tlie declaration of righteousness. :j; This would give the strange sense : because they lack the declaration of righteousness on the part of God, they are to be declared righteous. It must not be over- looked that men belong liere who, as inward Jews, according to cliap. ii. 29, have already trzaivoi; ex &foT'. Certainly, the question is concerning right- eousness before God, because the question concerns God's judicial tribunal. But what men were want- ing since Adam's fall, is not the righteousness of justification — for it is by this that that want is to be supplied — but the rigliteousness of life (not to be confounded with the righteousness by the works of the law), as the true glory or radiance of life l()6ia in tlie sense of splendor, majesty, perfection. Lange translates it : Gerechtig'xeiUglanz, Lebensruhm. — Pj S.]. But as the iiiAai,o(Tvrt] of man must come from the dr/.ai,o(Tvvti of God in order to avail before Him, so also the do^a. Therefore the alternative, from God or he/ore God, is a wrong alternative. § But the supply is equal to the want : the (h/.ai^oavvri of Christ becomes the ih/.a^navvij of tlie believer, and therefore Clirist's <)6ia his data (Rom. viii.).|| Ver. 24. Being justified freely.^f The par- ticiple di,xai.ot'fiivou, in connection with what * [Meyer : "ri /jiaprov . Dm Sundigun efnes Jcden ist als liistorisch'S Ptictum dn- Vnrffangen/ieU, wodurch der sun- dige Zustand hewirkl ist, dargisli'lU. Das Pn-fi'el. wurde es als vollende! ditslehi'iide Tlials/'clif bezeicJincn." See Text. JVote *, and Exeg. JVoles on jravrcs rnxapov in ver. 12. — P. S] t [This would be expressed rather by Kavxrjai^, or Kav- XT)no; ver. 27 ; iv. 2 ; 1 Cor. v. 6, &c.— P. S.] I [Thaluck (p. 144) explains : Die. vm Gott ausgehcnde. Ehrenrrtliirig, di'iii Siiiiii'. niich die Gn-rchterJcldrung, and quotes ft'om SchlichtiiiK: "hoc loco significtl emn gUiriam, quum Dru/i liomin'm prantmcial ju: means to make just, or, to lead to righteousness. The declarative sense is especially apparent in those passages where man is said to justify God, who is just, and cannot be made just, but only accounted and acknowledged as just ; Luke vii. 29, 35 ; Matt. xi. 19 ; Rom. iii. 4 (from Ps. Ii. 5) ; comp. also 1 Tim. iii. 16, where Christ is said to be justified in spirit. The declarative and forensic meaning of the phrase, dixavoTaOai, ex niarfnx;, may be proven (1.) from the ojiposite phrase, tiixai^orcrO-ai' Ix vo/iov, which is equivalent to liuxcuoT'trS-ai, naQct rm 0-fm iv voKO), Gal. iii. 11 (or s^ e^jyMV v6/tiov, Gal. iii. 10), or ivi!>ni.ov alno'<, Rom. iii. 20; i. e., to be justified in the sight or in the judgment of God ; (2.) from tlie term ).oyi^fvv fit; (iixaioGvvriv, to account for righteous, which is used in the same sense as (hxai- oiv, Rom. iv. 3, 5, 9, 23, 24 ; Gal. iii. 6 ; James ii. 23, and is almost equivalent with aio'Zu.^; to save fcomp. Rom. v. 9, 10; x. 9, 10, 13 ; Eph. ii. 5 ff.) ; (3.) from the use of the opposite word to condimn^ CHAPTER III. 21-31. 131 «. g., Prov. xvii. 15 : " He that justifieth ( P'^^SB , LXX. : faUmov y.qlvti,) the wicked, and he that coii- demneth ( S'^lT'^'ip ) the just, even they both are abomhiatioii to the Lord," in the transhition of the Vulgate : " Qui juxti.Jicat iinpiuin et ifia hi; xaTax^i/ia, Rom. V. 16, 18. Justification implies, negatively, tiie remission of sins (a^fdn,- T<7n' c(/ia()TiAv), and, posi- tively, the imputation of Christ's righteousness, or the adoption (I'toOtaia, Gal. iv. 5 ; Eph. i. 5). No Iniman being can so keep the law of God, which demands perfect love to Him and to our neigh- bor, that on the ground of his own works he could ever be declared righteous before the tribunal of a holy God. He can only be so justified free/i/, with- out any merit of his own, on the ohjcctive ground of the perfect righteousness of Christ, as apprehended, and thus made subjective by a living faith, or life- union with Him. This justifying grace precedes every truly good work on our part, but is at tlie same time the actual beginning of all good works. There is no true holiness except on the ground of the atonement and the remission of sin, and the holi- ness of the Christian is but a manifestation of love and gratitude for the boundless mercy of God already received and constantly experienced. This I take to be the true evangelical or Pauline view of justification, in opposition to the interpreta- tion of Roman Catholics and Rationalists, who, from opposite standpoints, agree in taking Jtzcetow in the sense of making just, or sanctifjfing, and in regard- ing good works as a joint condition, with faith, of progressive justification. The objection that God cannot pronounce a man just if he is not so in fact, has force only against that mechanical and exclu- sively forensic view which resolves justification into a sort of legal fiction, or a cold, lifeless imputation, and separates it from the broader and deeper doc- trine of a life-union of the believer witli Christ. Certainly God, unlike any human judge, is absolutely true and infallible ; He speaks, and it is done ; His declaratory acts are creative, efficient acts. But mark, the sinner is not justified outside of Christ, but only in Christ, on the ground of His perfect sacri- fice, and on condition of true faith, by which he actually becomes one with Christ, and a partaker of His holy life. So, when God declares him right- eous, he is righteous potentially, " a new creature in Christ ; " old things having passed away, and all things having become new (1 Cor. v. 7). And God, who sees the end from the beginning, sees also the full-grown fruit in the germ, and by His gracious promise assures its growth. Justifying faith is itself 1 work of Divine grace in us, and the fruitful source of all our good works. On the part of God, then, and in point of faet, the actus declaratorius can indeed not be abstractly separated from the actus ^ciens : the same grace which justifies, does also renew, regenerate, and sanctify ; faith and love, ju* tification and sanctification, are as inseparable in th» life of the Christian, as light and heat in the ray< of the sun. " When God doth justify the ungodly," says Owen (on Justif cation, vol. v. p. 127, Goold't ed.), " on account of the righteousness imputed unto him. He doth at the same instant, by the power of His grace, make him inltercntUi and subjectively righteous, or holy." Nevertheless, we must distin- guish in the order of logic : Justification, like re- generation (which is the corresponding and simulta- neous or preceding inner o^jeration of the Holy Spirit), is a single act, sanctification a continuous process ; they are related to each other like birth and growth ; justification, moreover, depends not at all on what man is or has done, but on what Christ has done for us in our nature ; and, finally, good works are no cause or condition, but a consequence and manifestation of justification. Comp. Doctrinal and Ethical, No. 5, bellow ; also the Exeg. Notes on i. 17 ; ii. 13 ; iii. 20.— P. S.] Freely. d(a.v, as a gift, gratis, not by merit (chap. iv. 4 ; comp. 2 Thess. iii. 8). [Comp also /} ()ii)i)fa rtji; {ii-y.aooatvrfi, Rom. v. 17, and OfoTi TO i)('iitov, Eph. ii. 3. — P. S.] — By his grace. The idea of grace denotes the union of God's love and righteousness, the highest manifesta- tion of His favor, which, by its voluntary operation, as love, destroys the sinner's guilt freely, and which, as righteousness, destroys the vuilt on conditions of justice. [Grace — i. e., God's love to the sinner^ sai'ing love, is the efficient cause, redemp ion by the blood of Christ the objective means, faith the sub' jective condition, of justification. avrov is em- phatically put before /cl^joti-. Justification on the part of God is an act of pure grace (Eph. ii. 8-10; Gal. ii. 21), and /m^m,- is the very opposite of /itaQoi; eijyinv or 6iffUjj/ia (iv. 4 ; xi. 6). Faith, on our part, is not a meritorious act, but simply the acceptance and appropriation of God's free gift, and is itself wrought in us by God's Spirit, without whom no one can call Jesus Lord (1 Cor. xii. 3). — P. S.] Through the redemption, a noXvTQMa 1.1;. The gi-ace of God is marked as the causality of this aTTo/i'T^oxTM,-. This is therefore to be regard- ed here as the most general view of the fact of redemption, as is also plain from the addition, t^? iv X. 'I. [m* Christ, not through Christ ; comp. Eph. i. 7 ; iv to Eyniiiv rijv anolinQinai^v Sia rov a('«ot- To? wrToT']. The aTloAinfiMaic, or redemption,* in the wider sense, and viewed as a fundamental and accomplished ftict, comprehends : 1. y.araV.ayri [change from enmity to friendship, reconciliation], Rom. v. 10 ; 2 Cor. v. 18 : freedom from the enmity and rancor of sin. 2. llaaiiot; [propitiation, expia- tion], 2 Cor. V. 14; ver. 21 ; Gal. iii. 13 [iir^yo- Qaoiv ly. tTji; y.axd(}aq tov I'o/ioi'] ; Eph. i. 7 [t^* dno'/.{nQtri,(;, viewed in its ultimate aim and eli'ect, means the transpo- sition irom the condition of the militant to the tri- umphant Clitircli : Luke xxi. 28 [" the day of re- dem[)tion drawcth nifjli "J ; Rom. viii. 23 ; Eph. i. 1, 1-4 ; iv. 30. The i/.a(F/i6>; is justly represer .ed here as the central saving agency of tlie wliole ano).vT(^'o)(n^. [Hodge: Redemption from the wratli of God by tiie blood of Christ. Philippi, Alford, and others : deliverance from the ffui/( and punixft- men' of sin by the propitiatory sacrifice of Christ. The one of course implies the other. — P. S.] Ver. 25.* Whom God set forth. Explano/- tions of TT^offlfTo: 1. Previously purposed, de- signed, decreed (Chrysostom, (Ecumenius, Frilzsche [Forbes], and others, with reference to Eph. i. 9) ; f 2. Kyplce : substUult, nostro loco dedit. Against the meaning oi nsJoriOr^/io.j^ 3. Publicly set forth (Vul- gate, Luther, Beza, Bengel, De Wette, Philippi, Meyer, Thoiuck [E. V., Alford, Hodge; also De- litzsch, Coinia. on Heb., ix. 5] ). Meyer : " This fiignification of nQoriO-fjiit,, well known from the Greek usage (Herod., iii. 148 ; vi. 21 ; Plato's Phcedr., p. 115, E., &c.), must be decidedly accepted, because of the correlation to *ii,- 'ivi^t-vti^vy § The peculiar interest of God is indicated by the middle voice. It was manifested through the crucifixion ; compare the discourse of Jesus, in John, where He compares Himself with the serpent of Moses ; John iii.i This explanation acquires its full weight by the following ilaar >iQi,ov, a subs'antive of neuter form, made from tlie adjective ila(TrijQt,oq, wliich relates to expiatory acts ; see the Lexicons. In the Septuagint especially it is the designation of the mercy-seat, or the lid or cover of the ark, rinbs , which was sprinkled by the high-priest with the blood of the sin-offering once a year, on the great day of atonement [and over which appeared the ehekinah, or doia tot /.vqIov; Lev. xvi. 13-16; Ex. XXV. 17-22. Comp Biihr : Si/mboUk des viosaischeii CuUm, 1837, vol. i., p. 379 ff., 387 ff., and Lundius, • [Olshausen calls this verse the " Acropolis of the Christian faith." Among English commentators Words- worth and Hodge are veiy Cull on this verse, especially the former, whose commentary is very unequal, past-ing by many important passages without a word of explanation, and dw(Jlino- upon others with disproportionate length. Hodge is much more symmetiical, but equally dogmatical. Of German commentators, comp. Olshausen, Thoiuck, Phi- lippi, Mcyei'. — P. S.J t [Wiiere npoTiOrjixi. is used of God's eternal purpose. In the third passage where Paul employs this verb, Rom. i. 13, lie means his own purpose. The E. V. translates correctly, Viitli) Kft f.irlh, but suggests in the margin, foieonlained. This interpretation would not necessarily require, as Meyer asserts, the infinitive eli'ai (qwm esse vuliiit Di'ii<), comp. irpoopifeii', exAeyeo-flai Tivd ti, and Rom. viii. 29 ; James ii. J. But it is iuoonsistent with the context; for Paul refers to a. /.ict rather than a pm-pose, and emphasizes the piihl icily of the fact; comp. n-ci^ai'e'pciJTai, ver. 21, and cis «i/6eift^; ver. 25.— P. S.] t [Kypke (luotes Euripides, Ipliig. AuL, 1592; but in this passace npovd-qxe means either simply : Diana set forth (tue sacrificial animal), or she preferred. See Meyer. — P. S.] § [Meyer adds examples from Euripides, Thucydides, Demosthenes, and also from the LXX., and remarks, in a note, that the Greeks use TrpoTiOcaOai especially of the ex- posure of corpses to public vii'w, and that the Apostle may nave had this in mind. — P. S.] II [llpoTi9£(T9a.i Ti means to set firth something as his own to others. Comp. J. Chr. K. v. Hoftnann : Ver Schrifl- heweis, ii. I, p. 337 (2d ed.) : " Nicht bios eiii Inleresse hat OoU dabei (Meyer, Schmid), sonde in siin isl und von ihiti ]commt er, den er hinstellt, und er macht ihn zu dem, ah was tr ihn hinslelU." — P. S.] Jud. Heiligthumer, Hamb. 1711, p. 33 ff.— P. S.]. Besides, the settle, or lower platform [ nni5 ] of th« altar of burnt-offering [Ezek. xliii. 14, 17, 20] waa so named [because the Anttra/i, like the Capporeth^ was to be sprinkled with the blood of atonement, or because it was the platform from whicli the sin-offer ingwas offered. — 1'. 8.]. See also Exod. xxv. 22, and other places. Explanations: 1. Ex/iiaturi/ saori- Jicc, siii-dfftring (Su/mopfer).* Some supply OT'na [which, liowevcr, is unnecessary, i/.a(TTtji.ov set forth from tlic Holy of iiolies into the publicity of the wliole world for believers. See Zech. xiii. 1 ; the open fountain. {d.) The u.a(TTi;i)iov unites as symbol the ditl'eient elements of the atonement. As the covering of the ark of the covenant itself, it is the throne of the divine government of the cherubim above, and the preservation of the law, with its requirements, be- low. But with the sprinkled blood of e.xpiation, it is a sacrifice olfercd to God, and therefore the satis- faction for the demands of the divine law below. Also Pliilo called the covering of the ark of the covenant the symbol of the gracious majesty [('P.fiD din'diuMi;] of God [ Vit. J/os., p. C68 ; comp. Jose- phup, Aiitiq. iii. 6, 5. — P. S.]. Meyer [admits tliat this interpretation agrees with the usage of the word, especially in the LXX., and gives good sense by representing Christ as the anti- typical Cafipordh, or mercy-scat ; but, nevertheless, hej urges against it the following objections : f («.) That t/.aaT/'joi.ov is without the article. But this ■would exclude the antitype, the Old Testament i/.a(jrt]iti,ov. The requisite articulation is here in iv rij) ut'ToT' ai'/fctTt. [With more reason we might miss a/.ijf)i.v6v or fjum'. Christ may be called our pascha, or the trce pascha, or the true merci/'xeaf^ rather than simply pascha or nierci/seat Yet this is by no means conclusive. — P. S.] (b.) The name, in its application to Christ, is too abrupt. Answer : Since there must be a place of expiation for every expiatory offering, the conceptions of places and offerings of expiation must have been quite familiar to the readers, not merely to the Jews, but also to the Gentiles, although here the idea is connected with the Old Testament symbol, (e.) If Christ should be conceived as Capporet/i, tlien the e«\' ritu:il, for the object and intent of sacrifice. If the word were formed from the Kal, it would be P^S3 . " The golden lid was called P"1E3, not because it covered the open ark, but because it subservtd the act of expiation which was here performed " (Biihr, Syiiiboiilc dex Mn.\ Ciit- ius, i., p. 381). The Capporelh was the centre of the pres- ence and revelation of God, and His uloiy dwelt over it between the two cherubim which overshadowed the ark, and represented the creation. Hence the Iloly of holies was called nibsn D'^S (lChron.xxviii.il). The Pe- ihito and Vulf^ate {prnptiatnriuvi) have followed the LXX. Comp. also Tholuck, Horn., 5tli ed., p. 157, note ; and Ewald, Aller/h.,p. IGo. But Ewald and Meyer derve r"lQ3 from 1S3 in the sense of scabere, to rub off, lo forgive ; against which Tholuck protests in favor of the usual derivation from "123 . Ewald {I. c, p. 165, 3d ed. of 18G6) maintains that Cupporelh cannot mean the plain cover, as if the ark had no other, but a second cover or a separate settle (the footstool of Jehovah), which was even more important than the ark itself, and is so described, Ezek. xxv. 17-21 ; xxvi. 84, &c. He derives it from "iE3 , as saxmnum, or scabel- lum from scabere, and refers to 'CDS , 2 Chron. ix. 18, ftnd to an Ethiopic verb. — P. S.] * [Wordswinth, on the contrary, urges Trpoeflero as an argn-tient a^ninst this intei-pretation, since the mercy-seat Was not set forth, but concealed from the people and even iom the priests. But tins h:is no force. — P. S.] t [Repeated by Jowett in loc.—V. S.] tWftJtr rTfi (ii.>'.ai,o(T vvtjq uitov would be im- proper, since the Capporelh must much rather ap. pear as «V()fti«,- of divine grace. This objection rests simply on a defective understanding of the Pauline idea of righteousness (see above). Accord- ing to Paul, righteousness is not merely condemna- tory and putting to death, b«t, in its perfect revela. tion, also delivering and quickening. Grace itself ia called, on one side, righteousness, on the other, love, ( TO) avtoT' a(/(«Tt]. Diff'erent interpreta- tions: 1. By faith on His blood {tv instead of fiq; Luther, Calvin, Beza, Olshausen [Tholuck, Hodge], and others). Although the language will permit this view, the thought is not only obscure, but incorrect, that God, by faith on the blood of Christ, should have made Christ himself the throne of grace for humanity. Faith, in this sense, is a cun^equfris, but not an antecedcns, of the established propitiation. 2. The same objection holds good against the con- struction of Meyer, and others, by which both clauses, iia rtii; tt'kjt. and iv tw alroT' a'i/iari', should refer coiirdinately to n()oi&fro ; namely, so that faith would be the subjective condition, and the blood of Christ the objective means of the setting forth of Christ as the expiatory oft'ering.* An ob- jective condition should precede the subjective one, and the ])ropitiation exists before faith, in the sense of the New Testament idea of salvation. Faith is therefore the completed faithfulness of Christ (see ver, 22), which, in the blood of His sacrificial death, has become the eternal spiritual manifestation and / power for the world. [As in ver. 22, I beg leave liere to differ from this unusual interpretation of TTtCFTi-q, and understand this, with other commenta- tors, more naturally of our faith in Christ ; comp. Tor ix nliTTfi'K; ^Jtjaov at the close of ver. 26. If it meant the faithfulness of Christ, the Apostle would probably have added avroT; as he did before cuiiari,. It is better to separate the two classes by a comma after " faith." — The blood of Christ means His holy life offered to God as an expiatory sacrifice for the sins of the world. It is like a healing fountain send- * [Meyer, in the third and fourth editions, ccuects Sia njs TTiCTTCw? with iAtttrT^piov, and iv raJ avTov aifian only with vpoeBero : God set forth Christ ' in His blood (i'. ('., by causincr Him to shed His blood, in which lies the power of the atonement) as a sin-ofierinjr, wh'ch is effec- tive throush faith De Wctte connects bot'i 6td iriar. ami iv TiZ avT. o'i/ii. alike with ov Trpoefiero iAacrTj)piov, the fonner expressing the means of the subjective appi-opria- tion (das fiiOJ'Ctive Aiiefffiiiii'ffsiiu','li-I), the latter the meane of the objective exhibition {ila.i ohjrclivr Du rsMluiig.ymd'el) of Christ as a propitiatory sacrifice. So also Alford, wh« seems to follow De Wette (at least in the Uomatis) morf than any ofaer commentator. — P, S.] 184 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. ing forth streams through tlie channel of faith to wash away tlie guilty stahis of sin. — P. S.] ipor the demonstration of his righteous- ness {_il(; 'dvdfiit'V xTji; d t/.aioiT i'V7j c av- Tov]. In order to perfectly reveal and establish it. Tlie divergent interpretations of the word <)i,y.ai,- oiri'vn indicate how difficult it has been for the- ology to regard God's righteousness as grace whicli produces righteousness. Truthfulness [contrary to tlie meaning of di,/.ai,off(irij^, (Ambrose, Beza [Tur- retin, Hammond], and others) ; goodness (Tlieodo- ret, Grotius [Koppe, Heiclie, Tittmann], and others); holiness (Neander, Fritzsche [Lipsius] ) ; judicial righteousness (Meyer* [De Wetle, Tholuck, Plii- lippi, Alford, Wordswortli, Ilodge] ); justifying, or sill-forgiving righteousness (Clirysostom, Augustine, and others) ; the righteousness which God gives [which would be a superfluous repetition of ver. 21, and inconsistent with ver. 26,] (Luther, and others) ; [Stuart, and others : God's method of justification, which ()i/.ai,()(Tvvri never means. — P. S.]. It is rather the ri)/hli'OHsness of God hi the fulness of itn revela- tion, as it proceeds from God, requires and accom- plishes tiu'ough Christ the expiation of the law, and institutes the righteousness of faith by justification as the principle of the righteousness of the new life.f For the righteousness of God, like His truth, om- nipotence, and love, forms an unbroken and direct beam from His heart, until it appears in renewed humanity. Because of (or, on account of) the prae- termis^ion (passing over), [i. e., because He had allowed the sins of the race which were committed before Christ's death to pass by unpunished, whereby His righteousness was obscured, and hence the need of a demonstration or manifestation in the atoning sacrifice, that fully justified the demands of right- eousness, and at the same time effected a complete remission of sins, and justification of the sinner. — P. S.]. Tlie TTcc^f (Tk; must not be confounded with the «f/)f(Ttc. as Coceeius has proved in a spe- cial treatise, De utUitate distinction s inter 7rd(ji-(nv et av 6 fjfoq. Philippi confines the expression to the sins of the Jewish people, in strict conformity to Heb. ix. 15 ; but here the Apostle had just proven the universal sinfulness and guilt, and now speaks of the universal redemp- tion of Christ.— P. S.] Vers. 25, 26. Under the forbearance of God for the demonstration [Unfer der Geduld Gottca zu der Ji!rweisu/ir/, iv r Tj dvo-/'ij rov flfor, &c.]. Construction ; 1. OlcumeniusJ Luther [Ruck- ert, Ewald, Hodge], and others, refer the dvo-/ri to THioytyovorMv [?. e., committed durinc) the for- bearance of God ; comp. Acts xvii. 20. This gives good sense, but would require, as Meyer says, a dif- ferent position of the words, viz., rwr dnaQT. tiTiv TTQoy-cyov. IV rfi (ir. t. 0. — P. S.]. 2. Meyer re- fers the forbearance to 7ioi(t((Tvq, in conseijuence of indulgence or toleration, as the ground of the pass- ing over. [So also Philippi]. 3. Reiche : *is tv- (itbiiv rTji; dixaioai'V/ji; ; the dly.aioff. having been manifested partly in the forgiveness of sins, and * [Dr. HodfTe, fi-om fear of Romanizing inferences, takes iropeo-is ill the sense of a.foyfya- voTor must be again supplied before avoyt]. Tlie ndiiityi.^ must by all means be connected with the avo/i'j ; but it is not operative by virtue of this iilone. The avo/rj denotes the old time as the period of God's prevailing forbearance, to the end that lie may reveal His perfect righteousness in the future decisive time. The Trn^jfrrtc, on the con- trary, appeared at that time as the supplement of the propitiatory and retributive judgments which had already commenced as preliminaries. For this reason, the tic; 'fvdfi,ii,v (ver. 25) is not the same na rnioi; rijv f »>()> tin' (ver. 26). The first 'iv- Sn.ii.c, as the judicial righteousness revealing itself iu the blood of Christ, has supplemented the ndQi-(Ti,i;. The second VrdftiK; is the purpose of the dvo/i'j, the fully accomplished h'duiii;, which branches off in penal righteousness, and in justifying righteousness to him who "is of the faith of Jesu.s, and draws faith from His fountain of faith." The f('<,- should there- fore not be confounded with the tt^^oc; (Meyer).f Ver. 26. [At this present time, Iv ro) vvv xccisjijj, not opposed to Iv rij dro/fj (Bengel, Hodge), but rather to 7T()6 in niioyf/ovuTiov, and added emphatically. The titne of Christ is a time of critical decision, when the 7id(iKnt; is at an end, and man must either accept the fuU renussion {d(ff(jii:) of sin, or expose himself to the judgment of a righteous God. — P. S.] — That He may be just and the justifier, &c. [fit; to flvai, aiiTOJ' (fl/.aiov y.ai di.xai'oTn'ra rov i y. TziffT fox; ^J fjffov. The fit; expresses not merely the result, but the design of God in exhibiting Christ to the world as the mercy-seat. — P. S.] We emphasize avrov, one and the same [cin und derxeliiv).\ That He may be — that is, that He may plainly appear [and be recognized by men in this twofold character as the Just One and the Justifier of the sinner]. The righteousness of God in the death of Christ has fully revealed that which the human view of the early and later times found so difficult to grasp ; namely, righteousness and fbrbf~arance or love in one spirit, condemnation and deliverance in cue act, killing and giviiig new life in one operation. [Bengel : '■^ Summurn hie habeiur paradoxon evav- geJicum; nam in leae conspiciiur DeuKJimtus et con- demnans, in evanjelio j uatus ipse et justijjcatis pecea- torem.'''' This apparent contradiction is solved, ob- jectively, in the love of God, which is the beginning and t'.ie end of his ways ; and, subjectively, in faith (tov Ix 7T((Trf(i)c), by which the sinner becomes one with Christ. In the death of Christ, God punished * [nence Dr. Langc, in his translation, mates a period after aniaprij/uaTuji'. I prefer the construction of Meyer and Pnilippi :is beins more natural. The avoxri must not be conf'ou dcd with X"P'5 • the former suspends and puts off the judsineht by Trapeo-ts, the latter abolishes the guilt of sm by aKTO.— P, S.] sin and saved the sinner, and Divine justice was vin dicated in the lullest display and triumph of redeem" ing love. Not that tiie Father poured tlie vials ol Ills wrath upon His innocent afid beloved Son (an the doctrine is sometimes caricatured), but the Son voluntarily, in infinite love, and by the eternal coua sel and with the consent of the holy and mercifu! Father, assumed tiie whole cui-se of sin, and, as the representative head of the human family, in its stead and for its benefit. He fully satisfied the demands of Divine justice by llis perfect, active and passive obe- dience. His sacrifice, as the sacrifice of the eternal Son of God in union with human nature, without wn is of infinite value both as to extent and duration, while the Old Testament sacrifices were merely an ticipatory, preparatory, and temporary. Justification is here represented as the immediate effect of Christ's atoning death. On (Vtzatow, conip. the Excfi. Notes on ver. 24, and also Doctrinal,, below. No. 5. Wordsworth has a long note here on the doctrine of justification. He likewise maintains that ()tx«iow (and p'^^fi) in the LXX. and iu the New Testament means, not to make righteous, but to accoutit and declare righteous, and to reyard and treat as such, in opposition to condemnhifi and •pronouncing gitilty. But he insists also, that we are actually made righteous by our union with Christ, and that God's righteousness ia not only imputed^ but also imparted to us in Him who is " the Lord our Righteousness." This work of infusion of grace, however, is not properly called justification., but sanctificaton. Comp. vi. 22: " Being freed from sin, and made servants unto God — i. e., being justified — ye have your fruit unto holiness " — this is satictification. — P. S.] Second Paragraph (vers. 27-31). Ver. 21. Where, then, is the boasting? Thia announces the great conclusion from the foregoing. The lively expression of the paragraph arises from the triumphant confidence of the Apostle. [Ben- gel: nor, particula victoriosa.~\ The y.avyrja i,<; [gloriatio'\ is certainly not the same as /.cuyr^fia [gloriandi material, subject of boasting (Reiche) ; but yet it is not exactly bragging (Meyer), since in many persons boasting of the law arose from dog- matic error. Jewish boasting is especially meant here,* but not exclusively, for the general conclu- sion is here drawn in reference to the righteousness of the Jews and Gentiles (see ver. 19). With the negation of the yai/ijOii;, the y.aV/rj/ia is also de- nied at the .same time. — It is escluded. Perhaps the expression is here chosen with reference to the limits of the court of justice. The law excludes unqualified plaintiffs and deftMidants. — By ■what law ? (By the law) of works ? Since the Mosaic law was a law of works in form only, and not in spirit (see chap. vii. 1), the question presup- poses that there is no such law of works ; the spirit of the law is the law of faith. But the meaning of the question itself is : the law, as such, erroneously made a mere law of works, is too imperfectly de- veloped in its operation to exclude boasting (see * [ITence the article ii, -which seems to refer to the Kavxri nviv/iciTOi; rTji; LioTji;, viii. 2; fwo/iot; Xiitarovy 1 Cor. ix. 21; vo/iot; Tihi^oi; riji,- fhvOf()iaq^ James i. 25; ii. 12 — all going to 6'liow that the liberty of the gospel has nothing to do with license and antinomiauism. — V. S.] Ver. 28. Therefore [For] we judge. ).o- fiLOufO^a Iceiisemux, comp. ii. 3; viii. 18 ; 2 Cor. xi. 5], is not, we infer, nor merely, we think, reckon (Tholuck [Alford, Hodge] ), which, with the read- ing ydt), would not even make good sense. The ex- pression, " For we think,''^ would be an odd method of demonstration. It is not the subjective fact of ♦uatificatiou which establishes the olyective economy of salvation already described ; but it is this objec- tive Economy which, on the one hand, excludes false justification, namely, that which is by works ; and, on the other hand, establishes real justification, that which is by faith. We must consider also that the Apostle lays down the statement of ver. 28 as the principal proposition to the entire following ai-gu- inent, but will not apply it as pi'oof for the negative statement, that man is not justified by works. — By faith [TTifTTf I. = <)\a nlfTTidiq, instrumental cause]. Luther's addition of alone [^clurch den Glauhe.n allein] is defended by Tholuck (the Nuremberg edition of the Bible of 1483 also reads, only by faith). Meyer properly remarks : It does not be- long to the translation, but it is justified by the con- text as an explanation.! — Without works of the ♦ [So nleo Alford and TEodRe : " vd^ios is not used here in its ordinary sense. The Koneral idea, however, of a rule of action is retained." — P. S.] t [This is very true. Luther's allem is correct in sub- Ltance, and appi'upriate as a gloss or in a paraphrase, hut has no husiness in the test. It is a logical inference from the context, and is equivalent to the eav »i)j in the parallel passage, Gal. ii. 16. The Latin Vulg.ite had taken the earae liberty, it is true, in other cases ; and, in this very verse, Luther's insertion can bo justified hy Catholic ver- sions, V z., the oldest German Catholic Bible of jSiuremberg (published 1483, the year of Lutl.er's birth), which reads : . NUR diirch il'^a GL, and two Italian versions (of Genon, 1478, and Venice, 1538, pur la sola. fi-d/). Even Erasmus defended Luther in this case, and said : " Fax soi^a lot clamoribiii, lupidnta line i^se.u'o in Lmlie.ro, revi'reihi'r in Pali-ihus [?] indi'iir." Comp. Wolf, Koppe, Tholuck, and Philippi ill loco. Xcvortheless, the insertion of the ".so/k " in the translation was unnecessary and uuni-e, :ind, in the eyes of Konianists, it gave some plausiliility to the unjust enarge of falsifying the Scriptures. It tirought Paul into direct verbal (though no reilj oontiict with James, when he Bays that by " woidts man is justified, ;ind no' byfuilh only " (ov/c tK iriVrews noi'oi', ii. 24). The dogmatic foiinula, sn'a fidi: (hence the term solifidiaiiisni), has become a watch- word of evangelical Protestantism, and, rightly under- Btood — i. e., in the sense of ijra'in snUi — it expresses a most precious truth, which can never be sacrificed. But it must lot be confounded -with fidi- soUlnrio, a faith that ix and '{mai/is alone. The X'*?'? ipyiov »omou must be connected law. This naturally refers to ^JcxaioTaOat., but not to faith. In the process of juslijicution, the worki of the law do not come into cooperation. [Hodge : " To be justitii.'sl, nfc. mani't sola: intrinsems ofrniur il I'x^rnixenif." The more full and correct formula would be : Gratia sola jastlficnmnr perf/lein qum Christ) jiistitiain itpprehfjidil el per carilatem operaiur (iriVrts £i' ayainfi evipyovjj-ivTii), or salvation by grace alone as approhcnde] by a living t':iith. Justifying faith purifies the heart, over- comes the world, and al)0und3 in fruits of righteousness. It is impossible truly to belit ve in Christ, without partak- ing of the power of llis holy life. Wordsworth in Inc. hits the point, when he says : " Though it is by faith we are justifi' d, aiid by faith nnhj, yet not by such a faith as has no works springing out of it. Every such faith is a dead faith. And yet it is not from the works that spring out of faitli, but from the t'lith which is rhe root of works, that all are justified." In other words, it is not by faith as an active or workijig, but by f lith as a receptive or approiu-iating principle, by which we are justified ; yet that which faith re- ceives is a power of life which must at imce mmilbst itself in good works. It is but just to Luther to add, that he taugh most clearly and forci'dy this inseparable connection lietwceo faith and works. I shall quote but one passage from his .ad- mirable preface to the J'^pistle to the P.,omans : " O ts ist c«« Icbendig, geschu/lig, lltu iff, niurlilig Diifj urn den GUtnbcn, dass cs iinmogiiih ist, c vero ex Jide justiUmn ccnseqiikur" (from Tholuck, p. 162). Meyer prop- erly regards this explanation as strange. But indif- ference as to the form of expression would be equal ly strange. There seems in reality to be a doi f )rm of breviloquence here : He will justify the cir cumcision (which is a circumcision by faith) by f iith ; for the real Jew fias already a germinal ing faith ; and He will justify the uncireumcision (that which through faith has become circumcisioii)n. Jowitt connects ix Tri'arews with TrepiTo/u^i/, tAe circiiinrision whUh is by fnith, and thereby destroys the correspondence 1o the other member. Green (<5.-., p. 300, as quot<;d by Alford) refers Std t^s Tri'orews to TriVTeto? lUst mentioned, hy (hi instrumentnUty of tkn identicul f"ih yohirh oprn/es in the case of the circumciserl. Bengel : ^' Jadsei pridnn in fid" fueranl ; gentiles fidem ab Hits recens vnrli ert'n'."^F. S.] t rVery simitar is the interpretation of "Wordsworth : The Jews, or chi'dren of Abraham, are justified nut of or /luut (ck) the faith which Abraham their father had, and which they are supposed to have in him, being already in the covenant with God in Christ. The Gentiles, ol efio, must enter that do»r of the faith of Abraham, and pass through it (6id), in order to be justified. 'T'here is but one Church from the beginning. Abraham anu is seed are in the housobold of faith in Chr st, but they lust live and act from its spirit ; the heathen must fni-r the house tkrough the door of that faith in llim.— P. S.] al)ly to Theodoret, Pelagius) has been maintained bt Semler, and others, and by De Wette and Meyer According to Meyer, the Apostle, from chap. iii. 31 to iv. 25, proves the harmony of the doctrine of jus- tification by faith with the law, by what has been Said in the law about Abraham's justification. Meyei urges against the former view, that then this very important sentence appears merelj' as an ar)rupt cate- gorical assertion ; and Philippi's reply, that chap, viii. 1 continues it fiuther, certainly does not relieve the matter. But Tholuck justly remarks against the second view, that then a yd^, instead of oiV, would be naturally cxiiected in chap. iv. 1. [Be- sides, the main object of Paul here is to show the true method of justifictition, and not the agreement of the law and the gospel. — P. S.l This much is clear: that ver. 31 constitutes the transition to chap. iv. But, in itself, it serves as the conclusion of the paragraph from vers. 27-30, in that it brings out the relation of the experimental fact that there are believing Gentiles — to the law. Paul had shown that the justification of the Gentiles, with the justifi- cation of the Jews, is to be traced back to one ana tiie same God. By this means, he says, the law ie not made void, but established. How far estab- lished ? The answer is furnished by the preceding verses : As far as the unity of God, which underlies the law, is glorified by the harmony of His saving operations among Jews and Gentiles. Particularism weakens the law, because it makes the law the stat- te of a national God. The universal Monotheism f Christianity, proved by the universal justification f believers, first properly establishes the law in its true character, by making plain the universal charac- ter of the lawgiver. — The sentiment. Do we then make void the law ? is sufficiently repelled by the emotional expression, /< j^ yivoiro, Par be it! by no means ! But the opposite sentiment, We establish the law, has been already proved by the fact that the law is defined as the law of faith, and has been traced back to the God of the Jews an(| i Gentiles. This is indeed extended further in what follows, yet not in the form of a continued proof, but in the form of a new scriptural argument. The question. How hr does Paul, or Christianity es- tablish the law ? has been variously answered ; see Tholuck, p. 163. Chrysostom, and others, say, that the salvation in Christ is the end of the law. Most expositors hold that the law is fulfilled by the new obedience, chap. vi. and viii. 4 [by love, which is called "the fulfilment of the Liw;" xiii. 10. Augus- tine, Luther, Calvin, Beza, Calov., Philippi. — P. S.}. Tholuck thinks that the testimony of the ro/foc and the 7T()0f/^Ta«. is meant. But this is not a n«w /(TTctrca ; nor would the continuation in chap. iv. be a new uTrdvai from this point of view ; it is o:;ly a new proof for the righteousness by faith : the proof from Scripture. The Apostle glorifies and estab- lishes the law on a new and broader foundation, by representing it as a unit, by tracing it to its principle of life, and enlarging its contents from the Jewish particulaiism to the universality of the revelation of the living God of ail men. thus the Mosaic kw, as the type of the Mosaic religion, is glorified so far as ii is the representative of all the legal elements of religion in general.* * [Comp. a long note of "Wordsworth iv Inc., who assigna no less than twelve re:isons for the assertion of ver. 21, viz., because the doctiine of justification is.groundcd on the testi- mony of the law that all are under sin ; because the sacrific* of Christ was pre-annouuced by the passover, and other sacri 138 THE EPISTLE OF PATTL TO THE ROMANS. DOCTEINAL A^T) ETHICAL. First Paragraph (vers. 21-26). 1. As the Old Testament, according to vcr. 21, has testified of tlie righteousness of faith contained in the New Testament, so does the New Testament —as the perfect revelation of God's righteousness — bear witness to the holiness of the law in the Old Testament. 2. It is a defective and inorganic view to believe that, as far as the single attributes of God are con- cerned, in the New Testament His justice is less prominent than in the Old, in order that His love may appear more prominent. On the contrary, the revelation of His justice is first completed in the New Testament. It is here completed so grandly, that, in proportion to this completion, tiie Old Tes- tament revelation of justice may be regarded as still veiled. The same may be said of all the Divine attributes. In the New Testament they have a kill- ing and a vivifying — i. e., creative efteci,. The jus- tice in union with love is grace. In the Old Testa- ment, however, justice appears mainly m its punitive aspect. 3. On the double form and kind of faith, see the Exeg. Notes on ver. 22. 4. Also on the dota &iov, see Exeg. Notes on ver. 23. As the dbxaioavvt] is the internal part of the Divine {iota, so is the want of doia on man's part the evidence of his want of diicaiorfvini. The eame connection is likewise exhibited in tlie life of faith. The doMi^KrOav arises from the di.y.aiov(r&au (chap. viii. 30). 5. The doctv'me of juniiflcation. On the Si-xa u- ovv, see chap. ii. 13, and the section relating there- to. On the fiict that it is under the di,/.ai,ov(j9a.v that man's utter want of personal righteousness first becomes prominent, see the Exeg. Notes on ver. 21. The evangelical definition per Jidem is opposed to the Roman Catholic definition propter fideni. The form propter fideni has a double sense. If faith is understood as merit, the order of the work of sal- vation is reversed, and its causality is transferred to man. It is very clear from the present tense (ibv.ai- oTiadav (ver. 28), that the Apostle distinguislies here, and throughout, between redemption and justifica- tion. Clirist is, indeed, effectively the righteousness of believers, and virtually the righteousness of hu- manity, and so far could the redemption be once ioosely denominated justification. Yet the Apostle's usage of language is far above this indefiniteness, and cliap. viii. 30 proves conclusively (comp. chap. V. 18) that he regards justification as a part of the flees of the law ; 'because the law reveals God as a just Judge, who needs an adequate propitiation for sin ; bfcause the death of Christ is such a propitiation ; because Christ has, hy His perfect obcd'oiice to the law, established its dijniity ; beo:uise justifioTtion by faith obliges men ti> new degi-ees of love and gratitude to God, &o., &c. But these are all sub- ordinate points — 111 one sense the law is abolished, as a type and shadow of things to come; as a killing letter, with its curse ; comp. Eph. ii. 25 ; (ial. iii. 13 ; but as to its moral oon- tenta, as the expression of the holy will of God, as a rule of Bonduot, it was perfectly fulfill 9d by Christ, and i" 'onstantly fulfilled by every believer in love to God and .o ,fc m our neigh- bor. The decalogue is a national code in form, a universal 3ode in spiril and nlm. This applies to ail the Ten Com- Oiandments, from which we cannot take out one (say the secnad, or the fourth) without ma' -ig the beauty, har- mony, and completeness of the »_... e. Christ hassettled that question in His interpretatioL- of the law, Viy the fun- daraenlal jirinciplo of the magna oL;u'ta of the kingdom of heaven, as laid down Matt. v. j.? fi.— P. S.] plan of salvation. The connection between th^ ()i,/.uiid make k^ioimi this grand method of salvation sooner? 1. To make it the more valued ; 2. To show His fidelity in the per- formance of His promises ; 3. To make known the virtue and efiicacy of the blood of Christ, which sanctifies the present, extends its influence to the pa.^t, and continues the availing sacrifice and way of salvation to all future ages. — Hodge : The doctrine of atonement produces in us its proper efiect, when it leads us to see and feel that God is just ; that He is infinitely gracious ; that we are deprived of all ground of boasting ; that the way of salvation, which is open for us, is open for all men ; and that the motives to all duty, instead of being weakened, are enforced and multiplied. — In the gospel, all ia harmonious : justice and mercy, as it i-egaids God ; freedom from the law, and the strongest obligations to obedience, as it regards men. — Barnes : One of the chief glories of the plan of salvation is, that while it justifies the sinner, it brings a new set of influences from heaven, more tender and mighty tiiau can be drawn from any. other source, to pro- duce obedience to the law of God. — J. F. H.] [Homiletical Literature on Justification (Id. the order of the text). — Cocceius, De Justijicaiione, op. 7, 180, T. W. Allies, fSerm. 1; B. Hill, Serm. 95 ; E. Cooper, Lead. Doct., 1. 20 ; M. Harrison, several sermons on Justificidmn (1091); E. B.vihek, Serm. 2, 248; T. Boston, Works, 1, 581 ; S. Knight, Serm. 2, 15 ; A. Fullkr, Three Sennons 07i Justifi- cation, Serm. 176 ; W. B. Collyer, On Script. Boat., 329; Bishop Hobart, Senn. 2, 32; W. Bridge, Works, 5, 364 ; C. Simeon, Works, 15, 79 ; A. Bur- gess, Oil JvsVfication (Two Parts); J. Hoole, 5crm. 2, 217 ; W. Stevens, Serm. 1, 268 ; Bishop Hali- fax, St. PaiWs Dortrine of Justification bi) Faith Explained, 2d. ed., Camb. 1762 ; T. Randolph, Doc- trine of Justification by Faith ; H. Worthington, Disc. 315 ; S. Disney, Disc. 125 ; P. Hutcheson, Serm.; T. Young, Justification, &c. ; E. Parsons, Justification by Faith, Halifax, 1821 ; J. C. Miller, Serm. 359 ; J. Johnston, Way of Life, 85 ; T. T, S.MITII, Serm. 289; W. Shirley, Serm. 151; J. Whitty, Serm. i. 413 ; J. Weslky, iro?'^s (Amer. ed.), vol. i. 47, 385 ; vol. ii. 40, 236 ; vol. iii. 153, 172, 259 ; vol. v. 37-442 ; vol. vi. 6-195 ; vol. vii. 47. — The Periodical Homiletical Literature on the same subject is very abundant. We give the prin- cipal artic'es: Justification by Faith (R. W. Lanpis), Amer. Bibl. Repository, xi. 453 ; (D. Curry) M I'ut, if well understood, it al'^o gives the best i^ense ; and we le^ai-d llie opposite readiiij;, which is now generally favored, as an explacitory transposition. Soe the Exig. ^'a es. [The lex', n-c. puts 'A/3paa^i Tor najipa (no* w po-KOLTopa) r)ijiiiv bif'irc eupjjxeVai. Cod. Sin. sustains the readi g of Lachniann, which is also adopted hy Alfoi-d, wlij, however, brackets eupriKeuai. as being of doubtful authority, since it is omitted by the Vatican Cod. (sie Tischt-ndorf's edi- tion, p. 14-18). But it is indispensable, and abmidai.tly sustained by the other uncial MSS. M.eyer admits the weigh: of Bxtemal authority in favor of Lachmann's reading, but is disposed, nevertheless, to regard it as a later transposition to suit the connection of Kara a-dpKa with to^ naripa ijfj.uiv. The E. V., following the Itxt. r. F., but inserted by N. A. C. D^. K. L.. Lachmann and Alford br.\cket it.-P. S.) '• Ver. 25.— [Luther, to whom above all others the Christian world is indebted for a lucid and forcible exposition cf Paul's doctrine of justification by faith, has made a strange mistake here by translating Siieaiiacr iv: Gerechligkeii Uigbteou suess), instead of: Me.chlferligung (justification). StKaiwo-tt is the divine act of setting tiinau right, or puttiog Dim into the state and possession of Sixaiocrvin].— P. S.l CHAPTER IV. 1-25. 143 EXEGETICAL AlO) CRITICAIi. Oeneral Eemarls. — The tlioocratical Scripture proof for the I'ighteousness of faith pioniiaed to tlie Gentiles as well as the Jews. Enlargement of the MoH:uc economy of particularism by the develop- ment of the f^erm-Iike universality of the Abrahamie religion. Survei/ : 1. Abrahani's juntijicalion vias a judijication bi/faitf., and excluded justijicalion by works. It was therefore only a justification of the tinner, as is shown by the beatitude prononuced by David (veus. 1-8). The opposite is the Jewish right- eousness of works. 2. It was independent of cir- cumcision and the law. Abraham did not obtain the blessedness of justifying faith in circumcision, but in uncircumcision ; circumcision was then added to it as a seal of justification. Abraham was thereby set forth to be the father of the faithful, as well of the uncireumcised as of the circumcised (vers. 9-12). The opposite is Jewish particularism. 3. Justifica- tion is as universal as the promise, which constitutes even an antithesis to the law. Abraham's justifica- tion is to him and to his seed a promise of the in- heritance of the world. This promise is not limited by the law. Such a limitation would make the promise void ; for the law produces that wrath (oitytj), which looks rather to the destruction than the inheiitance of the world. The promise is both conditioned and established by faith and grace (vers. 13-17). The opposite is Jewish legalism. 4. Abra- ham and Chris ians have in realiti/ the same right- eousness of faith. The analogy between Abraham's faith and that of his believing children, — Christians : a. In relation to the same wonder-working God (ver. 17). b. In relation to the same conduct of faith : looking away from the contrachction of the natural life ; strong confidence in the Divine word of reve- lation and promise (vers. 18-21). c. In reference to the same operation (vers. 22-25). The opposite is the external and superficial contemplation of the worldly sense. — Or also : a. The fiiith of Abraham (vers. 17-22) ; b. Application to the faith of Chris- tians (vers. 23-25). The opposite, in general, is the hierarchical formalism and ceremonialism. FiEST Pakageaph, vers. 1-8. [Paul exhibits Abraham as a truly evangelical character, as a man of faith, in order to confirm the doctrine that the ground of our .salvation lies not in us, but outside of us in the free grace of God, and that this must be apprehended first by faith, before we can do any good works. James, on the other hand (ii. 21 fi'.), in opposition to a barren orthodoxy and mere notional belief, represents Abraham as a man of holy obedience, who proved his faith by works. In tlie one case he appears as the champion of the righteousness of faith, in the other as the champion of the righteousness of life. Both views are right. Paul goes to the root of the matt<;r, the vital principle, which animated Abraham ; James looks at the fruit produced thereby. Faith and works, righteousness and holiness, are as inseperable as light and heat, as the tree and the fruit, as cause and eifect. Paul himself, after laying the only true foundation, as strongly insists upon a holy life as James. There is, in the Old Testament, an evan- gelical as well as a legal element ; and the gospel, or promise, precedes the law which came in between 10 the promise and the fulfilment (ver. 20). Abrahaa represents the evangelical element, as Moses does the legal. Abraham's faith diifcrs from the Chris- tian faith, as the promise differs from the fulfilment of tlie gospel salvation, and as hope differs from fruition ; but the essential element, the ethical key- note, in both is unconditional confidence and trust in God's truth and God's mercy. — P. S.] Ver. 1. What, then, shall we say. The 01% announces an inference from the previous state- ment (iii. 29), that God is the God of the Jews as well as of the Gentiles, considered in relation to Abraham's history and its significance. But our in- ference is not a corroboration (Meyer), or conf^rma- tio ub exemplo (Calvin). We have liere rather a new proof, as deduced from the foregoing, namely, the explanation of Abraham's history and of David's words of faiih. Likewise Tholuck observes, the ovv cannot be explained if, in accordance with the view of recent exjjositors, this verse be connected immediately with ver. 31 of the previous chapter. — The coustruciion : It may be asked, first, whether the question should be read as one question, or two? Grotius and others have placed an intenogotitm mark after i(to7'ii fv, and thus made two questions out of the sentence. Then diy.aLOfftvrjv is supplied to fv(j7iy.ivai,. — If the f !'(j tj y.ivat, be taken abso- lutely in the sense of the (rrecian philosophy, thia division could be made more easily. Yet the chief question here is not, what should be said, but what is Abraham's advantage ? — It may further be asked, whether zara adijy.a relates to 7r(>o>rccTo^a (nariija) or to f ii(j tj /.ivai,. Lachmann's read- ing : Tt orf i()ov/tiv tv(j/jy.irai, 'yi;J(), &c., [see Textual Note '], is the one most favored by the Codd. (A. C. D., &c., and also the Sin.). " The sus- picion that the transposition of the y.ara, aaiixa [of hv^jri/.ivai. rather. — P. S.] is to be laid to the charge of the copyist, is strengthened when we see that such expositors as Chrysostom, Theophylact, Gen- nadius in (Ecumenius, who read iv^jri/.tvai, y.ara ac'iijy.a, nevertheless connect the latter with nurhQ t,/nT,v" (Tholuck, p. 1G7). De Wette, Meyer [Th'o- luck, Alford, Wordsworth, Hodge], and most com- mentators, with the Peshito, connect y.aru ad^xa with fv^Tjy.ivai-, and not (according to Origen, Ambrose, Calvin,* &c.) with naTt^a {jjumv. But in ver. 9 ff., the subject is circumcision ; while in vers. 1-8, it is only the contrast between righteous- ness by works and righteousness by faith. There- 1 fore, according to Meyer's construction, xarai aaQxa, should correspond to the ii E^yo)v, yetj not so that the two ideas should be identical, but that works should be embraced in the more general idea of y.cnd an(jy.a. The (Tctiji, in antithesis tc the divine nrtr/ia, should then denote huma.'iitj given up to itself. Pelagius, Ambrose, and others, refer y.ard ad(jy.a to circumcision. Riickert un- derstands the word as embracing both circumcision and e(>ya. While Tholuck consents to the now cus- tomary connection of the xard ad(>y.a with fr^^- xtvai., he does not grant that the works of faithful Abraham were sQya xard ad()xa ; although Flaciua would include likewise the opera renati, as performed by men and not imputed by God, in the opera carnis ; and Bullinger and others would make ad(^i equal tc * [Hodge quotes Calvin for the opposite view, explain ingr Kara adpKa in tlie sense vaturaliter, ex sripso. But Calvin goes on to say : " Probahile tamen est epilJieti loca Patri cnrijungi," and gives the preference to the construo tion with irarepa. — P. S.l I4A THE EriSTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. (^ya. Tholuck therefore arrives at the conchjsion, that Paul did uot des^iga to apply Christian justifica- tion in all its consequences to the patriaicii. But how could he represeni him here as the father of the faithl'ul, if he would belittle or limit his justi- fication Y We go upon the supposition that, in ac- cordance with the best Codd., "^p'^«/( 6 Tr^o/rotToi^j r,fu7tv zaT« ad{i/.a (ver. 1) is an antithesis to alnoi; nariio ndvturv riitv 7it,(STtvo%'iiov, &c. (ver. 11), and to oi,' iatov nari;i> navTiov 7jii(7)v (ver. 16). The principal subject is, therefore, Abraham, the natural ancestor of the Jews ; and if it be asked, What hath he found? the emphasis rests on t/, and this refers to the ()i,xai.oiA/] by works [in the opinion of the Jews]. The answer assumes that the view that Abraham was justified by the works of the law, was already denied in the question. Yet this very thing was be- lieved by the legalistic Jew. "In the Tahnud it was even deduced from Gen. xxvi. 5, that Abraham ob- served the whole Mosaic law" (Meyer).* The an- swer does not therefore assume an oi''()f'i' [omitted before d jri^'l or an oviionovv (Tholuck), because y.ara (Tciit/.a [ver. 1] does not stand in connection with fi'iJij/.tvai,, [? comp. Textual Note '. — P. S.] To the question. Which of the two kinds of right- eousness ? it assumes the conclusion, that it was not the imaginary righteousness of works, but the true I'ighteousness of faith. The supposition is so plain, that the Apostle proceeds at once to the proof. — Was justified by works. The sense can be : if he .s/iouhl be so justified, it could only be at a human tribunal, and not at the tribunal of God — as has been already described. But it can also be understood thus : if Abraiiam, according to the national prejudice of the Jews, has been really jus- tified 6j/ works. This is the more obvious view. Conceding this kind of justification, Abraham ha'S a y.ui'i/ijiia [materiam gloriandi), but not before God. Not before God, first, because no flesh is justified by works in His sight (chap. iii. 20) ; second, because we know definitely from the Scriptures that Abra- ham was justified in God's sight, or at His tribunal, by faith. The iiSt-y.auhOr] is made by Beza, Grotius, and others, to refer to a general opinion pronounced on Abraiiam ; but by Calvin, Calov., and others, to an imng'murii opinion, snder the supposition of an incomplete conclusion (the major : he who is jus- tified by works hatii whereof to glory. The minor : but not before God. The necessary concluding state- ment; therefore Abraham is uot justified by works).f * [Meyer quotes Kiddwh, i. 82, 1 ; Tumn, f. 28, 2 ; Bi'vesih. rahhn, i. 57, 4. Tholuck says : " The justificafinn of Abra- ham b'furc God was a locus communis of Jewish thcoloa:v." P. S.] •* t [Calvin's interpretation is given by him {nd Uom. iv. 2) in these words : " Epicheremn [ini)f^eipriti.a, an attimptod proof, an incomplete syllogism] est, i. e., imperfic'" ralio- iinnlio, qux in haiic fnrmnn collitji drbel : Si Abrahnm opniliiis justificittns est, pntisl suo mn-ito gloriari ; scd nnii Vohel uiidf gtorielur cijmd Deum ; ert/o -non ex op.rihus jiis- tificalus est. I/a mnnbruni illud, ' Sid von iipud D um^' i-xt tniiinr prupusHio s>/ll(;gi.j , and he foUowa him, with Theudoret, in explaining thus: "For if Abraham has been justified by (iod tiirough works, iie has certainly received — the [lerfect fullilment of the law being granted, — glory, but not a divine glory, .so far as sucii gh>ry could not be traced back to God's grace." Tliis explaiuUion contradicts the previous suppositions : 1. Tiuit no flesh can bf justified by the deeds of the law (chap. iii. 20) ; 2. That no external fulfilment of the law in the sense of vo/iot; t(jyo)v is conceivable, but only in the sense oi v6/io^ niarnin;. A plain remark may aid in the understanding of this difficult passage : that i)iy.aLoT'(TDcit, always refers to a definite tribunal, but that this tribunal may be very different according to the different relations of dixaioitrOai.. Tims the tribunal of Jewish national prejudice already men- tioned was very different from that of the theocrati- cal connnunion of faith itself, which the passage in James ii. 23 has in view (see the Commentary on James, chap. ii. Also, Ps. cvi. 31, on the justifica- tion of Pliinelias). It has been counted to him for righteousness — -from genereitwn to generation, see Tlioluck, p. 172, thereon. What Theodoret says ia certainly true : that true justification before God must glorify the love of God ; but for this very reason no other mode of justification before God ia conceivable. (Singular explanation of Semler and others : Has he glory ? No ; before God, not ! Prot- estation.) Ver. 3. For what saith the Scripture 7 Paul makes a true i-eprcsentation of Abraham in accordance with the Scriptures, in opposition to the false representation of tiie Jews.* — [But Abraham believed God, and it (viz., t/ie b licving, to ttmt- Tfrffctt, which must be supplied from tn'iGT f viri-v) was reckoned to him for righteousness, 'Enia- Tfi>(JfV (is u4(Ii)adi^i TO) f)t(Ji, y.al i/.oylaO ij ainio ftq <)'i,y.aLoai''vtjV. Gen. xv. 6, Sept. The emphasis lies on ini(TTf v(Tfv, placed first, or the faith of Abra- ham as distinct from works and as excluding merit on the part of man. Aoyi^fdOai lii; diy.aiocrt'Vtiv, to reckon, or count, or impnie to any one as righte- ousness, and consequently to treat him as righteous, is identical with diy.avoo) (see p. 130). On the con- sold, Baur, Kostlin, Hodge. This interpretation would have been more clearly expressed thus : lx^' (cav^'jua- (fpo* to;' flebr)" aAA." ouk Ix^' Kav)(rifjLa Trpbs Toy 6e6v. But it certainly irives good sense and falls in best with the yap in ver. 3. We explain th'.is : It Abraham, as the Jews sup- pose, was iustified by works, he has reason to glory before God (for then he can claim justification as a just reward for his merits, leaving mi room for the display of God's mercv); but, according to the Scripture, he has no ground to glory before God, for (ver. 3) the Scripture derives his justifica- tion from faith in God or fi-om something outside of him, and not from works of liis own. Meyer, in his foi-mer edi- tions, defended the untenable view "that h . . . iSiKaiu>0j) was a question, and e^ei . . . Oeov the negative answer ; but, in his last editions, he returns, with Tholuck and Wordsworth, to the interpretation of the Greek fathers (Theodoret, Chi'yBostom, Theophylact), wliich would re- quire in ver. 3, aWd, instead of ydp. — P. S.] * [If ver. 3 contained the refutation of the inference, ver. 2, we would rather expect aAAa ti, instead of ti' ydft. But if the refutation is contained in , Lange : De?n abcr, welcher den Werkdienst treibt']. Tlie statements of vers. 6 and 7 are two sentences, which establish the doctrine of justification by faith, as well in its divine as in its human character. The work does not reach up to God, His grace, or His heaven ; but it belongs to tlie sphere of gain, and makes the remunerator the debtor — which cannot be said of God without impiety. But as God's grace is exalted above the claims of merit, so is man's faith exalted. The believer doea not rely on merit, but on the gracious strength of Him who justifies the ungodly, and he receives the righteousness in proportion to his faith. The first sentence establishes negatively, that Abraham, ac- cording to his relation to God, could not be justified by works ; the second sentence establishes positive- ly, that justification presupposes a relation of God'a grace to the sinner. It is therefore clearly intimated that Abraham was a sinner ; besides, the introduc- tion of David and his testimony proves conclusively that the justification is that of the sinner. But the root of the antithesis is in the iQ^ato n fvoo, and the fii] ((lyatofifvoi;; it is the continuation of the contrast in chap. ii. 7, 8. Those who strive un- tiringly, seek God as their only end ; but partisans oppose God by their claims. The i()yai^6fifvo(; is not " the active man, whose characteristic is works " (Meyer), but he whose righteousness con- sists only of works, who relies on the merit of his works, and whose basis of confidence and pride are works. Therefore, his counterpart is not an oiut i^ya^Ofifvoii, but a fi r i^y. Is the reward (6 /(la&oq) not reckoned according to (as a matter of ) grace {/.ara /cc(Ji,v). That is, the earned reward, in accord- ance with the law of wages and labor. The /.oyiZfij' Oai is a very flexible idea ; in the case of works, denoting a literal settling up, a payment, according to the external quantitative relations ; and in the case of faith, a respectful valuation or reward, ac cording to the internal qualitative relations. But even in the latter case, there is no fiction, no un. truth, but a decision in strict conformity with the actual condition. He who makes God his dcbtoi' for service rendered, reverses the poles of spiritual life ; he conceits that God exists for his sake, and for tha 148 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. lake of his external work. Tlierefore, the mere worker becomes a eulpable debtor in the judgment of God. Faith ia the return to the normal relation with God. Here God is the absolute majesty, the justifier, the source, the giver of all things, the inliuitely merciful ; and before llim the believer Stands in the sense of absolute need, dependence, poverty, impurity, and guilt. But when tlie believ- pp commits himself to the burning and delivering arms of God's love, his guilt vanislies as the cloud before the sun. — Not according to grace, but according to (as a) debt. The toya^o/m'oq really declines grace ; he claims a reward for his merit. And in tlie same way will his reward be reckoned according to his (.lebt. ' O (/fD.ij /i a, the debitnm, according to the relations of reward. — It is plain that sucii a relation did not apply to Abraham, from the fact that, according to ver. 3, he obtained God's grace ; and this in a defiuite case, where the ques- tion could not be one of merit (Gen. xv.). Ver. 5. But to him that worketh not (for hire), &c. Meyer pioperly remarks, in opposition to Rciche, wlio refers the statement directly to Abra- ham,* that the sentence is a locus commimis^ and that it is left to the reader whether he will include Abraham in it or not. But, according to Paul, Abrahain has certainly included himself. In the same way, Meyer properly observes that ci(Tfj3r'i<;, unjodly, must not be diluted into adl/.m;, unright- eous. Faith perceives that the foundation of the ci(%xia is the a(Ti{ht,a (chap. i. 21), alienation from God; and, because of its deeper knowledge of sin, applies to the grace of God. The marfvi-iv ini twa cannot merely denote a faith in the direction toward some one, but a believing self-surrender on the ground of God's grace (Acts xvi. .31, &c.). Ver. 6. Even as David. The introduction of David completely establishes the fact that the justifi- cation of man is a justification of the sinner, and that the believer perceives his sins ; for, in relation to Davigl, both his guilt and pardon were conceded by the ffews. And now David must also testify to this truth. Even as ( y. a 5- a tt f (j ) indicates that David is quoted for the elucidaiitm and proof of wliat has been said already in vers. 4 and 5. He is quoted, not as a universal example of justification in general, but in special proof that it is such a justifica- tion of the sinner as excludes the merit of works. rVers. 7 and 8 prove clearly that the forgiveness 4,i sins belongs to justification ; but this is only the negative part, with which is inseparably connected the positive part, namely, the imputation and appli- cation of the righteousness of Christ, and this con- tains the germ and power of sanctification. — P. S.] Tiioluck : " By the negative statement, Calvin was led to insist that'the idea of the justificatio is ex- hausted with the condnnatio peccatorum. {^Inst. iii. 11). The same thing is done by the Protestant doc- trinal theology before the Formufa Concordice — which first expressly added the r'toOfaln, which is really included therein." Compare, however, the Heidelberg Catechism, Question 60.j- The beatitude * According to Rciche, Abrahain is the /nrj epya^d/xevo«, the ao-60^! ; and this word alludes to the early idolatry of 4.brahani, which U described by Philo, Josephiis, and Mai- ■monidcs. Grotius, and others, have adopted the same opinion. t [This question of the Heidelberg Catechism, which was first published in 1563, contains one of the best statements of the evangelical doctnne of justification, and clearly brings put the positive element, which Tholnck yroiigly iates from the Form of Concord of the year 1577. It reads from Ps. xxxii. 1 and 2 is quoted from the Septtuu gint. [See Textual Note °] The choice of verbs in ver. 7 corresponds to the substantives. The aro/ua is a debt doomed to prison ; it is released, and thua abolished ; the aiia(>Tiu is the ground of it, and is covered from God's eye ( ^E3, nC3 ) — that ia, abot ished by Him. Second Paeaghaph (vers. 9-12). Justification applies also to the Gestiles. It ia a justification for all. Ver. 9. (Is) this blessedness [6 fiaxaQKT- fioq, the pronouiicitig liappi/, coji^rrainlaiioii, ISeiig- prelsunrj'], then, upon the circumcision. The question now is, whether the beatitude described by David applies only to the Jews. The exjiositors have supplied ditt'erent words : Tholuck [Stuart, Philippi, Meyer, ed. 4.], and others, iarl; Meyer'* [Fritzsche, De Wette, Alford, Hodge], }.iytrat, [comp. Heb. vii. 13 ; Mark ix. I'i], with reference to ver. 6 (others, ninm, [Theophylact], tjlOi-v [CEcuinenius], (.(jytTai, [Olshausen], yiyovt). The UyiTav has less foundation than laTi. [It is always safer to supply the simplest word. — P. S.] — Or also upon the un- circumcision ? The also shows that the previous clause is to be understood in the exclusive sense : upon the circumcision oidii. [Some M8S. add /(o- rov. — P. S.] — For vre say. The y«(> presup- poses that the Apostle has already mentally expect- ed an affirmative reply to the question. Or upon the uncircuincisiou also ? [The form of the question, too, with 7/ /.af, presupposes an affirmative answer to the second clause, and this implied aflirmation is made the ground of the argumentation, vers. 10-12. De Wette and Alford.— P. S.] The tw 'Jp<). is certainly emphatic, as Fritzsche, De Wette [Alford], and others, maintain, though Meyer detiies it ; for the whole of the following argument proceeds from the person of Abraham. [For we say that to Abra- ham faith was reckoned for righteousness. — P. S.] Ver. 10. Not in circumcision, but. Accord- ing to Gen. XV., Abraham was justified ab(jut four, teen years before his circumcision. Gen. xvji. [Con- sequently his circumcision was not the effective cause and condition, but the Divine ratification of grace already received. — P. S.] Ver. 11. And he received a sign of circum- cision [jtat arji^iflov tkaPfv ;rf ^tTO/« ^(j'f ]. Genitive of apposition \i. e., a sign which consisted in circumcision. Van Hengel and Hofmann, prefer- ring the reading 7ti-(>i,to/iijv to 7rf^HTo/(^^•, explain: As a sign he received circumcision, as a seal {g]%•, Duglit to Imve the article, aud explains: Ein Zcichen init welc/icm er durch die Beachneidnng verschen ward^ cinptinci er als Siegel — i. c, a sign, with which lie was provided in circumcision, he received as seal. But the article is sometimes omitted where the refer- ence is specific, and where tliere is no danger of mis- take; comp. Winer, p. 118 f. atj/iflov, sign, token, symbol, nix . Circumcision was the sign of the covenant God made with Abraham, Gen. xvii. 11 ; God, on His j)art, promising the Messianic yJ.tj- (lOvQuia (Gen. xv. 5, 18), and Abraham, on his part, exercising tlie obedience of faith which was reck- oned to him for righteousness (Gen. xv. G). Hence Paul represents it as a seal of the righteousness of faith. This was not only a " legitimate dogmatic inference " (Meyer), but, as Thohick remarks, a liis- toric-il necessity, since the sign of the covenant was granted in consequence of the faith previously shown. — P. S.] — The seal. The seal denotes here the symbolical and sacramental sealing ; from this, the real sealing of Abraham, which was given him after the offering of Isaac, Gen. xxii. 1, is still to be dis- tinguished (see the Bihlework on Genesis xxii.). " It is also represented in the Talmud as the sign and seal of the covenant. See Schiittgen and Wet- stein in he. These words belonged to the formula of circumcision : ' Benedictus sit, qui sanctijicavii diledum ab utero, et signum ( rix ) posuit in earns, et JUios suos sipiUavit ( cpn ) signo foederis sanctl y ' Beracoth, f. xiii. 1." Meyer [foot-note]. Christian writers \^Acta Thomce, § 26; Grabe, Spicileg. Pair. i., p. 333] speak in tlie same way of the water of baptism as a seal [// acf^ayli; roi' Xovt^joT'. A seal here means a mark of Divine ratification of a justi- fication already received, a " signaculum rei arfff," not a " pignus rei agendce ; " comp. 1 Cor. ix. 2 ; 2 Tim. ii. 19. We have here an intimation of the true idea of sacraments : they are signs, seals, and means of grace, but not the grace itself. Circum- cision is not the covenant, neither is baptism regen- eration. A sign and seal can never be the substi- tute for the thing signed and sealed, nor should it be made a groimd of confidence and hope ; but it is all-important as a Divine ratification, and gives, so to say, legal validity to our claims, as the govern- mental seal to a written instrument. Without the seal of circumcision, Abraham would have had no certain guarantee of the Divine favor ; and if justi- fication by faith is abstractly separated from the church and the means of grace, it becomes a subjec- tive fiction of man. — P. S.] — That he might be the father. The spiritual father is meant here. Abraham is the father of faith. "The conception of author, founder, is also contained in that of father; comp. Job. xxxviii. 28 ; Gen. iv. 21 ; 1 Mace. ii. 54;" Tholuck. — On the idea of Abraham's Bpiritual children, see Matt. iii. 9 ; John viii. 37, 38. Gal. iii. 8, 29, is a parallel. — That righteous- ness might be reckoned also to them. This means the sense in which Abraham, as a believing Gentile, has become the father of believing Gen- tiles. Ver. 12. And the father of circumcision. Prominence is here given to the fife of faith, the proof of faith, in connection with circumcision for faith. We remark on the language : 1. hi; to nvai. ctvTov must be mentally repeated after y.ai. 2. toTc, the dative eommo ii [for those'], comes in the place of faith. 8. Instead of «/.Aa xat Toti; arot/oTai,, we should expect a).la y.ul (STor/ovr sub typo terra Canaan nou modo spts ccelestis vitce, sed plena d solida Dei benedictio (Calvin); but it is the dominion over the world, whicli, with all its opposing forces, shall be sul, jected to Christ and the Christians (Reiche, Meyer, Fritzsche)." Ubviously too many negations' — rWe must bear in mind, that in the Messianic prom- ise given to Abraham, the struggle and the dominion are indicated only finally ; the chief idea is the bless- ing. If all the nations of the earth were to be really blessed by Abraham's seed, then his seed must be able to dispose of a world of blessing. [The prom- ise will be literally fulfilled when the kingdoms of the world are given to the people of the Most High, and Christ will rule with His saints forever and ever; Dan. vii. 27; Apoc. xi. 15; xii. lo; Matt. v. 5 ; 2 Tim. ii. 12. — P. S.] — By the righteousness of faith. This was the fundamental gift by wliich the promise of the world was conditioned. Meyer thinks that, because of the date of the justification, Gen. xv, [i. e., after the promise had been given ; Gen. xii. 3, 7; xiii. 15, 16. — P. S.], Paul must have here in mind only later passages [xv. 18 ; xvii. 8, where the prom- ise is repeated. — P. S.]. But, according to Gen. xii., Abraham's life of faith had begun at the time of his emigration. [The faith of Abraham covered the whole period of the promise, which was made and repeatedly confirmed to his faith. — P. S.] Ver. 14. For if they vrho are of the law. Proof that Abraham's believing children, but not they who, in contrast with them, rely on the law and its deeds, shall inherit the world. The ro/foc, ac- cording to Flatt, the moral law ; according to Meyer, the Mosaic law ; botii, according to Tholuck. The Apostle is certainly not concerned here exclusively with the idea of the Mosaic vofio^, as such, but rather with the idea of the legal standpoint, or of the law, considered abstractly in itself, and in con- trast with the promise. And it may be said of the natural moral law, too, that it worketh wrath, 01 til vo n o V are not people who are still under the law as such, but whose life-principle is the law, and who wish to be justified by the law. [oi in vofiov, those of law = adherents of the law, legal- ists. This periphrase is of frequent occurrence ; comp. ol It i^uO^flai;, those of self-seeking = self- seeking partisans ; ii. 8 ; ol i/. 7n(Ji,ro/iJj(;, the cir- cumcised ; iv. 12 ; Tit. i. 10 ; Acts x. 45 ; xi. 2 ; ol t/. ni(TTf(f)c, the believers ; Gal. iii. 7, 9 ; Rom. iv. 16 ; ol ti '7(T^a>//, the Israelites ; Rom. ix. 6, &c. ; comp. Xenoph., Anab. i. 2, 18, at ix rtji: ayooa^, the market people. The preposition it* (out of) indicates here the origin and character.— - P. S.] — Be heirs, faith is made void. At the time when this decisive word was uttered, it had not only a great spiritual, but also a great prophetical meaning. Judging from external signs, it was mom probable that the Jews, rather than the Christians^ would inherit the earth. Tliey had a powerful promi- nence, wide dissemination, and synagogues all over the world. But the Apostle was sure of his cause, and wished clearly to distinguish the future of faith from the future of tliat darkened legalism. Yet his thouglit is not : if the legalists are heiifl, believers cannot be ; but, if the legalists are heirs, there will be no inheritance of the promise at all. Faith ia made void — that is, it loses its import, the right- eousness of faith — Ijy wrath in the conscience ; the promise is made powerless by the wrath of histori. cal judgments, because it was only intended for faith. Ver. 15. Because the law w^orketh wrath> CHAPTER IV. l-'25. 151 The operation of the law is to rcveni sin and to represent it as transgression, as well in the con- science as in the lile itsell'. Therefore it produces wrath, whicii, according to the Divine sentence and goverinnent, bursts forth f'roTu the internal and ex- ternal life as tiie severe jiidgmeiit of dissolution and of death. For where there is no law, neither is there transgression (of the law) ; and where there is no transgression, there is no wrath. But inversely, the law fully reveals transgression, and, with transgression, wrath and condemnation to death. The proof that the law worketh wrath, is therefore negative. This operation is meant to apply first of all to the Mosaic law, as is proved by Rom. v. 13, 14, particularly by the distinction between a/(ci(iria and na(}Ui'iaai,i; (see 1 Tim. ii. 14 ; Gal. iii. 19). Tholuck quotes Augustine : " Sine lege potest esse quis iniquus, sed non prcevaricalor,'''' and says that " this difference has generally been observed ever since. But where it has not been observed, such na()f()/i}jrflai, have arisen, as with Luther (on Gal. iii. ly), who introduces, from chap. vii. 5; v. 20, the tliought that the lust of sin is dormant without the law." Tholuck also properly remarks, that the asiom of chap. v. 13, u/ic<(jria <)t oly. ().).oytZrai, HTj ovTo? vonov, can be understood only relatively ■of a less quantity of guilt, as is proved by the judg- ment of the Deluge, and other judgments. He quotes Thomas Aquinas : " Et tanien onme peccatnm potest did prcemricatio, in quantum legem naturalem trans- ffredUur." [But Thomas adds : " Gravius tavicn est transgredi siniul legem naturalem et legem script am, quam solam, legem naturce. Et ideo lege data crevit prcevaricatio et majorem iram promeruit."^ Yet the iD.oyuTau of chap. v. 13 is to be emphasized so as to denote God's real reckoning with the sinner by His law, which first causes the natural punishment of the sinner to assume the clear blaze of wrath. Man can obtain salvation only by this passage through the judgment of death. For this reason the Apos- tle does not deny the necessity of the law ; but with him it is a means for an end, and constitutes the pedagogic point of transition for the pious under the law {[ino vofiov, chap. vi. 14, 15). But people of the law {ol ix. I'o/foc), who seek justification t| t(}yif>v (chap. iv. 2) because they are in feeling tS t^JuOfiai; (eliap. ii. 8), make the means an end. They seek their life in the single precepts and observance of the law, in pride in the possession of the law, and in the settlement of their account with God ; and by this course they find their existence in the fire of sratli, but, unlike the salamander, they find no com- Torfc in the fire. They do not make the law their preparation for faith, but the antithesis of faith ; and they endeavor, by the fire of their fanaticism, to en- tice from a joyous and bright life those who are happy in faith, and to draw them into their own gloomy heat. For other explanations of o^yt^, see Tholuck. Cocceius : The ceremonial law is the ema- nation of wrath; J. Miiller : 6()y>} must be under- Btood subjectively — the consciousness of wrath ; Me- lanchthon : The oityt'i is the sinner's wrath toward the avenging God. Ver. 16. Therefore it is of faith. The infer- ence from vers. 14, 15. That cannot be ; therefore this must stand true. 'Ex niirrfox;. Supply: *] ii).tj^ovofiia yimav (Beza, Bengel) ; rj enayytUa •cm yipo. t(TTv y.ai ri't anifi^tari, alnov (Grotius, Fritzsclie, Tholuck iu earlier editions, and others) ; iuKcuoaivi} (Luther) ; or, better, oi y./.tjoovo/ioi ilai (Meyer, De Wette, and Tholuck, referriue to ver. 14, where tx TrtorKoq and ix ro/iov appear as an titlieses). Tiiis last seems the most appropriate ; ye; in ver. 14 we read not ol xhjiioviiiioi,, but oi in vo/iov — )!/./y(JOi'd/(ot ; and further on it is ol iA niartMii. Therei'ore, we must merely sr.p[)ly either x}.>jij()vo/i<)i, or i'rTTw. — That it might be by grace. Faith is here plainly denoted the homogeneous orgac of grace. It is grace, and not man's faith, that is the source of that general surety of (iod's promise ; but grace makes faith the organ, just as wrath mani- fests itself in the work of tlie law. iva denotep here the consistency of the principle of faith, which certainly restsupon a Divine determination. Tho> luck sujjplies mffiv. In order that the promise might be sure to all the seed [n'y to firut, p;(kuav riiv inayyiUav navti roi ff;Tf'(j/(aTi.]. The fit; denotes the result designed by God — that the promise of His grace b< connnunieated to faith. By this determination the fact is secured, that the promise holds good for hia collective seed — that is, for his entire sjMiiiual pos- terity. — Not to that only which is of the law, &c. The r(o ix toT vofinv denotes here the historical origin of the whole body of faithful Jews. The ri~) ix niffTfioi;, as antithesis, denotes the faithful Gentiles. They form a totality by which Abraham is the father of all (see vers. 11, 12). Ver. 11. As it is written. Gen. xvii. 5 ; where a natural posterity of many nations is prom- ised to Abraham in relation to his name.* Yet this promise has its ground in his faith (vers. 18, 19), and hence Paul very properly regarded it as the type of his spiritual posterity. The spiritual relation is also implied in the Divine appointment, ri-Onxa at. — [It was] in the sight of him whom he believed \^xaTivavTv oh in iar i va iv dfoTf]. On account of the connection with what has preceded, the difficult word xarivcivri, must be here explained [as far as the construction is concerned]. 1. Luther follows the reading iniarndaq [before God, whom t/iou haM believed^ of the Codd. F. G., It., and others, and finds here a continuation of God's words. An attempt to explain the connection. _ 2. Bretschnei- der: "in view of which word," oi' sc. fi()t]/iirov. 3. Meyer, Tholuck [Alford, Hodge], and others : The quotation, xaOo'x; — cf, is parenthetical [so also in the E. V.], and xariravTi, must be connected with Ol,' i(TTi ncirtiQ nctvTon' ij/aTiv [i. e., Abraham is the father of us all, not physically, but spiritually, in the sight and est mution of God, with whom there are no obstacles of nature or time. — P. S.] Meyer [and also Winer, Grantrn., p. 156, 7th ed.] thus resolves the attraction : xarivavri. roT> Of or, zart- vat'Ti' oil iniiTrtvui \i. e., before God, before vkon\ or, in vjhose sight he believed], according to the anal, ogous attraction of Luke i. 4 ; and rejects the mor« conmion resolution [adopted also by Fritzsche] of the attraction xwrivuvTi, 0;or, iTiiari-vnt [before God, whom he believed — a form of attraction with the dative, which is very unusual ; see Winer, p. 166, and Meyer ni loc. — P. S.]. See Meyer, for other attempts at construction. But what are we to * [Abraham, CnnSX := C^IS lirn SX, /aiJier .<; Goies, (Icm er Gtauhrnhlelt. He supplies cycVeTo, and commence* here a new paragraph. See his interprctatiou helow.- P. S.l x53 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROHANS. Endorstaid by the expression : lie is the father of us all before God ? The idea of a substitution by Abra- ham, wliich might easily be inferred from the lan- guage, would be foreign to the Apostle. 4. We supply tyivtro [l)efore xartrai'TtJ, and explain thus :" As it is written, " I have made thee a fatlier of many nations ; " it took place in the presenee of God, or, it eame to pass there, in the place where he stood believing before God, that he was made the father of many nations ; before Him, namely, God, &c. He who is justified, wlio receives God's prom- ise, stands before God. [Philippi, without paren- thesizing -/.aOi^K — Tf, supplies after this quotation: And as such — viz., as father of nations — he stands in the sight of God, &c. — P. S.] PouRTH Paragraph (vers. 17-25). A.—Ahraham^s Faith {vers. 17-22). Ver. 17. Before him v^hom he believed, *ven God. Explanations of coram [xarivav- tv, literally, down over against, opposite to, like the classical xarevavTiov ', then = xarfvo'imov, co- ram, so here, and often in the LXX., for "^IS? — P. S.] : 1. According to the will (Reiche). 2.' Ac- cording to tiie decision (Riickert, and othei's). 3. Vi a'que potestate dlnina (Koppe). 4. Before God's omniscience (Olshausen). 5. Meyer [p. 173, foot- note] : " We must leave it without explanation. Abraham is represented as standing before God who has appeared to him." But it denotes the first element of the Abrahamic fiith. Abraham, as the friend of God, stands in the view of the living God of revelation, the speaking God, who is at the same time the God of miracles and new creations ; and it is while Abraham is there, that he is appointed the father of many nations. (Theodoret, Tlieophylact, and others, have explained nartvavrt. as equal to o/ioimq TiT) OciTt ; Grotius has divided tlie sentence into question and answer; see Meyer). — Kari- vavri- o'v ( n IfTT f rrr fv, standing before Him, he believed the jiromise on tlie spot. Who qiiickeneth the dead. [The present tense Cw o n oi,o ? vtoi; and y.a/.ot'VTo <; is used to indicate the continued manifestation of God's crea- tive power in every physical and in every spiritual birth. — P. S.] "The tTwoTrotf Tv rohi; vixiiovq Is the solemn charaeteiistic of tiie omnipotent God," says Meyer. The doctrine of tiie omnipotence of God, as the wonder-working power of the God of revelation, has been directed from the beginning to the consummation of tiie revelation in the resurrec- tion of Christ, and subsequently to the special and general resurrection (Eph. i. 19 ff.j. This is evident from those passages of the Old Testament which rep- resent the wonder-working power of God as a power to bring tlie dead to life, jiroduced by it (Deut. xxxii. 89; 1 Sam. ii. 6; Isa. xxvi. 19; liii. 10; Ezek. xxxvii. 1 If. ; Hosea xiii. 14 ; Dan. xii. 1, 2 ; comp. Book of Wisdom, xvi. 13 ; Toljit xiii. 2 ; John V. 21 ; 2 Cor. i. 9 ; 1 Tim, vi. 13). The Apos- tle, with profound penetration, sees this miraculous power which raises the dead to life, foreshadowed (dlready in the promise of Isaac. For he does not hav( in view tlie offering of Isaac (according to Erasmus, Grotius, Baumgarten-Crusius), although the stronger expression seems to have been selected also with rcl'erence to that last believing act of Abra- ham. Ncit'.er is the awakening of tlie spirituall'* dead chiefly meant (according to Origen, Anselm, and others). Ncvertlioless, \ve would not, with Mey. er, altogetiier reject these explanaticuis as /W/»« ; fol the external awakenings stand in the most intimate reciprocal relation with the internal. In I'act, the former are generally conditioned by the latter ; as we see that Abraham had to believe first in tiie promise given to him. And calleth those things, which are not, as though they were [literally, callirg things not being, as being, y.aloTivroi; t« ftij orro (')(,• ovra. 'J'a /i ij o?'Ta diifers from rot o r x ovTct in that it jiresents the non-existence as conditional : if they are not ; or as relative only, inasmuch aa all things preexist ideally and subjectively in the Divine mind before they are created and set forth objectively. — P. S.]. Two explanations:* 1. Ref- erence to the creative agency of God (Tholuck, and most expositors). KahZv often denotes God's creative call, to mmmon into beinr/, into exist- ence (Isa. xli. 4 ; xlviii. 13 ; 2 Kings viii. 1 ; Book of Wisdom, xi. 25 ; comp. Ps. xxxiii. 9). Pliiio [Z>e creat. princ., p. 728 B.] : ra /lij ovra i/.aliairV tU TO Avat,. This explanation admits of severa.' modifications : a. The first creative act is thought of (Estius). h. God's continued creation is in mind (Kollner ; reference to the particip. /nes-.). c. A constant attribute of God is denoted (Tholuck). Meyer holds that this whole interpretation is de- stroyed by the o'l,- ovra ; for, in the New Testament, oit; is nowhere tlie same as tli;. Yet Tlioluck adduces proof In favor of the signification fit; to ftrat (i)q ovra. [He refers to 1 Cor. i. 8 ; 2 Cor. iii. 6 ; 1 Thess. V. 23 ; Jude 24. Comp. Phil. iii. 21, where the accusative ar/i/io^qov, like unto Iris glorious bod'/, is the accusative of effect = .so as to he like.-— P. S.] De Wette : oit; ovra. can indeed not be a substitute for hit; oj'Tct = ft? to ilvat,, but it _can be a substitute for mi^ tao/itva, or for ft.,- to ftVa* Mt; ovra (Reiche, and others). 2. Meyer, and oth- ers (Riickert, Philippi) : 117/o pronounces his enact- ing command over what does not exist, as over what does exist.j- It is not necessary to prove that, even in reference to the creation, this is the full sense (see Heb. xi. 3) ; the ideal preexistence of things in the mind of God is therewith intimated. Neverthe- less, the idea of the /.ahlv — to call into existence, or into appearance — must be retained. Meyer holds that the tilings which are not, that God called into existence, are, according to Gen. xv., the posterity * [Or three, rather ; Taut the third, which refers KoXelv to the efi'ectu;il calling of unhorn men by the llnly Spirit, and explains: "God calls to he His children those who were not children," is liitirely foreiprn to the context. It is str.inge tliat even the rationalistic Fritzsche explains : "liuminrs nrmdum in liicni edilos tumquam editos od vitnr,x seteniam irivitat." The iK\oyrj and Trpoyvwo'i? of God pre- cedes the hirth, but the kA.^o-cs only refers to living men. — P. S.] t [Tholuck doubts that KaKeiv, S"ip, ever means, to command, to dispose of; but comp. Ps. 1. 1 ; Isa. xl. 26; xlv. 3 ; .xlviii. 3. lloyer and Pliiippi quote two striking parallel passapos from Philo, Z>" Jus., p. 541, C, where lie speaks of the imagination as forming ra /u.i) ovra w? oira, and Artcmidor, i. 5.i, where it is said of the painior that he represents to. /a!) oi/ra w? oi-ra. To those quotations I may add the famous lines of Shikespeare on the creative power of the poet's genius {M.d:-^nnmer-J\'iglU's Dream, Act v. Scene 1) : " The poet's eye, in a fine frenzy rolling, Di)th glance from heaven to earth, from earth to boavea And, as inuigiuation bodies forth Tl e forms of things unknown, the poet's pen Turns tin m to shapes, ::nd .rives to airy nothing A local habitation and a name." — P. .'^. I CHAPTER IV. 1-25. 153 of Abraliaiii. But Abnibatn's faith undoubtedly pre- supposed earlier deeds of omnipotence. The ele- ments of God's creative power, and of Ilis renewing power, are coniprelicndcd together in the conception of His miraculous jjower. The creative word is a symbol and |)ledge of every new creative word which is spoken subse(|ucntly. Ver. 18. Who against hope believed in hope [oi,- 7r«(>' D.TTiiin f n' i?.ni()i, inin- Tfiifff J']. Faith in miracles, which is itself a mira- tle, corresponds to the gracious God who worketh miracles. Established on tlie ground of hope, he believed against the appearance of hope. Meyer solves the oxymoron incorrectly : Abraham's faitli was agalnat hope in an objective relation, and yet it was established on hope in a suhjedive relation. Tholuck's view is better : His faith is a " Yea " established on tlie word of God, in opposition to the "No" in the sphere of finite causes. ^ En' I'/.TTiiii^ 1 Cor. ix. 10. [j'tt' e).nt()b is not adverbial = conjidenifi/, but fnl signifies the subjective ground of his faitli. Faitii is the organ of the supernatural, and holds fast to the Invisible as if it saw Him. Hope is faith itself, as directeil to tlie future. — P. S.]. That he might become. Tliree explanations of f !(,• : 1. Of the result — so that he might be- come (Flatt, Fritzsche, and others). 2. He believed that he should be. That is, ftq to ytv. is the object of ini-rsT. (Bcza, Reiche, and others). 3. It con- tiiins the purpose of the (nv(7r. ordained by God (Meyer, and others). This is favored by the follow- ing /.uTo. TO fi(j>j!itror. [So also Alford, Hodge : He believed, in order that, agreealdy to the purpose of God, he might become the father of many na- tions.] — According to that which was spoken*' See, in Gen. xv. 5, the reference to the stars of heav- en. Codd. F. and G. insert the comparison : as the stars of heaven, and as the sand upon the sea-shore (the latter from Gen. xxii. 17). Ver. 19. And being not weak in faith. A meiosis [i(,Hiii(Ti,q, diminution], according to Theo- piiylact and Beza [i. e., the negative form for the positive : bcinff strong. So also Tholuck and Mey- er.] The sense is rather that, in the long trial, his faith did not grow weary, Imt stronger, in spite of the difficulties in his path. — He considered [not, oi'], xarfvoi'jfffv. Tholuck says: "Tlie omis- sion of the or in important MSS., such as A. C. [to which must be added Cod. Sin. and B. — P. S.], the Syriac Version, and others, was occasioned by hav- ing regard to Gen. xvii. 17, whore Abraham does certaisily reflect upon finite causes. For this reason the sense was thought to be, that he reflected with- out being weak in faith. But Paul had in view only Gen. XV. 5, 6, according to which Abraham accepted the promise at once without hesitation." [So also Meyer.] But Paul means plainly a steadfast faith, which became more vigorous by the trial of many years of waiting, and whose strength was augmented by the temptations occurring in the meantime.* — ♦ [Stunrt, nodfre, and 'Wordswortli take no notice of this important dififerencc of reading. Alford brackets ou, but prefers it as being better suited to the context ; the object being to extol Abraham's faith. Omitting oi, the eense will be: "And not being weak in the faith, he was ii'd' ed well aware of," &e., " but (Si) did not stagger at the promise," &c. ; or, "although he whs aware of," &c., •'yet did he not." This agrees better with Si i i ver. 20; but we miss in this case /j.ei' after KaTevorjae. The dog- BDatic idea of ihe passage is well brought out by Calvin, who is followed by Philippi and Hodge. A similar obstruc- ,ion of faith, as the one recorded of Abraham, Gen. xvii. 17, •ccurrcd is. the life of John the Baptist ; Matt. xi. 2 ft— P. S.l His ow^n body now^ dead. Abraham was mort than ninety-nine years old when the promise wai fulfilled (after the circumcision, Gen. xvii. 24), and Sarah was more than ninety years old. The terms vfVfy.()ii)f(ivov and viy.(j(ii(Ti(;, in reference to generative deatli (Heb. xi. 12), must not be taken absolutely, but be considered according to the meas ure of cx[)ericnce and the usual course of nature. Bengel : " Post Senium [Shcm) nemo centum annorum gemrasse Gen. xi. Icgitur,''^ [The difficulty concern- ing the later children of Abraham and Keturah, Gen. XXV. 1, 2, Augustin {Dc civit. Dei, xvi. 28) and Ben- gel removed, by assuming that the generative power miraculously conferred upon Abraham continued tc his death. Bengel : Novns corporis vigor etiam niansit in matrimonio cum Ketura. So also Philippi and Meyer. — P. S.] Ver. 20. He staggered not at the promise: of God. The di, whicii is an expression of antithe* sis, appears at first sight to favor y.aTtvoijtTf, th^ reading of the Codd. A. C, instead of o v y.atfvo- ;,fff. But it constitutes another antithesis. Ver. 19 says, that he continued steadfast in faith, in spite of the contradiction of sensuous experience ; that he did not regard natural appearance. Ver. 20, on the contrary, expresses the idea : Neither was he doubtful by unbelief concerning the piomise itself. For unbelief is not produced merely by reflecting- doubtfully on the contradiction of sensuous experi- ence, but also by an immediate want of confidence in the miraculous promise itself which belongs to I the sphere of invisible life. He was not only not I weak in faith in his disregard of sensuous improba-. I bility, but, while looking at the promise, he grew ! even stronger in faith ; for lie overcame the tempta- ; tion of a subtle misinterpretation of the promise. I According to Meyer, the f)i is only explanatory ; but Tholuck, and most expositors, regard it as express- ing an antithesis. According to Riickert, the article I in TTj aTTKTT/a denotes the unbelief common to I man • but it denotes unbelief as such, whose nature j is to doubt the promise of God. Tlierefore other j explanations are superfluous (Meyer: in consequence ! of the unbelief which he would have had in thi3 case).* The passive form, ivfdvra/iii')f)r], arises from his undoubting aim toward the promise. The promise has the effect of always strengthening the faith of him who looks at it. Therefore Grotius dis. turbs the real meaning of the word, when he takes it. in the middle voice, he strengthened himself. Even the intransitive meaning which Tholuck accepts, "to grow strong," fails in the same way to satisfy the relation between the promise and the steadfast gaze of faith. Ver. 20. Giving glory to God. To give God the glory ( ^^^''\ """i-S^ ^H? or> ^'^^ ) ; a mark of faith which God, as the revealed God, can de- mand. John ix. 24 was spoken hypocritically; J (hn xii. 43 is indirectly expressed. Comp. also Luke xvii. 18, 19 ; Rom. i. 21 ; 1 John v. 10 ; Rev. xix. 7 ; comp. Philippi and Meyer on this passage, both of whom amplify the meaning. Tholuck says bet- ter : " Then unbelief is a robbery of God's glory. It does not easily occur except in a state of trial (?), but it does so occur in such a state. Therefore Cal- vin says : ' Extra certamen quidem nemo Deum omnia posse negat ; verum simulac ohjieitur aliquid, • [Meyer and Philippi take rrj aTrioria as an instrumenta} dative ; r^ nitrrti as a dative of' reference : " Er schioiuikU nirhl VKRMOOE DES Unglaubkns (rfe/i er in diescm FiVe ge- Iwbt hiihen tvurde), tondern ivurde stark au Ulaxjben (dei er hatU).—V. S.) 154 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. quod cursum promisKwnum Dei impediat, Dei virtu- tern e xiio (jralu d^jicimii.i.^ " Ver. 21. And being fully persuaded. Ac- cording to Lacliiiiaiia (contrary to Tiscliendorf), the Kai before n}.i/(joiio(jt;0u'; is strongly attt'sted by the Codd. A. li. C, &,c. If the y.ai is omitted, we have here the reason for the fact that he gave God tlie glory. With the xai, the words suitably exphiin the manner in which he gave God the glory ; for be was fully convinced that He was the El Sliaddai, and that, by virtue of His omnipotence. He was able to fulfil what He in His trutlifulness had promised. It was by this confident looking at the El Shaddai's word of promise that he was made strong (" he- roic ; " Meyer) in faith. The n).ri(JoopT)6eii: "It is a very pjeat error for men to suppose that to doubt is an evidence of humility. On the contrary, to doubt God's promise, or His love, is to dishonor Him, because it is to question His word. Multitudes refuse t> accept His f!:iace, because they do not rejard themselves as worthy, as though their worthiness were the ground on which that tjrace is offered. The thins; to be believed, is, that God accepts the unworthy ; th.at, for Christ's sake, He justifies the unjust. Many find it far harder to believe that God can love tiiem, notwithstandinfr their sinfulness, than the hundied-y ears- old patriarch did to believe th.at lie should be thi' father of many nations. Confidence in God's word, a full persuasion that He ran do what seems to us imix)ssil)le, is as necessary in the one case as in the other. The sinner honors God, in trnstinir His grace, as much as Abraham Jid, in trusting Eis power."— P. S.] at the time of composition ; while the more usual perf. yiy(jcinrai., it is icrilleti, \s us(.'d in quota, tions of Scripture passages as we now find them, and as valid for present purposes. Coiiip. Philippi. — P. S.] Ver. 24. But for us also, to whom it [viz., the faith in God, or Christ, to Tnartrnv nji Ofi;)\ shall be reckoned [supply : for righteousnc.«s, t]^ duxacocri'rijv, as ver. 22]. The /it/. In, refers to the divine determination of Christianity as right- eousness by faith in all time to come ; but, contrary to Fritzsclie, it does not refer to justification at the general judgment. If w^e believe on him who raised up Jesua our Lord from the dead. [ToTt,- tti.(7't-c vova i,v "specifies the »},»«i;: and the belief is not a mere historical, but & Jiducial belief;" Alford. — P. S.] Christian faith is specifically a faitii in the risen Christ, or also in the living God of resurrection who raised Him from the dead. It is in this its central point that the tinislied faith of the New Testament is perfectly in harmony with the central point of Abraham's faith. The germ and fruit of this faith ate identical in substance, though tliey differ very much in form and development. The nearest formal analogy to Abraham's faith is the birth of Christ from the Virgin. The highest exhibition of omidpo« tence was at the same time the highest exhibition of grace. [Christ's resurrection was a triumph of God's almighty power, similar, though much higher, than the generation of Isaac from the dead body of Abraham ; hy faith in the miracle of the resurrec- tion, the resurrection is spiritually repeated in us, as we become new creatures in Christ, and walk with Him in newness of life ; comp. vi. 3 ; Eph. i. 19, 20 ; Col. iii. 1.— P. S.] Ver. 25. Who was delivered up, &c. [" In these words the Apostle introduces the great subject of chaps, v.-viii., Death, as connected with Sin, and Life as connected with Righteousnei-s ; " Alford and Forbes. " Ver. 25 is a comprehensive statement of the gospel ; " Hodge. The tivd means in both clauses, on account of, for the reason of, but with this difference, that it is retrospective in the first, prospective in the second: ()va, tm ti a (> an 7 di- nar a, because we had sinned, or, in order to se- cure the remission of our transgressions ; <)i,a rijv iii,y.alntm,i', not because we had been, but that we might be justified.* To the first ()i,d we must sup. ply : for the atonement, or, for the destruction of j to the second : for the procurement of. De Wette zur Bussung — zur Bestdiiqxing. nai)i<)6 D >y , a fre- quent designation of the self-surrender of Christ to death; Isa. liii. 12; Rom. viii. 32; Gal. ii. 20; Eph. V. 25 : naijidioxfv iavrbv vnko fifimv. ()^- xai,n(xTa) forms a complete antithesis; and to this corresponds, in the singia work of re- demption, the antithesis : the abolishment of our guilt, and tlie imputation of His righteousness. Yet, in reality, these two cannot be separated from each other, and tlie ()i,/.aioieK,i; here means the general and potential justification which is embraced in the alonenieiit itself, and whicii, in individual justifica- tion Ijy faith, is appropriated by indiviiiuals only by virtue of its eternal operation tiirough the inteixexsio, the gospel, and the spirit of Christ. [See Doctrinal and Ethical, No. 10.— P. S.] DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAI/. 1. As Paul has proved from the Old Testament the truth of the New Testament, and especially the doctrine of righteousness by faith, so can the evan- gelical Church confirm the truth of its confession by the best testimonies of the best fathers of the Catho- lic Church. The evanr/elical confession of sifi and (/race is defended against the Romanists by Augus- tine, and others, in the same way that Abraham defended tiie believing Gentiles against the Jews. [On Augustine's doctrine of sin and grace, comp. ray Church Histori/, vol. iii. pp. 783-865. Augus- tine differs in form from the Protestant doctrine of justification, since he confounded the term with sanctification ; but he agrees with it in spirit, inas- much as he derived the new life of the believer ex- clusively from the free grace of God in Christ, and left no room for human boasting. The same may be said of Ansetm, St. Bernard, and the forerunners ttf the Reformation. — P. S.] 2. Here, as in the Epistle to the Galatians, and especially in chap, iii., the Apostle characterizes the Old Testatncnt according to its real fundamental thought — the promise of God, which was revealed in Abrahaiii's faith, and perfectly fulfilled in the New Testament covenant of faith. Accordingly, the Mosaic legislation is only a more definite 01(5 Testament signature ; but, as a stage of develop, ment, it is subordinate to Abraham's faith (see chap. V. 20 ; Gal. iii. 17). Some errors of the present day concerning the Old Testament have in many ways obscured its true relation by the following declarations: (1.) "The Old Testament is essentially Mosaism." In tiiis way the patriarchal system in the past, and the prophetic system in the future, are abolished. (2.) " Mosa- ism is legal and statutory stationariness." But, on the contrary, the Old Testament is a continuous and living development. (3.) " This stationariness is theoeratical despotism ; the Jew is absolutely en- slaved under the law." This is contradicted by Moses' account of the repeated federal dealings be- tween Jehovah and His people, by the introduction to the Decalogue, as well as by the whole spirit ot the Old Testament. It is particularly contradicted by the fact that Jehovah abandons the people to their apostasy, in order to visit them in justice. 3. The signification of Abraham for the doctrine of justification by faith is supplemented by David^a example and testimony. Abraham was justified by faith, notwithstanding liis many good works ; David was likewise justified by faith, notwithstanding his great offence. The righteousness of faith is there- fore thus defined : (1.) It does not presuppose any good works ; but, (2.) It presupposes a knowledge of sin. On the signification of the passage, vers, 3-5, for justification by faith, see Tholuck, p. 175. 4. As Abraham became the natural father of many nations, so did he become the spiritual father of the believing people of all nations, both Jewa and Gentiles. 5. The designation of circumcision as a seal of the righteousness of faith, is important for the doc- trine of the sacraments. See the Exeg. Notes. 6. T]ie great promise of faith (ver. 13). Its de« velopment (chap. viii. ; Isa. Ixv., Ixvi. ; Rev. xx.- xxii.). There is a grand view in the reasoning of ver. 14. The men who are h. ro/iov, of the law, cannot be the heirs of the world : (1.) Because they are particularists. But al.'io, (2.) Because the legal, human 6(^>yt], jirovokes the historical, divine wrath — the destruction of the world. Thus did legalistic f^inaticism bring on tlie destruction of Jerusalem, the fall of Byzantium, the exhaustion of Germanj by the Thirty Years' War, the disorders in Spain, Italy, Poland, and other countries (see Matt. v. 5). 7. The identity of the faith of Abraham with that of Paid. We must define: (1.) Its object; (2.) Its subject; (3.) Its operations. The differ- ence, on the contrary, must be determined accord- ing to the developing forms of the revelation of sal- vation, and in such a way that the initial point will appear in the faith of Abraham, and the concluding or completing point shall appear in the saving faith of the New Testament. But it is a mistake to sup. pose that faith can be the same tiling in a subjective view, and another in an objective. The objective and subjective relations will always thoroughly cor respond to each other here ; and the operations of faith will be shaped in accordance with them, i'oi J 50 THE EriSTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. Distorical information on the question under con- BiJenitiou, see Tholuck, p. 173. 8. On the nature of saving faith, see the Exeg, No es on ver. 19. Likewise, ou the signification of the resurrection for faitli, tho.se on ver. 25. 9. The importance of the sentiment, " He gave God tlie glory." See tlie Exeg. Notes on ver. 20. [10. On ver. 25. Tiiis important and compre- hensive pa.ssage clearly shows tlie inseparable con- nection between Christ\ death and Chrisfs resur- rection, as also the connection between the remis- sion of sins and j ustijication to a new life (comp. V. 10 ; vi. 4). By His atoning death Christ lias abolisiied tlie guilt of sin (iii 25), and .secured our pardon and peace ; and hence it is generally repre- sented as tlie ground of our justification {()ixaiii>(n>iiiv (subjunctive, with a hortatory Bcnso) is strongly attested by N'. A. B'. C. D. K. L. tnany cc rsives and vorsione (including Syiiac and Vulgate), nlso by many lathers ; iidopled by Lachniann (in the margin^ Bcfaolz, ifritzEche, Allord (5th ed.). This airay cif aulhoiitii's would CDUiiiel us to adopt it instead of e^of^^'' {Jiec, j{cor. B*. F.), were it not tor the following considerations: 1. The early transcribers frequently interchanged o and w. S. The change having been made, it would be retained by the fathers, since it " indicates tlie incipient darkciingof thfl doctrine of the righteousness of faitb " (I.aiige). 3. The liortatory meaning is not in keeping with the context. Evon Alford, after ado]ting the subjunctive, and alleging that it can only have the force of the imperative, denies this mean- ing. An exhortiition on a new sul)ject jiisi here, would introduce a foreign element (Meyer). These reasons have been deemed, by many of the best editors, sufficient to outweigh the preponderai.t MSS. authority. Comp. the £xrg. ^otes. — R.] * Ver. 2. — [The perfect eo-x'?K«M*»' is rendered erjnvgl hahm by Lange ; have hml is the literal meaning, implying continued possess-ion. We oblaiiud (Amer. BibU- Uiiiim) is open to th(^ objection urged in Exig. JS'otes. The articU should be retained with access, as conveying a slight em|)hasis.— K.] ' Ver. 2.— [Lange rejects rn Trio-Tct (R-e0a, but can be retained throughout, where- ever the verb occurs. The connection is with hare had. If necessary, a semicolon alter stand would indicate this. — B.] • Ver. 2.— f Lajige's view of this pass;ige requires the insertion of the article, which is not found in the Greek, Sea Sxeg. iVo/rt.— K.] • Ver. 3. — [Ric. : Kavx^joicda, >c. A. D. F. K. Alford considers this a mechanical repetition from ver. 2, and teads Kavxijifi-evoi. (B. C), but the other reading is to be preferred. — K.J ' \ei. 'd.—['YiTOfj.ovri, Slaiidhafiiglceit (Lange); endurance {Alford); patient cnrfui-awcc (Wordsworth) ; Ausdaiier, fierseivrantia (Mc5'ei). The idea of patimre is implied, but the result is referred to here. — R.] *_ Ver. 4. — [Approval is certainly preferable to erperunce ; and yet it is not altogether satisfactory. Lange, Meyer: Bt'wdlirinig ; Wordsworth : proof; Alford, Amer. Bhie Union, as al>ove. — R.] ' Ver. (i. — [The text is disputed at two ]ioint;s in this clause. -Re-., with N. A. C. D'.'. K., and some fathers, read «Tt yap ; which is adopted by most modem editors. B. (followed by Alford) reads etye, however. The MSS. authority for the ioimer is so strong, that it would be adopted without hesitation, were not the decision complicated by another va- riation, viz., the insertion and omission of a second en after dcrSeviov. The authority for ii (N. A. B. C. D'. F.) is even Bti^onger than for the first. But this repetition has bei n deemed unnecessary, and many critical editors have therefore rejected the second ert. (So ifec, Meyer, Lange apparent I \.) The insertion is explained as a displacement growing out of the fact, that an ecclesiastical portion began with Xpto-rbs k.t.A. But the uncial authority is too strong to wanant its rejection. Alford justly remarks : "We must eithtr repeat trt, . . . or adopt the reading of B." He takes the latter alternatii'e ; it seems safer, with Griesbach, Lachmann, Wirdsworth, to take the foimer. In that case, en may either be regarded as repeated for emphasis (see Exig. JSoles), or Wordsworth's view be adopted : Besides, when we were yit weak. The former is preferable. — R.] '" Ver. 8. — ['O 6cds is wanting in B. Its position varies in other MSS. n. A. C. K. insert it after eis 4/^ostle intended to emphasize the fact that God thus showed His (eavroC) love; hence the position at the end of the clause. This not being uuderh^tood, it was moved forward and then rejected. — R.] "^ Ver. 9. — [Literally: having been then justified. The E. V. means to convey this thought. It should be noticed that «/ fidlows (E. V., h}j). The idea of instmmentality is not prominent ; the sense seems to be pregnant. So also in ver. 10: iv rrj ^oirj, by his li/e.—Ji.] '^ Ver. 10.— [The parallelism is marred in the E. V. — R.] '* Ver. 11. — [Rec: Kavxtart/o)fifv, let us hold fast and enjoy * [See Tfxt. Note i. The Sinaitic MS. reads EXOMEN, the small o on the top of oi bei ig a corrrction by a later hand, Ihouirh this correction may possibly have been taken from an older MS. Tischendoif, in his recent edition of the Vatican MS., credits the correction 6x°M«'' to B^*., instead of B'., as is done by Alford, Meyer, and others. Dr. llodse, who pays little or no attention to the ditlerent readings, and ignores Cod. Sin. altogether, although it was published two years before the revised edition of his Cmnm. on Rntnaiis, incorrectly says (p 0O5) that "the external authorities are nearly equally divided" between exoM«>' and ixutfiev. Alford, in the 5th ed., has a long note and calls this " the crucial instance of overpowering diplomatic authority compelling us to adopt a reading against which our subjective feelings rebel. Everv internal consideration tends to impugn it." Retaining exw^icv in the text (with Lachmann and Tregelles), he gives it up in the notes. Forbes very strenuously contends for exiofiev, and consist- ently takes also Kavxi^iJii-Oa in the hortative sense.— P. S.] t [Rom. xii. 18 refer to peace loith m,' n (like the famous sentence in Gen. Grant's letter of acceptance of the nomi- ABtion for the Presidency : Let us have pLace),—P. S.] peace ; comp. Heb. x. 23 : xciTi/mfuv t/;v ouoXo" ylav rTji^ i/. lidot; az/n'/]. But in this case w« should expect the 'irticle before {i()/jvrjr, and a pre- vious mention of peace in the argument. The in- dicative t/o/uv, on the other hand, is free from all granunatical and doctrinal difficulty, and is in keep- ing with tlie declaratory character of the section.— Peace with God, fii^jt'jvtjv n(i'oii rov dJtov^ in our relation to God. It expresses the state of reconciliation (opposite to the state of coiidemna* lion, viii. 1), in consequence of the removal of God'i wrath and the satisfaction of llis justice by the sac- fice of Christ, who is our Peace ; Eph. ii. 14-16. Comp. Herodian 8, 7. 8: avri noXiuov fttv fio^v^v i/ovtfi; TT^ix; &iori;, and other classical parallels quoted by Meyer and Philippi. On tt^os rov (-JtnVf comp. Acts ii. 17 ; xxiv. 16 ; 2 Cor. vii. 4. This objective condition of peace implies, as a necessary consequence, the subjective peace of the soul, the tranquillitas animi, the pax conscieniice, whicli flowfl from the experience of pardon and reconciliation 5 Phil. iv. 7 ; John xvi. 5?3. Sin is the source of all discord and war between man and God, and lietween man and man ; and hence there can be no peace until this curse is removed. All other peace is an idle dream and illusion. Being at peace with God, we are at peace with ourselves and with our fellow- men. Paul often calls God the " God of peace ; " XV. 33; 2 Cor. xiii. 11 ; 1 Thess. v. 23; 2 Thess. iii. 16; Heb. xiii. 20. Comp. also Isa. xxxii. 17: " the work of righteousness is peace." — P. S.] Ver. 2. Through whom also w^e. These words do not announce a climax in the description of the merit of Christ (Kiillner) ; nor do they state the ground of the preceding dva ^Jtjffov X. (Meyer), but the immediate result of the redemption, [xai, also, is not accumulative, but indicates that the n^ioiiaymyri fii; Ttjv /d(ii'V, itself a legitimate conse- quence of justification, is the yround of ftjj/jvi].— P. S.] — Have obtained access, [riiv tt^joc;- ayioyijv ia/ r/ xa/ifv; literally, have had the (well-known, the only possible) introduction (in the active sense), or better, access (intransitive). The perfect refers to the time of justification and incorpor.ation in Christ, and implies the continued result, since in Him and through Him, as tlie door and Mediator, we have an open way, the right and privilege of daily approach to the throne of grace ; in distinction from the one yearly entrance of the Jewish high-priest into the Holy of Holies. This is the universal priesthood of believers. — P. S.] Ex- planations of the 7Tpoqay(oyi^ : 1. Meyer : admis' sion, introduction (Hiiizufuhruiu/). This is claimed to be the only grammatical signification.* It cer. tainly denotes the entrance efltected by inediationy where it means admission, audience. But this re- quirement [the Ti^joiyayoyn'i;, seqnes'er, the media- tor or interpreter, who introduces persons to sove« * [By Pape (Lex.) and Meyer, who quotes passages from Xenophon, Thuoydiffe senrs dfu Znn GnWs tilgemleii Silinop/trs uriaer npoiayujyevi; ffcioorden ist, uder, mie es Chi'i/^. IriJfiruX ausdruck' : fiaxpav ovra^ irpos^yaye." Comp. Hai> less (p. 251) anil Braunc, cm Eph. ii. 18. Chrysostom dis- tiniiuishes, Eph. ii. 18, npo^ayiayrj and jrpdsoSos : ovk eiire* irpoioSov, aWa n-posaywy^t'. But TrposoSos, in classic Greek, has both the active and passive meaning. Hcsychius de- fines rrpocrayioy^ : " 7rpo?e'AfV(7ts, reclr: acoessio, niiiipf AB DEOEBM AiiAs, suppi.icATio." The word occurs onl) thre< times in the New 1 .-stament— here, and Eph. ii. 18, and iiL 12, where the intransitive meaning, accens, is the most oaiu ral.— P. 8.] CHAPTER V. 1-11. IGl leigiiB, Laraprid. ia Alex. Sev. 4. — P. S.] is secured here by <)».' or, which does net well suit this inter- pretation. 2. Accens. [Vulg. : acccssum; 7i(>6(;o()oq, *i'so')oi,-.] The view of O'k-umenius, and most ex- positors [Pliihppi, Ewald, Smart, Ilodge, Alford] ; Bee Eph. ii. 18; iii. 12. (Tlioluek finally decides for tlie active sense.) Tiie imago, at bottom, is plain- ly not that of a worldly audience witii an Eastern king, but the type of the entrance of the hlgii-prlest into the Holy of Holies (see 1 Peter ill. 18 : A'(u(ttol; S7ia()fv,ifa fjitcl(; 7i(iO(;ccy(i.yri riji Otoi; Ileb. x. IS* : t/ovTn; Ttjv na(i^>j(riav fn,- tIjv Hi;o(>ov r(7)t' ayiiov iv rrZ aiuari, 'Ji/ffoT). This view Is also In harmony with the idea of tlie S]pistie, by which Christianity is the true worship restored, or rather first realized ; and in this connection the fVoia &fGv has reference to the Sheklnah of the Holy of Ho- lies. — Obtained {eriauyt huben). Tholuck justly re- gards it as pedantic prudery In Meyer (after Frltzsche) to hold that icf/iixaittv does not mean nacti sumus et habtinan, but habuimus (when we became Chris- tians). Meyer more appropriately says : " The divine grace in which the justified participate Is represent- ed as a spacial coinpass." But he has not made good this remark. We iiave free access Into the real Holy of Holies, which is grace ; anr" hope to behold In It the real Sheklnah, the cVoJa of God ; and, looking at It, to participate of it. — Into this grace. [The Tavrijv Is emphatic — such a glorious grace. — P. S.] Those who adhere to the reading tri niffxfi in ver. 2 [see Ttxtual Note ^] connect therewith nt; r'r^v /d(jt,v (a connection which Meyer properly rejects, nlarii; nt; rijv yd(jiv[\ and under- stand Tr^oo-a/oj'// absolutely: access to God.* But the 7T(iofjayiia conditioned by the life of prayer, and especially by dallv purification, in the comfort of the atone- ment (Heb. X. 22, 28). And triumph (glory) in the hope of the glory of God [zwt y.av/MfiiQ-a tri i/.nldi, * [This is not necessary, tji niaTti and Iv tt) jtiVtsi, whether ponuine or not, can bt' taken as explan:»tory of the metliod of access to the tlirone of grace. The phrase " faith on trraci- " nowhere occurs in the Bible. — P. S. ] t [" Demeurcr ferme. signifie combattre courageusement." —P. S.] !["...«< firma sfabilhqtie snlua nobis mnneat: quo iignijicnl, prrseverantiam non in virtu'e indttsriave nostra, sed in Chrisin fiinihilam rsae." So also Philippi (feslslehen, bleib'uid vtrhnrrfii), and Hodpe : " We are firmly and im- mov.ably established." Comp. Jobn viii. 44, where it is said of Satan that he stood not (owx HrrriKtv) in the truth ; i Cor. rr. 1 i 2 Cor. i. 24.— P. 8.] 11 rtj(; i)6ifjq TOO O-fOvJ. Tho verb y.ai Ydoficu [usually with ir, also with ini, vnt^, and with tha accusative of the object] denotes the ex])ression ot a joyous consciousness of blessedness with reference to the objective ground of blessedness ; In which true glorying is distinctly conirasted with its carica- ture, vain boasting in a vain state of nilnd, and from a vain ground or occasion. Keiche eui|)hasizei the rejoicing, Meyer the gloryiiu/. Tl e tni, ex- plained as propter (by Meyer), denotes more defi- nitely the basis on which Christians establish their glorying.* The ground of the glorying of Chris- tians in their present state Is not the doia Ofov itself, but Jie hope af the glory of God, as one con- ception ; indeed, the whole Chiistianity of this lif(9 is a joyous anticipation of beholding tiie glory,* Tholuck: " rJoJa Otou is not, as Origen holds, the genitive of object, the hope of beholding this glory, which would need to have been expressed more defi- nitely ; still less is Chrysostom's view right, that it is the hope that God will glorify Himself In U8. Neither are Luther, Grotlus, Calixtus, Reiche, cor- rect in calling it the genitive of author, the glory to be bestowed by God ; but it is the genitive of pos- session, participation in the glory possessed by God ; comp. 1 Thess. il. 12." But more account should be made of beholding, as the means of appropria- tion. To behold God's glory, means also, to become glorious. This is definitely typified in the history of Moses (2 Cor. Hi. 1.3 ; Exod. xxxiv. 33). Tho- luck also remarks : " The dtwfjuv rijV ()6iav toU A'^nffTor, John xvii. 24, is the participation in the doicc OtoT', the avy/J.tjiJovoiihlv, the ar/ifia(Ti,/.n''ftv, and arrdoiciffOTjvai, tw A'^nfrrw ; Rom. viii. 17; 2 Tim. il. 11. Cocceius : ' i/ac est gforiatio Jideliuniy quod persua-sum habent, fore, id Deus gloriosus et adiiiirob lis in ipsis Jiat illuininmido, smctiJirandOf Ice'ijlcitndo, glorifcaiido in ipsis ; 2 Thess. i. 10.' " As the seeing of man on God's side perfects the vision of man, according to 1 Cor. xiii. 12, it is the beholding of the glory of the Lord on man's side by which he shall become perfectly conformed to the Lord, and thus an object of perfect good pleasure, according to 1 John III. 2 ; Matt. v. 8 ; comp. 2 Peter I. 4. The goal of this reciprocal ^old'Zuv and fyoiaLKTi9«i, is, in a conditional sense, the removal to the Inheritance of glory In the future world; 2 Cor. V. 1 ; and, in the absolute sense, the time of the second coming of Christ ; Rev. xx. [This triumphant assurance of faith is incom patible with the Romish doctrine of the uncertainty of salvation. A distinction should be made, how- ever, between assurance of a present state of grace, which is necessarily Implied in true faith, as a per- sonal apprehension of Christ with all His benefits, and assurance of future redemption, which is an article of hope (hence tn i).ni)i), and must be ac- companied with constant watchfulness. Christ will lose none of those whom the Father has given Him (John xvii. 12; x. 28, 29); but God alone knows His own, and to whom He chooses to reveal it. We must give diligence to make our calhng and election * [So also Philippi: "«ir' kXitiSi, pr< plpr spem. inC mtt (Jem Di'tive dient bei den Veibis der Affede zur Angabe del Grdndes. So yeAov, fiiya (ppovetv, fiaiveo'Oat, 07ai/aKT6tj' eTTt tiki." — P. S.] t (The reading of the Vult'ate : gUirite filiorum Dei,\s, accordinc ti) Meyer, a gloss which admirably hits the iiense. But 6ofa fleoO is more expressive in tbis connection. It i( the gloiy wliich God Himself has (gin. pnsspssinnis), etuiia which believers shall once share ; comp. Jobn xvii. 2Si ; 1 Thess. ii. 12 ; Apoc. xxL 11 ; 1 John iii. 2.— P. S.l 102 THE BfPISTLE OF PAtJI. TO THE ROMANS. sure to ourselves (2 Peter i. 10), and work out our own salvation witli fear and trembling, becuuse God worketli in us boih to will and to do of His good pleasure (Phil. ii. 12, 13). Tlie possibility of ulti- mate failure was a powerful motive and stimulus to faithfuluess and holiness even in the life of an apos- tle, who exercised severe self-diseipline, lest, having preached to others, he might himself at last be re- jected, and lose tlie incorruptible crown of the Christian race (1 Cor. ix. 27). How much more, then, should ordinary Cliristians, who stand, take heed lest tliey fall (1 Cor. x. 12) !— P. S.] Ver. 3. And not only so [.sc, in, the bravery and manliness with which the Christian contends against the storms of trials and persecutions. Meyer adduces, as ap- plicable here, Cicero's definition of perseveran ia : " in, raiione bene considerata stabUis et perpetua permaii sio^ On the difference between vnouovi], /taxiJoOi'/iia, and avo/rj, comp. Trench, Si/noni/ms of the New Testament, Second Series, ed. 1864, p. ii.— P. s.] Approved (proof), t) o y. i. /t tj . [Comp. 2 Cor. ii. 9 ; viii. 2; i.x. 13 ; Phil. ii. 22.] Not trial (Gro- tius), for the fl/.iit'tc itself is trial; nor experience (Luther [E. V.] ), for experience is the whole Chris- tian life. It is the condition of approval, whose sul)jective expression is the consciousness of being sealed; Eph. ii. 13. [Bengel: "()ozi//// est quail' tas ejus, qui est (iozt/'oi,-." Hodge : " The word ia used metonymieally for the result of trial, i. f., a- probation, or that which is proved worthy of ap- probation. It is tried integrity, a state of mind which has stood the test." James i. 3 : rb <)oy.i/ii.i)V lyntjc riys nicrtKiiq xaT.'4tj y.aTai,tj /d^i,c; Iv yilhal aov. Alford (after 01s- hausen) : " h may be taken pregnantly, t/./.ty. ft<; y.ai fiivfi, Iv — or better, denotes the locality where the outpouring takes place — the heart being the seat of our love, and of appreciation and sym- pathy with God's love." — P. S.] — By means of the Holy Spirit who was given unto us [()<,a 71 v( V ft aroi; dylov Tor ()o&irroi; fjfilv]. The gift of the Holy Spirit is the causality of the experience of the love of God. Chap. viii. 15, 16 ; Gal. iv. 6. [The Holy Spirit mediates all the gifts of grace to us, and glorifies Ciirist in us. Olshausen and Alford refer the aorist participle to the pente- costal effusion of the Spirit. But this could not • [Similarly Olshausen : "Die Goltenlirbe zum Menschen, dit abir in ilim die Gepeiiliebe wrcld (1 John iv. 19), und V-Mir itichl die Geiji nliebe mil den bloss natiiilicheti Kiuflen, tondern mil den hoheien Krd/teii des golllirhen Geisles." Forbes: "The love here spoken of is not God's love, as merely outwardly shovx to us, hut as shed abroad in our hearts as a sift, and it is placed in connectiou with other Christian s""('ccs — patience and hope." — P. S.] ■ [Meyer: " Der Bi griff des Reichlichen liegt sdwn in ier siiinlichen Tirslellung des Au.ischu'teiif, kann aber atich me Tit. iii. 6 tun h besonders ausgedruckt werden."—P. S.] ap[>ly to Paul, who was called afterwards. Heri'e i( must be referred to the time of regeneration, when the Pentecostal fact is repeated in the individual. - P. SJ Ver, 6. For Christ, when w^e were yet ["£ T t y a c X (J la T 6 (; o v r w v r fi wr , y..t X On the different I'eadings, tVt ja^;, for yd, or stVl^ with a second tVt alter dnflsviiiv (x), nyi-, if «'*♦ deed, with tlie second iVi. (B.), iri, yc'iii, without th« second in, [text, ree.), fit; tI yd(/ {{l)''. P.), fi yd(J, fl ()f, see 2'extuai Note °. — P. S.] The tVi [/mm4 adhuc~\, according to the sense, belongs to uvtoiv^ &c. [Comp. Matt. xii. 46 : iti, alnov ).a).ovvrui: ; Luke XV. 20 : in d't aiTuv fiax()dv nTit/ovToi; Similar transpositions of tVt aniong the classics See the quotations of Meyer in loe., and AViner, Gramm., p. 515. — P. S] Seb. Schmid, and others, have incorrectly understood jti as insuper [more- over, furthermore ; but this would be irv <)(, Heb. xi. 36, not in yd(j. — P. S.] ; contrary not only to the meaning of the word, but also to the context. They hold that the in. docs not enhance the pre- ceding, bat gives the ground why the confidence of salvation is an ever-increasing certainty. Thuluck, with Meyer, favoring the in, at the beginning of the verse, says that in, has been removed at the begin- ning because a Bible-lesson began with the verse [with the word A'()ktt6s-]. The result was, that it was partly removed, partly doubled, and [jartly cor- rected. We hold tliat the twofold in, which Lach- maun reads [and which Cod. Sin. sustains] has a good meaning as emphasis. Ver. 7. When we were yet weak, or, with- out (spiritual) strength [orrwr t'j/iiZv da Of' v(T)v sTt]. The state of sin is here represented as weakness or sickness in reference to the divine life, and consequently as helplessness, in order to de- clare that, at that time, believers could not do the least toward establishing the ground of their hope. [Comp. Isa. liii. 4, Septuagint : rcn; d/i afiriai; ijtuTtv (ff{ni,, with Matt. viii. 17: rat; da fvfiaq ^jfn7)v i/.afif. Sin is here represented as helpless weakness, in contrast with the saving help of Christ's love. — P. S.] The daO fvftc; are then de- nominated daffifti;, ungodly, in order to express the thought that we, as sinners, could not add any thing to the saving act of Christ, but did our utmost to aggravate the work of Clirist. Sinfulness is rep- resented, therefore, not merely as " the need of help," and thus " as the motive of God's love inter- vening for salvation " (Meyer), but as the starting- I)oiiit of redemption, where the love of God accom- plished the great act of salvation without any co- operation of siimers — yea, in spite of their greatest opposition. At the proper time (or, in due season). Kara xat^or. Two* connections of the xara X.: 1. It is united to ovriov, &c. We icere weak according to the time [pro temporum ratione'], in the sense of excuse (Erasmus) ; in the sense of the general corruption (according to Calvin, Luther, Hofmann). Against this are botli the position ( f xai,(i6(;, and its signification. 2. It is referred to dniO-avfv, but in different ways. Origen : at that time, when He suffered. Abelard : held awhile in death. [Kypke, Reiche, Philippi. Alford. Hodge: at the appointed time, foretold by the prophets. — P. S.] Meyer : As it was the full time [proper * [Or three, rather ; for the words have also T)pcn con« nected by some with In = en rort, adhuc eo tempore, al IM time of our weakness. — P. S.] 164 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. time] for the deliverance of those who lived at that time. Better : It was the fit time in the history of humanity. This by no means weakens the principal thought, which rather reciuires the definite statement that the sacrificial death of Christ was according to Divine wisdom ; since tlie necessity for salvation and the capacity for salvation were decided with the ful- ness of natural corruption. The highest heroism of the self-sacrifice does not exclude its reasonableness. See Rom. xvi. 25 ; Gal. iv. 4 ; Eph. i. 10 ; 1 Tim. ii. 6; Titus i. 3. [xaxa xat^ov is = iv xat^ni, n(; y.ai.(i6i', ini xaifjou, xai^ioc;, tempore op/ior- tuno ; in opposition to Tia. ■/.an)ov, tempore alieuo, unlimebj. Here it is essentially the same with the 7i).tji)iii/(a Toil' /.cuiji^ii', Epli. i. 10, and the tt /./)(>(•//(« Tor /i^iovuf, Gal. iv. 4; comp. Mark i. 15. Clirist ap()eared when all the pre[)arations for His coming and His kingdom in the Jewish and Gentile world were completed, and when the disease of sin had reached the crisis. This was God's own appointed time, and the most, or rather the only, appropriate time. Clirist could not have appeared with divine fitness and propriety, nor with due eflfect, at any other time, nor in any other race or country. We caanot conceive of His advent at the time of Noah, or Abraham, or in China, or among the savage tribes of America. History is a unit, and a gradual un- folding of a Divine plan of infinite wisdom. Christ is the turning-point and centre of history, the end of the old and the beginning of the new humanity — A truth wliich is confessed, wittingly or unwittingly, by everv date from A. D. throughout the civilized world.— P. S.] For the ungodly. vntQ, for, for the good of. It is a fuller conception than the idea instead of, avrl, if we remember that, where the ques- tion is concerning a dying for those who are worthy of death, the conception naturally involves a well- understood uvri. See Matt. xx. 28. The terms vnis) and ^f^t [which Paul uses synonymously. Gal. i. 4] are more comprehensive ; but the expres- sion avrl is the most definite one. [Meyer con- tends that !int(j and nf^i always mean for, in be- half of for the benefit of, and not avTi, in the place of loco, although, in the case of Christ, His death for the benefit of sinners was a vicarious sacrifice ; iii. 25 ; Eph. v. 2 ; 1 Tim. ii. 0. Sometimes the vniiJ, like the English preposition for, according to the context, necessarily involves the ui'ti, as in 2 Cor. V. 15, 20, 21 ; Gal. iii. 13 ; Philom. 13. The Apostle says vtieq aatpHtv, instead of vni^ fjumv, in order to bring out more fully, by this strong antithesis, the amazing love of Christ. — P. S.] Ver. 7. For scarcely for a righteous man will one die, though, for the good man, per- haps some one may even dare to die [ M 6 An; ydlj !i nil) <) i,y.aio v (without the article) t n; ano- {) avtlr at,' (';r«^ Y^i' (t'l*^- second yd() seems to be exceptive, and introduces a correction of the preceding with reference to /(6?.n;: with difficulty, I Bay, for it is a fact that) toT' nyaO-ou (with the article) ray a ruq y.ai to), fiu a. TZ o av fiv . — P. S.]. The difficulty of this verse has led to vari- ous conjectures,* The Peshito reads vTiii) (X()ixiiiv (unrighteous), instead of I'TTtsj iir/.aiov ; Erasmus, Luther, Melanchthon, &c., read ()i,xaioit and ayafyoT' as neuter words ; Hot'mann [formerly, not now. — P. B.] : at least the latter is neuter ; Origen, on the con- * ('.Tfiroiiie, Ep. 121 ad Algas., mentions five explana- tions ; Tholuck.— P. 8.] trary, held merely rft/.. as neuter, and understood by ayaDnq, Christ as the perfectly good One. But, ai Meyer properly observes, that both sul)staiitive3 ara masculine, is evident from the antithesis a(r:[Jtii;, b» wliich the question is generally concerning a dying for persons. [ ()i.>t«to r, without the article, must be masculine — a righteous p/rson (not the r.ght^ TO di/.cuov); but tdT' ocyaO-or, witii the arlicl* may, grammatically, be taken as neuter = summum boiium (the country, or any good cause or nobla principle for whicli martyrs have died in ancient and modern times). Yet, in this case, tiie antithesis would be lost, since Christ likewise died for tho highest good, the salvation of tiie world. The an- tithesis is evidently between men who scarcely are found to die for a ^)ixaloc, though occasionally per- haps for 6 (their) dyaOoi;, and Christ who died for dfn^fini;, ver. 6 ; or a.fta'.., indefinitely, implies a harmless (guiltless) man ; 6 aj'ai>oc;, one perfect in all that piety demands, excellent, bounteous, princely, bless- ed — for example, the father of his country." — P. S.] Meyer i-egards all these as " subtle distinctions." [He quotes, for the essential identity of di/.awc; and dyaOo., Matt. v. 45 ; Luke xxiii. 50 ; Rom. vii. 12, where both are connected. — P. S.] Then the differ- ence between the Old and New Testament would also be a subtle drawing of distinctions. The Old Testament, even in its later period, scarcely produced one kind of martyrdom ; but the New Testament has a rich martyrdom. Yet we would understand the dyaOo^ in a more general sense. The i)ixaM<; in- stills respect, but he does not establish, as such, a communion and exchange of life ; but the dyaOo^ inspires. Paul's acknowledgment here, which waa supported by heathen examples, is a proof of liia aiiostolie coiisidcrateness, and of his elevation above all slavery to the letter. An ecclesiastical rhetorician would have suppressed the concession. The selec- tion of the expression with rd'/a and toIiiu. is ad- mirable ; such self-sacrifices are always made head- long in the ecstasy of sympathetic generosity. * [Calvin: " Rarissimmn sane inter homines exemptum exstat, ul j/ro jiiiti) qiiis mari sxsft'nent: qmimqU'tm illud nnnnnnqumn nrciiUre possit." The exception e.stablisheei the rule. Fritzsche, Hofm.ann (in the serond edition of hia ScUn'f.beweis, ii. 1, p. 348), :md Meyer (4th ed.) have re* turned to this view. In the 1st ed. (which Hodfie, p. 214 seems alone to have consulted), Meyer took toO ayaOov, on account of the article, as neuter (as did Joroniv, Erasmus, Luther, Melanchthon, Ruckert, and Hoftnann in tlie^«l edition of his fkhnf.bewci.^:), and rendered the latter claus« of tho verse iiiterrogiitivcly : "denn wer wagl's auo' leiditf lich/ur das Oule zu sUrben /—P. S.J CHAPTER V. 1-11. 165 4, It is liaidly necessary to mention the view [maintained ))y Meyer in tlie first edition, but now given up by liini. — P. S.], that the second member of tho sentence is interrogative : for vilio would dare to die rcadili/ even for (he good? [T can see no material difference between inter- pretations 2 and 3. The principal point in botii is tlie distinction made between itiy.caoi; (taken in a narrower sense) and 6 ayaOoi;, corresponding to our distinction between just and kind. Such a distinc- tion is made by Cerdo in IreiiiBUS Adv. hcer. i. 27, quoted also by Eusebius, //. E., iv. 11: rov fiiv dixaiov, Tov ()£ ayaOov vnikQyn.v, altcrnm quidem JUSTiiAf, ahernm autcm bonum esse ; and by Cicero, l)e ojfic, iii. 15 : " Si vir bonus is est qui prodtst quibus potest, itocet netnini, recte (certe) jus- TUM viri/m, HoNUX non facile reperiemus" (but some editions read: ^^ cer.'e i-stion virum bo7ium").* The righteous man, who does all that the law or justice requires, commands our respect and admiration ; the good man, the benefactor, who is governed by love, inspires us with love and gratitude. Then we would have tiie following sense : " It is hardly to be ex- pected that any one would die for a righteous man, though for the good man (i. e., for a kind benefactor or intimate friend), this self-denial might possibly be exercised, and does occnsionally o<;cur. So Olsliau- Ben, Tiioluek, Pliilippi, Turner, Stuart, Hodge, Al- ford, Woriiswortli. The latter refers to the death of Orestes for Pylades, his al er ego, and of Alces- tis for Admetus, her husband. Webster and Wil- kinson : " To make the admission less at variance with tlic first assertion, he substitutes for iit.y.aiov, TO*' «;'«i9or, the man of eminent kindness and philanthropy, the well-known benefactor, y.()tjlood and, as being His fellow-participants in peace, w« shall be preserved from tlie wrath by the glorious exercise of His authority, and then by His lifs Preservation from wrath is a negative expression of peifect redemption. 1 Thess. i. 10. Compare the positive exiiression of 1 Tim. iv. 18. — [By his blood, aifta is the concrete expression for the atoning death of Christ, which is the meritorious cause of our justification. This does not rest on our works, nor our faith, nor any thing we havo done or can do, but on what Christ has done for us comp. iii. 25. — P. S.] Ver. 10. For if, being enemies [*t y«j e/O^oi orTK,-]. It may be asked whether i/f)(Joi — that is, God's enemies — is to be ex« plained actively or passively ; whether it denotes the enemies [haters] of God, according to chap, viii. 7 [i/f)()a tl^ ,9 for] ; Col. i. 21 (Eph. ii. 16 does not belong here), or those who are charged with God's wrath [hated by God], for which view Rom. xi. 28 [where iyO()oi is the opposite of ayaTrijToi ; comp. also OuxTTvyui;, i. 13, and rtxva 6(iyT^i;, Eph ii. 3. — P. S.] has been cited. The passive inter- pretation has been supported by Calvin, Reiche, Fritzsche, Tholuck, Krehl, Baumgarten-Crusius, De Wette, Pliilippi, Meyer [Alford, Hodge], and the active or subjective interpretation by* Spener, Titt- mann, Usteri, and Riickert [among English cominen- tatora, by Turner]. Meyer says in favor of the first view : 1. " Christ's death did not destroy the enmity of men toward God ; but, by effecting their pardon on the part of God, it destroyed the emnitii of God toward men, whence the cessation of man's enmity toward God follows as a moral consequence, brought about by faith. 2. And how could Paul liave been able to infer properly his noD.tJ) fin/J.nv, &c., since the certainty of the aoiOr/ffo/uha rests on the fact that we stand in a friendly relation (grace) to God, and not on our being friendly toward God ? " These two arguments have a very orthodox sound, but are without a vital grasp of the fact of the atonement, and here without force. For, first of all, the death of Christ is as well a witness and seal of God's love, which overccuiies man's enmity and distrust, as it is an offering of reconciliation, which removes the 6(jyrj x9toTi in His government and in tb, to chiDiffe), express the general idea of a change of relation of two parties at enmity into a relation of peace, or the idea of reconciliation ( Versohuunr/^ Aussd •niinr/), with a slight modification, indicated by the prepositions — xard, in relation to ; iSm, be- tween ; dno, from ; avv, with, but without refer- ence to the question whether the enmity be mutual, or on one side only — which must be decided by the connection. The noun di,a?./.ayfj is more frequently used in tiie classics than y.ara/./.ayi''], but nowhere in tlie New Testament ; the verb dta/auaw, or dia- IdttM occurs only once; in the pass. aor. 2 imperat., Matt, V. 24 : (iialldyrjOi, rm ddf/.qioi iroi', be recon- ciled to thy brother. The noun xaraD.ayrj is used four times in tlie New Testament; Rom. v. 11 (E. v., atonement); xi. 15 (the reconciling); 2 Cor. v. 18, 19 {reconci'ia ion, twice) ; the corresponding verb KaTa).d/noni/nifii of the New Testn- ment, Second Part, p. 137 f.) gives the following judicious explanation of the term: "The Chiistiaa y.uTa'/J.uyri has two sides. It Ls first a recoucilia« tion, ''qua Ueu.s nox sibi reconciUait,^ laid aside His holy anger against our sins, and received ui into favor — a reconciliation effected once for ajf for us by Christ upon His cross ; so 2 Cor. v, 18, 19; Rom. v. 10; in which last passage y-arak- IdrraKTOai, is a pure passive, ' «6 tv and jtaraA/. aye-CTfS not actively, but passively : reeonciled with God, so that He is no more hostile to us, having given up His wrath against us." On Tittmann's attempt to distin- guish between oi. ]K may be asked, however, whether the meaning is : God had been reconciled toward us (Meyer, Philippi) ; or: we have been reconciled toward God ; or : there lia3 been a mutual reconciliation ? The first cannot be said [?], since the y.ara/./.ay/j denotes a change [from enmity to friendship] ; also the y.ara/j.ayrj in 2 Cor. v. 18, "tot y.aTa/./.diavTo^ 'i/'cti; tavrm,^ must be carefully distinguished from the ('/.ctfT/io^' (see my Angewandle Dogmntik, p. 858). f The sense is, therefore : While we were still enemies, adversaries of God, we were delivered by the deatli of Jesus, and the expiating ihi(rfi6(;, which is identical with it, from guilty subjecti(m to the punislimeiit of the oi)yf'i, and have been made objects of His conquer- ing operation of love ; and now, in the light of this operation of love, we have a heart delivered from tlie enmity of alienation from God — a heart which, in the train of love, has joy in God, But how can we distinguish between the objective and subjective change of humanity ? It is plain, from the risen Redeemer's salutation of peace and His giispcl-ines-. sage, that the love of Christ on the cross conquered the hatred of humanity. The risen Saviour's salu- tation of peace contains the " peace on earth," Add to all this the difference and antithesis be- tween vers, 8, 9, 10, which are completely ot> * [And also the note of Fritzscho on Bom. v. 10. Titt manT), De Synon. iV. T., i. 102 (approved hy 'Robiuson silh KaToKiaa-ta), makes SiaAaTTeir to mean "rffircyr' lU qnir. fiiit ird'iiiritia MUTUA, ea essi' di'siiKit," and KaraAaTTcn', ^ fwirt ■ul ALTER viimirinn niiiinun tjrponnt." This distinction \i arbitrary and fanciful. Comp. the preceding remarks.— P. S.] t [In vol. iii., p. 858, of his work on Dogmnlics, Dr. Lang« distinsuisbes between (caroAAay^ as belontriiig to the jiro« phetical, iAaor/u'Sf to the priestly, ari d;roAvr/>(oois to tbc kinglj- office of '^hrist.— P. S.] CHAPTER V. 1-11. l(Vi Bcured by the prevalent explanation above alluded to. The clause, Crad comnieu/(7)/nv). Riickert, Tholuck. Only ainOfjOo/ifOa must be supplied to fiovov di. The construction then runs thus, according to De Wette : We have not only the hope of escaping from the wrath of God, but we also glory in God. 2. The participle cannot stand for the finite verb (see, on the con- trary, the discussions with Meyer, in Tholuck). But even here (KoOfjcrn/ifOa only is to be supplied. The sense, then, is this : but not only shall we be mred by His life, but so that with this crto^frrOai, we shall also glory in God. [Alford : " Not only shall we be saved, but that in a triumphant manner and frame of mind."] 3. KaraD.ayivrfc must be supplied. Not oiili/ reconciled, but aho r/lor)/iug. Thus for- merly Fritzsche, KiiUner, Gloekler, Baumgarten- Crusius, and Meyer in his earlier editions. This ex- planation is proved to be relatively the most cor- rect, as the tyiii'ZiaOai, deiiotes not a mere degree of salvation, but comprises salvation to the point of completion, and as y.aTa/.?.ayivTf<; is repeated m i)v 01' rrv Ttjv y.uTa/./.ay/jV e/.ctj-Jo/ifV. Our view is, however, that we have here an antithesis of climaxes. Or f(6vov atof) tjaoiitOa — y.amk'/.ayivTfi; iv rri cwJj A'^iffTor — a.)J.a y.al y.cti'/coutvot iv rm ^toi did xoTi xi'fjiov tjfiihv J'jffnv X^.atov. The rising climax is the following : 1. We are delivered from the wrath. 2. We are safely harbored in th« fife of Christ. 3. God, in. His love, has become, through Christ, our God, in whonj we glory. We glory not only in the hope of the ()oJc< of God, and not only conditionally in tribulations, &e., but w« glory absolutely in God as our God ; see chap. viii. Through whom we have now. Reference to the future glory, as it is grounded in the experi. ence of the present salvation, and ever devtiopi itself from this base. — Have appropriated [t/)»» y.aTa/.?.ay fjv i/.cc^j a /i f v ]. So we tiaiislate the t^.a.fJo/1 fv {angefignet halien), to emijhiisize the fact of the ethical appropriation, which is very im portant for the beginning of the following section. [It is safe to infer from t?.c(po/ifv that y.ara/./.ay^ primarily means here a new relation of God to us, which He has brought about and which we receive, not a new relation of man to Qid, or a moral change iu us, although this is a neeessaiT moral consequence of the former, and inseparable from it. Hence y.aTal).ayi%'Tii;, in Rom. v. 10, is parallel with di,y. a td) Oi vTfc, ver. 9: diy.aiinOivrit; awflcyco- ituo, as well as its final issue, in approval (experience) ; approval converts hope to confident assurance, which cannot deceive, because it is itself the prophecy of approaching glory. The Apostle's sorites describes a chain of blessed expe- riences, which cannot be broken unless the first links to approval are rendered brittle by insincerity, but whose strength increases from link to link to that unconquerable assurance of hope. 6. The elder dogmatics, especially the Reformed, have made prominent the doetiine of approval and perseiierance in grace ; or, what is the same, the doctrine of scaling. They made sealing follow jus- tification. If this great truth had been carefully guarded, the controversy between the Lutheran and Ref')rmed theology, as to whether a pardoned person can fall from grace, could have been regarded as a mere question of words, to be solved by the further inquiry as to whether the question concerns Chris- tians before, or after, they are sealed. The heart's experience of justification must be put to proof, in which it becomes the historically established expe- rience of life. Steadfastness in such proofs results inwardly in sealing by t'.ie Holy Spirit (2 Tim. ii. 19 ; Rev. vii. 3; ix. 4 ; 'Eph. i. i3 ; iv. 30), and out- wardly iti the establishment of the Christian in the •har\cter of his new nature {SoAkfit'i). The 7ionien et omen in lehbile of baptism, confirmation, and ordi nation, becomes the real character indelebilis onlj by approval, or sealing. This is ethically connected with the fact that, by tlie test of tribulation and stead- fastness, a purifying process has taken place, by which a separation of the most combustible material has been effected. 7. The way which Christians pursue with Christ goes downward, according to ai)pearance, and often according to feeling ; but it goes upward, according to internal operation and experience. This occurs in a threefold relation : (1.) Since all the high stand- points of worldly consciousness are without support, the Christian's position in the fellowship of Christ, who is above, is established as his second nature. (2.) The persevering fellowship in the historical igno- miny of Christ, is fellowship in the historical honor which shall be received in the iiarvest of the world. (3.) There is forming a dynamical nature of light and heat of the inner man, which, by its impulsive and sustaining power, as well as by the still stronger upward attraction, ascends to the kingdom of glory. 8. The experience of the hve of God in Christ for us is changed, with its joy, into pure reciprocal love ; and from the complete life of love of thia new birth there arises pure salvation, which, in this world, is divided into hope and patience. See chap, viii. 24, 2.5 ; 1 John iii. 9. As the Holy Spirit caused the birth of Christ, so does He cause the new birth of Christians; ver. 5. 10. The contemplation of the love of God for us, which was revealed in the death of Jesus, in Hia dying for us (ver. 8), remains the ground of the life of love of believers. See Philippi, p. 166. On the ii7Ti(), see Meyer, p. 150. [P, 189 i., fourth edition. Meyer maintains here that in all the passages which treat of the object of the death of Christ (as Luke xxii. 19, 20 ; Koni. viii. 32 ; xiv. 15, &c.), the prep- ositions vni<) and nfiti mean in conimodum , for the benefit of and must not be confounded with avri, loco, instead of which Paul never uses (but Christ Himself uses it. Matt. xx. 28, doTvav r't^v ^r/^v a'vjov ).vT()ov avri no).).MV, comp. Mark x. 45, ?.iiT^ov avTi 7To).).m') ; but that Paul nevertheless teaches a satisfactio vicaria, by representing Christ's death as a propitiatory sin-offering, Rom. iii. 25 ; Eph. v. 2, &c.— P. S.] 11. After the Apostle has represented the soritea of the Christian's subjective certainty of salvation (vers. 1-5), he makes a sorites of his objective cer- tainty of salvation (vers. 6-11). The thesis from whicli he proceeds is the fact that, among men, there is scarcely one who will die for a righteous man, though perhaps one would die for the good man (see the kjceg. Notes ; comp. Tholuck, p. 208). The sen- tence must be enlarged by the farther definition: No one would die for the ungodly, or for his enemy; but God has performed this miracle of love in tlie death of Christ. For Christ died for us when we were, in a negative view, incapable, and, in a posi- tive view, even ungodly. Therefore the objective certainty of salvation is established in the following conclusions: (1.) We were sinners, debtors, for whom Christ died; much more shall we, since we are justified and reconciled, be preserved from the wrath to come. (2.) The death of the Son of God has overcome our enmity, and reconciled us ; much more shall His life perfectly redeem us as reconciled until the consummation. (3.) Since we have ob- tained reconciliation, we are happy even now in the triumphant joy that God is our God. CHAPTER V. 1-11. 109 12. On the dift'enmce between the If.atr/ioq and the xaTa/.hxyij, see the Eveff. Notes [p. IGOJ. [Bishop Jlui^ley (Serm. on Horn. iv. 25) on the atonement and rtconciliaiion : " Tliose who speak of the wrath of God as appeased by Christ's suH'lt- mgs, speak, it must be confessed, a figurative hiu- guage. The Scriptures speak figuratively when tiiey ascribe wratii to God. Tlie Divine nature is insus- ceptible of the perturbations of passion, and, when it is said that God is angry, it is a figure, which conveys this useful warning to mankind, that God will he determined by His wisdom, and by His providential care of His creation, to deal with tlie wicked, as a prince in anger deals with rebellious subjects. It is an extension of the figure wiien it is said tiiat God's wrath is appeased by the suffer- ings of Christ. It is not to be supposed that tiie sins of men excite in God an appetite of vengeance, which could not be diverted from its purpose of punishment till it had found its gratification in the Bufferings of a rigiiteous persmi. This, indeed, were a view of our redemption founded on a false and unworthy notion of the Divine character. But nothing hinders but that the sufferings of Christ, which could only, in a figurative sense, be an ap- peasement or satisfaction of God's wrath, might be, in the most literal meaning of the words, a satisfiic- tion to His justice. It is easy to understand that the interests of God's government, the peace and order of the great kingdom, over which He rules the whole world of moral agents, might require that His disapprobation of sin should be solemnly declared and testified in His manner of forgiving it. It is easy to understand that the exaction of vicarious sufferings on the part of Him, who under- took to be the intercessor for a rebellious race, amounted to such a declaT'ation. These sufferings, by which the end of punishment might be answered, being once sustained, it is easy to perceive that tlie Bame principle of wisdom, the same providential care of His creation, wliich must have determined the Deity to inflict punisliment, had no atonement been made, would now determine Him to spare. Thus, to speak figuratively. His anger was ap- peased ; but His justice was literally satisfied, and the sins of men, no longer calling for punishment, when the ends of punishment were secured, were literally expiated. The person sustaining the suf- erings, in consideration of which the guilit of others may, consistently with the principles of good policy, be remitted, was, in the literal sense of the word — 60 literally, as no other victim ever was — a sacrifice, and His blood shed for the remission of sin was literally the matter of expiation."] 13. This section contains, in narrow compass, a sketch of the whole development of Christian salva- tion, in which its principial perfection * is made emphatic at the beginning as well as at the conclu- sion, in order that the peripherical imperfection of the state of faith in this world may not be regarded in an Ebionitic way as a principial one. We must observe that, in Rom. viii., this designation is further elaborated under a new point of view, and that tliere, too, the Kubjertive and objective certainty of salvation can be distinguished. 14. The idea of the real worship of God reap- * [PRiNcrpiELLE Vnllkommenheit, perfection as a princi- ple. The word prir.cipi(d (from principium), in the sense of initial, elementat y, fundamenlnl, though now ohsolete, 1b used by Bacon. In German, the word is almost inais- p«nsable.— P. S.] pears definitely here in the beginning as well as a° the end of the section. nOMILETICAL AJfD PRACTICAI*. The fruits of the righteousness of faith. They are : 1. Peace with God through our Lord Jesui Christ (ver. 1) ; 2. Hope of juture glory in the tribulations of tlie present time (vers. 2-5); 3. Con- fidence of salvation established on the love of God for us as made known in the propitiatory death of Christ (vers. 6-11). — Peace with God: 1. In what does it consist? 2. By whom do we obtain it? (ver. 1). — The peace of heart with God is the source of all other peace : 1. In homes ; 2. In churches ; 3. In nations. — By Ciirist we have obtained access to the grace of justification. In this are comprised : 1. A strong consolation (we are no more rejected from God's face ; the door is opened ; we can come in); 2. A serious admonition (wc should not disre- gard this access, but make use of it ; and 3. We should often come with all our burdens.). — In what should and can we glory as Christians ? 1. In the future glory which God shall give ; 2. But also in the tribulations which He sends us (vers. 2-5) ; 3. In God Himself as our God. — Why should we, as Christians, glory also in tribulations ? Because we know : 1. That tribulation worketh patience (endur- ance) ; 2. Patience (endurance) worketh experience- (strictly, approval) ; comp. 2 Cor. ii. 9 ; ix. 13 ;■ James i. 3) ; 3. Experience (approval) worketh hope ; and 4. Hope maketh not ashamed (vers. 2-5). — Why does Christian hope prevent shame? 1. Because it is not a false hope ; but, 2. It has its ground in the love of God, wluch is shed abroad in- our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us (ver. 5). — In what respect does God commend (prove)' His love toward us ? 1. In Christ's dying at the appointed time for us ; 2. But still more in His- dyiiig for us when we were yet sinners (vers. 6-8). — It is noble to die for a benefactor, but it is divine to die for evil-doers (ver. 7). — The importance of Christ's life and death for men : 1. His death bring* reconciliation when we are enemies ; 2. His life brings salvation when we are reconciled (vers. 9-11). — Clu'ist's life our salvation (ver. 10). — Salvation by- the life of Christ is necessary for Christians of the- present time. — Let us speak of Christ's death, bub let us also speak continually of His life (ver. 10). Luther : One has experience when he has been well tempted, and can therefore speak of it as hav- ing been in it himself (ver. 4). — God is our God, and we are His people, and we have all good things in common from Him and with Him, in all confidence (ver. 11). Starke : Ver. 2. Future glory is connected with justification by an indissoluble chain ; chap. viii. 18, 30, 32. — Ver. 2. Nothing can make so happy aa the hope of the incoriuptible, undefiled, and imper- ishable inheritance which is reserved in heaven ; 1 Peter i. 4. — Ver. 5. He who has the Holy Spirit, is the only one who is certain that God's love is shed abroad in his heart. — Ver. 10. The death of Christ is the principal agency toward our reconciliation ; but His resurrection is the seal and assurance that we are truly reconciled to God. — Ver. 10. Christ's resurrection is the ark of life and royal city of our salvation. — Ver. 11. No one can glory in God but he who has Christ ; for He is the way by which we come to the enjoyment of God ; John xiv. 6. He, 170 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS, therefore, who does not have Him, is alec without God in the world , Eph. ii. 12. — Hkoinokr : To be certain of the forgiveness of sin, is the fountain of all joy and consolation (ver. 1). — Beware of the hypocrite's hope, which destroys ! The believer clings to God's love in Christ as an anclior to the rock ; Heb. vi. 19. Would to God we understood this well ! If we did, nothing could grieve and fflict us (ver. 5). — A Cliriscian must regard the suf- fering of Christ not only as a mirror of wrath, but also as a mirror of love (ver. 8). — What a glory! God's child, and in good favor with Him ! How in- comprehensible, how glorious, and how blessed ! (ver. 11). — Cramer: If we are justified by faith, we have free access to God, so that we do not need any patron or saint to prepare the way for us (ver. 2). — The suffering of Cliristians is their glory ; for they suffer without guilt, and for Christ's glory (ver. 8). — OsiANDER : Tlie cross and tribulation make us humble and patient ; they are therefore the most precious gems and best ornament of the children of God (ver. ^).—Nova BM. Tub. : Oh, how blessed is the cross ! Though it pain the flesh, it brings eternal good. We are better purified by it, than gold is by fire ; our hope is strengthened, and the love of God is shed abroad in the heart (ver. 5). — Love is rare among men, yet there are remarkable examples of some who have given up their lives for their fellow-citizens and brethren. But there is no comparison between all this and the love of Christ (ver. 7). — Who would not love in return a God so full of love, and prefer fellowship with Him to that of all others ? (ver. 10). Gerlach : Justification by faith not only gives free access to God's grace at the present time, but it also confers the certainty of future glory (ver. 2). — In justification the believer receives the first germ of the whole new life. But since the germ grows into a tree, and the tree ever becomes more firmly rooted amid storms, all that the believer had at the beginning is renewed and established at every new stage of trial (ver. 6). — Since God has performed for sinners and enemies the greatest service. He will cer- tainly not leave unfinished for the recuncihd and r>r/hteous the much smaller remaining part of His work (ver. 9). — The Apostle begins to indicate here what he treats more at length in chap. vi. : Faith so tr.insposes us into Christ, that His life, death, resur- rection, and glory, become ours. Each circumstance from His history becomes the history of mankind believing in Him, as well as of each individual be- liever (ver. 10). Lisco : The saving fruits of the righteousness acquired by faitli in Jesus Christ (vers. 1-11). — The fruit of this righteousness (vers. 1-5). — The most certain sign of the love of God toward us just men- tioned, is the redemption made by Christ (vers. 6-8). —The blessed result of this love of God and Christ, is the certain hope of the eternal duration of this love, and, finally, of our attainment of glory (vers. 9-11). Hkubner: Paul here strikes the note of the triumphal song of the justified. Listen : His read- ero should participate in his joy ; we are reconciled, wc are pardoned. — Without justification, there is no joy, no love, no happiness in life ; without it, noth- ing can make us happy — nc'ther nature, nor the love of men (ver. 1). — Grace is prepared, and offered to all. Many accept it, but all do not remain steadfast |ver. 2). — He on whom God has placed many hur- iens, has much entrusted to him ; God has made him an object of distinction. Therefore, tlie highet and more joyous the Christian's spirit is in suffer, ing, the greater will be the increase of his joy and strength in conflict (ver. 3). — What influence does suffering exert on the Christian ? (ver. 3). — The sacred hope of the Christian maketh not ashamed ; it is holy in its object and ground. — Faith in the love of God is the ground of all hope (ver. 5). — The helplessness of the unimproved heart is followed by the saddest results of sin ; just as severe sickness is succeeded by weakness (ver. 6). — God's holy love of His enemies (ver. 8). — The greatest misery of a created being, is, to bear the wrath of God (ver. 9). — God's love of us is a prevenient love (ver. 10).— Christ's life is the ground of our salvation (ver. 10). Bksser : The salvation of those who are justi- fied by faith. It is: 1. A present salvation ; 2. Also a future one (vers. 1-11). — Tribuhition is praisewor- thy, because the evergreen of hope is sprinkled with the tears of tribulation (vers. 3-5). — God's wr.ith ia not human ; God is love, and Divine wrath is con- nected with the love which takes no pleasure in the death of the sinner, but is ah ardent, compassionate desire to save the sinner. Eecouciliation is the exe- cution of this loving determination of God by means of the atonement through the death of His Son (ver. lb). — God unites in the Church with pardoned sin- ners — who have faith in Jesus, and glory in God aa their God — more intimately and gloriously than in Paradise with innocent man (ver. 11). ScHLEiKRMACHER, ou vers. 7, 8 : The death of Christ is the higliest glorification of God's love toward us. 1. God imposed death on our Redeemer as the most perfect proof of obedience ; 2. Many are jus- tified by ti.is obedience. Spener : 1. The fruits of justification : (a.) Peace ; (b.) Access to God ; (c.) The joy of future hope; (d.) Victory in tribulation and the cross; (e.) The gift of the Holy Ghost. 2. The causes of justification (vers. 1-11). [BoKKiTT : One grace generates and begets an- other ; graces have a generation one from another, though tliey all have one generation from the Spirit of God. — He that does not seek reconcihation with God, is an enemy of his soul ; and he that rejoices not in that reconciliation, is an enemy to his own comfort. — Logan (sermon on Jesus Christ JJgirig for Sinners, Rom. v. 7, 8) : The greatest trial and exercise of virtue is when an innocent man submits to the imputation of a crime, that others may be free from the punisliment. This Christ did. He was be- trayed like an impostor by one of His own disciples, apprehended like a robber by a band of soldiers, led like a malefactor through the streets of Jerusalem, nailed like a murderer to the accursed tree, and, in the sight of all Israel, died the death of a traitor and a slave, that he might atone for the real guilt of men. — Com p. Comm. : He that puts himself to the charge of purchasing our salvation, will not decline the trouble of applying it. — Hodge : As the love of God in the gift of His Son, and the love of Christ in dying for us, are the peculiar characteristics of the gospel, no one can be a true Christian on whom these truths do not exert a governing influence.— Annot. Paragraph Bible : God establishes His love toward man by demonstration ; it is a love worthy of Himself, and which none but Himself can feel. Comp. CiiRTSOSTOM, De Gloria in Tribulatioru ibus ; Archbishop Usher, Four Sermons, Workn, vol. xiii. 226 ; John Howe, Influence of Hope, Works, vol. vi. 277 ; Bishop Manx, The .Love of God tht CHAPTER V. 12-VIII. 39. 171 Motive to Man's Salvation, Sermons, vol. i. 115 ; Jonathan Edwards, Men naturally Ood's Enemies, Works, vol. ii. 130. — On the Section vers. 1-5, see Nath. Hornks, 'The Bracelet of Pearl of Sanc/ifi/- ing Graces, Works, 207 ; Richard Baxter, Short Meditations, Works, vol. xviii. 503 ; C. Simeon Benefits arising from a Justifying Faith, Worki^ vol. XV. 116; J. Morgan, The Hidden Life Bia- closed in Bom. v. 1-5, an Exposition, Belfast, 18Bi —J. F. H.] SECOND DIVISION. BIN AND GRACE IN THEIR SECOND ANTITHESIS (AS IN THEIR SECOND POTENCY): ACCORDING TO THEIR NATURAL EFFECTS IN HUMAN NATURE, AND IN NATURE IN GENERAL. THE SINFUL CORRUPTION OF THE WORLD, PROCEEDING FROM ADAM, AND INHERITED IN COMMON BY ALL MEN, AND THE LIFE OF CHRIST AS THl INWARD LIVING PRINCIPLE OF THE NEW BIRTH TO NEW LIFE IN INDIVIDUAL BELIEVERS, IN ALL MANKIND, AND IN THE WHOLE CREATED WORLD. (THE PRINCIPLE OF DEATH IN SIN, AND THE PRINCIPLE OF THE NEW LIFE; AS WELL AS THE GLORIFICATION OF THE NEW LIFE, AND OF ALL NATURE, IN RIGHTEOUSNESS.) Chapters V. 12-Vin. 39. First Section. — Adam^s sin as the poweiful principle of death, and God^s grace in Christ as the mon powerful principle of the new life in the nature of individual men, and in mankind collectively. The law as the d,rect medium of the complete manifestation of sin for the indirect mediation of tht completed and glorious revelation of grace. Chap. V. 12-21. 12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin ; and so death ' passed upon all men, for that [f(jp' qj, i. «., on the ground that, because] 13 all have [omit have] sinned : ( [omit parenthesis] * For until the law sin was in the world : but sin is not injputed when there is no lavv [where the law is not]. 14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned [those that sinned not] ' after the similitude [likeness] of Adam's trans- gression, who is the figure [a type] of him that was to come [the coming one, 16 t. c, the second Adam]. But not as the offence [fall, transgression],* so also is the free gift : for if through the offence [transgression] of [the] one [the] many be dead [died], much more [did] * the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man [the gift by the grace of the one man], Jesus Christ, hath 16 abounded [abound] imto [the] many. And not as it was [omu it teas! by [the] one that sinned," so [omu so] is the gift : for the judgment was [came] by [f?, of] one {fall) to condemnation, but the free gift is {came] of many offences [falls, transgressions] unto justification [piy-aiana^ sentence of acqiiittal, 17 righteous decree, or, righteous act]. For if by one man's offence [by one trans- gression, or, by the transgression of the one] ' death reigned by [through the] one ; much more they which [who] receive [the] abundance of [the] grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by [the] one, Jesus Christ.) 18 \omit parenthesis.] Therefore, as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation ; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift cam,6 upon all men unto justification of life [So then, as through the transgression of one, or, one transgression, it came upon all men to condemnation ; so also through the dr/.(a(afiatog, righteous act of one, or, one righteous act, it came 19 upon all men unto justification of life].* For as by one man's disobedience [through the disobedience of the one man] [the] many were made [consti- tuted] ' sinners, so [also, ovzcog xai] by the obedience of [the] one shall [the] iO many be made [constituted] righteous. Moreover the law entered [came in besides]," that the offence [transgression] might abound [multiply]. But where 172 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMAXS. 21 sill abounded [multiplied], grace did much more [exceedingly]'' abound: That as sin hath [omit hath] reigned unto [fV, in] death, even so [so also] might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by [through] Jesus Christ our Lord. TEXTUAL. 1 Ver. 12. — ['O davaroc {Rfc.) is found in N. B. C. K. L , some versions and fathers ; is adopted by Iiachmaniif Meyor, ■Wordsworth, and Laiige. Tischendorf ;ind Alford omit it, on the authority of D. E. F. G., and many fatliera jLlf ird con^i'lers it a marginal k'oss, to define the subject of SiriKdev. But the external authority for it is sufficient to o 'ercome the doul)t arising fiom the variation in jjosilion found in some (luthorities, especially as the oniission may tave readily arisen from the transcriber's mistaking -ous, which precedes, for the close of the word he was about to Write: -tos (Meyer). 2 Ver. 13. — [Oil the parenthesis of the E. V. This is to be omitted ; for, although it might be a help to the ordinary reader, it is inserted on the view that ver. 18 is strictly resumptive, which is not in accordance with Lange's exe- gesis. Even were it the case, vers. 13-17 comprise an argument so important, that it does not deserve the subordination implied in a parenthesis. The E. V. is frequently unfortunate in this regard : e. g., Gal. i. 7, where the very theme of the Epistle is put in parenthesis. 3 Ver. 1 4. — [Some cur.sives and fathers omit fiiq. This probably arose from a wish to make this verse correspond with ver. 12, the meaning of which was misunderstood. There is i o question as to the correctness of its insertion. — Tho pluperfect of the E. V. is to be changed to the simple past : sinned, as a more correct rendering of the aorist participle. The other emendations are not absolutely neccBsary, but are offered as more literal, and perhaps preferable fur other reasons. ■• Ver. 15.— [The word TropawTio/ia, occurring five times in this section, is rendered offence in the E. V. ; by the Amer. Bible Union : trfupusB. Both are etymologically correct, but more modem usage compels us to reject offence. Trespass would be pn-ferable to Irantgiession, on the ground that Tropa^acrts (ver. 14) must also be rendered by the latter word ; yet trespass has at present a technical meaning, which is legal, transgression being more theological. The very slight distinction between TrapdjSacris and irapdnTuixa is sufficiently implied in the clauses where the words occur. Lange renders the latter : Suinlenfall, fall, to distinguish it from 7rapa/3ao-is, Uebertreluvy, ver. 14. » Ver. 15.— [The aorist, i-nepicavaev, is to be rendered p.aTos, and 8i' efos Si(caiuj/iaTO! ; leav ng tho subjects indefinite (instead of retaining the italicized glosses of the E. V.). Lange supplies Trapan-rwpa and fii/caiuipa. On all the points, see Exig. Notes. » Ver. 19.— [So Amer. Bible Union. Lange : herausgesielll. The rendering given above is correct ; any dogmatic questions that arise cannot attect this. 1* Ver. 20.— [ IlapeisijASe V, only Gal. ii. 4; there, in matam partem. The above rendering is literal and exact. Lange translates : came in. hetw.en. See Exeg. Notes. " Ver. 20.- -[Alford suggests that words compounded with vnip have a sj'pcr/a/i'w, not a comparative firce,— Fhl ihange ir the fl.-st verb in English is to indicate that two ditferent words .are used in Greek.— E,.] [The follow ng is the Greek text of this section, in parallelistic arrangement, from Forbes : 12. 13. 14. 18. 19. 90. SI. r'Hcrrep 6i' evbs avBpiairov r) aixapjia eis tov Kocryiov e[)crarTa$ iirl tu 6/xoiupari T^s Trapapd^tati 'A3^* 0^ OS e OavdTio, ovTws KoX T) >(lo ami Bound discusBion. Comp. the same author's B.'bl. Thmlngie des N. T., vol. ii. pp. 2.iC- iiii.) Rich. Rothe (died 1SG8), JV.M' r VasiicJi 'unr AusUyiuig da- Paulin. SIHIe Horn. V. 12-21, Wittonborg, 1836. (A maBterpiece of ijxegetical acuteiiess and finesse.) I. Ciia. K. V. HoFMANN, I),r Scliriflhiweix, 2d od., Nurd- liupeu, 1857, vol. i. pp. 024-541. Jul. MOllf.k, Chris:l. Lihie van dn- Silndi', vol. ii. p. 407 ff., 472 if., 3d Gcnn. ed., 1849. II. KWALD, Jdiim und Chrislus, Horn. V. 12-21, in his Johiirwhir fur bibl. Wisscuscko//, ii. p. 106 ff. Timo- thy l>wioiir (of Yale College), Princeton Exrycxis. A Re- view nf Dr. £/odg,''s Commiintary on Romans V. 12-19, in the i\iw Englnndrr for July, 1868, pp. 551-603. (Polemical against nodue). A. Stoltinq, Beilrdgi' zur Exe.gese di r PdUr- lin. Bricfr, Gott., 1869, pp. 1-12. Rbicht;, Olshauskn, Tho- I,UCK, Stuart, Hodok, and Forbks, are most full, though widely divergent, in the exposition of this passage, which many regard as the most difficult in the whole Bible. — P. 8.] [Introductory Remarks. — This section is diffi- cult in proportion to its deptii, grandeur, and world- historical comprehensiveness. Only a mind of the very highest order — to say nothing of inspiration — could conceive such vast tliougiits, and compress them within so few words. The beginning, the mid- dle, and the end of history, are here brought to- gether in their representative moral powers and prin- ciples. Paul deals with religious tiuths and facts, which are much broader and deeper tlian the after- thoughts of our logic and theology, and cannot be squeezed into the narrow limits of particular schools and s(!hemes. The exegesis of this part of the Ro- mans began in earnest with Augustine, in his contest with the Pelagian heresy ; it was resumed in the Reformation period, and carried further, philologi- cally and doctrinaliy, in the present century, but is by no means exhausted, and puts exegetical skill again and again to the severest test. Every line bears the marks of theological controversy about original sin, free agency, imputation, limited atone- ment, universal salvation, and other questions which will occupy the human mind to the end of the world. The section is not a mere episode, but a progress in the argument from the doctrine of justification to the broader doctrine of a life-union of the believer with Christ, which prepares the way for the doctrine of sanctification, in chap, vi., and glorification, in chap. viii. Like a skilful physician, the Apostle goes not only to the root and fountain-head of the evil,* but also to the root and fountain head of the cure. In bold antithetical contrasts, and on the basis of a vital, organic union of humanity, both in the order of fallen nature and the order of redeeming grace, he presents the history of the fall by the first, and the redemption by the second Adam. Adam and Christ are the two representative heads of the whole race, the one the natural, the other the supernatural ; from the one, the power of sin and the power of death have proceeded upon all men through their particii)a- tion in his fall ; from the other, righteousness and life have come upon all on condition of faith, or a living apprehension of Christ. But the gain by the redemp- tion greatly surpasses the loss by the ftiU. The main stress lies on the idea of life in its progress from Christ to the believer. The same parallelism be- ♦ [As Chrysostom remarks in the beginning of his tenth Homily on Romans, Open), torn. ix. p. 519, ed. Montfaucon, but lie" omits the positive part, which is more important. — P 8.1 tween the first and second Adam, but with exclusive reference to the contrast of death and the resurreo tion, occurs in 1 Cor. xv. 21, 22, 46-48, whicj should be kept in view. It is impossible to under stand this section from the standj)oint of a mechaniU cal and atonjistic conception of humanity and of sin, such as Pelagianisni and cognate systems maintain. On the surface, all things apjjear separate and iso lated ; in tiie hidden roots, they are united. It il characteristic of all deep thinking, to go back to principles and general ideas. Paul evidently views the human race as an organic unit. Adam and Christ sustain to it a central and universal relation, similar to that which the fountain sustains to the river, or the root to the tree and its branches. Adam was not merely an individual, but the natu- ral head of the human fanjily, and his transgression was not an isolated act, but affected the whole race wiiich sprung from his loins ; just as the character of the tree will determine the character of its branches and fruits. So it is with Christ. He calls himself emphatically the (not a) Son of Man, the miiversal, normal, absolute Man, the representative head of regenerate humanity, which is from heaven, heavenly, as Adam's fallen humanity is " of the earth, earthy" (1 Cor. xv. 47, 48). Both were tried and tempted by the devil, the one in the garden of innocence, the other in the desert ; but the one suc- cumbed, and dragged his posterity into the ruin of the fall ; while the other conquered, and became the author of righteousness and life to all who embrace Him. Christ has gained far more for us than Adam lost — namely, eternal reunion with God, in tb.e place of the temporary union of untried innocence. The resurrection of humanity in Christ is the glorious solution of the dark tragedy of the disastrous fall of humanity in Adam. In view of the greater merit of Christ and the paradise in heaven, we may rev- erently and thankfully rejoice in the guilt of Adam and the loss of his paradise on earth — always, of course, detesting the blasphemous maxim : Let ua do evil, that good may come. It is God's infinite wisdom and mercy alone which overrule the wrath of man for His own glory. — P. S.] Meyer inscribes this section: The drawing of a parallel between salvation in Christ and the ruin produced by Adam. But this does not do justice to the context of the section. Tholuck adopts Bengel'a view : " liespicit totam tractationem superiorem, ex qua hcec infert apostolus, nou tarn digressionem fa- cicns quam rcgressum de peccato et de justiiia.^* [Bengel continues : " In imitation of Paul's method, we should treat first of actual sin (chaps, i.-iii.), and then go back to the source in which sin originated." Philippi also regards this section as a comparative or contrastive retrospect and comprehensive conclu- sion ; De Wette and Rothe as an episode. — P. S.] We differ from all these, and refer to our division of the Epistle, and to the superscription here. 1. The principle of sin and death become imma- nent (hereditary) in humanity (vers. 12-14). 2. The opposing principle of the gift of grace and of the new life made immanent (spiritually he- reditary) in humanity (vers. 15-19). 3. The cooperation of the law for the finished revelation of sin and for the communication of the finished revelation of the grace of justification (vers. 20, 21). 1. Arrangement of the first paragraph, vers. 12-14. (a.) Sin and death, proceeding from Adam'l 174 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. nagd^juinq upon all, under the form of an ethical appropriation by all (ver. 12). (6.) Death as revealer of the improperly appre- hended sin, from Adam to Moses, or to the law (not by the law, vers. 13, 14). 2. The second paragraph, vers. 15-19. (rt.) The actually manifested contrast in the effects of the two principles, (aa.) The contrast be- tween the natural and actual effects, according to their quantitative extension to persons ; or the con- trast hi its personal relation (ver. 15). (bb.) The contrast between the positive effects, according to the qualitative intensity of judgment and justifica- tion ; or, the contrast in its essential relation (ver. 16). (6). The contrast in the potential and prospec- tive effects of the two principles, {aa.) The con- trast between the enslavemment of all personal life by impersonal (merely personified) death, and the future glory of the pardoned, immortal, and reign- ing personalities in the new life (ver. 17, at the same time a proof for ver. 16). (66.) The contrast in all its ideal magnitude : One condemnation came upon all men, because of the power of the fall of one man ; so, by the righteousness of one, can all men attain to the justification of life (that is, not merely of faith, ver. 18). (c.) The contrast in the final effects disclosed by the gospel. By the effect of one man's disobedience, the many are represented in the light of the gospel as sinners exposed to the judgment ; finally, by the obedience of one, the many are to be represented as righteous in the judgment (ver. 19). 3. Third paragraph, vers. 20-21. The law is designed to effect directly the devel- oping process of sin to historical completion, in order to effect indirectly that revelation of grace which far preponderates over the development of sin (vers. 20, 21). First Paraqeaph (vers. 12-14). TTie principle of sin and death in humanity. Ver. 12. Wherefore [Jtti toZto]. Riick- ert, KoUner [Tholuck, Reiche, Stuart], &c., refer Sm roT'To to the entire discussion from chap. i. 17 ;* Rothe, to the previous section, v. 1-11, which he claims to treat of holiness ; Tholuck, to vers. 11, 10, 9, &c. ; Meyer, to ver. 11 alone. f We refer it merely to ikdfio/c(v in the previous verse. The verb Xafifidvfuv does not denote, in the New Testa- ment, a passive reception, but an ethical, religious, and moral appropriation; for example, John i. 12. And this is here the point of comparison between vers. 11 and 12. Because this point has been overlooked, an in- credible amount of vexation has been produced in * [So also Bengel : " Sia tovto refers to the whole of Ihe preceding discussion, from which the Apostle draws these conclusions, herein making not so much a dijjrre^^.sion fts a retrogression." Hedge : " The wherrjhre is to be taken B.S illative, or marking an inference from the ivholi' of the previous p:ii-t of the Epistle, and especially from the pre- ceding verses." — P. S.] t [Meyer: " darum, we.il wir ndmlich durch Clirislum die KaraAAayij und die Giwisshfil dus iwigi'n Mils emp- fangen habrn, ver. 11." But Meyer regards ver. 11 as the Siunmary of the whole preceding doctrine of justification »nd salvation. Philippi likewise refers Sia toOto to ver. »1 in such a way that it looks at the same time to the whole deduction from i. I7-v. 11. This to us seems to be the most tetisfactory connection. — P. S.] reference to the presumed anacoluthon, or uvavT» 7T6<)orov [an incomplete sentence, a protasis withoul an apodosis]. Conjectures [coneerning the construe* tion or the apodosis corresponding to wam^, likt as] : 1. According to Calvin, Tholuck, Philippi, and others, the conclusion is indicated in the worda oi; iffTt Ti'iTTot; ToT' /( t/./.orToi,-, ver. 14. [Meyer also regards the clause : " who is a type of the future (Adam)," as a substitute for the apodosis, wliich waa swept away by the current of ideas in vers. 13 and 14.— P. S.] 2. According to Riickert, Fritzsche, and De Wette [?], Paul dropped the comparison between Adam and Christ after enumerating the points of analogy, because their dissimilarity occurred to hia mind (ver. 15). De Wette translates ver. 12 : There- fore (is it) as by one man, &c. According to Origen, Bengel [Rothe], and others, the Apostle designedly suppresses the conclusion. [Bengel says simply : '■'■Apodosis, variata oratione, latet in seq." is con- cealed in what follows. But Rothe holds that Paul designedly omitted the apodosis, to prevent the ille- gitimate doctrinal inference of a universal salvation. See below.— P. S.] 3. According to Grotius, [E. V., Stuart, Barnes, Hodge], &c., vers. 13-17 are parenthetical ; and the conclusion follows in ver. 18. [Against this con- struction may be urged, with Meyer, the unexampled length and importance of the supposed parenthesis, and that ver. 18 is not so much a reassumption as a recapitulation. — P. S.] 4. According to Clericus, Wolf, and others, the conclusion is already in ver. 12, and begins with y.ai omux; [as if this could be synonymous with oi'To) y.al, so also, which is impossible. — P. S.] ; according to Erasmus, Beza, and others, it begins with y.al ()i,d [which makes Ji-a TorTo sui)erfluous, and sets aside the comparison between Adam and Christ.— P. S.] 5. The proper view is the one defended by Koppe, in harmony with [Cocceius] Eisner, and others. The apodosis begins as a comparative statement with (I'mnirfj, since e/.d^ofitv v.araX/.ayrjv liv nlnov is brought over from ver. 11. [In other words, oKjTifQ introduces the .iicond member of the comparison, while the Jirsf must be supplied fuom ver. 11 in this way : Therefore (we received and appropriated the reconciliation through Christ in the same manner) aa by one man sin entered into the world, &c. — P. S.] * * [This construction is favored, upon the whole, by De Wette (who, however, objects to it: '^E'gdnzt man ttji" KaTaAAa7i)»' eKd^onev Si' outoD, .w wiss miin nicht rechi, ivismmi mil ilir Vngleichimg nvfnign soil"), Umbreit, Theo. Schott, "Wordsworth, Alfoi-d, Jowett, Cony- beare and Ilowson. I subjoin Alford's note in full, though I Tia. n<; rov y.od/iov tiiifji.Otv y.al (Via T/Jt,- dficc(iTiaq 6 Odvaroi;, y.ai or- Xti}i; 6 Octvaroi; tii; tiolvtch; a.vO(iot7Toi% <)i.7j/.0tv, h^ ^ ndvrti; »y/«a(jTor. It is very plain that, without the conception of ).aii[]dvft,v, the whole ot tiie fol- lowing antitheses would appear as a scries of blind natural necessities ; see Book of Wisdom i. 1(5 ; ii. 24, and the exjdauation of tV <<>, which follows below. Kotlie thinks that tiie Apostle's supposed anacoluthon was even premeditated — according to the idea of Origen — in order to conceal the doctrine of the apocatastasis which might be deduced irorn the protasis. See thereon Tholuck, p. 215. [I cannot bring my mind to adopt Dr. Lange's construction, which evades a grammatical difficulty only to give room for a more serious logical one, and mars the beauty and completeness of the analogy. It seems to me that the most natural solution of the diflSculty is either (1.) to take wam-^j elliptically : " This is therefore like the case when ; " comp. Matt. XXV. 14 : inantQ ydq dr!)()i»7T0Q, as a man going abroad, where wanni neither has, nor neces- sarily requires, a corresponding o('r(i)i; (see Tcxhial Note in the Amer. edition of Lange on Matthew, p. 442); Gal. iii. 6; 1 Tim. i. 3, where y.aOioc, and Mark xiii. 34, where mi; is used elliptically ; or (2.) to assume an mtentional anacoluthon (comp. Winer, Gramm., p. 527 ff., on the two kinds of anacolutha, in- voluntary and intentional). I prefer the latter solu- tion. The complete antithesis would read thus : "As {o)(j7rf()) by one man (Adam) sin {Ij diiaiirla) en- tered into the world, and death (6 Odvaroc) through Bin, and thus death extended (duj/.Ofv) to all men, inasmuch as all sinned {tj/iaQTov) : so also (oi'toi,- xat) h/ one man, Jesus Christ, righteousiiess {Ij At- xaioffrri;) entered into the world, atid life (tj ui)//) through righteousness, and thus life shall extend [fiuhvdiTni) to all men, inasmuch as (on condition that) all shall believe (niaTft'cFovrai,)" We might also supply, after the second " righteousness " : " in order that all, being justified by faith, may be tavedy Rothe (p._61) supplies as the last clause of ".he apodosis : tV '';> jrdvrt^ di/.aioi y.araffraOtjaov- Ta^ ; Philippi : tqi w ndvrf(; di,y.ai,t<){j i^aovrai,. But these are unessential differences. The great points of comparison are: (1.) Sin and death, as a prin- ciple and power, proceeding from Adam ; righteous- ness and life, as a counteracting and conquering principle and power, proceeding from Christ, upon the whole human race. (2.) Death passing upon all men by participation in the sin of Adam ; life pass- ing upon all men by participation in the righteous- ness of Christ. But the analogy is not absolute ; for (1.) the participation in Adam's sin is universal in fact, while the participation in the righteousness a Htf.ake.ni'ng than a stren^theniner the analogy. "We have examples for this use of ixiirep in Matt. xxv. 14, and of icaflui?; Gal. iii. 6."— P. S.I * [This objection was made hy Do "Wette, from whom Tholuck, p. 215, quotes. Meyer calls this explanation Ulotrical, because the universality of Adam's corruption, which is the prominent idea in ver. 12, has no correspond- ing parallel in the protasis which is supplied from the pre- siding Terse. — P. S.l of Christ, though this righteousness is equally uni- versal in power and intention, is limited in tact t<\ believers ; in other words, all are sinners, but not all are believers ; all men are one with Adam, but not all are one with Christ (hence the past tense KaiKTrdOtjijav in the case of the d/Lta(jro)^.oi, but the future /.ararrraf) t'jrTovrai^ in the case of the i)ixaioi, ver. 19). (2.) What Christ gained for us is far greater {no/J.oi fid).).ov inf(jl(jaiv(Tiv, ver. 16, comp. rijv nuiiaatiav ili; ydQvTot;, ver. 17, and i'7it(Jtnn)ia(jtvatv ij /ce^ut,-, ver. 20) than what was lost by Adam. Paul, therefore, in the rush of ideas suggested by the parallel, intentionally suspends the apodosis, to make first some explanatory and qualify- ing statements in regard to the difference in the mode, extent, and quality of the effects proceeding respec- tively from Adam and Christ, and then, after hinting at the second member of the comparison, at the closo of ver. 14, he brings out the double parallel of siuii- larity and dissimilarity in full as a conclusion, vers. 18, 19, and 21. The whole section, as Meyer justly remarks, bears the impress of the most studied and acute premeditation ; and this must apply also to the apparent grammatical irregularity in the absence of the apodosis. The Apostle might have spared the comnjentators a great deal of trouble, if he had, according to the ordinary rules of composition, first stated the comparison in full, and then given the ex- jilanations and qualifications ; but such granmiatical difficulties in the Scriptures are generally overruled for a profounder investigation and elucidaton of the sense. — P. S.] As by one man [oi^-Trf^ dv' kvbq dv&Qo'i- 77-0 1', "by one man, single and singular in his posi- tion, and so presented as the rvnot; rov /'i^J.ovto^, the type of the one greater man ; " Webster and Wilkinson. — P. S.] Kot by his guilt (Meyer) [d^ evoi; dfia(jT>j(rarToc, ver. 16], which would by no means suit the antithesis : Christ. But rather by one man, as the human principle, as the historical cause.* The one man is Adam, as representative of the first human pair in their unity. The sin of Eve (Sir. xxv. 24 ; 2 Cor. xi. 3 ; 1 Tim. ii. 14) did not fully decide concerning the future of the human race, because Adam was the head. It was with hifl sin that the sin of Eve was consummated as the guilt of the first man [and acquired its full power over posterity]. Therefore Adam is meant as the head, as the principle, and not merely with regard to propagation. [Webster and Wilkinson : "Adam, not Eve, is charged with the primal sin, as he re- ceived the command direct from God, and his sin was without excuse. Here, only the guilt of the transgression is in view ; in 2 Cor. xi. 3 ; 1 Tim. ii 14, the mode, instrument, and process." Bengel assigns three reasons for the omission of Eve : (1.) Adam had received the commandment ; (2.) He was not only the head of his race, but also of Eve ; (3.) if Adam had not obeyed his wife, one only would have sinned. The omission of the mention of Satan, the primary cause of sin (comp. Gen. iii. ; John viii. 44 ; 2 Cor. xi. 3), he accounts for because (1.) Satan is opposed to God, Adam to Christ, whose economy of grace is here described ; (2.) Satan has nothing to do with the grace of Christ. It should be re- * [And also the efficient cause in the same sense in whicL Christ is the efficient cause of righteousness and life. Ac- cording to the Pelagian and Unitarian theory, Adam waj merely the occasion : he sinned, imd set a bad example to others, as Christ set a good example. Here Christ sinks t« the position of a mere teacher.— P. S.] 176 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE PtOMANS. membered, also, as Forbes remarks, that in Gen- esis the very name of Adain, with tlie article pre- fixed ( -Txn , the Adam, the man), is treated as an appellative more than as a proper name, and that, in Gen. i. 27, it includes generically both sexes : " So God created Ailam (in Hebrew) in his own image, in tlie image of (iod created lie him : male and female created he them ; " eoinp. Gen. v. 1, 2. It was man, or human nature which we have in common with him, that was put on trial in Adam. Paul draws a parallel between Adam and Christ, but never between Eve and Mary. The latter analogy is an unjustiliable inference, first hinted at by Irenseus, and more fully developed by Roman Catholic divines, and became a fruitful source of Mariolatry, which virtually makes the hunjan mother of Clirist the fountain of the Christian salvation. — P. S.] Sin. [ iy afiaQTia. The definite article be- fore ct/ia^Ti'a, and also before .9araToc, denotes Bin and deatli as a power or principle which controls man and reveals itself in hereditary corruption, and in every form of actual sin. So tj ()t.y.ai,o(Tvvtj, which corresponds to it as its opposite, vers. 17, 21, is not a single righteous act, but the power of good as a state and as a workirig principle. Sin is personified as a fearful tyrant, who acquired universal dominion ovw the human race ; he " reigns in deatli," ver. 21 ; " works death in us," vii. 18 ; " lords it over ua," vi. 14 ; " works all manner of concupiscence," vii. 8 ; " deceives and slays" the sinner, vii. 11, &c. In all these cases the force of the definite article can De rendered in German, but in English, on the con- trary, the absence of tlie article has the force of gen- eralizing, not so much, as far as I know, from any rule of grammar, as from usage, and perhaps tor euphony's sake. — P. S.] In what sense ? Explana- tions : 1. Original sin, or natural depravity (Augus- tine, Calvin); 2. Sinfulness [Sundhajtigke4, habitun peccaiidi], (Koppe, Olshausen [also Webster and Wilkinson : sinfulness personified ; a sinful dispo- sition, our sinful nature ; vi. 12, 14] ) ; 3. ActUiil sin (Limborch, Fritzsche) ; 4. Sin as a ruling power (Meyer [De Wette], Tholuck), or better as a prin- ciple (Rothe). Philippi, on the contrary, under- stands sin as the unity of propensity and deed, as also Aret., Schmid, J. Miiller. But sin, as an in- dividual deed, is expressed by ttp w, &c. It is tlierefore the principial or fundamental power {die princihielle 3/achi) of sin as the mother of death (James i. 15). [The Apo.stle very carefully, through- out this whole section, distinguishes between a/iast- Ti'a, as the generic idea, and na()dflaaL(; and TtaQanrtofia, as a concrete act, the transgression of a law; compare vers. 12, 13, 20, 21, with 15, 16, 17, 18. By the nctfjcinrdifia of Adam the afiaorla entered into the human world, and this a.iiai)Tia again became the fruitful mother of the innumerable nauanrMftoiTa of his descendants. — P. S.] Entered into the Tvorld. [a\- rov y.ocr/iov fiaTjlHtv ; comp. the Book of Wisdom ii. 24 (in ex- planation of Gen. iii.) : qOovm ()i,ap6).ov Sdvaroi; Ha/j/.Ofv fK,' Tov x6(T/iov. Sin tli;Tj).f)i, came in; death <)i,Tj}.O^f, pasaed throtigh ; the Mosaic law na- ()H'i;Tj/.Of (ver. 20), came in bi/ the side, or between.^ Limborch : a popular personification. On the ex- cessive personification of sin and death in Fritzsche, Bee Tholuck, p. 219. — Into the world. Not merely into the luman world (Meyer), or into juman nature (Rothj ) but as ruin and destructive power in the wide sphere of humanity in general (see Rom. viii. 20). It is fJain that the human sphere of the world alon- is assumed here (according to Abelard : in hant partem tnutidi xc. terrcnain, in. qua homines habi ant), as Tholuck remarks, from tlie fict that, " according to the Apostle's conviction, evil was already hi existence in another world." [Corap. 1 Cor. xi. 3 ; Gen. iii. ; Book of Wisdom ii. 24 ; John viii. 44. — P. S.] The expression indicates not only the tendency to sin and death in human nature (Rothe), but also the propagation of sin (Augustine), because the xorriiot; is a conjunchr)^t''in der tiunde ein nencs Sterben." Without sin, there would be neither spiritual nor physical death. This was sym. bolically intimated by the tree of life in paradise, of wiiich fallen man was forbidden to eat, " lest he live for ever." Adam, if he had not sinned, might have passed to higher forms of life, but without a riolenl separation of body and soul, without being " un. clothed," but by being " clotiied upon " (2 Cor. v. 2-4), or, in the beautiful figure of the Rabbins, " by a kiss of the Almighty." Death and l/fe are vei-y deep and comprehensive terms in the Scriptures, and the connection must decide whether all, or which of the meanings are exclusively or jirominently kept in view. There are three kinds of death : (1.) The death of the soul (1 John iii. 14 ; comp. Matt, viii 22 ; Eph. ii. 1), which is properly the first and im- mediate effect of sin, since sin is a separation of the soul from God, the fountain of life ; (2.) The death of the bodi/ (Rom. v. 10 ; Matt. xx. 18 ; xxvi. 66 John xi. 4," 13 ; Acts xiii. 28 ; Phil. i. 20 ; ii. 8), which is the culmination and end of all physical malady and evil in this world; (3.) the eernal death of soul and body (Rom. i. 32 ; '2 Cor. iii, 16 ; vii. 10; James v. 20 ; 1 John v. 16), which is also called the second death, 6 Odraroi; 6 dfvr.'-QO'; (in the Apoc. ii. 11 ; xx. 6, 14; xxi. 8). In our pas- sage (as also Rom. vii. 21, 23 ; vii. 5 ; 2 Tim. i. 10), 6 Odvaro^ is as comprehensive as >} d/ia(>Tla, its cause, and as ^ Joi*/, its opposite. It embraces all physical and mornl evil, as the penal consequence of sin ; it is death temporal and spiritual, viewed as one united power and principle ruling over the hu- man race. That the Apostle meant physical deith, is clear from ver. 14, and from his unmistakable ref * [Gen. ii. 17, where death is meTitioned for the first, time, speaks rather for a more comprehensive riew, se* helow, sub (3) ; since the first parents were thie:ttened with the penalty of death to he inflicted on the very day of tbeil fall, and long hefure •heiit physical death.— P. S.] CHAPTER V. 12-21. 171 erence to Gen. ii. 17 ; iii. 3, 19 ; while from vers. 17, 18, 21, we may infer that lie had also in mind spiritual and eternal death, as the eontrast to eternal life, uiiij auiii'ioc, in whieli tiie Seriptnre idea of lift cuiHiinat(;s, as tlie idea of deo!h culminates in etc 'nal damnition. Ewald has an excellent note on this passage {Die Sendsclirciben. d o'l no t'c, upoii all men, is equivalent to the pi'eceding y.6(Tiioi:, but differs from it " as the concrete parts from the abstract whole ; and ai, differs from flc^i/taOai, as the going from house to house differs from entering a town;" De Wette. Luther well translates diTjX- 5 f r : ist durchgedrungei), passed through and per- vaded, as a destructive and desolating power. — P. S.] In such a manner that [solcherweise dass, or, on the ground that; better: inasmuch £s]. i(p' 01 (=; ((fi o'li;) is as much as ini toi'toi oti. It can therefore mean here ; on the ground that ; du'iTi,, propter ea quod (Meyer) ; under the suppo- sition that (Baur) ; on condition that (Rothe) ; in conformity wirri it, that. Tholuck [p. 234] favors the meaning because, with reference to 2 Cor. v. 4 ; Pliil. iii 12 ; yet he makes the because relative, and translates, so far as they all. [It is almost unanimously agreed now, that E(p *), for which the Greeks generally use the plural, eip' ofi,- {pro/terea quod), has here the sense of a conjunction, and that oil Oilo/nv iy.<)t'aaaOai, d'/.X tTHrViliaaaOcii, \ Phil. iii. 12: e.(fi w y.al y.arf^.t'jqO r^v). It is not SO much a causal, as a qualifying and conditioning con- junction (a relative or modified on.), which in our passage shows more clearly the connection of death witli sin. It implies that a moral participation of all men in the sin of Adam is the medium or cause of their death ; just as faith on our part is the moral condition of our participation in Christ's life. It is unfavorable to the doctrine of a gratuitous imputa- tion. The legal act of imputation is not arbitrary and unconditioned, but rests on a moral ground and an objective reality. — P. S.] [All sinned (not, have sinned, E. V.), ndv- Tfc; tjfia(jrov. The aor. II. presents the sinning of all as a historical fact, or a momentary action of the past ; comp. dntOavov, in ver. 15; ol ndrrfq dniSavov, 2 Cor. v. 14; and especially Rom. iii. 23, where precisely the same phrase occurs: "all sinned," as in one act (in Adam), and consequently became sinners (comp. TextuaJ Note ^, p. 128). Some take the aorist in the sense of the perfect i^fioi^ttj- y.acTo = I'f/' dfici^Tiav ilai ; but the aorist was clio. sen with reference to the past event of Adam's fall, which was at the same time virtually the fall of the human race as represented by liini, and germinally contained in him.* \4f(a()rdvfi,v cann()t mean : to be, or, to become sinful (= M//ct(^Tw/6i' flvai, or, yly- vKjOav), although this is the necessary result of the first siuful act ; still less, to suffer the punisliment of sin ; but it means real, actual sinning. In what sense ? The choice hi the following list lies between interpretations (4) and (5), which are both equally consistent with tlio natural gi'ainmatical sense of t'j/iatjrov ; while the other interpretations are more or less strained or false. — P. S.] Explanations of ndvrfi; ij/ia^Tov: (1.) In quo, namely, in Adam, the whole nie« * [Winer, p. 259, denies that the aorist is ever confoun 1- ed with the perfect. Even in Luke i. 1 (e7rexfip'?a^ai') ; John xvii. 4 (iSo^acra, eTeXeiiaaa) ; Phil. iii. 12 (eAa/3o>'), and simi- lar cases, the action is related simply as pat-t-ed. Tlie per- fect expresses the past action in its relation to the present, so that the resull of the action is ptnerally, though not necessarily (see Kriiger, 151, and Winer, 254), supioccd t« he continued. — P. S.] 178 TUE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE RoMAJT?. Binn<>d. (Origon,* Chrj'yostom.f Theopliyhu't, Augus- tine :j: [Bfza, Bronz, Bucer, Ksto, Erasmus Sciiiiiid], and, as probably " the last among Protestant exposi- tors" [Vj, Benjamin Carpzov, 175S). § Tlie suppo- sition liere is the organic unity of the human race. (2 ) Because all have become sinful [viiid/i sunt, peccalons facti s««/] — that is, sinners by original fin (Calviu, Melanelithon, Flatt). | (8.) Metonymically, because all have been pun- * [Origen taught a pcntonal fall of all men in a pre- txistml state. In Ep. ad Rum. (0pp. iv. p. 546) : " Si L'vi in luiiihis Abnihx fui.'se p rhihilur, mullo nuigis luimcnis in lumhis eraiit AdiB, cum udhw; rs.^el in purudiso, ei nmnr.s humi- fies cum ipso vd in ipsi expiiUi sunt de parailiso." — P. S.l + [Clirysostom (Homilia ^.) explains niihei' loo-sely and BUpcrficially : ti 6e co-ti;', e./)' cJ rraire? r]fxapTOv ; exeiVou ireo'diTO?, koX oi firj ^ayovrei air'o toO (uAou yeyovairii' i( tKfivov Trai'Tes 0vr)Toi, i e., "by the lull of Adnm, even those who [lid not eat of the forbidden tiee have all become mortal." This is all he says, and then he passes imme- diately to ver. 13.— P. S. 1 X tAugnstine, following the wrong tran.slation of the Vulgate — in qui — used ti.is jmssage as an argument for the doctrine of origin:il sin and the fall of the human race in Adam. De pccc. mer. et rem. iii. 7 : "In Ad'imo nmnes 'unc picaiverunf, qunndo in ejus nalura, ilia insita vi qua ens gignere pnlerat, udhuc (mines ille unus faerunt." C'lnira Jul. V. 12 : " Faerunl omnes raliane seminis in lumhis Adtmi qunndo damna'ns es'. . . . quenunlmodum fuei-unl I.naeli m 171 luwbis AbiaUse, quand-i decimutus est," llcb. vii. 9, 10. Ve C^vilale Dei, 1. xii'. c. 14 : " Omnes enim fumus in illo uiiii, qufiiido iimnes farinus ille tiniis, qui per J'eminnm lap- sus est in peceiitiim, . . . Nundum era! nobis siiigiUalim ereata et dislrihufa forma, in qua siiiguH viveremux ; sid jam nalura eral seminalis, ex qun prnpigaremur ;" i. <-., "the f>rm in which we were to live, as individuals, had not yet been created and assigned to us, but that seminal nature was already m existence, from which we were to be propagated." From this last passage it is evident that Augustine did uot teach, as he is sometimes misrepresent- ed, a personal and ennscious coexistence and coagency of Adam's posterity in Adam Mnd his fall (which involves the contr:idiciion i.f an existence before existence), but s mply a p'llinlnil or germinal coexisten''e. The genus homo or human nature which he represf-nted, was not a recoptac e of millions of human beings, but a single, simple es-ence, which became manifold by propagation. As in the doc- trine of the Trinity and of the Person of Christ we distin- guish tstreen hatureand person, so also here. Our hu- man nature was on trial in Adam, and fell in him ; conse- quently we all fell as partaking of that nature, ani share in his guilt. This seems to me to be Augustine's view. Eslius, one of the best Roman Cattiolic commentators, gives the same interpretation on the has s of the Vulgate translation : '^ Dirnii'iir mnnes peccassc in Adam, tanquam in principio el radice l' w. For e' <^ = iv w, as in ver. 14; Mark ii. 4 ; Luke v. 25 ; e>/ tw 'A6a/i., 1 Cor. xv. 22.— P. S.) II [Melanchthon : " O.nms habenl peccalum, scilicel prav- italem prnpiiga'am et realnm." Calvin: " JVempe, inquit, fuoniam (rmiies jjeccavimus, Pcrro istnd pevcare est corrup- tot esse et viliosos. Ilia enim na'ural s pravilas, quam e matris utero offer Imus, tame' si non ita cilo fructus suos edit, peccalum tamen est coram Doniin", et ejus ultiot em merelnr. Atque hoc est pecentuni, quod vacant natnrnli-," According to Calvin, then the inherent, hereditary depravity derived from Adam is the retison why all die. This interpretation is not only uiigrammatical. since aixapravnv cannot mean, to becomr corrupt, but it also vitiates the analogy between Adam and Christ; — I*. S.] ished as sinners, or are in'^olved in the consequences of the fall (Chry.sosiou.,''' Urotitis,f Arminians and Socinians [and Calvinists o' the Federal sciiool, Mao knight, Hodge] ).% (4.) Some supply evoi\ Adamo peccante after t(/' 01 (Ptireus, and otliers; Bong<;l, Olshausen, &c.). Philippi, p. 17S ; " We 'iiu.-t mentallv supply e» '-^<)«/(, or more specifically, Adaino piccante, tc ijiicioTov." Meyer, likewise, " betau.^e al' sinned wlien Adam sinned, in and with him t " 1 Cor kt * ['E^ fKfCvov jrai'Tes 6vyiToC. — P. S.] t [Grotius: /)as//(ni( /»ict. to suffer pui]is,hl,'>ei.t. Hi ap- peals to Gen. xxxi. .56; .lob vi. 24; 1 Kings i. '2i, fo.-th;sm'> tonyiny of the elfect. t^' (L ho tnkts = ihrongi w^olj. Th<< same interpretatio i is more fully defended by 'Wi;itby, as Arrainiaii, on Rom. v. 19. -P. S.] t [Meyer calls this interpretation sh.'^er ungranimatical arbitrariness {nur sprachw drige WilC-iH^r) ; for jj/iapToi- means, Iheij sinned, and nothing else (p. 2v>4). Nevertheless, it is defended by Dr. Uodgo, of Princeton, even in the revised edition of his Comm. (p. 236 ft'.), with a d-^giee of dogmatie positi veness, as if there could be no doubt abou^ it. He holdt that all men sinned in Adam merely in a npre.'eidalive or pu- talive, uot in any real sense, and th;it rnj.apToy has the passive meaning : they became legally guilty, and were regarded and trealed as s nners on account of Adam's si ■ by xirtiie of a natural and federal relationship between Adam and hia posterity. "The only possihle way," he says, "in which all men can be said to have sinned in Adam, is putatively." [This is begging the question.] "His act, for some good and proper reason [?], was regarded as their ,act, just as the act of an agent is regarded as the act of his principal, or the act of a representative as that of his con-titue its" [although in this case they never elected liim]. " The act (if the one legally binds the oth'r. It is, in the eye . t law and justice, their act." But ajxapTdveiv never has this meaning of putative sinning. It is obviously impossible ii. a/xiipTrjaavTai, vor. 14. In the parallel passage, iii. 23, Hod4e himself understands it of actual sinning ("all have sinniil, and are sinners, or, all sinned," p. 140). The two solitary pa.ssages which he qtiotes from the Septuagint (Gen. xliii. 9, comii. xiiv. 32 : f/^apTijKws e(ro/.»ai, and 1 Kinss i. 21: eao/xeda . . . a/u-apruiAoc, /. ' ., 11 the view ot the reigning prince), are neither ptira'iel nor decisive, as has often been shown by older commentators. When HodL;e confidently appeals to the authority of "theolo- gians nf every grade and class of doctrine, Calvinists, Arminians, Lutherans, and Rationalists," in favor of his interpret.ition (p. '211), he is greatly mistaken. I know of no ri'cent commentator of note, German or Englisti, who agrees with him on this point. Phi'ippi and Words- worth, whom he quotes o i his side, hold the realistic Au- gustinian view (which Ilodu'e repudiates as mmsense. Sea next foot-note.) So does even Robert Haldane, the most rigorous Scotch Oalvinistic commentator on the Romans, who says (p. 211 of the Amer. edition) : "Adam's sin was as truly the sin of every one of Lis 7 >sterity, as if it had been personally committed by him. It is" imly in this way that all could be involved in its consequence. Be- sides, it is only in this light that it is illusti-ative of jus- tification by Christ. Believers truly die with Christ, and pay the debt in Him by their union or oneness with Iliin. It belongs not to us to inquire how these things can be. We receive them on the testimony of God." . . . " If God deals with men as siin.ers 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 dinners on any account which did not make them truly sinners." The metonymi- cal interpretation arose from opposition to the doctrine of original sin. Hodge tries to defend the dogma of impu- tation on a Socinian exege.->iB. But by rejeetin,' the real- istic theory of a participation of Adam's posteiily in hia fall, he loses the basis for a just imputation, and resolves it into a legal fiction. Only a sinful and caiilty being can be the suliject of the displeasure of a righteous and holy God. We do not object to the doctrine of imputation in itself, but simply to that form of it which iy-nores or denies the vital nature of our connection with Adim and with Christ, as plainly taught in this whole section. Adam is our natural representative de fa-to as well as de jure. He is the root of humanity, and his fall aftected the stock, and every branch, by the inherent law of or- ganic life-union. " Not Adam's transgression outwardly reckoned, but Adam's sinfulness and mortality inwardly communicated or imparted," are the chef points of com- parison, and placed in contrast with the righteousness and life of Christ, with whom we hold even a mo'-i intimatf life-union by faith, than with Adam by sin.— P. iJ CUAPTER V. 12-21. V,9 82 [iv XM^ j4' gigen sag' M'ljer, das Wiirt passe nidil auf die gesitmligl hahenibn Kinder," children whu have sinned, instead of " in Bi Ireff der vieten Millionen noch nicht gesundigt habmden K" (see Meyer, p. 203). Tiie printer's omission of ni.di mcht, not yet, makes sad work here with the argument, and caused some per- plexity to the trai slator. Flatt, and others, raised the same objection to the above interpretation, viz., that it would include infants among actual sinners, which is not true. Hodge, p. 232 f., urges five arguments agaiu^-t it.— P. S.] t [So also Hodge : " It would make the Apostle teach that, as all men die because they personally sin, so all men live because they are personally and inherently rigbteous. This is contrary not only to this whole pas.sao-,-, but to all Paul's teaching, and to the whole gcspel." — if. S.. ]80 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO TDE ROMANS. takes place by ftiith, so in the actual sharing in tlie guilt of Adam dues an ethical participation by un- belief take place (see Rom. xi. 32). It is a great error to imagine that, in order to avoid the Pelagian heresy, we must cast our.-iclvcs into the arms of the Augr.stiiiian tiicory, and do violence to the plain text. Tliis is done by Beza, Calvin, Philippi, and Meyer, tiiough by each in a different way. (6.) Tlie fi/' (I) is understood as causa finalia : XJiTO which, viz., death or punishment; thus mak- i (g i/Ti to mark the end, or consequence, to wliich g nniug came. (Venema, Sclnnid, Glockler, and Ewald [formerly, not now].)* Meyer observes, that this tehc view implies a necessary, thougli not intended effect, in accordance with the idea of fate. (7.) Hofmann : Under whose (death's) dominion they sinned. Tliis view miglit be better supported by the thought in Heb. ii. 15, than by the language in Hel). ix. 15. Yet it is untenable.! (8.) Thomasius : Under which relation (namely, that .^in and death came into the world by one man) all sinned, &c. It is evident tliat the most of these explanations are attempts, from doctrinal considerations, to avoid the idea of individual personal guilt, and by this means a relation, clear enough in itself, is obscured. The Apostle's assumption is the priority of sin in reliition to death, and the causal connection of the two. Accordingly, the meaning is, since sin came into the world as an al)normal ethical principle, death came into the woi'ld with it as tlie correspond- ing abnormal physiological principle. Therefore the propagation oi the abnormal principle of death pre- supposes the preceding propagation of the principle of sin in the real sinning of all. It arises from the unity and solidarity of humanity, that certain cases — for example, children born dead, or dying [and idiots] — do not here come into consideration. The definition of the fi;' m, wider the presupposition that, is therefore the most natural. In view of the death of innocent children, we may assume different degrees of guilt and death : " in proportion as," or " in what measure, they all sinned." Ver. 13. For until the law, &c. ['-■//()t y«o V 6 /I oil, — i. e., from Adam to the Mosaic legislation, comp. ver. 14 — a /t a (> r i a ij v i v y. 6 (Til 01. Alf'ord : "How, consistently with chap. iv. 15, could all men sin, before the law? This is now explained." But iv. 15 is too far off, and treats of naoa^lacii,!;, not of aiia()Tia. ycti) connects this verse with navrtq i'l/iaiiTov, ver. 12. — P. S.] The Apostle did not need to show first that the death of * [In his Xihihuhrr der hib'. Wi.iaenscJinfl, ii. p. 171, Ewald explained, with the rejection of the second 6 6dva- To? : " ni'd xii zii alien Menachcn darchdiung das, worauf- HIN ALLE sCxDiGTEN," " ;ind SO parsed upon all men lluil unto which all sinned." viz., death, which in Gen, ii. 17 is decreed as the punishment of sin, so that whoKoover sins, sins unto death — ;. e., must die. But subsequently, in his Comm. on the I'au ino Epistles (1857, p. 327), Ewald trans- lated : " soFEUN alli' yuiiiliglfn,''^ " imixmiich as all sinned," and remarks (in a foot-note on p. 373) that this meaninp: of i^' If (as a conjunction) is similar to the preceding oi/Tws, showinj^ death to be the consequence of sin. — P. S.] t [lloi'miinn, Schrif.hi'weix, vol. i. p. .'j'29, 2d cd., takes ewi as a proposition of t me, and refers tcu to (he preceding tavaToi; (wliich is wanting in several MS8.) in the sense : \ci di.-isen Vi)rhand:"nsei>i, i. e., during llie ragn of dea'h all ainnul. He quotes, in support, Heb. ix. 15 : at ejtI tj} rpiMiTf) BiaBrjicji 7rapa/3i(T6is. But this simple and almo^t tri\'ial idea could have been expressed much more clearly. The interpretation nf Thomasius (sub 8) resembles that of Hofmann, exi'ept that he takes (Riiekert, De Wette, Neander, and otliers; and formerly Diodorus, Calvin, and others). CaloT. has correctly concluded : Since they were punished because of sin, they must have had some law.* But sin ia not imputed [reckoned, in Reck- iiung gehracht, '^-ifiafiria niiy. t /. / o ;'f Trai]. (Philem. ver. 18 {text, rec."] is the only other place).f Meyer explains : Is brought to account by God for punishment [icird in R chnung gebrachf, viz., zur Bestrafung']. His citirtion (cha[). iv. 15) is sufficient to correct him. It is with the ro/'oc, and the con- sciousness of it, that the aiicn>ria (which is also transgression, according to the measure of the natu- ral conscience) first receives the impressed charac- ter of conscious transgression, nct(jd^]aini;, and there- with the oiiyj is first finished by the xaT{(>yc'(^>- T // (T « v T « <)• f. 71 1 r m o /< o t «> >* a t i t »/ ( n a (1 a. p It (7 Ktx; ^^ filing Over thosp who, unlikf Adam, were not guilty of a definite nn^ajiaai-ii, oi transgression of a definite command nf God. The y.ai may be understood as antithetical to Adam, oi better, as making a distinction between sinners ia the general sen.se, and the wicked transgressors of special laws of God, who effect, as it were, new falif of man, such as Cain, Ham, &c. Athanasius ex plains thus: those who committed no mortal sin Grotius : no gross sins ; Crell, and others : trans- grossed no law to which the threat of death was attached. But the measure is simply the /ra^a- /jafTtc, as in chap. iv. 15. The elder expositors have included here also the children [and idiots] sub- jected " by Adam's sin to the poena danini ; " Brenz makes this the exclusive reference [against which Calvin correctly protests. Children are in- cluded, but not specially intended. — P. S.] Indi- rectly, this verse refers definitely to the connection between sin and death in the period from Adam to Moses, as has been also perceived by De Wette, Friizsche, and Baur, but is opposed in vain by Mejer. Who is a type of the coining one \i. f., the second Adam, (is trrri^v ti'ttoi,' Tor fii?./.ov To<,']. Koppe conies in positive conflict with the context, when he takes /it}./.ovTOi; as neuter : of that which should come. The first Adam is the type of the second (1 Cor. xv. 45), and is the principle of the first eon, as Christ is the principle of the second, but according to the antagonism between the first and second eons. See Meyer, for similar expressions of the Rabbis ; e. (/ , Adarrnis postveinus est Alcssias. According to Tholuck, the deduction of the rnti- tiietical side should now have followed, but Paul was contented with the oq lari, &c., in order to indicate the other half. But in our view the antithesis lias already preceded (vers. 9-11), and is fully elaborated in chap, vi.-viii., after the transitional individual an- titheses that now follow. [This important clause points back to ver. 12, and indicates the apodosis, the other member of tho comparison, Tvnoi;, from jvmm, to strike, to wound, has a variety of significations which are closely related, and yet may seem in some cases con- tradictory (comp. the German Abbild, Urbild, Vor- bild). It means (1.) a blow ; (2.) a print, or im- pression, made by a blow (John xx. 25, rov rvnov Twv T^/iiir) ; (3.) a form, image, figure {Bild, Ab- bild ; so often in the classics, and in Acts vii. 43, toil: Ti'77or(;, oi'c tnoitjauTi: niion/.vrciv aiToic) ; (4.) a pattern, model (Muster, Modell, Urbild ; Rom. vi. 17, ri'nov <)i.i)ax7ji; ; Acts vii. 44 ; Heb. viii. 5 ; in the two last passages, however, rvnoi; is taken by some in the sense of copy ; comp. Bleek on Heb. viii. 5, vol. iii. p. 439 f.) ; (5.) a moral model or examide for imitation {Vorbild ; 2 Thess. iii. 9, \vn iai'Toli; rvnov (iiofifv i/iiv n(; rb iit,)ttiafi(xt i,f,u<: ; 1 Tim. iv. 12 ; Tit. ii. 7 ; Phil. iii. 17 ; 1 Pet V. 3) ; (6.) a historical prefiguration ( Vorbild), or type in the usual theological sense — i. e., a person of thing designed to foreshadow or symbolize a future person or thing which is the a)'T/T)';To<,' [Urbild) \ so 1 Cor. X. (5, 11, and here. Generally the New Testament antitype is related to the Old Testament type, as the substance is to the shadow, or the and is equivalent to oiJ.olit><: rrj irapapda-ei. It must not b€ connected with i^aaikevuev (('hrysostom and Bengel), bat; as IS usually done, with /jt») ajxapTriaavTai. — P. S.l 182 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. original to the copy.* But Christ corresponds to Adam in tlie antithetical sense : Adam being the author of death for all, Christ the autlior of life for a'.L The prefiguralive feature in Adam was his cen- tral and universal significance for the whole race, which was fulfilled in a much higher sense and with opposite effect in Christ, the absolute and perfect Man. In 1 Cor. xv. 45, Paul likewise contrasts o nfjutroi; \-l()d,u and 6 trr/aroi; '^-tdci/i, witii refer- ence, no doubt, to tlie Rabbinical theology, in which the Messiah is called ",i"inxn cnxn , Adarnus pos- tre»ius, in opposition to "|iirx";!n onxn .f To this personal contrast corresponds the contrast of two epoclis and orders of things, 6 aiiov oiru<; and 6 aiiov fiD.hitv. Tlie cmainrj one {roii fi eXXovroq) is not to be referred to the second coming of Christ (Fritzsche, De Wette), but to the first. Paul speaks from the historical standpoint of the first Adam. — P. S.] SECoNr Paragraph (verb. 15-19). Tholuck remarks on the train of thought to ver, 19 : In the explanations of the elder expositors there is no attempt to trace the connection and prog- ress of thought to ver. 19 ; many of the later ones doubt altogether the possibility of such a proof. Morns says: "Z'e kac dissimilitudine agitur jam per quinque versus ita, ut quinquus idem illud repetatur, vnrialis quuJnn verbis^ at re mnnente xeiiiper eadem^ Kiillner and Riickert similarly ; against whom, see Rothe. According to Tholuck, the train of thought is as follows; In ver. 15, the quantitative "more" on the side of the operation proceeding from Christ ; in vers. 16, 17, t!ie qtialitaive "more;" in vers. 18, 19, resumption of tlie parallel, including the dif- ferences pointed out. Our construction is given above. [Vers. 15-17 occupy an intermediate position between ver. 12 and vers. 18 and 19 ; and as vers. 13 and 14 are explanatory of tlie reign of death in connection witii sin, asserted in ver. 12, so vers. 15-17 are qualifying, by stating as briefly and terse- ly as possible the disparity in tlie parallel between Adam and Christ, in favor of the superabounding grace of Christ. Tlie admiiable symmetrical adjust- ment of parts will aiipear from the following ar- rangement of the text in literal translation : 15, Eut not as the fall (n-opaTTTto/Aa) so also (i ) the grane (\api.» i; it a i to /dfjia fi a]. We hold that the Apostle, in his brief and pregnant expressions in vers. 16 and 16, lays down axioms in negative construction. Meyer translates ver. 15: "Not as the trespass, so also the gilt of grace;" and quite unintelligibly ver. 16: " And not as by one who sinned is the gift." The 7Tai>dnr(i)iia is sroc, the /df^nfT/ict fvoi;. As prin- ciples which enter humanity and permeate it, Adam and Christ are alike ; but in the nature of their effects they constitute contrasts. — Rosenmiiller, and others, would neutralize the negation by regarding 01'/. as interrogative ; but tliis, as Meyer remarks, is forbidden by the contrasting character of the con- tents. We see no reason for taking the na(>dnT»tfia, contrary to its most natural signification, as " offence ;" it denotes, witli sin, a fall, an ethical defeat ; yea, the fall as a medium of the fall, just as the /diiirr/ia of Christ is not merely /«(>ic, but a medium of the ■/d.()i<;. \^llai)dmii)iia, from naitanimM, to fall, is not a sinful state or condition, but a concrete actual sin, the transgression of tlie law {7Tc.()(xfia(Ti-i;), the act of disobedience (;r«(;«zoc/) by which Adam fell; conip. vers. 16, 18, 19, and Book of Wisdom X. 1, where it is likewise used of the fall, to /«• Qvafta. and ij •/d()t.<; mean nearly the- same as ij fi«)(>f(x in this verse, to (Hdi^rj/ta, ver. 16, ()'t/.«('fi>(7tq LiDijc, ver. 18, but they empiiaslze the idea that sal- vation is of free grace. Forbes ingeniously refers TO /n'i()tjna, the Gift of righteousness, anti- thetically to Sin, which it removes and supersedes ; the one is mainly the grace that justifies, the other the grace that sanctifies. See his note, p. 243 f.— P. S.] Tholuck thinks that we should expect iJ*- y.aUofia [ii:7ny.ofj would correspond better. — P. S.] * [Or, "by the one that sinned," if we read aixap-rijaath To«. See Tcx:uiil Noh- «, and Excg. Nnte below.— P. S.] t [T

yer, the reading : ev ivl napaimoiiaTi, " bv one fall." See Ti'xijtdl Note. ', and Exeg. No'.es below.— P."S.] X [According to Lange's translation : Aber mcht stehl'l (mi Si„n lier <;Uirl,i„acs«i,ik'U A, lams ui'd Chrisll) wit mit djm S&U' drvfiill alsn mil dfm Giindeiigilt (rltr fm'nnliclirn C.tihn^abe, ('Aruf.d). Alford translates : liul not (in all joints) as tht act c," liansgression, so also is the gift qf grace, — P. S.] CHAPTER V. 12-21. 183 instead of /aoiafia. But the question here is con- cerning the niUuial or iii.storicai ett'ects of both prin- ciples, wliile i'l ver. It) they are presented in their relation to law and right. For if through the fall of the one the many died ['£1. yao nji roT> (mark the definite article, wliich is overloolced in the E. V.) kvoq na()a nrMftarv ol nokloi {the many, i. c, the immense multitude of all the descendants of the one Adam) aTtiOavov. — P. S.]. The n is not hypothetical. There is an oxymoron in the ex- pression : one fell^ many died (not only the one). Why 01 Tto/J.oi, and not noivin;, as in vers. 12 and 18 ? Meyer : " The antithesis to the fit; is made more sensible md stronger by marking the totality as multitude ; for ^ponsunt aliqua esae omnia, qnce non SMM< »«M/ta,' Augustine. Grotius wrongly : \fere omnes, excepto EnocJto^ which is contradicted by vers. 12 and 18." \^a.ni[) avov must betaken in the same coniprehensive sense as fidvaroc; in ver. 12; see p. 176. It is parallel to ijfia(jrov, ver. 12, and must be explained accordingly ; see p. 177. — P. S.] Much more. Is noXXm fiakkov the ex- pression of a logical piu.s, that is, of an inference ( [Chrysostom, nolho yui) tovto (v).oyilnt(j(n'^ Theodorct, Philippi [Fritzsche, Hodge, Stuart], and others), or of a real pins, a comparison (Calvin [Bengel *], Rothe [Alford : much more abundant], &c.). [In other words, does noD.iT) f(a)J.ov express a stronger degree of evidence, as an arffumcrduin a minorc ad viajus (here a pejori ad meliitx), as it cer- tainly does vers. 9 and 10, or a higher degree of efficacy? — P. S.] Meyer: This latter is contrary to ver. 17. This is so far right as death, viewed abso- lutely, is an absolute negation, and a real pluti [a higher degree of abundance] is comprised already in 7Tf(ii.a(7fitvv. But the logical plus involves also a real plits. [So also Tholuck.] It rests on the following antitheses: 1. The tli; introduced here without name, and opposite to him, 6 Ohot; and o Hi; avOyinno^ Jif(jn'% XfJiGToc ; 2. TTa^jciTirdiiia, and the opposite tj x^il''^ ""^ '} *5"'4'f« tv /(x(ti,Ti, ; 3. i7Tt()'ianr(i\iiara ; be- sides, we have diojjti/ia, y.^l/ia, y.ard/.^io/ia, ydfjiO' fia, and <)t,)iaiii)/ia. Tholuck observes: "Those Codd. present frequently a corrupted text, one con. formed to the Latin translation ; and as u/iaiiTtjiuai' Tot; is not even sufficiently attested by external authorities, it must give way to the more difficult reading." But, at first appearance, ()i irix, diiH^nij' navToTi/rj/ici. — P. S.]. This [which? iirri, or iytnro?-^ P. S.] is sufficient with d/id(tr)jfict, which means more than a/iw^jWa, and expresses the idea of guilt [Verschuldung) in connection with sin (see Maik iii. 28 ; Luke iv. 12, &c.). For the judgment (passes) from one (trans- gression) to condemnation [to fiiv ydi> y.til' f< a ii f 1' 6 c f (' <; y.aTdy.(Ji/(a. Lange supplies, from the preceding clause, u/i uqt /j /i aro^ aftei ti froc, and translates it, in both cases, Verschui dung. — P. S.] Here, too, the vei-b is wanting Meyer supplies tytvfTo, or resulted; De Wette turned out. But the verb is indicated by the u<; Hi; requires tlie idea of progress, development. (Foi the antithesis, Rothe has attempted to substitute an untenable division, to /»«i', to f)f). The y.(ti/ia might mean judgment in general (Meyer), § if it did not refer to diid(jr>gta, by which it becomes judg- ment to punishment. Explanations : 7-eatus (Beza, ♦ [The Codex Sinaiticus, in the octavo edition of Tisch- endorf (lS6f), reads d^tapnjo-ai'To?, but this is a currcction by a secon'i or third h:ind. In the original MS. and the larpe uncial edition tl e word is broken by the linr, and reads, AMAPTH-T02, which may be a niistrikc for afiopnj- juaT05, as well as for a/xapTriaavTo^. The absence :f the article before ecos is in favoi- of Lanae's preference for a.liapTriiJ.aTOi, for Paul always uses the article when evdf refers to a person, except in ver. ]2, where it is fiist intro- duced ;'nd connected with avBpuynov. — P. S.] t [Meyer : "£.v ix! damit nirhl so, ah ivcnn cs ii' ivhs o/ompTijo-. (wi'e flrr Tod ilurrh Adam) venirancht %vdrr (c.-,- isl velmehr « ttoAAuv ■napaimaixaTiov ziim Sixaiwixa g vjor- drii)." Meyer emphasizes the diu' and via iiy, ;iEd siipplie« simply 6(7Ti after Suip-qixa. Similar is the explanation oj Kothe, Ewald, Van HenL'el.— P. S.] t [So also Al'ord, who supplii 8 to yevoiievov : " And vm as (that which took jilace) by one llial sinned, so is the gift." -P. S.] § [Meyer: "to Koifia gam allgrmmi : das UrtTieit, Welches God als Rchkr fdlll. D; nn lu was fur eivem Un tlieil diises in coiin-rln nn tji sclih'gin isl, sagi erst doA foi gende tis KoTdfcptna." — P. S.l (84 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. Cocceius) ; the threatened punisliinent, Gen. ii. 17 (Fritzsche, Tholuck) ; the sentenee of punishment pronounced on Adam and his posterity, Gen. iii. 19 (Reiche, Baumgarten-Crusius [Ruckert, De Wette], and others). — From one (transgression). We simply supply tlie foregoing u,«ai-T//,/(«, and trans- late the iiicurring of (jnilt, because the deed is con- nected with its consequence, and tiie word is con- nected with the idea of guilt, tj fro,- is talccn by Meyer as masculine. — 'I'o condemnation [ft\- xaTa>t^)t/( «]. Explanations of the antitliesis to xpt)(«, to /.aTa/.iivtia: 1. Fritzsche: The threat of punishment, (Jen. ii., and the sentence of punish- ment, Gen. iii. ; similarly Tholuck. Reiche : the Bentence of [)unisiin]ent pronounced ,on Adam, and that on liis posterity. 2. Riickert : the Divine sen- tence and its result, deatli, was declared against the one wlio had sinned ; but from him tlie sentence has extended to all. Plainly, tlie xj<("/(«, as the princi- ple of judgment, proceeds from tlie one aiiduTijua of Adam, and passes through gradations of judg- ment to the y.ard/.iivna, which is completed ideally as the sentenee of fitness for condemnation by tiie appearance of the gospel, and will be actually com- pleted as real judgment to condemnation at the end of the world. Yet the antithesis here does not pass beyond the ideal judgment to condenniation. The antithesis of the one Adam and of the whole race, whicli Baumgarten-Crusius finds here, is only pre- sumed ; the numerical antithesis, rather, in this pas- sage is tV diidortjua, no)J.d naiicciTiitiiaTa. It must be borne in mind that the expression /la^a- Tirio/iaTa is much stronger than nncifJTtlnaTci, and denotes the gradations of the one fall by many new apostasies (see the Second Conmiandment). But the gift of graoe (passes) from many falls (lapses) unto the good of justification [to de / d(j 1,(7 /I ct ex 7To)./.(~iv n a<) n jTrin a d- Tiitv fli; d I'it.aiii) ft a, which Lange translates : das Gnadengut aber geht von vielen Sande.nfdlleii. aaa fort bis zum RechtfertigHngsrpd ; or, in the Exeg. Kotex, Bechffertu/iiiigsmittel. — P. S.]. The personal charisma is Christ himself (see ver. 15), the source of all special gifts of grace (see Titus ii. 11). — Prom many falls, or lapses {S'aiidenfdLleii.). Caused by them. As the /.(Jtiia of Adam has become the uni- versal /.ardy.ouia of humanity, so has the -/diiLfjiia of Christ grown to be the universal and absolute (hxaii'iua. As Christ, as the Risen One, has come forth fx I'fzfjw)', so has He, as the Just One, the personal d'lxauo/ia, come forth from the place of the TTaoaTTTii'inara. It was thus with the advent of Christ on earth ; but the finished rra(jd7TTciiia was the same crucifixion by which He was perfected as (!it./.aii<)/ia. Tiie usual explanations rest mostly on a misconception. Meyer : Since God declared sin- ners righteous. Augustine : Quia non .solum illiid unum solvit, quod originaliter trahtur, sed ciiaiii OHce in uno quoque hoinine motu pi o'iriw voluntatis addantur. I3etter De Wette [and Alford] : " The gift of grace became, by occasion of many trans- gressions, justification." Pliilippi : " From out of niany lapses." The ihxalioua is neither the con- di'.ion of righteousness (that would be (iixaintri'vrj ; Luther, Tholuck, and others), nor the declaration of God by which He tixecutes the tiixaiincni; (Meyer), but, according to Riickert an), Stuart, Alford, and Hodge, take f)yxal«iiia in ver. 16 as equivalent to (ly^alntriii;. (Allbrd : " As xardx^ifia is a sentence of condem- nation, so di-xaiiiifia will be a sentenee of acquittal. This, in fact, amounts to /*«i9 6€ KaX SiKaiiOfxa. KaActTai 8i ^aWov 6t.KaL0TTpdyTqua to KOivhy, £t.Kaiuip.a 6e to erra- v6p6u)ix.a Toil aSiKTi ijLaTOi . "An unjust act difler( from llie unjust (iniusliee in tiie abstract), and so docs a jusl ad from the (abstj-act) jujt : for a t "ling [:• unjust eitha CHAPTER V. 12-21. 185 Ter. 18 (where, however, the word is opposed to na- ouTiTM/ia, not, as in ver. 16, to >taTax(>i/im, being tl>e opposite of na^jd- nto)fia, and essentially equivalent to ii/ray.ot'j, in ver. 19, must denote the rv/hteous deed, i. e., the perfect obedience of Christ, and is so understood by Calvin, Este, Grotius, and Bcngel. As it is not likely that the same word should be used in one breath in two difterent senses, it is safe to explain <)iy.cciiii/gunr/sspnic/i), Ewald {Oerechtsupmch), Van Ilengel, Umbreit, who give i", in both verses the meaning, righteous decree. I (4Uote, in addition, the exeellent note of Bengel on dy/.aiiii/tta in ver. 18, which throw."? light on its mean ing in ver. 10: ^^ Ji,y.ali»/ia est quasi materia i) I. y. a I, w n a munimevtum, 7tt(ji> x d a Q /I a jmrgamentum, ni^ Irl' tjfia ranientun\ (j/.tnaa/ia teyivmcntum, a t i (> t m ff a firmament iian, v7i6()f]fia calceamentmn, (^ o 6v7j /( a smti- mcntiim, Gall, sentiment. Aridot. I. v. Etlc. c. 10 opposita statuit d din tin a et dtxatoi/za, atque hoc describit to inavd^ &(i>f(a rov adixfj/ia- Toi,-, id quod tantnndern est atque satisfactio, vo- cabulum Socinianin irnmerito invisum. Exquisitam verborum proprietatem schcniatistnus exhibet : A. B. C. D. Ver. 16. x^T/ta, xardy.Qt/iia' }(dQi-a/xa, SmaioifAd. A. B. C. D. Ver. 18. 7TaQd7Tro)pa, Hatdx^i/ia,' di'xocio)ffa, (5'^>'.at(;icrw,• l.,o)7jq inutroque versu A et B avaToi'/fZ, itemque G it D, sed A et G, dvnaToi'XfZ, itemque B et D. Fiej'.s'M 16 dencribitur negotium ex parte Dei : ver. 18 describitur ex parte Adami et Ghristi : idque in oeconomia peccati minore verborum varietate, quam in ceconomia f/raiice. Svy.aioxr t.q Loitj^ est d eel a- ratio divina ilia, qua peccator, mortis reus, vitce ad- judicatur, idque jure.'''' — P. S.] B. The conti'ast of potential, prospective effects. 1. The contrast between the enslavement and negation of all personal life by personified death, and of the future glory of pardoned persons in the new life (vei\ 17). 2. The contrast in all its ideal magnitude : owing to the power of the fall of one, judgment and con- demnation came upon all men ; all men can attain to justification of life (that is, not merely of faith) by the justifying righteousness of one (ver. 18). Ver. 17. For if by one man's fall, &c. ['£t yctQ TO) to"' ivoc; naftcintM n an, x.tJ..]. This verse (which Rothe has improperly treated as a parenthesis,* and which Er. Schmid has even con- ceived to be the contradiction of an opponent) is, in form, first of all a proof of the liiy.alwfia and /.ard- yi()i,fia, in ver. 16 ; but it develops the consequence of the 6i,y.ai())fia, as of the y.aTdy.Qt,/ia, to a new and glorious contrast. Here, now, the personal ele- ment in ver. 15 is united with the material one in ver. 16 ; yet the personal predominates. From one by nature or by order (ordinance). But the very same tiling which, when done, is an unjust act, is not so before it is done, hut it is unjust. The same may be said of a just act. But the common term is rather a deed justly done (BiKaionpayriixa.) ; but the correction of an unjust act is a just act (Siicai'u)/u.a)." — P. S.] * [This is a sliirht mistake, occasioned by a statement of Tholuck (p. 261 f.). Dr. Eothe regards not ver. 17, but ver. 16. as a parenthesis (1. c. p. 132), and ver. 17 as a corrobo- rative and explanatory reassumption of ver. 15, to which it corresponds in all its parts as follows : Ver. 15. •I T^ Tou evoi irapaTTTwu-ttTi ot iroKXoC airiOavov, iroXAw ju.aAAoi' q xipti ToO &eov zeal r; ST)9 Ua TOU ivbs 'Irjcr. XptoroO, K.T.A.— P. S ] proceeded, through one offence, the tendency toward destruction ; death tyrannized over and defaced the personal life, and threatened to extinguish it ; but much more shall believers become by the one Christ, on the ground of the di,y.aio(7iivij, the fiaai-lfvovrfq, the i-uling, royal personalities in eternal life. The point of the antithesis is therefore ipaaD.nKTfv and fiaai,}.fvaovcn.v. The TzokXtJi fidkXov is also here a logical conclusion, which involves the higher degree of real power, as brought out in the antitheses : IV naQanrmfia, and the opposite ij 7it(ivaatia T^t; ydQi,'tO(; xai tTji; d(i>(jiui; rJjq dtzctt- oai'vrji; ; to which is yet added the y.a/ifidvovrti; in contrast with the bondage of the former slaves of death (Heb. ii. 14) ; then again, the nameless ft? and the one Jesus Christ ; and finally, to a certain extent, 6 iJdvaroq and // lio/j, Meyer well remarks: " Bear in mind that Paul does not say in the parado- sis, in conformity with the protasis : ?} to)»/ fJaai,ht'' ati, inl Toi'i; . . . }.a/iftdvovra(;, but, in harmony with the matter in question, and corresponding to the active nature of the relation, he places the subjects in the active first." This is the chief point just here. (Menochius : " suavins et gloriosus S07iat.") Tholuck : " To be ruled, is a bound and passive con- dition, while, on the other hand, the quality of free movement lies in life. The eschatological idea of a ruling in the finished kingdom of God, was brought over by Ciirist in a more profound sense from Jude ism (Matt. xix. 28 ; Luke xxii. 29). Paul has espe dally appropriated it (1 Cor. iv. 8 ; vi. 2 ; 2 Tim. ii. 12)." Tholuck questions the right to make promi- nent, according to Thomas Aquinas, Grotius, Stier, and others, the element of subjective spontaneous- ness, here, " where the whole weight falls on the Divine work of grace." But the Apostle speaks of the self-active appropriation of the work of grace in the life of believers. Ver. 18. Therefore, as through the fall of one, &c. [Better : through one fall {tvoi; in the neu- ter), *'^^() a ovv ') n o V q i li; daialoyai'V Cw^^ ].* • [The Greek is here, like an exclamation, as brief and concise as possible, and cannot be intelligibly rendered without supplying some words. The E. V supplies, be- 186 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. Thia verse is, as Mever and others remark, a re- Bumption of the preceding contrasts compressed In one sentence {trt'i.^.oyi^fTai ivrarOct to nuv, Theo- dore of Mopsvestia). But we must not overlook the new contrast brought out here. (On the use of a^a ovv, see Meyer.)* As far as the verb that is want- ing is concerned, De Wette remarks : It is usual to iupply here (likewise Riickert and Fritzsche), in the first member, to x^/hw iyivfro, and in the second, TO yc'tQi-ana iyivfxo ; but better, something indefi- nite, as tj'tivTo (thus Meyer and Tholuck) ; Winer, anipt]. We c-ali up the pregnant expressions in chap. ii. 28, 29, and repeat accordingly na^d- TTtoifia after nafJunTo'i/iaroi;, and dixalo)f(a after di.xai.(l)/iaroi;. a/Tt^^// is sufficiently contained in ili;. The contrast in that case is simply this : The fail of one maib came ideally and dynamically as a fall upon all men unto condemnation; that is, by the common fall, all men would, without redemption, be subject to condenmation ; on the other hand, the d t' y.a i ti> fi a of one came ideally and dynamically as d'txamfia upon all men unto justification of life in the last judgment; that is, the {)txaiw/ixa from ver. 18, and translates : " Dtin- nach also: mir ilnrch den Sunderifall de.s Einen (ein Sund'-n- fall) auf alle Meiischen {laimmt) zur Verdammniss, so audi {komml') durch Eiiies Rechlfertigung.'gut {tin Rechlfirtig- urigagu!) auf alle Menschen hin ziir {wirkHcheii) Riclilfcrtig- ung des L^'brns (welche Lfhen ist)." Eothe takes kv6<; in both clauses not in the m:isculine, but in the neuter ren- der, and supplies only the verb came : " Wit es dtirch Eiue Ueberlrduiig ,fur alle Menschen ziir Verdamnuisx (knmiiil), in eben derselben We.isc (knmint es) ouch durch Bine li'Chh- genuglhuuvg fur alle Meiischen zur Rich'frtiguiig dcs Le- b:'nx." Meyer: " }F(C es also durch Eiii Vergihrn fur alle Minschen zain Verdammiiiigaurtheil (gijcnmnien ist); so ist es auch durch Ein R ch>feiiiguiigsurtheil fur alle Menschrn zur Rechlfertigung des Lehrns {grlcmiinm)." Alford in the same way (except that he gives SiKaiiafj-a a different menn- ing) : " Therefore as by means of one trespass it came (e-yeVero bein? supplied) upon all men unto condemnation, so also by means of one righteous act it came upon all men unto justifi- cation of life." "Wordsworth likewise takes ivo^ here as neuter, and translates : " Therefore, as through one trans- gression the sentence was unto all m'n to condemnation, so through one state if acceptance with God (so he interprets tiKaiuiixa), the sentence now is wdo all men to justification of life." Ewald most literally: "Also denn — mie durch Eincn F'hltrilt fur alle Mi'iuchen zur Verurllieiluiig, so amli durch Einen Qrrecldspriich fur alle Mtnschen zur Rrch'- fertigung von L'ben." Dr. Hodge adopts the translation .of the E. v., from which he very seldom departs. The new version of the Amer. Bible Union likewise agrees with the E. V. in siipplyinp; judgment came, and free gift, but more correctly retiders 6i' ivoi napa-iTT., through one trespass, and Si.' evb? SiKaiiifiaTos, through one righteous ac'. — P. S.] * [Meyer says: " apa ovv is conclusive: demnach nun [accordingly then, so then, therefore now) ; it is of frequent occurrence in Paul (vii. 3, 25 ; viii. 12; ix. 16, 18; xiv. 1'.', IS; Gal. vi. 10; Eph. ii. 19 at.), and, contrary to classical usafre (Ilerm. ad Anlig. 628, ad Vigcr. p. 82:i), at the bo- ginning of the sentence." Klotz distinguishes between ►pa :md oSk, in that the former " ad inter nam potius causa m tpec'at," the latter " magis ad externam." The ratiocina- Hve force of apa. is weaker, and is supported by the collec- tive power cf ovv. See Ellicott on Gal. vi. 10. — P. S.l t [The antithesis eis Trai/ras, and the analogy of vers. 12, 15, 17, 19, where toO cfos is masculine, are in favor of Lange's view, which is a!s4 that of the translators of the E. V. ; but the absence of ti^e iirticle before iv6<; is almost conclusive against it ; for in all the eight cases of this see- tjoii, where it is indisputably masculine, it has uniformly ver. 16, Meyer makes the (hxcitio/ia to mean judg ment of justifictition {JiecJitfirt (/uvgsspriich), and rejects the translations : fuljilvient of the right (liechtserfiillunt/, Kothe and Philippi); deed of jua- tijication {Rechtfertif/uuf/sfhat, Tholuck) ; virfuout' ne.ss {'J'ligend/ia'tif/kcit, Baunigarten-Crusius) ; obe- dience {Gehorxani, Ue Weite) ; the rede factum of Christ (Fritzsche). It is simply the same every- where. If it be said that Christ is our righteou8« ness, it is the same as saying that Christ is the per- sonal medium of our justification. [Comj). the remarki on p. 184 f. — P. S.] The future ano[li](7tTai, supplied by Winer and Philippi in the apodosis, is sufficiently implied in fi^c. We hold that the Apostle here means the final ()t,/.aio)ai,ii, justification, which, in the general judgment, constitutes the an. tithesis of the x.«tcc/!^h/(«, condemnation. The (5(.x«*- o)/ia is offered to all men, and the dvy.auoai^i; uoi^q is its purpose ; but the realization of the purpose takes place merely according to the measure of faith. The Roman Catholic expositors assert that justifica- tion of faith itself is denoted here as justification of life [i. e., progressive justification = sanctitica- tion. — P. S.] According to Calvin, and others, it is the justification whose result is life. Tholuck : The d'i,xaio)ai,i; with the effect of the future completion of life. Augustine likewise. Thomas Aquinas de- scribes correctly the ideal universality of the dixaL- (i)/iia : " Quanivis possit did, quod justifcalio Chrl'M transit in justifcaiionem omninin, ad sufficien- TiAM, licet quantum ad efficientiam procedit in so- los fidcles.'''' [i/ai'Tfi,- avOQO)7Tou are, in both clauses, all men without exception, as in ver. 12 ; but this does not justify a tlnivcrsalist inference, for Paul speaks of the objective sufficiency and intention of Christ's ihxaio),iia, not of its subjective application to individ- uals, which depends upon the ).ciiificivn.v of faith, _ as intimated in ver, 17. The distinction drawn by Hofinann and Lechler between tzcivtk; avOQio- not,, all men without distinction, and navra; oi uv' OlJionoi.) all, withoiit exception, lacks proof (Meyer calls it, rein erdiclttet). More of this in ver. 19.— P. S.] C. The Contrast of the Final Effects. Ver. 19. For as through the disobedience of the one man, &c. {^'SlemfQ yciQ (Vici r^q na^axoijq TO (I eroq av 0- fj o>7TO v ccfiaQTO)- Xoi xaTfcrra{y?](Tav ol 7io).).oi, o i' t w c," KCti, x.t./.. According to Meyer, ver. 19 furnishes only a grand and conclusive elucidation of ver. 18 ()'«(>). Tholuck likewise, in harmony with Calvin. But thia contrast denotes the filial antithesis of the judgment and of justification as made manifest by the gospel (see chap. ii. 16). The sense is : As, in consequence of the disobedience of the one man Adam, the many (as many as there are) have been presented in the light of the gospel as sinners subject to condemna- tion, so, in consequence of the obedience of tlie one man Christ, shall the many (as many as believe) be the article (ver. 15, T

nov), and therefore unnecessary; while in ver. Ifi, where e( ev6<; must be neuter, in opposition to ttoAAwi" irapanTiDixaTuyv, it is, as here, wthout the article. The Apostle is therefore quite careful and consistent. The ob- jection that the comparisim is between Adam and Christ, rather than between the fall of one and the righteousness of another, does not hold, for it is clearly a comparison of both persons and efl'ects. The E. V. has niTich obscured the force of this section by omitting the article tki-oughouJl before els, as also before noWoi. — P. S.| CHAPTER Y. 12-21, IST presented ia the same light as just. It is sclf-cvi- dcn*; that the cli'ect of tlio gospel is included in the Becond elause ; but from vers. 20 and "21 we must infer tiiat it is presumed also in the first clause. It is only througli the gospel that this ideal general judgment is brouglit to pass, by which :dl men are presented and exposed as condemned sinners in cou- Bequenco of their connection with the sin of Adam see John xvi. 8, 9 ; comp. Ps. li. 5, G). We are uthDrized by the language in maintaining that y.a- •6«rraj'(/) possesses here the full idea of setting down, cxiiibiting, making to appear as what one is. [See below.] [Through the disobedience of the one man, Si^n Ttj(; TtaitaKoiji; too kvoq a,v (y ^) lonov . The trespass, or fall, of Adam, to 7Tc((jn7ir(Ofia, is here definitely described as an act of disob: dicnce, which is the mother of sin, as obedience to the Di- vine will is the mother of virtue ; for disobedience is essentially selfishness in actual exercise, the re- bellion of the human will against the Divine, the false self-assertion or independence in opposition to God, to whom we owe life and all, and whose service is true freedom. — P. S.]* The many vrere constituted sinners [ a// ct ^ - t«)).oi KaTtaidOTja avW Meyer: "Accord- ing to ver. 12, they were, through Adam's disobe- dience, actually placed in the category of sinners, because they sinned in and with Adam's fall." This is Augustinian dogmatics, but no exegesis warranted by the context. [? see below. — P. S.] Tholuck : Were made^ became. In tiiis sense, according to his account, certain commentators have found the impu- tatio forensis expressed ; others, a real becoming, in which the element of spontaneity is included. On the furtlier complications which have arisen between Romish and Protestant commentators on the suppo- sition of realhi becominff, see Tholuck, p. 268. The yruQaxoi] of Adam himself has certaiidy set forth the many as sinners, but only because it has come into the light of the law, and finally of the gospel, and so far as it has now become clear : 1. As an ethico-physical causality, but not as a purely physi- cal fatality ; 2. So far as the offence of Adam has become the clear type of the sinfulness and sin of every man ; 3. So far as the judgment of the finished revelation comprehends the many as in one. So by the obedience of one shall the many be made (constituted) righteous [oi'tw? y.al di,cc T 7j q II n a/.oTjc; ro'i eroq (J/zctiot y.a- raj(rovTav oi no}J.oi]. That is, not merely by the death [the passive obedience] of Christ, but also by the [active] obedience of His • [Tholufk quotes here the quaint and pointed remark of Lutlior : '• Wuhl sefzl Adam sehie.n Znhii in einen Ap/el, aber in Wuhrheil srtzi er ihn in einen iSlachcl, wrlcher ist dns ffOUlichi' G- bn'." Bengel says that itapa, in napaKorj, very apposil cly pomts out the principle of the initial step, which ended in Adam's fall, namely, the carelessni'ss of his nn- derstandiiiij and will, which simultaneously gave way ; as the fii-fit step towards the capture of a city is remissness on the part of the guards on watch. — P. S.] t [Vulgate : piccalores cotisfilitti sunt. So also Calvin. E. V. : wre made sinners. Lange translates : als Sunder ieraufgi-sli'llt wurden sind, sel furth, made lo appear {iji their real charac'er) as sinners. So also Ewald : a/.s Sunder dar- gtslellt wurden. Meyer and I'hilippi : "ah Sundr Jiin- fex'elU, in die Kategorie von SUnderii ve.rsetzl wurden," set dnwn in l/ie rank; or category, of sinners. Alford (with De Wctto) : "were nt'ide actual sinners by practice, not, 'were Eiccountcd as' (Grotius, a/.) ; nor 'became by imputation ' (Beza, i;cni;el); nor 'were proved to be' (Koppe, Eeiche, Fritzsche)."— P. S.] whole life, which was finished in His death.* But why the future ? Meyer : " It relates (correspond., ing to (ia place (this would give good sense here : to be set down in the rank of sinners ; but see below) ; (2.) to ap/ioint, to elect (this is inapplicable here, as it would make God directly the author of sin); (3.) to conditute, to cause to be, to -make (reddere aliquent aliqukl) ; hence the passive : to be rendered, to be. come ; (4.) to conduct, to accompany on a journey (only once in the New Testament). Reiche has spent much learning to establish a fifth meaning : to show, to exhibit ; but this is somewhat doubtiul. The verb occurs twenty-two times in the New Testa- ment, three times only in Paul (twice here, and once in Titus i. 5). In sixteen of these cases (including Titus i. 5) it clearly refers to official appointment , in one it means, to accompany (Acts xvii. 15) ; in the remaining five, viz., Rom. v. 19 (twice); Jamea iii. 6 ; iv. 4 ; 2 Peter i. 8, it is, to constitute, to ren- der. So it is taken in this verse by nearly all the recent commentators.f But in what sense ? Figu- ratively, or really ? Chrysostom, and the Greek commentators who did not believe in original sin, started the figurative or metonymic interpretation, which was subsequently more fully developed by the Arminians and Socinians (Grotius, Limborch, Wet- stein, Socinus, Crell), and advocated also by Storr and Flatt, of the school of the older German super- naturalism, namely, that y.aTf(JTdf)t](Tav d/iaQTO)).oi means : they were only apparently made sinners, or (icconnted, regarded, and treated as sinners — i, e., ex- posed to the punishment of sin, vAthont actually being siiiners.\ The same view has been strenu- * [Meyer refers vitaKo^, as the opposite of Adam's iro- paKOTj, specifically to the exjdatory death of Christ, which was KOiT efox'ji'i His obedience to the will of God ; Phil. ii. 8. But Lechlcr, II<:>fmann, Stuart, Barnes, and others, agree with Lange. — P. S.] t [Philippi doubts the meaning reddere, facere, in the N. T., and insists upon the fundamental meaning (1.) to set dnwn, sisfere, cnnstitiiere, hintlellen, einse'zen, and tnms- la'cs: in die Kategnrie von Sundern gesetzt %verde.n. But also in this case the setting down or the imputation must bo b.asid on the fact that they realty are sinners, and so it is taken by Philippi. — P S.] X [Chrysostom is generally set down as the first advo* cafe of this interpretation, but it should be remembered that he puts the metonymy not in the verb Ka.Ti(na.8y}cra.v . but in the noim atiapTioKoi, which he makes to m^an ob« noxious to piinisbinent and conciemr.ei to death, icaTo- SeSiKaa-fiivoi ^ai'aTw. He says that the Apostle designed merely to state the fact, that all became mortal ttirouglj Adam, but not the why and wherefore. (Horn. x. Tom. is., p. 523, ed, Bened.) It is unnecessary to pro^e thai 188 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. ously advocated even by so sound and orthodox a commentator as Dr. Hodge, but from the very oppo- site Joetrinal standpoint, and in the interest of im- mediate forensic iniputationism. He takes zarf- ardOfiffav, like ijfia(JTov, ver. 12, in a purely legal and forensic sense : tbey were regarded as sinners Independently of, and anteccdeiitly to, their being •inners, simply on the ground of the sin of Adam, their federal representative ; as, on the otlier hand, they are regarded as righteous solely on the ground of Christ's righteousness, without any personal right- eousness of tbeir own.* This interpretation, though less aitificial than the corresponding passive render- ing of ■rinajJTov, ver. 12, is not supported by a sin- gle passage of the New Testament where xaOtartjiiit, occurs, and conflicts with the connection. For ver. 19 gives the reason (yct^) for the statement in ver. 18, why "judgment came upon all men to condem- nation," and it would be sheer tautology to say : they were condemned because " they were regard- ed and treated as sinners." The phrase, then, can be taken only in the real sense, like ijna^tov in ver. o(xapT(oAos, in the N. T., means a real sinner, and nothing else. Grotius explains Rom. v. 19 : " Here again is a me- tonymy. They were so treated as though they had actu- ally sinned ; tlint is, they were subject to death. So the word 'sinner' is used in 1 Kings i. 21, and elsewhere." So also Whitby, one of the best English commeiitators of the Arminiau school. — P. S.] * [Dr. Hodge, though otherwise a strict Calvinist, re- jects the realistic Augustinian view of a fall of the whole race in Adam, and yet makes all the descendants of Adam legally responsible for his fall. To maintain this groimd of an exclusively forensic imputation, he must r]ixa nii.<:xiign ; allein dn- fJ WILL er O'lih zugJeirh mix vollig bf.wusster Absicht (mid er errelcht dirse. Absicti' dinch das yap eiiiei-aeils tind f/uTch das sweimnlige oi voWoi aiidrersfits), in dem Liser tie BESTIMMTE Vebmuthlng crrrg'n), daxs nii-h die gc- tcliichlli' hi: Ve.rwirkI ichiing jmer renh'n Moglirhknt von i'hni nilginicint sein mogi: ; aber auch eben nue als Vermuth- CNQ, d(V er dtnchiius nichl soil cms dem Gliel der blossin Wtihrsrh'inI icld,-eii in das d'-r Evidrnz Ititiuberziehen koii- nen. Gfjviss, die meisterUche Knnst in der Diirch/nhnnig tiner go /tin nitancirttn Intention ist luohl zu bewandeni." -P. S.l evils of the fall, we have a right to infer that by fai the greater part of the race will ultimately be saved, especially if we take into consideration that the half of mankind die in infancy before having committed actual transgression, and that, in the days of millen- nial glory, the knowledge of Christ will cover the earth. It is a truly liberal and noljle sentiment of Dr. Hodge when he says (p. 279): "We have I'eason to believe that the lost shall bear to the siTcd no greater proportion than the innjates of a prison do to the mass of the community." But from all oui present observation, as well as from the word of God (comp. Matt. vii. Ki, 14), we know that many, very many — yea, the vast majority of adults even in Cliris- tian lands — walk on tlie broad path to perdition, al- though they may yet be rescued in the last moment. Paul himself speaks of the everlasting punishment of those who obey not the gospel of Christ (2 Thess. i. 9), and teaches a resurrection of the unjust as well aa of the just (Acts xxiv. 16). We know, moreover, that none can l)e saved except by faith, which is God's own express condition. For salvation is a moral, not a mechanical process, and requires the free as- sent of our will. Now Paul everywhere presents faith as the subjective condition of justification ; and in ver. 17 he expressly says, that those who receive (ka/ifidvovrfi;) the abundance of the grace and of the gift of righteousness, shall reign in life by the one, Jesus Christ. He contrasts the whole generation of Adam and the whole generation of Christ, and, as the one die in consequence of their participation in Adam's sin, so the other shall be nuide alive by virtue and on condition of their union with Christ's righteousness. In Gal. iii. 22 he states the case beyond the possibility of mistake : " The Scripture hath concluded all (ra ndrra) under sin, that the promise by fliith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe {roii; TnaTfioiatv)." — Universalism must assume a second probation after death even for those who lived in Christian lands, with every opportunity of saving their soul. But such an assumption is contrary to Gal. vi. 7, 8, and the whole practical tenor of the Bible, and is in itself untenable and illusive. A new trial, instead of improving, would greatly lessen the chance of building up a good character. For as it is impossi- ble, without a new creation, to return to the moth- er's womb and live the old life over again, the sec- ond trial would have to commence where the first left off — that is, with a dismal outfit of neglected opportunities, broken vows, sad reminiscences, abused faculties, bad habits, and in the corrupting company of moral bankrupts, with every prospect of a worse failure and a more certain ruin. God wisely and mercifully gave to men but one state of probation, and those who improved it best, would shrink most from running the risk of a second. — P. S.] Third Paragraph (vers. 20, 21). JIoio the law is designed to bring about directly thit process of the development of sin, in order alat to bring about indirectly the revelalicm cf grace. Ver. 20. But the law. [Nofioq de, x.r.k The Mosaic law is meant, though the article is want, ing, as is often the case where there can be no mis- take. — P. S.] The Apostle now cannot avoid to state the relation of the law or of Moses to this an. tithesis — Adam and Christ — especially since he ha^ 190 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMAXS. already intimated this relation in ver. 13. Grotius thought the following; discussion induced by an ol>- jection. But chaps, vi. and vii. show that Paul could not avoid to answer this question. — Came in be- tween [^zwischenein, parentheiicalli/, as it were] 7ia()tt,aTi).&tv. Not besides, thereto (Meyer);* nor subirdrai'it (Vulg.) ; \ nor invidentaUji, subordU natefi/ {iiebensdchlick, Kothe,:]; Tholuck [Reiche, Plii- lippi], and others [contrary to the pedagogic mission of the law ; iii. 20 ; Gal. iv. 24] ). The comimj to, in addition to, lies in the Tza^xi ; the coming into, in the Hi;. Therefore, properly to cuter between, to come between [Adam and Christ] (Theodoret, Calvin, Luther [Estius,§ Grotius, Usteri, Ewuld], &c.), which Meyer opposes without warrant. The reference to the position of Moses between Adam and Ciu'ist may, indeed, be only an intimation ; but to say that sin merely supervened in adilition to sin (Beza, De Wette, &c.), is not satisfactory, because the question in the foregoing is not concerning sin alone, but the antithesis of sin and grace. Tholuck concludes in- correctly from this consideration, that the law is characterized as an incidental factor. The law inci- dental ? (Chrysostom [Theo[)liylact, Cornelius a Lapidc, without any foumlation], have understood Tzaod as denoting obiter, ad tcitipus). The Apostle lias evidently the idea of an ethico-chemical process. The law had to enter into the process of the devel- opment of sin, in order to force it to a crisis. [Ols- hausen : " Paul regards the law as a salutary medi- cine, which forces the disease that rages in the in- ward, nobler parts, to the surface." So also De Wette and Rothe.— P. S.] That the fall might multiply [iva nXio- va(Tr\ TO n a iJ d nrio fi a ; Lange : damit der Siin- den.fdll volliger werdc {ersch'ime) ; Alford : in order that the trespass might multiply. The Apostle uses TzaQaTtziDfia here (not na^aTirn'i/iaTa, nor d/ta^- ria), l)ecause the law does not aim to multiply sin as such, but to make it appear and to reveal it to the conscience as a ncc^dnTiDiia — i. €., a transgres- sion of the positive -will of God ; cornp. iii. 20 ; iv. 15; vii. 7; and Rothe, p. 167.— P. S.]. The bold- ness of this thought has troubled the commentators. It is indeed not satisfactory to alleviate it by sup- posing that the law is intended merely to enhance the knowledge of sin (Grotius, Baur, and others) ; but this is one important element of its mission (see chap, vii.), and must not be rejected, with Meyer, as false. To explain iVa of the consequence or result * [As Trpojereflr;, Gal. iii. 19. Beza: prxlerea inlrnill, supervened, came in tlie way of addition. lUeyer : es Icnni no-h ihmi'bm e.iii, viz., in adilition to sin, which" had alrcadj' entoriMl into the world, ver. 12. Similarly Alford: '■^camn ill lii.sidrx the fact of the many being- mad'3 sinners, and .as a transition-point to the other result." llod^e • The law was superinduced on a plan already laid, and lor a subordi- nate (?) althouirh necessary purpose.— P. S.] t [I'he idea of .svcns.v, or surrrplilioiis entrance, is not necessarfty implied in irapa. (fomp. 7rapei(rayti>, TrapcitrSiiu), irapeicT'^epu)), and must be either derived from the context, as in Oal. ii. 4 (the only passaa;e in the New 'i'estameiit where the verb occurs besides our own), or be expressed by ka.Bpq. In our passage such an idea would be inconsistent ■with the holy character of the law, the solemn manner of its promulgation, and the Apostle's reverence for it (Eom. vii. 12 ff.). From Meyer.— P. S.] t [Rothe, p. 158, translates : ncbenbei zwischendn ge- knnimKii, it came in niciilentullt/ hilwfcn. He thus combines tho idea of the incidental coming in of the law with that of its n-.odial position between Adam and Christ. So 01s- hausen : " In dnm TTa.pei<7ri\9ev isl snwnlil das mit'en inne TreUn, als aucli dus B'ilaufigi', nicht absolut Kolhwmdige dcsscMen nngedenlcl." — P. S.] % ;Kstius : " Lfx, pmhihens peccalum, mudio tempore intei Adam et Christum subiriffressa est." — P. S.] (merely iy.[}ari,/.i!K, with Chrysostom [orx alnoXo- yiuc, a/.). iXjj'cifff (!),■ ; Estius : " non fiiudcni causaii denotut, scd evcntum." — P. S.], Koppe, Reiche [Stu- art, Barnes] ), is likewise unsatisfactory ; yet tha Apostle has certainly inferred from the result tin design and intention in the Ira.* Gal. iii. 19 doc« not serve as an elucidation of this passage, as Meyei would have it ; and Rom. vii. 14 proves that, by tha law, the knowledge of sin comes ; while 1 Tim. i. 9 shows that the law constitutes a weapon against the ungodly. Reiche has called the telic constructiou blasphemous ; in reply to which, comp. Meyer [p 224]. He properly remarks, that sin had to reach its culminating point, where it will be outdone by grace. Only this culminating point should not bo merely objective, but subjective also, in accordance with the sentence quoted from Augustine, on Ps. cii. : "A'ciw criideliter hoc fecit Deus, sed consilio me'UciiicB ; . . . augetur morbus, crescit inalitia^ qnceritur medicus et totiim sanatur." It is a fact both that the misunderstood law, according to God's decree, induced the crucifixion of Christ — the climax of the world's guilt — and that the same law, well understood, prepared the way for the saving faith of the New Testament. For this reason there is truth in Rothe's explanation : All sin should ever stand out more complete under tlie form of the jiaiidmiDita. Tholuck also takes ground with Ols- hausen, De Wette, and Neander, in favor of the telic rendering. Reasons: 1. Nitimur in vetitum ; 2. Thomas ; " When the passions dare not manifest themselves, they become more intense." Docs thi.i apply here ? Sin, even in the form of anti-Chris- tianity, undoubtedly becomes more intense in oppo- sition to the gospel, but still this is mu»>tly ecbatic consequence ; 3. Luther : The accusing and con- demning law awakens enmity to God. For this rea- son, Judaism, like all fanaticism, is angry at God. It is a prime consideration that here the law is spe- cifically understood as the law of the letter, as de- signed to finish, both objectively and subjectively, the sinful process of the old world. Therefore the second Iva in ver. 21, as Tholuck well remarks, takes the sting from the first. [In other words, the first (Va indicates the mediate, the second 'iva the ultimate end and purpose. — P. S.] Philipiii under- stands by na^dTiTMfia merely the naiidnr. of Adam inhering in sinners. But it denotes here rather the completion of the fall of hiimanity itself. But where sin multiplied [or di tTT/.to- vatTfv 7] dfiasirlal. Where it was completed, came to full revelation. It is very strange that Rothe regards the head of the whole deduction from oh (U to xu()it; as parenthetical. Oh is not tempo- ral (Grotius [De Wette, Fritzsche, Stultiiig] ), but spacial (Meyer, Tholuck) — perhaps Ijotli; time being considered as an expansion — [Grace exceedingly abounded (not, much more, E. V.), !'7rf(jf7ii' pl(T(TfV(Tl-V ij /W(JHi']. V7lf(i(7tf(}V(TatVil,V [supra modum redund wit'\ is superlative [not com* parative ; comp. hnff^nXiovd^M, hntiivi-y.dii}, hnw' iii/'ow, vTif^Uav] ; (2 Cor. vii. 4 [the same verb] ; 1 Tim. i. 14 ; Mark vii. .-57 ; 2 Tlie^s. i. 3). Ver. 21. That, as sin reigned in [not unto, E. v.; Lange, mitteht, by means o/~\ death [tVa, * [Meyer, who is a philological purist even to occasional pedantry, takes 'iva here, and everywhere, reAiKiis. and thus seems to justify even the supralapsarian theory of sin, Alford likewise insists on the unifonn telic meaning of 'iva It undoubtedly denotes the design here, but the medial^ not the uUimaie design, as in ver. 21. — P. S.] CHAPTER V. 12-21. 19 &arcir(i>. The second iva indicates the nioie re- mote and ultimate purpose of the coming in of the luw, as the liist iV«, ver. 20, denotes it^i nearer and mediate aim and effect ; the increase of sin served merely as a means for the triumphant and eternal reign of grace. Ilodge : " The design of God in permitting sin, and in allowing it to abound, was to bring good out of evil ; to make it the occasion of the most wonderful display of His glory and grace, BO that the benefits of redemption should infinitely transcend the evils of the apostasy." — P. S.] As Bin wrought death, so again did death work sin (see Heb. ii. 14). But here the priority in the j;]apoi't in humau consciousness, and incon- Bistent with the plain sense of Rom. v. 12, which, in harmony with Gen. hi., derives sin from the one his- torical Adam. (4.) The AcGUSTiNrAX or realistic theory of a real though impei'sonal and unconscious participa- tion of the whole human race in the tall of Adam, as their natural head, who by his individual trans- gression vitiated the generic human nature, and transmitted it in this corrupt and guilty state to his descendants by physical generation. As an individ- ual act, Adam's sin and guilt was his own exclusive- ly, and is not transferable to any other individual ; but as the act of mankind in their collective, undis- tributed, and uniiidividualized form of existence, it was, virtually or potentially, the act of all who were germinally or seminally contained in their first pa- rent, as Levi was in the loins of Abraham (Heb. vii. 9, 10). Persona corrumpit naturam^ natura cor- rumpit pemonam. In other words : Adam's indi- vidual transgression resulted in a sinful nature ; while, in the case of his descendants, the sinful na- ture or depraved will results in individual transgres- sions. See the passages from Augustine quoted on p. 178, third foot-note. His view rests on his deep religious experience and his interpretation of Rom. v., but it presupposes, as a necessary prerequisite, the original organic unity of the human race, a dis- tinction between person and nature (which must be made also in the doctrine of the Trinity and the In- carnation), and may be philosophically supported by the Platonico-Aristotelian realism concerning the doctrine of the general conceptions, as the original types of individual things. i- This realistic view of the fall of the race in Adam became the orthodox doctrine of the Latin Church. It was defended by the great schoolmen, Ansejm, Peter the Lombard, Thomas Aquhias, &c. (yet with a material modification of Augustine's conception of 1 original sin and guilt, which scholastic theology made to consist only in the loss of original righteousness; viewing it more as a nrgatife state of privation than as positive corruption). It was even more earnestly and vigorously maintained by the Reformers, both Lutheran and Calvinistic (who advocated afresh the Augustinian view of hereditary sin and guilt in all its severity). The various writings of Luther, Me- lanchthon, Calvin, and the symbolical books of the sixteenth century, abound with quotations and remi- niscences from Augustine on the doctrines of Sin Rnd Grace. But within the Augustinian system different fiews of imputation were developed, especially in the Reformed Church : (a.) Imputation, immediate and mediate * con- joined and inseparable. This makes the guilt of Adam's first sin imputed, and the guilt of inherent depravity inseparable and conditional to one another. Both kinds of imputation are held in fiict ; but tiie distinction was not made before the seventeenth century. Participation is assumed as the ground * [The terminology immediate or anleci-rtenf, and wicffi- ate or conn'jqiii-ii! imputation, is trncod by Turrctin (Tnsliy., Pars I. p. SSf), Locua IX. de pecnato, Qti. X ) to Josiiua do la Place, of Saumure (1 596-1(155), who was charsed with in- venting it to evade the force of the sjTiodical decision of Chareiiton, 1645. Augustine and the Refornicis did not DM it, and hence there has heen some dispute as to the Bide on which to place them.] of imputation. Nati e corruption is itself sin, anj likewise punishmerit for gui't incurred in Ad»ru's sin. Hereditary guilt coexists with hereditary sia; man is condemned, both on account of the act oi disobedience whicii he committed in the loins of Adam, and for hereditary depravity. Mere we must distinguish again a minor differ* ence relating to the order of the two kinds of im putation : (««.) Some put immediate imputation b/fore m^ diate in the order of things. So Augustine and his strict followers in the Catholic Church, and the Calvinists of the Montauban school, David Pa- rens, Andrew Rivet,* the elder Turretin,f and Hei« degger ; :j: — with this difference, that the Dutch and Frencii Calvinists of the seventeenth century com- bined, with the Augustinian theory of participation, the federal theory of representation (see below, Xo. 6) ; and, while still holding to both kinds of impu- tation, they laid the chief stress upon immediate im-. putation — thus preparing the way for exclusive im- mediate imputationism. (66.) Others give mediate imputation, or the im- , putation of inherent depravity, the logical priority, so that Adam's sin is imputed to us only because it becomes our own by propagation (to which some ' i add, by actual transgression). Here belong, in all probability, Anselm among the schoolmen, g Calvin,! * [In opposition to Placseus, and in vindication of the decree of the Synod of Ch:irenton, the distinguished Pro- fessor Rivet, of Leyden, made a collection of passages on imputation from the Reformed and Lutheran Confessions, and prominent divines, as C:ilvin, Beza, Bullinger, "VVolf- frang Musculus, Viret, Bucanus, Peter Mai-tyr, Wolleb, Whittalvcr, Uavenant, Zanchius, Olpvianus, Ur.'^inus, Pa- rens, Piscator, L. Crooius, Melauchtlion, Cliemnitz, Jlun- nius, and many others (includlii<.' also Roman Catholics). But these testimonies are to a gi-eat extent general, and make no distinction between immediate and meiliate impu- tation. The collection of Rivet is translated in part in the Priticefoii Riview, vol. xi. (ISSfO, pp. 55;i-579.] t [T'urretin (1. c. Pars I. p. 557) defines imputation thus; " Iiiipulatio vil (■«■/ RES ALiENy"E, vcl PROPRIA:. Aliquandt impidatur nohis id quod nostrum est pcrsnnaliter, quo sensu Di IIS iinputat prccata pcccatnribus, qiios proplir propria criiniiia puuit, et in bonis dicitur zilus Phine/e itli impntn- tus ad jusUtiam (Ps. cvi. 31) ; atiquando imputnlnr id quod est EXTRA Nos, lire a nohis est priestitum, quomodo juslilia Glirisli dicitur nabis impuiari, el pcccat.a nostra ipsi impu' tanlur, licet nee ipse pcccatum in se habcal, nee nos jusli- liaiiiy] t [The Farmnla consensus Hetvelica, a stronsly partisan theological Confession, drawn up in 1675 by Heidcgeer ol Zurich, :it the solicitation of Tiu-retin of Geneva, and Gem- ler of Basel, in opposition partly to the tnediate imputa- tionism of La Place, asserts that the impiitatin culpie is not the consequence, but the cause of the propagalin vitiofila' lis, or the comiplio lierrditaria, and condemns the doctrine of those who '^ sub inijiutationis mediiilx et cfusequintis nomine, nfin impulationem duntaxat pn'mi peccnti tnHtmt, seit h'-reditarix cl.iam corruptionis asse.rlionrni gravi pirindo ofijiciunt." Arts, x.-xii. (in Nierneyer's Cullic/., p. 73'5). The same Confession teaches also a limited atonement, and verbal, even punctual inspu-ation; but it soon lost all au- thority. Ebrard (Khchen- und Dngincngrschichle, iii. p. 65(i) calls it, rather too severely, the " ridiculous after-birth of a symbolical book."] § [Anselm (Z>e cane, virg., c. 7) says we are not con- demned because "we ourselves sinned in Adam, as we did not yet exist, but because we were to descend from him i (sed quia de illo fuluri eramus)."] II [Calvin, on Rom. v. 17 : " We are condemned for the sin of Adam not by iraputation alone, as if t'le punishment of the sin of anothci were exacted of us (peccato Adie nor per siilani impnialionem ilamnnntur, acni alieni pTcati rx- igeretur a no jis poena), but we bear its punishment because we are puilty of the sin also {quia it cnlpre. sunnis rei), in so far as our nature, vitiated in him, is held bound with the guilt of iniquity before God (quatenus scilicet et ntdiira nostra in ipsr> vitiata iniquitatis rrntu obslringilur apiid Denm)." He then goes on to say, that we arc in a differ- ent manner restored to salvation by the righteousness of Christ, viz., not because it is in us, but it is freely giveu to CHAPTER V. 12-21. 198 wid BuUinger among the reformers ; * and, more clearly and expressly, Stapfer and President Ed- wards,! wiio are often inaccurately quoted as medi- ate imputationists ; also the orthodox Lutherans of the seventeenth century.;}; It is certain that we have all to bear the consequeuccs of Adam's sin, and this sin is therefore the cauxe of our native cor- ruption ; but it is not our personal guilt independ- ently of this corruption, and our assent to it. (6.) Mtiliate or conseqjicnt imputation makes in- berent depravity derived from Adam, and this alone, the ground of eondemnatign. " Vitiositas preeccdit iinputadonem." So the Keformed school of Saumur, in France, especially Joshua Plactcus (La Place), who denied that the imputation of Adam's sin w;is prior to, and independent of, inherent depravity, but wlio claimed to be in full harmony with the teaching of Calvin on this subject. This view, " so far as it re- stricts the nature of original sin to the mere heredi- tary corruption of Adam's posterity, excluding tlie imputation of the first sin by which he fell," was condemned by the French Reformed Synod at Clia- renton, near Paris, in 1045, yet without mentioning the name of Placaius, who contended that he was not touched by this decree, since he admitted a me- diate imputation of Adam's sin, consequent and de- pendent on corruption. (c.) Immediate or antecedent imputation as op- posed to mediate imputation, makes, on purely legal grounds, the sin of Adam, as the sin of the federal us by grattutous imputation {gratuHam jusiitix imputa- tinneni). Eb-ard (Doffmalik, i., p. 512 f.) and Hodge (on Unmans, p. iiW) represent Calvin as a tiiedinle. imput:itioii- ist ; the former assenting, the latter dissenting. Calvin and the Reform sd Confessions draw no line of demarcation between original sin imputed and original sin inherent. Calvin always guards against the supposition that we are condemned "by an arbitrary imputation of a foreig-n act personal to Adam.] * [Ebranl says, 1. c. 1. p. 513 : " Bullinger knows of such a reatus only wliich takes place in consequence of the cor- ruptio or vitidsi'.as, but not of a realus which is the anise of the innate viliositas. This would be likewise mediate imputation only. But compare the passages of Bullinger quoted by Eivet, 1. c] t [The aim of Edwards, in his treatise on Original Sin, written against the Arminian, Dr. John Taylor, of Nor- wich, was to show that it is no absurd or impossible thing for "the i-ace of mankind truly to partake of the sin of the first apostasy, so that this, in realit}' and propriety, shall become l/fir fin ; and therefore the sin of the apostasy is not theirs merely because God imputes it to them, but H is truly and properly theirs (by virtue of a real union between the root and the branches of mankind, established by the Author of the universe), and on that ground God imputes it to them" (Works, ii. p. 559). He says, moreover, that the arguments which prove the depravity of nature, estab- lish also the imputation of Adam's first sin, and that both are included in the usual conception of orisinal sin. " The first depravity of heart, and the imputation of that sin [of A.dam], are both the consequences of that established union ^between .\dam and his posterity] ; but yet in such order, that the evil disposition \s firsl, and the charge of gui;t con- S'qiunt,»s it was in the case of Adam himself "(p. biA). Then, ii a foot-note, he quotes ^dth approbation a long extract from Stapfer's Th'ologia Po'rmicn, to the eii'ect that the mediate and the immediate imputation are inseparable, and that one should never be considered without the other. Dr. Sliedd, H'Slory of Chrislian Dodrinc, ii. p. 163, seems to hold the same view. Edwards spe:iks, however, of im- putatiiin only incidentally ; his main object was to defend the doctrine of native depravity by the theory of identity; >'. «., a divinely constituted oneness of Adam and his race, by which his posterity should be bom in his moral image. Whether good or bad, according to the law that like begets tike.] t [The Lutherans held that the impuiaiio is immediata : in quantum cxstitimus adhuc in Adamo (quia Adam r'prse- scn'ative fuit totum genus humanum) ; mediata : medJante peccatn originali inhmrenir, in quantum in propriis prrsn- nis (t individualittr considiramur. The first is mediated through the second, (-omp. Luthardt, Oompendiwn der Dogmalik, p. 114 (2d ei. 1866),] head of the race, the only and exclusive groand of condemnation independently of, and prior to, nativa depravity and personal tranngrcssion ; so that he- reditary guilt precedes hereditary sin, and not vice* versa. This exclusive immediate imputationisin is held by Calvinists of the supralapsarian ;ind federal school, and gives up the Augustinian ground of par- ticipation. See below. No. (5.) (6). In antagonism to this view, the New School theology of New Eng- land has departed to the opposite extreme of reject- ing imputation under any form. (See No. 6.) (5.) The ftderal theory of a vicarious represen- tation of mankind by Adam, in virtue of a covenant made with him. It arose in Holland in the seven- teenth century, simultaneously witli the development of representative federal government, and gained advocates among Calvinistic or Presbyterian divines in France, England, Scotland, and the United States. It supposes a (one-sided, /(oioTr-J.fi^for) contract or covenant of the sovereign Creator ^^ith the first man, called the covenant of works {fcedus opcrutn, fcedits naiurce), as distinct from the covenant of grace [foedus gratice), to the efl'ect tliat Adam should stand a moral probation on behalf of all his de- scendants, so that his act of obedience or disobedi- ence, with all its consequences, should be judicially imputed to them, or accounted theirs in law. Adam's position is compared to the relation of a representa- tive to his constituents, or rather of a guardian to his wards, since in this case the wards were not con- sulted, and did not even exist at the time of his appointment. The transaction must be resolved at last into the sovereign pleasure of God.* Here again we must distinguish two schools : (a.) The Aygustino-federal school is a combina- tion, and superadds the federal scheme on the real- istic basis of participation, so that imputation is made to rest on moral as well as legal grounds. This was the view of the founders and chief advo- cates of the federal theory, Cocceius (originally John Koch, or Cook, born at Bremen, 1603, died as pro- fessor at Leydeti, 1669), Burmann, "Witsius, and is taught by the Westminster standards,! and even in the Conse7isus Helveticus, although in this the Au- gustinian idea of participation is almost absorbed by the idea of the covenant.^ {b.) The purelg federal school (from nominal- istic premises, according to which the general con- ceptions are mere names, not things, subjective ab- stractions, not objective realities) denies the Adamic unity of the race in the realistic sense, consequently also all participation of Adam's descendants in the * [See the different definitions of this fcedus operum from the writings of Cocceius, Witsins, Heidegger, &c., in Heppe's Dogmafik, pp. 204 ff. It is called ./'dS'/xs fiovd- v\ev pov , quia uiiins tantum partis disposilione et pro- missinne constat, as distinct from a. fee Ins mntnum or Si- irXevpov. There is no Scripture proof whatever for such a primal covenant. The solitary passage quoted, Hosea vi. 7: "Fur they" (Ephraim and Judah) "like men" (not, " like Adam") " have transtrressed the covenant," refers to the Mosaic covenant. Even Turretin (Inst. lino!, rienrhticx. Pars I. p. 519, of the Edinb. and X. Y. ed., 1847) admitj that it is inconclusive, and may be explained of the incon- stancy of men, " ut dicantur transgressi foidns sicul liomi' 7)is fiicrre Solent, qui sua natura vani, levesque sunt el Jicltm sirpe fa Hunt."] t [On the Westminster divines, see Baird, Elohim JB*- veatrd, pp. 39 ff., and especially the learned articles of Dr. Laudis in the Danville R>viev) for 1861-6'2.] t [Ai-t. X. : " Siru' Dens foedns operum cum Adamo inivii non tantum pro ipso, sed etiam in ipso, ul capite et STIEPS, cum tolo genere humano, . . . ita Adamus tristi prolapsus non si/>i ctunlaxat sed toll tHam. humano generi, . '. . bona in fctiUre promissa prrdidit." C'">ap. also the passafcet q.uoted by Heppe, 1. c. pp. 228 £1 194 THE EPISTLE OF rAUL TO THE ROMANS. act of the primal apostasy ; yet it holds that, by virtue of his federal headship on the ground of a Bovereign arrangement, his sin and guilt are justly, directly, and immediately imputed to them. The imputation of Adam's sin, and in tlnj same way also the imputation of Christ's righteousness or justifica- tion, is thus made a purely forensic process, whicii aflects our legal relation, but by no means our moral character. This forensic tlieory of imputation, which ex- cludes participation in Adam's sin, dates from the time of Turretin, in the latter part of the teven- tcenth century,* and is uplield by a number of Cal- vinistic divines in Enghmd and America, but has no advocate of note, as far as I know, among modern Continental divines.f Legal representation seemed to offer an easier vindication of Divine justice than the Augustiniau * [Turretin, like Hoidcggrcr, holds indeed to a douHe unity of the racL? with Adam, a natural or real, and a feileral or forcns'C, but he evidently lays the chief sti'i's,-i upon the latter, and prepares the way tor giving up the former. He 6:iy8 (in his Itislilules, first published in 1G8S, Pars I. p. 557, Qu. XI.): '^ AiMtmus diipUei vinculo nohiscwn janctus es' : (1.) Naturali, qitiUinus paler est, et nos ejus Jilii ; ('.'.) Po- lilTico (!c FORENsi, guitlcnus /uit princrps et caput represcn- taUvuiii totius gKiieris liumani. Fundamentum ergo impu- fa'wnis nnn est tanluni commuiiio naturalis, qiue nobis cum Adumo inlercedit — abas omnia ipsius peccata deberent nobis impuari — sed PRiEciPDE moralis et fcederalis, per qnam factum est, ut Diius cum illo, u'. cum nostra capde, fcslus pepigerit. Unde, Adamus sr. habuit in illo p'ccilo, -non ut PERSON.^ PRIVATA, Sed ut PUBLICA el REPRESENT.VTIVA qux omiies suoa postcros in aclioiie i'la reprx'enlavit, ciijus pm- inde. demeritum ad omnes pertinel." In Qu. XII. he quotes with approbation from Augustine, " in illo uno muUi unus homo eratil" adding, by way of explanation, " unitatenonspe- Cifica vp.l numKricij, srd partiin unitate originis, quia omnes ex uno sunt sariguine, partim unitate repr^skstationis, ?ui.a unus omnium personam rrpriesentobat, ex ovdinc Dii." uQu. XVI., pp. 558 f., he establishes his view from Horn. v. 12-14. He says of Tracres ijjiiapTov correctly, that it cannot mean the habit of sin, nor inherent corruption, but .actual sin committed iu the past (pe.ccatum aliqwul actuate, idque 'prx'erilum), which can be no other than the sin of Adam itself (q'^f't/ nnn potest, aliud e.-:se, qua in ipmm Alami jiecca- tum) ; but then he tiu-ns it into the meaning of representative sinning: ^^ Ergo co jieccante, censentur et ipsi />eccasse." He proves this from the analogy of Christ: "In Christo jusli constituimur per justitix imputationem: ergo el pec- catores in Adamo per peccati ipsius impu'alionem." This is precisely the eset^esis of Dr. Hodge, except that Turre- tin translates e<^' w, with Augustin, in quo (viz., Ailamo), while Hodge, more correctly, takes it as a conjunction.] t [Dm. Ridgely, Doddridge, Watts, and Cunningham, of Scotland (in his Hislnricil Tlieo'ng,/, Edinb., 1863, vol. i., p. 515, and in his Reformers and the T/iecjIogy of the Refir- mation, Ediub., 1862, pp. 371 fi'.), are counted on this side. Dr. Hodge, of Princeton, is ttie ablest advocate of imme- diate forensic imputationism. He states it (on Romans, p. 279) as follows: "The doctrine of imputation is clearly taught in this passage (Rom. v.). This doctrine does not include the idea of a mysterious identity of Adam and his race, nor that of a transfer of the moral turpitude of his sin to his desoenilants. It does not teach that his offence was personally or properly the sin of all men, or that his act was, in any mysterious sense, the act of his posterity. Neither does it imply, v.i reference to the right- eou.suess of Christ, th.at His righteousness becomes person- ally and inherently ours, or that His moral excellence is in any way transferred from Him to believers. The sin of Adam, therefore, is no gi'ound to us of remorse; and the righteousness of Christ is no grou-nd of self-complacency in th'ose to whom it is imputed. This doctrine merely teaches that, in virtue of the union, representative and natural, between Adam and Ins posterity, his sm is the ground of their condemnation — that is, of their subjection to penal evils— and that, in virtue of the union between Christ and His people, His righteousness is the ground of their justiti- eation. This doctrine is taught almost in so many words in vers. 12, 15-19. It is so clearly stated, so often repeated or Msumed, and so foi-mally proved, that very few commenta- tors of any class fail to acknowledge, in one form or an- other, that it is tne doetrino of the Apostle." The last is a mistake, as we have shown in the Ex-g. Notes. Dr, Hodge's hostiliti' to the realistic Augustinian view pro- view.* It involves, undoubtedly, an element of truth, but, if detached from the idea of moral par tici|)ation, it resolves itself into a mere legal fiction, and greatly enhances the difficulty of the problem by removing the best reason for imputation. For how can an infinitely just and holy God punish countless millions of liuman beings sinii)ly and sole, ly for the sin of anotlier, in wliieli they had no part whatever? The passage, Ezek. xviii. 1-4, where God rebukes the Israelites for using the proverb of the sour grapes, wliich Julian of Eclanum and his sympathizers have quoted ad namea'ii against the Augustinian theory, returns here with doulde force. Tlie analogy of forensic justification is not to the point, for the righteousness of Christ is not imputed to the impenitent sinner, but only on the subjective condition of faith, by which Christ is apprehended and made our own. Justification presupposes re- generation, or an action of the Holy Spirit, by which He creates repentance of our sins and trust in Jesua Christ, and makes us one with Him. By " being in Christ " is meant, not merely a nominal, putative, or constructive relation, but a real, substantial union ; so also our " being in Adam," by which the other relation is illustrated, is real and vital. This anal- ogy, therefore, leads to the opposite conclusion, that moral participation, either potential or personal, or both, must be the ground of the imputation of Adam's sin. (6.) The New School Calvinists of New England (since the days of the younger Edwards), in radical opposition to Princeton, reject imputation altogether ; but maintain that the sinfulness of the deseendanta of Adam results with infallible certain tj/ (though not with necessity) from his transgression ; the one class holding to hereditary depravity, prior to sinful choice, the other class teaching (with Dr. N. W. Taylor, of New Haven) that the first moral choice of all is uni- versally sinful, yet with the power of contrary choice. This is a peculiar modification of the Pelagian con- ception of liberiim arhitrium, but differs from it in making a nice distinction between natural ability and moral inability.! (7.) The skmi-Pelaoian, and the cognate Armin- lAN theories (of which the former, since the fifth cen- tury, has gained large influence in the Latin, the lat- ter, since the seventeenth century, in a considerable portion of the Reformed Churches, and was adopted by the Wesleyan Metliodists), though by no meana explicit and uniform on this point, agree in that they adtnit the Adamic unity, and the disastrous effecta of the primal apostasy upon the whole posterity of Adam, but regard the native or hereditary corrup- tion not properly as sin and guilt exposing us to just punishment, but only as an evil, an infirmity, mala- dy, and misfortune, for which the most benevolent God provided a sufficient remedy for all. Zwingli taught a similar view, and distinguished original sin as a moral defect or f^'sease (he called it, in the Swiss dialect, Bresten) 1 .jm sin proper. Semi-Pela- gianism holds a medium position between Pelagian- coeds, I think, from a misur derstanding. He does not dis- tinguish between a virtual or potential, and a personal or individual coexistence and eoagency of the race in Adnm, Augustine taught the former only ; the latter is impossible and absurd, unless we hold it in the form of preexistouce, which Augustine expressly rejects.] * [Watts, as quoted by Prof. Fisher, 1. c. p. 50(5, naively confesses that he would gladly renounce this theoi-y if ha could find any other way to vindicate Pro^^de!1ce, I t [Corap. Stuart and ISarnes on Rom. v. ; Prof. Geo. P. Fisher, "The Prince'on Rview on the Theology of Dr. N \V. Taylor," in the New Englander iot April, 18(58.1 CHAPTER V. 12-21. 195 Ism ami Augustinianism ; Arminianism wavers be- Iweeii seiiii-Pclagianisiu and Calvinism ; both roay, ac'cuiding to the elastic nature of compromises, lean now nujre to the one, now to tlie other extreme ; employing at times tlie Augustinian pinaseology, but putting, after all, a ditl'erent interpretation uj)on it. The stationary anthropology nnd hamartiolcigy of the Greek Cliurch occupies a sinalar position, but it never passed through tlie mill of Western contro- versies, aud remains to this day theologically incom- plete. Most evangelical divines of the present day are di- vided between the Augustinian or realistic, the federal or forensic, and the Arminian theories, or they look for a still more satisfactory solution of the difficult proble:n by a future Augustine, who may be able to advance, from a deeper study of the Scriptures, the knowledge of the Church, and reconcile what now seem to be irreconcilable contradictions. It should be remembered tiiat the main difficulty lies in iha fad itself — the undeniable, stubborn, terrible fact — of the universal dominion of sin and death over the entire race, iniants as well as full-grown sinners. No sys- tem of philosophy has ever given a more satisfactory explanation than the great divines of the Church. Outside of the Christian redemption, the fall, with its moral desolation and ruin, remains an impenetra- ble mystery. But immediately after the fall appears, in the promise of the serpent-bruiser, the second Adam, and throws a bright ray of hope into the gloom of despair. In the fulness of the time, accord- ing to God's own counsel, He appeared in our nature, to repair the loss, and to replace tlie temporary reign of sin by the everlasting reign of superabounding grace, winch never could have been revealed in all its power without the fall.* The person and work of the second Adam are the one glorious solution of the problem of the first, and the triumphant vindi- cation of Divine justice and mercy. This is the main point for all practical purposes, and in this, at least, all true Christians are agreed. — P. S.] 3. [In Lange, No. 2.] Criticism of the Anr/nn- tinian doctrine of Sin, and Grace. Augustine, in his controversy with Pelagius, has undoubtedly ex- pressed and defended the Church's sense of religious truth, and thereby become a rich source of blessing to Western Christendom. It cannot be denied, bowever, that the theologico-dogmatical expression of his sense of truth — especially his doctrine of original sin — far transcends the Scriptural bounds, and has done harm by its erroneous features. Au- gustine has not only supported, but also obstructed the Reformation. His explanation of iip iji in ver. 12, which has obscured the exegesis of this passage even in Meyer (not to speak of Tholuck and Philip- pi), is of itself a sufficient testimony of this. See the Excff. Notes. It sets aside the formal freedom • [This idea has found fam-uar expression in devotional lines such as those of Watts : " In Christ the tribes of Adam boast More blessings than their father lost." Bishop Ken {Christian Year, Sunday next before Easter) : " Wbat Adam did amiss, Turned to our endless bliss ; O hap]iy sin, which to atone, Drew Filial God to leave his Throne !" k. Ii. Hillhouse : " Earth has a joy unknown in heaven — Tlie new-b(irn peace of sin forgiven ! Tears of such pure and deep delijrbt, Ye angels ! never dimmed your sight."] which remains even within the material bondagd and slavery, and which, iiider the power of sin, bo comes a /.afij-Jdrti.v of death by means of unbelief but, under the exercise of the gratia pravmicns^ becomes a /.a/i^jurnv of the marks of salvation bj means of faitli. It thus destroys or weakens tho ethical signification of the ).afifiavn,v itself [comp. vers. 11 and 17, and Notes'] in the interest of th« Augustinian dogmatics. Tlie biblical doctrine ol original sin is distinguished from the Augustiniaii mainly in the following respects: {a.) The Bible teaches an ethico-physieal fall of the liunian race from Adam, as a fall in principle ; Augustine, a physico-ethical fall of the human race in Adam, as a completed fact^* Therefore Augus tine ignores the distinction between the inheritanci of the [iropensity and curse of sin, or of death—, which inheritance oppresses all who are Adamically begotten — aud the ethical appropriation of the cor- ruption. {b.) With Augustine, the ideal and potential con- dition of condemnation — that is, the condannable- ncss of men, apart from redemption — coincides with a judicially cornpldid condition of condaiination ; therefore, with him, redemption is properly a new creation. (f.) With Augustine, the exercise of grace, of the Logos, and of the Spirit of God, is theocratically and ecclesiastically bound and limited ; his Christ is, in substance, not greater than the extent {rayon) of the Church ; therefore he does not perceive the gra- dations of the hereditary blessing and of the heredi- tary curse within the general corruption of mankind, and still less the significance of the antithesis in chap. ii. 14, 15, within the whole world. His accep- tation of mere gradations of evil downwardly, is in contradiction with his own system. {d.) A consequence of this extreme view of original sin is his exti'cme view of the government of grace. He had in mind, probably, the great re- ligious truth of the ethical irresistibility of all-con- quering love ; but in his theological system he gave it & fatalistic character in opposition to formal free- dom. {e.) Because, with him, the ideal and potential condemnation of all is aggravated into an actual con- dition of condemnation, he has also — in consequence of the fact that only a part of humanity within the ecclesiastical pale of this world believe and are saved — limited the extent of the effects of the ideal and potential (ii/.aiMfia, or righteous act of Christ ; while Paul teaches that the ilt./.aio)fta has come fit; di,y.ai(i>(ji.v uoj^c,- upon all men. [There is considerable force in these objections to the Augustinian system which apply « fortiori to Calvinism. But they cannot diminish the great merits of the African father, who searched the prob- lem of sin more profoundly than any divine before or after him. He was right in teaching the (virtual or potential) fall of the whole race in Adam, and the sinfulness of our nature, or depraved will, as the source of all sinful volitions, words, and acts. But he did not take into sufficient account that there ia a Divine nd(tKri,(; and dvoyt'j, which hold the ana of God's os^y'i, and suspend the full and fnal ex& cution of the well-deserved judgment, until men make the fill of Adam their personal, individual acl^ and reject the offer of redemption (comp. l.ie re marks on Rom. iii. 24, 25, p. 134). Hence Angus • [Oomp., however, my remarks on pp. 178 and 162.] 196 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. tine consigns even all unbaptized children to condem- nation, although in the miUlest form (Z)e pecc. ori(/., C. 36 : " Iiifaiift perditione panilur, quia pert'uiet wl masmin p'jvditionis." Envhir., c. 93 : " Alilissi. •»a sane omnium pcena erit eoruin, qui prceter pec- satum quod orif/inale traxerunty nullum hisuper mI- diderunl") In this respect even the strictest CaU vinistic divines of our age decidedly dissent I'rom him, and are disposed to hold that all children who die in intUncy, whether bai)tized or not, will be eaved by the infinite mercy of God. Tiiis chajital)ie belief and hope has a strong support in the uui\*er- Bal sufficiciicy of the atonement, and especially in the words of our Saviour concerning little children, spoken witiiout qualification or limitation (Matt. xix. 14 ; Mark x. 11). Tiiere can be no salvation witii- out Christ, even for children ; but God is not bound to the use of His own appointed means, by which the benefits of Christ are ordinarily applied to men. — P. S.] 4. On the question why JiJia(Ti.<;, as the traiiM/ression of the Divine commandment standing clearly before him; naitdnrmfia, as the sin which resulted in a fall ; a/i ci^fTij/ia, as a start! lufpoint of many sins ; 7ta(iuy.o>i, as dis- obedience to the known will of God. These designa- tions and statements set aside such theories on the origin of sin as that of J. Midler (that there was a previous or timeless fall of the human souls), and that of R. llothe (that sin was the original, abnormal condition of humanity proceeding from their mate- rial constitution). 7. The relation of sin to death. Sin is death. * [Pelnsriu-i, in liis suporficial commentary on Romans, rre?orv(Hl iii the works of Jerome and Aui^ustine, explains ii' wot oi'flpuiTrou: "^«!>' unuDi kDiiiiiiem Evaiii."—^. S.] says John (1 John iii. 14, 15) ; sin hringeth forth death, says James (chap. i. 15); sin has, as its wagei or punishment, death as a consequence, says Paul (Rom. vi. 23), This is all the same relation, but from dill'erent points of view. The physical dying of the creature in itself is not thereby meant, but the perishableness of the creature is increased bj ethical or spiritual death (Rom. viii.) ; and the ongi^ nal transformation destined for man (2 Cor, v. 1 ff.) has, by sin, become fearful death, in connection with corruption and the gloom of Sheol. Therefore Death itself is conquered i)y the death of Christ, be- cause its sting is taken from it (1 Cor. xv. 51, 66). The ethical character of death and the salvation of the redeemed from death are brought to light not only in tiie resurrection, but also in the revelation of the original transformation at the end of the world (1 Cor. XV. 51) ; while the ungodly, in spite of the gen- eral resurrection, are subject to the second death (Rev. ii. 11 ; xx. 6, &c.). 8. In the period between Adam and Moses, death appeared to be merely the order of nature, because the paradisaical law had disappeared from knowledge by the foil, and the Mosaic law iiad not yet appeared. Nevertheless, sin was also at that time tlie causality of death, but not as transgression in the light of legal knowledge. The concealed sin against the law dwell- ing in all men (chap. ii. 14, 15) was, indeed, attest- ed by the manifest, tyrannical, and terrible dominion of death. Sin, says Paul, is not imputed where there is no law — that is, not fully settled until the law. But since it is with the gospel that the full significance of the law becomes clear, it follows that condemnation can only come with final hardening of the heart against the gospel. 9. Adim and Ohri^t appear here as principles of the old and new humanity, of the first and second a3on, so far as their posterity is determined by their life. Yet it is not Adam in himself who is the prin- ciple of sin and death, but Adam in his deed — hi.rt 'ch more on Christ's part) ; then the removal of sin by grace, and the triumpii of the new principle (so far as by means of the law it makes sin itself serviceable to its glory). On the construction of these antitheses, compare the general groundwork of the Exeg. Notes. 10. While doctrinal theology has ascribed to the law a threefold use or purpose (bar or bridle, mirror, rule — Ziic/el, Spiegel, Kegel), the Apostle seems here to add a usus qnartm, or rather primus, in so far aa he says that the law must have brought sin to full manifestation and development. This tiiought is not altogether included in the use of the mirror (see the Exeg. Notes), but it is most intimately connected with it. As the knowledge of sin must c-ime by the law, so also the revelation, the bringing of sin ts CHAPTER V. 12-21. 197 Hffht, must eomc by the law. The law has not pro- duced real inward sin, but, like a chemical element, it has introi,>7nXfovd^or(Ta (I Tim. i. 14), a grace supera)>ounding ; that, if thero were more worlds, grace would ' bring salvation ' even unto them all. St. Paul's own parallel shidl end this point (1 Tim. ii. 4). It is God's will that ' all men should be saved.' " — P. S.] HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. What follows from the comparison of Adam with Christ ? 1. That by the one Adam, sin, death, con- demnation, and the dominion of death have come ; 2. But by the one Christ, life, righteousness, and the dominion of grace have come upon all men (vers. 12-21). — Sin and death passed upon all (vers. 12- 14). — Sin as the cause of death : 1. Original sin ; 2. Sins of commission (ver. 12). — They too have sinned who have not committed the same transgres- sion as Adam ; comp. chap. ii. 12 (ver. 14). — All sin is transgression of the law, but not in the same way (ver. 14). — Adam is a figure of Him that was to come (ver. 14). — Man a figure of the Son of Man (ver. 14). — The first and second Adam : 1. Resem- blance ; 2. Difi'erence (vers. 14-19). — The differ- ence between sin and gift. It consists herein : 1. That, through the sin of one, many have died, but that, on the other hand, God's grace and gift have freely abounded unto many ; 2. By one man's sin many have become condemned, but one gift has abounded from many off'ences to righteousness; 3. By the sin of the one, death has reigned over many, but by the one Jesus Christ will many still more rejoice in the dominion of life (vers. 15-17). — The sole man Jesus Christ ; not only (1.) one, but also (2.) the only one of His character (ver. 15). — Yet how differ- ent are the fnnts of sin and righteousness ! 1. The fruit of the former is condemnation ; 2. The fruit of the latter is justification of life (ver. 18).^Aa condemnation is come unto all men, so also is justi- fication of life (ver. 18). — The universality of Divine grace brought to pass by the righteousness of Christ (ver. 18). — The different eff'ects of Adam's disobe- dience and Christ's obedience (ver. 19). — For what purpose did the law enter? 1. Not merely to niaka sin prominent ; but, 2. To bring it to a crisis ; and so, 3. To prepare for grace by Jesus Cluist our Lord (vers. 20, 21). Luther : As Adam has corrupted us with foreign sin without our fault, so has Christ saved us with foreign grace without our merit (ver. 14). — Notice that he speaks here of original sin, which has come from Adam's disobedience ; therefore every thing ia sinful which pertains to us ( rer. 18). — As Adam't TS58 THE EriSTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. Bin has become our own, so has Christ's righteous- ness become our own (ver. 19). Bknhel : (iod's gift is grace, flowing from the Father upon Ilim, and through Him to us. Starkk : Believers are, by the spiritual life of the new bitth, reigning ]o be fellow-kings in the heaven of gloi'y (ver. 17). — universal grace of God, by which all may be saved by Christ ! 1 Tim. ii. 4 ; Acts xvii. 80, 31 (ver. 18). — A small drop of grace can calm and engulf the raging waves of corruption (ver. 20). — Crameu : As no one can deny that he is mortal, BO also must no one say that he is not sinful (vi-r. 14). — Nova B'tbl. 7'ub. : Sin has a mighty kingdom and dominion. Let nobody regard it as small and contemptiljle ! Yet the kingdom of grace is much more mighty. The purpose of the latter is to de- stroy the former ; where the kingdom of grace in- creases, the kingdom of sin declines. The former brings lite, the latter death. GKitLAcn : There is this great difference between the effects of the fall and of redemption : the effects of the former consist in a strongly legal judgment, which must ensure condemnation in eonsequfnce of a single transgression ; but the effects of the latter are a free gift, which made amends not merely for one sin, but for all the repetitions of Adam's trans- gression that have arisen from that first one ; and it has made amends so completely, that it has really effected in fallen men the righteousness required by the law (ver. 16). — So powerfully does gi-ace operate on those who have received its fulness, that they, by grace, become rulers in life through Jesus Christ (ver. 17). Lisco : Mankind is united in Adam and Christ ; therefore the sin of Adam became the sin of all, and Christ's offering became the propitiation for all. As every leaf of the tree suffers by disease of the root, so does every one recover by its restoration ; thus it is with mankind in Adam and Christ (vers. 12-21). — Death is the groat evil that was begotten by sin (ver. 12). — As Adam's sin has become ours, so has Christ's righteousness become ours (ver. 19). RiEGEu : This little passage is as the pillar of fire in the wilderness ; dark and threatening toward the Egyptians and impenitent, but bright and clear toward the Israelites. This passage lightens and thunders against hard sinners, who treat every thing lightly ; but it shines with the lovely splendor of grace upon penitent and anxious souls (ver. 20). Heubnku : The dominion of sin in the world is not God's work, but man's guilt. — The universality of corruption should not comfort, but humiliate us : 1. We should each be ashamed before all the rest ; 2. We should be ashamed before the inhabitants of other worlds, who perhaps do not know any thing about sin ; '6. We should so much the more bear in mind, that, amid the universal sinfulness, we shall not be the oidy pure ones ; 4. We must therefore work out our salvation the more earnestly by prayer, and faith in Christ (ver. 12). — Adam is the natural, Christ is the spiritual ancestor ; the former is the transgressor of the Divine commandment, the latter the fulfiUer of the whole Divine law ; the former is the cause of death and human corruption, the latter the author of life, redemption, an(i holiness (ver. 14). — The real ground why the operation of Divine grace is as universal as the sinful corruption from Adam, is this : that ffrace knows no other limits than -hose which man himself sets by unbelief (ver. 17). — The more man is pervaded by the knowledge of his sin, the richer will be his reception of grac4 (Luke vii. 47). Besskk : By one upon all (vers. 12-21). — The saving counsel of God has always been one and the same to all men, not only to the children of Abra ham, but to all the sons of Adam (ver. 12). — Death, having once stepped its foot into the world, haa forced its way to all men (ver. 12). — Sin has become a natiiral power over persons, which cannot be di* lodged by the blows of any club ; but grace — which does not enter with compulsory power, but with the evangelical drawing of the word of God — is so powerful that it breaks the power of nature (ver. 12). — Death reigned. Well for us that this is said as of a ruler who is dead (ver. 17). — The new de- cree, " You shall live," which is warranted by the empty grave of Jesus Christ, is higher and stronger than the old decree, " You nmst die," which is con- firmed by millions of graves (ver. 17). — The Apostle once more recapitulates the abundance of doctrine which he has demonstrated all along from ver. 12 : Slu^i dea'h, grace, rightcoiixness, life. These five stand thus : grace rises highest in the middle ; the two conquering giants, Sin and Death, at the left ; the double prize of victory. Righteousness and Life, at the right ; and over the buried name of Adam the glory of the name of Jesus blooms (ver. 21). SciiLEiERMACHER, ou ver. 19 : The effects of the death of the Redeemer, so far as it was a work of His obedience. — Deichert: Has the Christ who died for us become the Christ within us ? — How much more blessed to live under grace than under the law ! Lange : Adam and Christ in the internal and historical life of mankind. — As all men are compre- hended in the fall of Adam, so, and still more, are they in the righteousness of Christ. — As sin and death have assumed the appearance of personal, princely powers, in order to extinguish the personal life of mankind, so does the personal God again elevate men, by the glorious personality of Christ, to a personal life in royal freedom. — The antithe- sis between Adam and Christ : 1. In personal ef- fects (ver. 15); 2. In essential effects (ver. 16); 3. In the destruction of the apparently personal life of sin, and the restoration and glorification of the true personal life of grace, or the false and the true pa(Tvlf{ii-vv (ver. 17); 4. In the final aims of both (ver. 18) ; 5. In the full manifestation of both in the light of the gospel (ver. 19). — The glory of God's grace in the exercise of its authority. How it haa not only, 1. Conquered sin and death ; but, 2. Even made them of service. — The Divine art of distin- guishing the effect of the law. — The twofold charac- ter of the law : 1. Apparently a promotion of sin ; but, 2. Really a communication of grace. — Adam, Moses, and Christ. — How far does Moses appear to stand on Adam's side ; but how far does he rather stand on Christ's side ? — The twofold effect of the law and of legality in the history of the world.— The twofold curse of the law : 1. The curse of the law, well understood, leads to salvation ; 2. The curse of the law, misunderstood, leads to ruin. [BuRKiTT (.ondensed): Every sin we commit in defiance of the threatenings of God is a justifying of Adam's rebellion against God. Our destruction is in ourselves, by our actual rebellion ; and at the great day we shall charge our sin and misery upon ourselves — not on God, not on Satan, not on instru- ments, and not on our first parents. — Henry: We are by Christ and His righteousness entitled to, and CHAPTER v. 12-21. 1U9 Instated m, nu re and greater privileges than we lost by the offence of Adam. The plaster is wider than tlie wound, and more healing than the wound is kill- ing — KfOTT : Insti'ad ol [jerplexing ourselves about the incomprehensible but most righteous dispensa- tion of God, in permitting the entrance of sin and death, let us learn to adore Ills grace for providing 80 adequate a remedy for that awful catastrophe. — A.8 our children have received a sinful and suttering nature from the liist Adam, let us be stirred up by tlieir pains and sorrows to seek for them the bless- ings of the second Adam's righteousness and salva- tion.— -Wesley (Sermon on God's Love to Fallen ilan, Rom. v. 15) : The more we deal our bread to the hungry and cover the naked with garments, and tl e more kind offices we do to those that groan un- d,;r the various ills of human life, the more comfort We receive even in the present world, and the great- er the recompense we have in our own bosom. — DwiGiiT : The subject of moral evil is too extensive and mysterious to be comprehended by our under- standing. Many things connected with it lie wholly boyoud our reach. But where knowledge is unat- tainable, it is our duty and interest to trust humblj and submissively to the instructions of lllrn who if the Onlji IF/'.sr. — Ci.auke : The grace of the gospel not only redeems from death and restores to life, bu^ brings the soul into such a relationship with God, and into such a participation of eternal glory, as we have no authoiity to believe would have been the portion of Adam himself, had he even eternally re- tained his innocence. — Hodge: We should iiefer yield to temptation on the ['round that the sin to which we are solicited appears to be a trifle (meielj eating a forijidden fruit), or that it is but for once. Remember the one oifence of one man. How often has a man, or a family, been ruined forever by one sin ! — Compare Isaac de la Peyrere's Men before Adam (London, 165(5), in wliieh the author attempts to prove that the first men were created before Adam, and builds up a curious theological system on that supposition. — Compare also W. Buckland's Inquiry wlnther the Hentence of Death pronounced at the Fall of Man included the Whole Animal Cre- ation^ or was restricted to the Human Race. Lon- don, 1839.— J. F. H.] PRELIMINART REMARKS ON THE CONSTRUCTION OF CHAPTERS VT.-VHI. After the Apostle has exhibited the antithesis of Adam and Christ in its principal or fundamental form and significance, chap. v. 12-21, he passes on to exhibit the same antithesis in all its conse- quences, first of all for believers, but then also for the whole world. The negative side of this consequence is exhibit- ed in chaps, vi. and vii. : The dying with Christ to Bin and to the entire old form of life. The positive side is exhibited in chap. Tiii. : The new life in Christ. I. The first division is again divided into four parts. A. As Christians have fundaToentally (objective- ly by the death of Christ himself, and subjectively through the faith sealed by baptism) died with Christ to sin in order to walk in newness of life, so should they act as those who are dead to sin. For their new life is an organic connection with Christ, an organic development ; yet it is not a life subject to fatalistic natural necessity, but, in conformity with fellowship with Christ, it is a life in true freedom, as life after Adam has been one in false freedom, or the seeming freedom of hard service. It is a re- ligiously or ethically organic relation ; chap. vi. 1-11. B. Because believers are dead to sin, they are n-ee from its dominion. They should therefore take knowledge of the fact that they are delivered, and keep themselves from the bondaae of sin ; and in the power of their freedom, they should yield them- selves under grace to be the servants of I'ighteous- ness ; chap. vi. 12-23. C. But their being dead to sin means also that tLey, as those who passed into newness of life, have received in themselves the new principle of life, which is righteousness, or the inward substance of >he law. Therefore, by Christ, they are dead to the law iu the narrower sense, in which they lived in matrimonial alliance. They should serve, not in out- ward ordinances, but inward principle — firom the force of grace, the impulse of the heart ; chap. vii. 1-6. D. But if to he dead to sin means also to be deed to the law, as well as the reverse, there follows notn- ing therefrom contrary to the holiness of the law. The law, rather, was designed, by its constant opera- tion in awakening and increasing the conflict with sin, to effect the transition from the state of sin to the state of grace ; chap. vii. 7-25. II. The second or positive part is thus prepared. The condition of believers is free from all condem- nation, because, in harmony with its character, it ia a life in the Spirit of Christ. But it is a life in the Spirit which is prepared by the Spirit through the glorification of the body and the whole nature ; for the Spirit, as the Spirit of adoption, is the first se- curity for it, and the believer is certain of it before- hand in blessed hope ; chap. viii. A. This life in the Spirit now demands, first of all, the laying off, in the conduct of the Christian, of all carnal lusts, which must, however, be distin- guished from a positively ascetic mortification of the body ; chap. viii. 1-10. B. As the Spirit of God testifies to adoption, so does it, as the Spirit of the risen Christ, secure the inheritance — that is, the renewal of the body, and the glorification of life; vers. 11-17. The certain- ty of this blessed hope is established : a. On the de- velopment of life in this world, vers. 18-30 ; b. On the future or heavenly administration of the love of God and the grace of Christ, which make all the forces that apparently conflict with salvation even serviceable to its realization ; vers. 31-39. Meyer's inscription over chaps, vi.-viii. is : " Eth- ical Effects of the 6iy.ai,o(ivvri Stov. Chap. vL 1 shows that the dix., far from giving aid to inimo. rality, is the first to exclude it, and to promote, restore, and vitalize virtue ; and chap. viii. exhibit* the blessed condition of those who, being justified, are morally free." Tholuek : " It has been showr down to this point how much the Christian has re- ceived by that dix. tiktt. ; chap. i. 17. It is th* mention of the fulness of grace called forth by th« 200 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. powiir of sin, that nov^ leads the Apostle to exhibit the moral conseqiK'nces of this communication of grace, wiiich in turn leads him further (chap. vii). to the statement of the insufficiency of the legal economy ; and in antithesis thereto (chap, viii.), to the moral effects of the economy of grace and it! saving issue ; so that the Apostle, after am- pli ying and enriching the explanations between chap. i. 18 and chap, v., returns to the same point with which chap. v. concluded." The Apost'e doc^ indeed, return to the same point with which, not th« whole of chap. v. concluded, but with which chap V. 11. concluded, but in a sense altogether different, inasmuch as from chap. v. 12 on, the Apostle bring! out, not merely the actual antagonism of sin and grace in humanity, as before, but the prmcipial an- tagonism of the two principles in its ethical and organic aspect. SicOND Section. — 77ie contradiction between sin and grace. The calVmg of Christians to neicness of life, since they were translated by baptism into the death of Christ from the sphere of sin and death into the sphere of the new life. Chap. VL 1-11. 1 "What shall we say then ? Shall [May] ' we continue in sin, that grace raay 2 abound ? God forbid [Let it not be I].'' How shall we, that are dead [who died] 3 to sin, live any longer therein ? Know ye not, that so many of us as [all we who] ' were baptized into Jesus Christ [Christ Jesus] * were baptized into hia 4 death ? Therefore we are [were] buried with him by [through] baptism into death : that [in order that] like [o-nn like] as Christ was raised up from the dead by [through] the glory of the Father, even [omit even] so we also should 5 walk in newness of life. For if we have been planted together in [become united ^ with] ^ the likeness of his death, we shall be also in [toith] the likeness 6 of his resurrection : Knowing this, that our old man is [was] crucified with him, that [in order that] ' the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth V we should not serve [be slaves to] ' sin. For he that is dead [hath died] ° is 8 freed [acquitted] from sin. Now it' we be dead [died] with Christ, we believe 9 that we shall also live with him : '" Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more ; death hath no more dominion over him [dominion over 10 him no more]. For in that [or, the death that] " he died, he died unto sin once 11 [for all] : but in that [or, the life that] he liveth, he liveth unto God. Like- wise [Thus] reckon ye also yourselves to be [omit to be] ''^ dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord [iv XQiazoo 'Itjaov, in Christ Jesus. Omit our Lord].'^ TEXTUAL. 1 Ver. 1.— [The reading of the iZc<". (ejri.uevou/iiev) is poorly supported. A. B. C. D. F. read ewinevtaiifv; adopted by Griesliach, Lachmann, Tischondorf, Meyer, Alt'oid, Wordsworth. The above emendation is supported by the last two editors. N. K., and some cursives, have eTrifievo i^ev. * Ver. 2. — [ Mr/ yecoiroisa very forcible negative. How it should be rendered, is perhaps a matter of taste, but the God fiirbid expresses its foroibleness as no other English phrase can. Comp. Guhiltaus, ii. 17 ; p. 49, notf. 3 Ver. .3. — [The E. V. is literally correct, but the reference seems to be to those baptized as a whole (Meyer) ; hcnco the emendation, which is adopted liy Alford, Wordsworth, Amer. Bible Union. * Ver. 3. — [B., and a number of cursives and fathers, omit 'lrivToi. « Ver. 5. — [Tn of the E. V. is not found in the Greek. With, in both clauses, is borrowed from (tvijl. — P. S.] Ver. 2. Let it not be [/(^^ yivouro']. See cnap. iii. 4, (J [and Textual Xole ", p. 112.— P. S.]. How shall -are who died to sin [oiTi'Vf(; nn t avo u tv ti_ ^((«(*T«'a.] O'lTiiVn; [de- cribing the quality^, as such who. Living in sin is utterly contradictory to the character of Christians. And the contradiction is very intense, not simply because of the aversion and repulsion between natu- ral death and life referred to by Rungius (see Tlio- luck).* The Christian is specifically dead to sin ; and the liffi in sin., as a dejinitily false life., is op- posed to this definite death. We have here an ex- pression, therefore, not merely of " freedom from all life-fellottiidiip with ;;/(«(^Tor, v. 12, and anf- •©"aj'TTl (ri'r Tf5 Xqi,itt>, (Tv(nar(jo7;ucu, &c., signifies the life-union of the believer with Christ ; comp. the remarks of Tholuck, p. 281 f. — P. S.]. Buried in death; an oxymoron, according to which burial precedes and death follows, as is illustrated in the immersion into the bath of baptism. The analogous feature in the life of Christ was His rejection by the world, and His violent death on the cross. The expression de- notes not only a burial before death and for death, but it is likewise an expression of the decision and completion of death, and, finally, a reference to the transition from death to the resurrection. The fin- ished xardl^aAa;, 6 TTaAAaib? aj'^ptorroy danTeTou, Kat KaraSu? /caTca Kpvmerai 6\oi^ KadaTTO^' elra avai'cvoi^Tutu ij^ioVy 6 Kaivoi; afCKTi iroAti'. Hi^ then quotes Col. ii. 12 ; Rom. vi. (j. Bloomfield : "There is a plain allusion to the ancient mode of baptism by immersion ; on which, sec Suioer's Thes. and Bingbam's Ant-'quilies." Barnes : " It is altogether pi-oba- 'ble that the Apostle has allusion to the custom of baptizing by immersion." Cony beare and Uowson : "This passage .cannot be understood, unless it be borne in mind that the primitive baptism was by immersion." Webster and Wil- kinson : "Doubtless there is an allusion to immersion, as ■the usual mide of baptism, introduced to show that bap- tism symbolized also our spiritual resurrection, isjrep .mipOr) X." Comp. also Bengel, Ttiickcrt, Tholuck, Meyer. The objection of Philippi (who, however, himself regards this allusion probable in ver. 4), that in this case the Apos- tle would have expressly mentioned the symbolic act, has •no force in view of the daily practice of baptism. But im- .morsionists, on the other hand, make an unwarranted use of this passage. It should be remembered, that immersion js not comfiiandcd here, but simply alluded to, and that the immersion, or KaTdSvfiiv^. In newness of life ; that is, in a new kind and form of life, which is gubsequently denoted as incorruptibility, and therefore also by implication as continual newness ami perpetual re- newal of existence. Consequently, more than twjy xaH'7 (GrotiuB).f [Meyer, Alford : " Not ' a new life ; ' — nor are such expressions ever to be diluted away thus." — P. S.] Walk gives prominence to the practical proof of this newness in new, free conduct of life. Ver. 5. For if we have grown together [ft ydQ (7v /n (ftvroi, yf yo va/( f i']. The ex-. pression avfiqmroq, denoting originally inborn [innate] ; born icith [congenital, connate], means here the same as ati/Kfiviji;, grown togelher b;/ nature. [Grotius : coaluhnus ; Tholuck, Philippi, Meyer: ZHSammengewachsen, verwaclisen mil, coticretus ; Stu- art : become homogeneous ; Alford : intimately and progress! veil/ united. — P. S.] The expression com- plautati (Vulgate, Luther [E. V. : planted to ;ethcr^ ) goes too far, and is not justified by the language ; i while the interpretation grafted i: to (Erasmus [Cal- vin, Estius, Conybeare and Howson], and others) does not express enough here [and would require i/^qivTiVTOi;, insiti'ius. — P. S.] The figure denotes believers as a unity of different branches in one root or one trunk. These characters, which are united in one spirit, as the grapes of a chister, have sprung from one gospel or new principle of life. Thus be- lievers have grown into an image or attalogue of (he death of Jesus (rrlj o/fOKii/iart, dative of direc tion), but not with such an analogue (Meyer, Tho. * [Sofa and Siivafiii are closely related ; comp. the He« brew "iS, and to Kparo^ t-^s S6(rit, Col. i. 11. Meyer ex« plains &6(a, die glorreiche GesammlvollJcommenheit Gotles. — P. S.] t [So also Koppe, Reiche, Stuart : " Kai«'(jTr)Ti t^j ^ ^ I regard as a Hebraistic f unn, in which the liist noun s;.p- plies the place of the adjective." Against this dilution, comp. Winer, p. Jll, Meyer and Alforf in Ik: The ab. stract noun Kan-dnjs gives greater promimnce to the qual- ity of /leiof/csv, which is the chief point here ; comp. ] Thess. ii. 11 ; 1 Tim. vi. 17.— P. S.] t [vTOi is not derived from <^vt£v(i>, (o pla'tt (^vt«w Tos, used by Pl.ito), but from <^uu», or ^uo/ia<, io grow. Comp. 1 the different meanings of vi^.t, Keich* Fritische, and PhiUjipi in luc. — P. S.] CHAPTER VI. 1-11. 203 luck), with which we cannot connect any clear thought. [Phiiippi and Meyer explain : grown to- gether, or, intimately ocrmected with the likeness of His death ; the oftoiiD/ta being spiritual death, so that the meaning is : If we are spritually dead to sin, lis Chri.st was physically dead, &c. So in the other clause our spiritual resurrection is the o/iotw/'tt of the bodily resurrection of Christ. — P. S.] Nei- ther can rijj ofiono/iaTi. be the dative of instru- N mcnt : We have grown together with Christ [tio XifKrio) being understood as in ver. fj] tliroufffi the resemblance of His death-baptism, the likeness of His death (Ei-asmus [Beza, Grotius], Fritzsche, Baur [Van Hengel], and most others). For [this would require ai'Tji after aviKfiToi., and] Believers a.re not grown together by the likeness of the death of Christ, but by His death itself in a religious sense, as cause (through the medium of the gospel), in order that, as an organism, they should now exhibit as a copy His death in the ethical sense. We shall be also with his resurrection [«/./.« Aui r ijq a vci(T rda I ok; « c 6 /< f 5 a ]. The antithesis is strengthened by aX/.d [which is iised sometimes also by the classics for the rapid and emphatic introduction of the antithetical idea in the apodosis after a hypothetical protasis ; see Meyer 171 loc, and Ilartung, Pnrtikelhhre, ii. p. 40. — P. S.]. We shall also be grown together with Him into the likeness of His resurrection (Beza, Grotius, Meyer, Phiippi ; Tholuck : " abbreviated comparative "). Not avfiqivroi' Tt^i; dvaffTfiafoii; (Erasmus, Calvin, Olshausen, and others).* The reference of the ex- pression to the resurrection of the body (by Tertul- lian, and others) is not in harmony with the context (see ver. 4) ; )'et is altogether authorized by ver. 9, if we regard the new life as continuing to the bodily resurrection (therefon! an ethical and physical resurrection, which Meyer and Tholuck oppose). The future, tVd.Hffla, is indeed not imperative (Keiche [Olshausen, Stuart : expressive of obliga- tion] ) ; nor does it denote willingness (Fritzsche), but the certainty of the result, the necessary conse- quence of dying together with Christ [Tholuck, Meyer, Hodge], if we understand thereby not merely a natural consequence, Ijut an ethical one, which in- volves an ever-new willingness. Tliis is likewise in- dicated by what immediately follows. Ver. 6. Knowing this. That objective rela- tion of the resurrection is not only confirmed by the subjective consciousness (Meyer), but it is also con- ditioned by it. That our old man [6 ^raA«^o? Tjfuov a V lO () i<) 7r o g ]. Meyer : our old ec/o. This is liable to misunderstanding, and expresses too much. Meyer further explains : " Personification of the entire state of sinfulness before the nahyyfvfrria (John iii. 3 ; Titus iii. 5 ; Eph. iv. 22; ; Col. iii. 9)." This expresses too little. The old man is the whole sin- fulness of man, which, proceeding from Adam, and pervading the old world and making it old, has be- come, in the concrete human image, the pseudo- plasmatic phantom of human nature and the human form f (see chap. viii. 3). Tholuck's explanation is • [Grammatically, this is not impossible, since aviJ.vTO<; Is constructed with the arenitive as well as with the dative ; but rrj oioKT-Tcia-ei would have been more natural in this cfuse ; hence it is better to supply vToi ruJ ofioidJfiaTi, to that TTj^ avatrriaeoii depends upon t. o/uouo^ari. — P. S.] t [One of Lange's hardesi sentences : " D r alle Menmh isi die liiihi itHch,' Sundlw/ligTidit des iUnschi-n, vie sie von Adam ouag liitid, die alle Wi'lt durchziehend und zur alien naeherui in dan concreten Menschenbilde mmn pseitdoplasvia- almost unintelligible : " Indication of the tpo of th« earlier personality ; as in taui wrfl^ojTzoc, 6 y.(JV7Z^ Tcx; iv tt] y.a(it)ia dvO^ionot;, 1 Peter iii. 4.* Was [not is, as in the E. V.] crucified with him [fri)»'f (TTai''(»oi i9 ;/, comp. Gal. ii. 2t>: A^^*ff- Tiji (TfVKrTaT(j(i)/Aai. ■ Uo) iii oix.iTi. iyo'), oj di if i/ioi A'(/KTToi,]. " Namely, at the time when we were baptized," says Meyer [referring to vers. 3, 4]. But this is rather a superficial view. Baptism haa actually and individually realized a connection which had already been realized potentially and generally in the death on the cross ; see 2 Cor. v. 14, 16 ; Gal. ii. 19; Col. iii. 1. Tholuck: " Calovius says verj properly against Grotius : auv nou, similitudinem notat, verum simultatem, ut ita dicam, et commu- NioxEM. The accessory idea of pain, or of gradual death [advocated by Grotius, Stuart, Barnes], could hardly have been thought of in this connection by the Apostle." Yet we are also reminded of the violence and effective energy of the death on the cross by the following : in order that the body of sin might be destroyed. The destructive power of the death on the cross involves not merely pain and sor- row, but also the ignominy of the cross of Christ. According to Meyer, Paul only made use of the ex« pression because Christ had died on the cross. In order that the body of sin might be destroyed [i'ra xar uq y r^ &rj to aoi/ia t^s afia^Tiai;; comp. to awfia t^c; aafjxoi;, Col. iL 11, and TO /ia rTji; iTaQ/.6(;, Col. i. 29. Similarly Alford, after De Wette; tlie body, which belongs to or serves sin, in which sin rules or is manifested, = tm /<«'/'/, ver. 13, in which is 6 v6,uoi; rrjt; aiiaQrlai;, vii. 23. Wordsworth : the body of sin is our body, so far as it is the seat and instrument of sin, and the slave of sin.— P. S.] c. Tlie body as mo/ia rtji; (ra^y.oi;, and the latter the seat of sin (Sender, IJsteri, Riickert, Ritschl, Rothe, Ilofmann ; see Tholuck, p. 290).* 3. The anti-dualistic expositors, who interpreted this ai'i/ia as the real body or the natural man, were compelled to render improperly tiie xaTai)yr]Ori, as: evacuaretur, might be made inoperative and power- less. [Tertullian, Augustin; also Stuart and Barnes: might be deprived of efficiency, power, life. Alford : rendered powerless, annulled, as far as regards ener- gy and activity. — P. S.] That henceforth vre should not be slaves to sin. [Calvin: ''^ fimnn aholitionis notaV'\ Sin is regarded as the controlling power (see ver. 16) ; John viii. 44. If this power is to be broken, the body of sin must be crucified. The reason for this is given in what follows. [to*' fajy.tri, dovhinLV fjfia(; T-Jj c(iia{>Tia is a more concrete expression of the aim than tlie preceding clause, iva y.axaijytjO't'i, x.T.A. See Winer, p. 569.— P. S.] Ver. 7. For he that hath died is acquitted from sin. ['O y(t() ano 0-avMV S^d'i^xaloyrai, an 6 rtjq ana,{)rlaq; comp. 1 Peter iv. 1 ; oVt 6 TiaOitjv iv (TaQxl, ninavTaiy a/taQrlaq. The in- terpretations of this passage depend upon the mean- tog of anoO-avmi, whether it is to be taken in a ♦ [Tholuck takes trMika in the literal sense, but viewed M the Stat and nrgnn of sin (p. 303), and enters in this con- nection into a full discussion of the moaning of irap^, and Its relation to sin, p. 296 ff. ; but the proper place for a bib'ico-psychologioal excursus on o-apf, (jiijjko., i//v;^ij, voOs, nvtviiA, is chap. vii. See below. — I*. S.J physical, or in a moral (legal), or in a spiritial (rays- tic) sense — P. S.] The chief and only question here is not ethical dyii.g, or dying with Christ (Eras- mus, Calvin, Cocceius, Bengel, Olshausen [De Wette, Philippi], and others. And the reason for this is, first, because justification must not be regarded as the consequence, but the cause of the ethical dying with Christ. Second, because not merely the being justified or freed from sin should be proved, in and of itself, but the being justified or freed from sin by death. An e;u']ier, alieady present, universal, moral, and theocratical law of life is thus used to illustrate the new, religious, and ethical law of life in Chris- tianity, in the same way that chap. viL 1-6 has refer- ence to such a law. The universal prmeiple whicii the Apostle makes his grotmdwork here in the figura tive expression, is the word in ver. 23 : The wajei of sin is death. The Grecian and Roman form of this antithesis was : by execution the offender is jus- tified and separated from his crime (AletluBus, Wolf, and others). The theocratic form was the same decree of death for sin, according to Gen. ii. 17 ; ix. 6 ; Lev. xxiii. 1 ff. The sinner who was made a curse-offering, Clierem, was morally destroyed in a symbolical sense, but, at the same time, his guilt also, as well as his life of sin, was destroyed in a symbolical sense. According to Gen. ii. 17, the same thing held good of natural death, not so far as it, as a momentary power, put an end to the sinner's present life (Chrysostom, and others), but rather be. cause it made a penal suffering extending into eternity (Sheol) the punishment of sin. All these modifica- tions are grouped in the primitive law : death is the wages of sin ; and this is the law which the Apostle makes the image of the Christian law of life. The Cinistian dies to sin by being crucified with Christ. Now, the being justified does not mean here justifica- tion by faith in itself (although dying with Christ is connected therewith), but justification as a release from sin by the death of the sinner himself. Be- cause Meyer ignores the complete Old Testament idea of death, he attacks the statute of Jewish the- ology : death, as the punishment of sin, atones for the guilt of sin. He explains the Apostle's decla- ration thus : " He is made a dlxaioq by death, not as if he were now free from tlie guilt of his sina committed in life, but so far as he sins no more." Tbe explanation of ethical death with Christ (Rothe, Philippi, and others already mentioned) here makes what is to be proved the proof itself (as Meyer prop- erly remarks). Meyer refers the passage to physical death as exit from the present life — a view in which regard is not paid to penal suffering.* Better than this is the view : As activity ceases in the dead, and sin with it, so should it also be with you who have died with Christ (Theodoret, Melanchthon, Grotius). But there is the same inadequateness of the com- j)arison. Tlioluck's exposition is utterly untenable (with reference to Calvin, Bengel, Spener, and oth- ers), that sin should here be regarded as a creditor who has just claims on man, &c. ; for, while a debtor is released by death from his creditor, there is by no means a dixaiovaOau of the debtor from his debt.f ♦ [Meyer's view is, that he who is physically dead is free from sin, because he is free from tlie body, the seat of sin. But this, as Philippi remarks, is contrary to the biblical and Pauline anthropology. — P. S.] t [We add the views of leadinp; English and American commentators : Scott, 5I;ioknipht, and Hodge : He who ia dead loiih Clirid is frerd from the guilt and punishment oi sin by justification. Stuart nnd IJarnes : The Apostle ap- plies a common Jewish proverb concerning physical deaths CHAPTER VI. 1-11. 205 Ver. 8. Now if we died with Christ, &c. [ £ ( fw]. All His life, His whole glorious life, is for God. As His death consisted wholly in the ethical reaction against sin, so His life consists wholly in consecration to God, His honor, and His kingdom. [Christ's life on earth was also a life for God, but in conflict with sin and death, over which He triumphed in the resurrection. — P. S.] Theophylact's view is wrong : by the power of God. Ver. 11. Thus reckon ye also yourselves (account yourselves) dead indeed unto sin [Oi'Toii; v.al vf(fl(; }.oyl!^f(Tx)e ianoii; vf- x^ohi; ftev ttj a/(a^Tt'a]. A /.oyi^iaOav of Christ does not stand as a parallel to Xoyi'Cfadf (which is imperative, and not indicative, as Bengel would have it).f It should rather be derived from the meaning of the death of Christ, according to ver. 10. But alive unto God in Christ Jesus [Iv Xq. 'Jijij.]. That is, in fellowship, or living union with Him (not merely tlirough R\m).\ It refers not simply to living to God (Riickert, De Wette [Al- ford] ), but also to being dead to sin [Reiche, Mey- er]. The Xoyi^Kjfyfr requires of Christians that they should understand what they are as Christians, aa members of Christ, according to the duties of com. mon fellowship (Tholuck, Philippi); but not that they should attain to this condition by moral efl'orl * [The dative of reference or relation ; in point of fact, in the case ol afiaprCa it is the Dalivus incommodi, or detru mcnti ; while in the next clause tw Bhu is the Dat. corrif rmdi.—V. S.] ' ' t fThe indicative would rather require : ovto) koX fifittt AoyifoMeSa, instead of the second person. Alford is quite mistaken, when he says : "Meyer only holds it to be in. dica'Jvu." Meyer, on the contrary, takes Aoyi^eo-Se to bs the iwperaHve, in harmony with the hortative character ol what follows.— P. S.l X [Meyer : iv X. *I. is not per Christum (Grotius, Fritzsohe, c/.), but denotes the clemint in which the beiug dead and being alive holds. Comp. "Winer, Gramm., p. 361 —P. S.] 206 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. (Baur). That is, Christian life proceeds upon the believing presupposition of our completion in Christ; but this completion is not, reversely, brought to pass by a moral eflbrt. Of course, the telic completion then meets the principial completion as the goal of tifort. DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. 1. See the rreliminary Remarks on chaps, vi.— /iii., and the inscription to the present section, chap, vi. 1-11. 2. On chap. vi. 1. The false conclusion which anoiu/a?i)sm has ever derived from the fact that sin, in its complete development, occasions a still more glorious revelation of grace, rests on the erroneous supposition that the ethical and organic relation on both sides is a purely natural relation, which justifies to an altogether passive conduct in religious and moral things. Tliis anomiauism appears in Indian heathendom, as well as in modern humanitarianism, chiefly in a pantheistic form. But in Christian re- ligiousness it appears only sporadically in this form ; yet mostly, on the otlier hand, in dualistic forms. This is as much as to say, that if the flesh be in- dulged in its sphere, the spirit will likewise maintain the ascendency in its sphere ; or, grace will over- come sin, and the like. But in every form this ano- miauism is to the Apostle an object of religious and moral abhorrence, which he expresses by /i>j ylvoiro. He opposes tliis false conclusion by tlie truth of the relation according to which the whole of Christianity is rooted in a thoroughly religious and moral act^ the death of Jesus. 3. Baptiiim, in its full meaning, is a dying with Christ, which is potentially grounded in the dynamic meaning of His dying for all (2 Cor. v. 14), and is actually realized in the dynamical genesis of faith. It follows from this that it is not only a partial puri- fication of the living sinner, but his fundamental purification by a spiritual death and burial ; that, further, it not merely represents sensibly and seals the single parts and acts of the Christian life, but its whole justification, in all its parts ; and therefore that it is .available, operative, and obligatory once for all. It follows, finally, that baptism is not sim- ply an ecclesiastical act performed on the individual, when the individual is passive, but an ethical cove- nant-transaction between Christ and the one who is baptized ; wherefore even the baptism of children presupposes in the family, the parents, or the spon- sors, a spirit of faith which represents and encom- passes the child. From all this it will be seen how very much bap- tism is obscured and desecrated by regarding it either as a mere ceremony which certifies the Christian life of the person baptized, or, on the other hand, as a onesided and magical act which is supposed to create the Christian life. [In opposition to the low and almost rationalistic riews now prevailing in a large part of Protestant- isoQ on the meaning and import of Christian baptism, it may be well to refer to the teacliing of the sym- bols of the Reformation down to the Westminster standards, and of the older divines, which is far deep- er. Take, for instance, the Westminster Confession of Faith (chap, xxviii.) : " Baptism is a sacrament of the New Testament, ordained by Jesus Christ, not only for the solemn admission of the party baptized into the visible Church, but also to be unto him a sign and seal of the covenant of grace, of his in- grafting into Christ, of regeneration, of remission of sins, and of his giving up unto God, through Jesus Clirist, to walk in newness of life." (Con>p. the Larger Catechism, Qu. 165, and Shorter Cate* cliism, Qu. 94). Calvin says : " In treating the sac- raments, two things are to be considered : the sign and the thing signified. Thus, in baptism, the sigt is water ; but tlie thing signified is the cleansing of the soul by the blood of Christ, and the mortifica- tion of the flesh. Both of these things arc com prised in the institution of Clirist ; and whereaa often the sign appears to be ineffectual and fruitless, that comes through men's abuse, which does not annul the nature of the sacrament. Let us learn, therefore, not to tear apart the thing signified from the sign ; though, at the same time, we must be on our guard against the opposite fault, such as prevails among Papists. For, failing to make the needful distinction between tlie thing and tlie sign, they stop short at the outward element, and there confidently rest their hope of salvation. The sight of the water, accordingly, withdraws their minds from Christ's blood and the grace of the Spirit. Not reflecting that, of all the blessings there exhibited, Christ alone is the Author, they transfer to water the glory of His death, and bind the hidden energy of the Spirit to the visible sign. What, then, must be done ? Let us not separate what the Lord has joined together. We ought, in baptism, to recognize a spiritual laver ; we ought in it to embrace a witness to the remission of shis and a pledge of our renewal ; and yet so to leave both to Christ and the Holy Spirit tlie honor that is theirs, as that no part of the salvation be transferred to the sign." — Dr. John Lillie, in his ex- cellent posthumous Lectures on the Epistles of Peter (New York, 1809, p. 252), in commenting on 1 Peter iii. 21, remarks : " But what, you will ask, is bap- tism, then, a saving ordinance? Certainly; thnt is just what Ciirist's Apostle here affirms. Nor is this the only place, by any means, in which the New Tes- tament speaks of baptism in a way that would now offend many good people, were it not that the per- plexing phraseology is unquestionably scriptural. Recollect, for instance, Peter's own practical applica- tion of liis Pentecostal sermon : ' Repent, and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesua Christ, for the remission of sins.' And so Ananias in Damascus to the liumbled persecutor: 'Arise, and be ijaptized, and wash away thy sins.' Paul, too, expressly calls baptism ' the laver of the water ' by which Christ puiifies His Church ; and again, ' the laver of regeneration ' by which God saves us. Frequently, also, he represents it as that by v.hich we are united to Christ, and made partakers of His death and resurrection. Nay, Christ Himself, in sending forth His gospel among all nations, named baptism as one condition of salvation. We need not, then, hesitate to call it a saving ordinance. But how does it save ? Just as any other ordinance saves — not througli any inhenmt virtue of its out- ward signs and processes, but solely as it is a chan- nel for the communication of Divine grace, and used in accordance with the Divine intention. On the one hand, while grace is ordinarily dispensed tlirough ordinances, it is not confined to them, God being ever higher than His own a]ipointments, and acting, when it so pleases Him, independently of them alto- gether. And, on the other hand, there must be on tlie part of man, besides tlie observance of formal precept, a yielding of his wliole nature to the quick- ening and traneforming infl.ience. Take for an e» CHAPTER VI. 1-11. 207 ample that greatest ordinance, the Word of God. It ' is able,' says James (L 21), ' to save your souls.' But liow ? Not simply aa it is preaciied, or heard, or read. Tliat it may be ' the power of God unto ealvation,' it must first be accompanied with the ' demonstration of the Spirit,' and then ' received with meekness,' and so become the ingrafted word. It is not the foolishness of preaching that saves ; but ' it pleases God by the foolishness of preaching to eave them that believe.' Now, just so with baptism : equally with the gospel itself, it is a Divine institu- tion, whereby (Jod ordinarily dispenses His grace. But its whole cQicacy is due to that grace of God, and to our fitting reception and use of the rite — not to its mere external administration, by whatsoever priestly or apostolic hand." — P. S.] 4. According to the Apostle, the burial as well as the dralh of Christ is represented in the meaning and effect of baptism. But as the burial of Christ not oidy seals His death, but also brings to pass the mysterious form of His transition to new life, so is it also with the world's renunciation of the secret inward life of the Christian, which develops from a germ in mysterious growtli, and is hid with Christ in God. (For fuller information on being baptized into the death of Christ, see Tholuck, p. 280, and Phi- lippi, p. 206.) 5. Christianity is not only a new life, but a new- ness of life — a life which never grows old, but has ever a more perfect and imperishable renewal. But as the resurrection of Christ rests on a deed of the fflort/ of the Father, so is it with the new birth of the Christian. See the Kxeff. Holes. 6. Although believers are so intimately connect- ed or grown together in a living organism as to ap- pear to be living on the same vine or the same branch, they are nevertheless not grown together in the form of natural necessity. While unchurchly and unhistorical sectarianism ignores the organic internal character and historical structure of the Christian communion, hierarcliism, on the other hand, disregards its ethical and free inward ciiarac- ter. The life of Christ is repeated and reflected, after His death and resurrection, in His image — the Church ; but not in the sense that it is quantitative- ly a supplement or substitute for Him, but that it completely unites itself qualitatively with Him as its living head. Because the Christian suffers death in Christ, rises, and is justified, Christ, as the crucified and risen One, lives in him. (See chap. viii. 29 ; Kph. i. 4 ; Col. i. 22, 23, 24 ; ii. 11 ; iii. 1, &c.) 1. The Apostle's doctrine of the old man, the iody of si9i, the bodt/ of death, the law in the mem- bers, &c., shows a divinatory anticipation of the idea of the pseudo-plasmas, which has first appeared in the modern science of medicine. The old man is not the real man, nor the natural man, but sin, which has pervaded man as the plasmatic phantom of his nature, and, as an ethical cancer, threatens to consume him. (On the various theological interpre- tations of the old man, see Tholuck, p. 287. For a more complete interpretation of Paul's pseudo-plas- matic ideas, see Erep. Notes on chap. vii. 24.) 8. Tnose who designate the real body of man as the source of sla, abolish the real idea of sin. Even the expression, that the body is not the source, but the seat of sin, is not correct in reference to the ten- dency of the wicked, and is only conditionally cor- rect in reference to the life of the pious, in whom Bin, as sinfulness, as a tempting propensity in the bodily part of the being has its seat, and will con- tinue to have its seat, until the old form of the bod/ is laid off. 9. On being free from the debt of sin by death, see the Ji'xeff. Notes. Death removes guilt — a defi- nition which may be further formularizcd thus : the kind of death corresponds as justification to the kind of guilt ; the depth of death corresponds to tb» depth of guilt. Therefore the death of Christ i\ the potential justification of humanity, because ii plunged the absolutely guiltless and holy life into the absolute depth of the death of mankind. 10. On the expression body of sin, in ver. 6, compare the elaborate discu.fsion by Tholuck, p. 288 ff. Likewise the same author, on ver. 9, or the re« lation of Christ to death ; p. 306. HOMHiETICAI, AND PEACTICAl.. On the relation of sin and grace : 1. It is true that the more powerful sin is, the more powerful ia grace also ; but it cannot be inferred from this, 2. That we should continue in sin. But, 3. We should wish, rather, not to live in sin, to which we died (vers. 1, 2). — To what would continuance in sin lead? 1. Not to grace, for he who sins wilfully, trifles with grace ; but, 2. To the terrible looking for of judg- ment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the rebellious (vers. 1, 2). Heb. x. 26.— Of Christian baptism. 1. What is it? a. a baptism into Christ ; h. a baptism into the death of Christ. 2. Of what service is baptism to us ? a. We die and are buried by it in repentance ; b. we are raised by it in faith (vers. 8, 4). — By baptism we enter into a double communion with Christ : 1. Of His death ; 2. Of His resurrection. — Christians are, 1. Companions in the death of Christ ; but also, 2. In His resurrec- tion (ver. 5). — The crucifixion of our old man : 1. The manner and form of the old man ; 2. his cruci- fixion. — The glorious immortality of Christ : 1. Ita foundation ; 2. Its importance to us (ver.s. 8-10). — We should reckon ourselves dead in relation to sin, but alive in relation to God ; that is, 1. We should, by faith, be ever taking our stand-point more per- fectly in Christ ; and, 2. First of all in His death, but also in His life (ver. 11). Starke : The suffering and death of a Christian are not to destruction, but a planting to life. Hf.dingee : Under the grace of God we are not permitted to sin. — Muller : Life and death cling to- gether ; the more the old dies and goes to ruin, the more gloriously does the new man arise. — Either you will slay sin, or sin will slay you. — Where faith ia there is Christ, and where Christ is there is life. Gerlach : The baptism of Christians is a bap- tism into Christ's death ; that is, into the complete appropriation of its roots and fruits. Besser : Paul places the gift of baptism first, and connects with it the duty of "the one baptized. Heubner : Recollections of our former covenant of baptism : 1. What has God done for us in bap- tism ? 2. What have we to do in consequence of baptism ? — Thomasius : The power of baptism in ita permeation of the whole Christian life. — Floret: We are baptized into the death of Christ. Namely: 1. Upon the confession that He died for us ; 2. On the pledge that we should die with Him ; 3. In the hope that we shall live by Him.— Harless : The im- pediments to Christian life : 1. The pleasure of life, which is terrified at evangelical preaching on death ; 2. The dulness and unbelief of spiritual death, which 208 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMAXS. is terrified at evangelical prenching on life ; while yet, reverriely, 3. The plotisure, power, and jiiou.s conduct of the Cliristuin re^ts upon the death which he has died for newness of life. is to his former diversions. As natural death cats off all communication with life, ?o must sanctifica- tion in the soul cut off all communication witii sin, — Macknigiit : We should daily recollect our bap- [Sueui.ock: As the death of Christ was not barely | tisni, and be stirred up by it to every religious act a natural death, a separation of soul and body, but and thought posiiblc, for it is this that sets before a sacrifice tor sin, to destroy the dominion of it, so us the death and resurrection of Christ. — Clauke : our dying to sin is the truest conformity to the death The sacrificial death of Christ is the soil in which of Christ ; and as we must consider His resurrection believers are planted, and from which they deriTe as His living to God and advancement into His spir- their life, their fruitfuluess, and their final glory. — itual kingdom, so our walking in newness of life is Hodge : It is those who locjk to Christ not only for our conformity to His resurrection, and makes us pardon, but for holiness, that are successful in sub» true subjects of His spiritual kingdom. — Hexry : duing shi ; the legalist renuuns its slave. To be in As natural death brings a writ of ease to the weary, j Christ is the source. of the Christian's life; to be like 80 must we be dead to all the sins of our former [ Christ is the sum of his exoellence ; to be with rebeUions life. We must be as indifferent to the Christ is the fulness of his joy. — J. F. U.J pleasures and dehghts of sin, as a man that is dying ' Third Section. — TJie principial freedom of Christians from the service of sin to death, and their actual departure th,erefrma and entrance into the service of righteousness unto life by the power of the death of Jesus. {Believers sliould live in the consciousness that they are dead to sin, just as even the slave ie freed by death.) Chap. VL 12-23. 12 Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, that ye should obey it in 13 {omit it in] ^ the lusts thereof. Neither yield ye [Nor render] '^ your members as instruments \or weapons] of unrighteousness unto [to] ^ sin : but yield [ren- der] yourselves unto [to] God, as those that are alive [as being alive] * from the dead, and your members as instruments \_or weapons] of righteousness itnto [to] 14 God. For sin shall not have dominion over you : for ye are not under the [r/Hijv the] ^ law, but under grace. 15 What then ? shall [may] ^ we sin, because we are not under the [omit the] 16 law, but under grace ? God forbid. [Let it not be !] Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey ; whether [either] of sin unto death, or of obedience imto rigliteousness ? 17 But God be thanked [thanks to God], that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have [omit have] obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine [teaching] ' which 18 was delivered you [whereunto ye were delivered;].* Being then [And being] 19 made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness. I speak after the manner of men because of the infirmity of your flesh : for as ye have yielded [rendered] your members [as] servants to uncleanness and to iniquity unto iniquity ; even so now yield [render] your members [as] servants to righteous- 20 ness unto holiness [or sanctification]." For when ye were the [omit the] servants 21 of sin, ye were free from [as regards] righteousness. Wliat fruit had ye then in those things whereof ye are now ashamed ? [What fruit hud ye then there- fore ? Things whereof ye are now ashamed ;] '" for " the end of those thing3 22 is death. But now being [having been] made free from sin, and become ser- vants to God, ye have your fruit unto holiness [or sanctification], and the end 23 everlasting life. For the wages of sin is death ; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ [in Christ Jesus] "" our Lord. 1 Ver 12.— [The correct reading seems to be : viraKovcif rati en-ievfitais avrov, found in N. A. B. C, many •uraives, most versions .and fathers ; adopted by Lachmann, Tischendorf, Meyer, Alford et id. Griesbrich, on insufficient authority,_omitri all after vitaKov €i,v . D. i'. insert axni), omitting the rest. C^. K. L., some further insen avrji it before rai? cTriflvgiais. So Rec. ; hence it in of the t. V. All these variations arc accounted for by Meyer, who supposes that aur^ was added, first as a marginal glosB, to direct attention to sin as the source of " the liists," then in* corporated in the text, and fubsequent changes made to ivoid confusion. " Ver. 13. — [The idea of military service found in r ipia-rdv ere is better expressed by render, since yieZfJ impliM a previous resistance, not found in tha Ajcrtle's thought. CHAPTER YI 12-23. 20U * Ver. 13. — [ To is the better rendtrinK of tlie simple datives hcie, as in ver. 19. Unto has a tclic force, which makei tt equivalent to tis. This disliiictiou is proscrvod in ver. 19, but lost sight of liy the English lr:inslators hero. - Ver. 13. — [As hciiKj iiiivc froiii the dead (Amor. Bible Uuion) is a good versidii of wo-el e/c vsKpiiv ^wvTat; but the paraplirase of Aliord : as alive, fmm havivg been dead, coiiveys the full meaning. Still better is the llovision bj Vi^i Avigiiwin Clergyrnon : as (hose thai were dead, and arc alive. ' Ver. 14.— [The article of the K. V. is not only unnecessary, since the Greek phrase is vno vrf/xo v, but perhapi IncoiTeet ; for the reference may be to " law " in general, rather than to " the (Mosaic) law." So in ver. 15. * Ver. 15.— (The reading aixaprrja- o /lev (Jiir.) is weakly supported. N. A. 13. C. I). E. K. L., have aixapTrjaroi fitvi adopted by L;ichmaun, Tiseheiidorf, Meyer, and others, 'this is the deUberadve bubjunctive ; hence : "may we sii;." ' Ver. \1 .—[Teaching is prcl'crable to doctrine. See £xi(/. A(^tis. 8 \or.n.— [To which ye were diiivired, eis ov napeSoOriTe, is literal, and corresponds with the figure implied In TVJroc.-The full stop oCthe E. V. is unnecessary, as the next verse is closely connected with this one. The fona of ver. 18 is altered, to make this connection more obvious'. * Ver. lO.—f'Ayiaapiov may mean hoUiiess, Heil.glccit, or sandificalion, Biiliguvg. Bergel, however, di.^ciiioi- nates between oytd-niT and ayiao-Jios, the former "holiness," the latter " sanctification." See i. 4, p. 62, and Exig. Aoics, whcjre Lange contends for the latter meaning here (against Meyer). 1" \^er. 21.— [Lange adopts the punctuation of LaohmaMn, Griesliach, and many others, placing the interrogation after Tore, ai d making what follows tl.e answer. A gieat array of authorities can be cited in support of each way of pointing, but this seems to give a better sense to Kapwd?. C'onip. Alford in- loco. " Ver. 21.— [X^. B. D. ¥^., Lachmann, Meyer, Alford, insert ju.e'i' before yap. "Wordsworth does not insert it in his text, but favors it in his notes. It is omitted by N'. A. C. D'. K. L. It seems more probable tLal it was carelessly omitted by siinn' transcribers than inserted for any special reahon. '2 Ver. 23.— (The E. V. again loses the point of the closing phrase, by rendering iv, through. The life is em phatically in C/irw( /eius our iorJ. llcnce perhaps XpuTcu "Ijjo-oiJ. — li.] EXEGETICAL AND CEITICAX. Ver. 12. Let not sin therefore reign [M^ ovv iJaat'livi'toi ly a/(a^Tta]. The Apostle conducts the following discussion in a hortatory manner, but without actually " entering the sphere of exhortation," as Tiioluck thinks. [The negative part of the exhortation, vers. 12, 13, corresponds to t'fz()oi'(; ftiv I'll cc/ia(jri(x, ver. 11 ; tlie positive part, d/Aot /tctiJacni^fTarf, ver. 13, answers to twvTca; de t(T) Onji. So Meyer, Philippi, Alford, Hodge, &c. — P. S.] ' In a didactic respect he teaches that believ- ers, by their transition from a state under the law to a state under grace, are first properly qualified and pledged to the service of righteousness, but are not free for the service of sin. That is, the true eman- cipation from outward legalism leads to an inward and free legalism, but not to Antinomianism. Tlie ovv indicates that ver. 11 shall be elaborated. But as the previous section has shown what is conform- able to the slate of grace in itself, the present secti(m phows what is according to freedom from the hard service of sin, which was presupposed by bondage under the law. Let not sin now reign (imp.). Tlie true sovereign command of grace is opposed to the false sovereign command of sin, which is still pres- ent as a broken power (Luther : Observe that holy people still have evil lusts in the flesh, which they do not follow). Tholuck : " Philippi and Meyer correctly remark, that the Apostle does not express- ly make any concessions to the concupiscentia [tni,- tOi'/uatc,-] ; yet his admonition does not extend any ■farther than that lust must not become a deed. Sin is represented as ruler in the body, which ruler is served by the fnltj as organs." That is, however, as the one who has been tlie ruler ; and the methods are at the same time given for destroyhig the lusts of the flesh, that they — by the life in the Spirit, which also changes the members into instruments of righteousness — should not only be continuaUy ignoied, but also annulled. [Alford, in opposition to Chrysostom, who lays stress on patnkfviro), says : " It is no matter of comparison between reigning and indwelling meirln, but between reigning and beimj deposed.'"'' — P. S.] In your mortal body [Iv rlo ^vi^tw vfimv ffo)/(aTt]. The ffw/(ct as fliv/ror must be distin- guished, on the one hand, from the aiTma T~;q u/ick^- Tta? of ver. 6, and, on the other, from the a(7>/ia vftiQov of chap. viii. 10. The aiTi/ia r'jq ciftafJT. is the pseudo-plastic apparent body of the old man, 14 and, as the sensual side of all sinfulness, is devoted with it to destruction. The body is a aw/ia vfxfiov so far as it no more asserts itself as a second prin- ciple of life with, or even superior to, the principle of the Spirit, but yields itself purely to the service of the Spirit. But a aw/ia dvijtov is the body so far as it, as the sensual organism of the earthly ex- istence, has living organs, which shall be purified from the former service of sin and transferred to the service of righteousness. The aoi/ta as a false prin- ciple is destroyed ; the aoifia as a secondary prin- ciple is dead, absolutely helpless ; and the ailifta, aa the organ of the spiritual principle is transformed into instruments of righteousness. It is called mor- t .1.1 because its earthly propensity is toward sin and death, and it must be compulsorily brought into the service of righteousness, and exercised as for a spiritual military service in antithesis to the body of the resurrection, wliich will be the pure power and excellence of righteousness. Meyer is therefore cor- rect in rejecting the interpretation, that drrjTov ia the same as vi/.(^6v (dead to sin ; Turretin, Ernesti, and others). But it may be asked, For what purpose is the adjective Ovtjtov'i 1. Calvin : per contemptum vocat mortale \ut doceat totam hominis naturam ad mortem ct exitium inclinare'\. Kollner : It is dishonorable to make the spirit subject to this frail body. 2. Grotius : De vita altera cogifandum, nee for' niidan:iOS labores Itavd sane diidurnos. [Clirysos« torn, Theodoret, Eeiche, likewise suppose that ths word reminds us of the other life, and of the short- ness of the conflict. — P. S.] 3. Flatt : Reminder of the brevity of sensusj pleasure. [Comp. Theophylact]. 4. Meyer, obscurely : It is absurd to make siu reign in the mortal body, if the Christian is dead to siu and alive to God. 5. Philippi : To call to mind that the wages of sin is death. [Philippi takes ffw^wa in opposition to 7iviT'f(a.'\ 6. Tholuck, with Bullinger and Calixtus : Be« ^ause sensual enticements are regarded as inseparac ble from the present sensuous organism, &c. [7. Photius, Turretin, Einesti : driiTov is figur* tively = dead ; i. e., corrupt (in which sense vix()6i is often used).] In all these definitions the relative dignity and estimate of the " mortal body," which are definitely declared in ver. 13, are not regarded; the ftaxptt 210 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. members, which until then had been instruments of unrighteousness, henceforth being instruments of righteousness. The organism of eartlily existence and action, which lias become mortal by sin, is natu- rally an organism for the service of the spirit. By the dominion of sin in it, its morality became still more intense ; but by the norma! subjection of sin to the service of the Spirit, it shall be brought with it on the course toward everlasting life (ver. 22). That ye should obey the lusts thereof [_tli; to iiTzaxovivv rati; i rt i, 0- vii iait; ai<- Toil]. According to the sense, we must supply tVa<.' to ii/ta/.ovfi.v. To the end that ye obey its lusts. Even if the body were holy, its impulses would have to be subject to the dominion of the spirit ; much more must they be subject to the spirit, since they are diseased, irritable, excitable, and in- clined to self-assertion and demoniacal self-distrac- tion. Ver. 13. Nor render your members [Mij TtiQiaravm ra, /liXfj i'/moi']. Without doubt 7tai)i.(jrdvnv has reference here to enlistment or de- livery for military service. The Apostle is writing to Rome, the metropolis of military affairs, and there- fore derives his figure from Roman customs (com p. chap. xiii. 12) ; just as he admonishes the Corinthi- ans by expressions that call up the Isthmian games (1 Cor. ix. 24), and speaks to the spiritual city of Ephesus concerning the battle with spirits (Eph. vi. 11, 12). Sin is already distinguished as the false ^aaJ.fiK;, who causes the false summons to be pro- mulgated that the members shall be ordered into his warfare against righteousness. — Your members. If the body has ceased to be an independent prin- ciple, onl) its members come into consideration (in the good sense of the principle : Divide et imrera). According to Erasmus, PhiHppi, and others, the in- tellectual forces and activities (perception, will, un- derstanding) are included in the term. According to Meyer, only the physical members are meant (the tongue, hand, foot, eye, &c.), " for which, however, intellectual action is a necessary supposition. The physical members are plainly meant as organs and symbols of ethical conduct (different from the pseudo- plasmatic members ; Col. iii. 5). As weapons [or instruments] of unright- eousness [o;rAa adtxiai;]. Meyer says, of immoral iti/. But, in war, people contend for the right or the wrong; therefore the expression ccifuitia must be strictly retained. — ""OttP.cc, according to the Tulgate, Theodoret, Luther, Calvin, Bengel, and Meyer : weapons. Calixtus and De Wette [Stuart, Reiche, Hodge, Ewald, Alford], on the other hand : instruments. The former construction can by no means be favored by appealing to the fact that the (SocfftAf I'fn' suggests warriors in service, for the trope is already oblitijrated (?) in that term ; but it is favored by the consideration that the Apostle also elsewhere — when he uses o/r/a in the ethical sense — employs it in the meaning of ' weapons ; ' Rom. xiii. 12; 2 Cor. vi. 7; x. 4" (Tholuck). [Meyer insists that iinka, while so frequently used in the sense of instruments by classical authors, is never thus used in the New Testament. — R.] To sin [rrj a/( a(>T la'\. Personified as the presumptively false ruler (see chap. v. 12 ff.). But render yourselves [«AA(i 7za()aar/j- ffWTf 8 a II TO (''(,•]. We must observe here a double antithesis : first, the aorist na^adri'irran in oppo- sition to ine previous present, jiaiiaardvtrf ; second, lavtoiKi in connection with the following xat id /(i).ij, in opposition to the previous ra /liXij. Both are quite in harmony with the antitheses. For be- lievers have already fundamentally placed ihemselvel as such in the service of righteousness, and in com' plete unity with the centre of their life, while the man in the opposite service of sin yields his mem- bers individually to a foreign power. At all events, the Christian, as the servant of sin, would be led into the contradiction of wishing to remain free him- self while he placed his members at the service of sin. On the aorist 7Ta(ja(Jtt'j(TaTf, comp. Winer, p, 293; and Tholuck, p. 311. (It denotes, "according to Fritzsclie, what hap[)eus in the moment ; accord, ing to Meyer, that which occurs forthwith ; and ac- cording to Philippi, that which appears once ; " Tho- luck). Tholuck does not attach importance to the difference between the aorist imperative and the present imperative, since he concurs vvith those who disregard the temporal reference. We hold, with Ilerm. Schmidt {De imperativis ; Wittenberg, 1833) : " The imperative present commands to occupy one^s self with so))tethinff ; the imperative aorist, to accom- plish something." We add to this : That something already under consideration, or already undertaken, must be carried through. [The greater delinitenesa implied in the aorist must not be lost sight of, what- ever view be adopted. — R.] As being alive from the dead [w^- tx vi- y.Q('>v kiovraq. The ox; does not introduce a figure, but means rather (comp. ver. 11): regarding yourselves as those who are alive, almost = since you are. The phrase is a condensed description of the state of twcToi'i,-. While the reference is un- doubtedly ethical, yourselves must be taken in its widest meaning — body, soul, and spirit ; and the im- plication is, that the whole man was once dead m sin (not to sin, as ver. 11), but now is alive ; hence the pertinence of the exhortation. The reference to a field of battle is extremely doubtful, since it in- troduces a new figure so soon after vers. 2-11. — R.] Meyer : Those who, from dead persons, have become living. We assume the figure of a field of battle. The Christians lay there as dead or slain persons, and from dead persons they became alive ; therefore they can and should go over to the banner of righteous- ness. And your members [xat id fiiXr; v/hmv. Hodge paraphrases and: and especially; but xa seems to have an inferential force here. — R.] Be- cause they have become themselves the warriors of God, they must also regard their members as God's weapons, the weapons of righteousness for God.* Ver. 14. For sin shall not have dominion over you ld/ict^>Tla yd() {i/n'iv on xi'^t^j'i- ffft]. The future, according to Melanchthon : dul- cissima consola'io ; erroneously regarded by Roser^ miiller, Flatt, and others, as imperative. If we were to distinguisii between the expression of confident supposition (Calov. and De Wette) and consoling promise (Chrysostom, Grotius, and Tholuck), we would prefer the former meaning, since the predomL * [The German commentators generally take the second T(j5 ©eo) as dat. commodi, and render /Sr Gntt. They ad- vance no special reason for it. This view unnecessarily disturbs the parallelism of the clauses, since the second rif OeiZ is in strict verbal contrast with Tjj ofiapn'o. The first Tiu 9fiZ is undoubtedly the simple dative after ■n-apioT)) t. v ], ■which operates as an inward and new principle ot life ; while the law, as such, confronted the inward life only as an outward demand — threatening, arous- ing, and casting down ; and in tliis form it presup- posed the dominion of sin. Bondage under the law betokened bondage under sin, without being able to remove it ; but it is removed by the dominion of grace, whieli has become an inward law of life. [The general idea undoubtedly is : " Ye are not tinder a legal dispensation, but a prnciovs one " (Stuart) ; yet the whole context forbids the ex- clusive reference to the method of justification. " (irace " is here used in its widest sense ; " the Di- vine grace, shown in Christ, is the power under which ye stand " (Meyer), and which assures that ye shall not be under the dominion of sin. — " Gratid lion solum peccata diluit, sed ut non peccemus facit " (Augustine). — R.] Ver. 15. What then? May we sin [Ti olvi dfi a(>T I'lcrco/ifv. See Textual Note ^. — R.]. According to Riickeit, Meyer, and other.*, a new sec- tion should commence here ; which Tholuck is right in opposing. The unity of the following with the foregoing is the fundamental thought : freedom from Bin. Also the reference to the members continues throughout what follows (ver. 19). There is, however, a modification. Down to ver. 14 the antithesis was rather an etliical demand ; but now a religious con- firmation predominates. There, tlie new life was contrasted with the old as a voluntary entrance into the military service of righteousness over against the wicked, mercenary service of sin ; here, the Apostle (speaking according to human analogy) pre- eents the obligation of a new service in contrast with tlie old service. In the present verse Paul therefore brings out prominently the fearful consequence of the impure Antinomian view of the state of grace, ill order to condemn it forthwith. To this earnest rejection of a horrible consequence, arising so fre- quently in ancient and modern times, the conjunc- tive a.f(aQrtj'niss," instead of "of rif)!itrousi)e.''s uiito 7;/('." He ii timates that thus Paul marks this distinction : To sin we give our- selves of otir own free choice and power as bondc-imen, but we cannot of our own free choice, and by any cflbrt of will, give ourselves to the service of righteousness; hence all ■we can do is to yield ourselves up to God's gxace, to save us, :\s servants of nbedioicc, for or unto riubteousness, as a " gift" to be tiestowed upon us, ;ind ir.'wi-ought into us by His Spirit. He also notices that tlie direct expression : servnnls In ri'ghti'nusnfss does not occur until ver. 19— the caution being attributable to anxiety lest such an expres- sion be turned to legalistic account. — E.] t [De 'Wette: '^ Suntlenrlend iiholicTvpl." So Aiford: " The state of misery induced by sin, in all its awful nspectt and consequences." The wider view is necessary, since th« ■word occurs frequently, in the remainder of tt e clmijter and in chap, vii., in such a connection that a limit a ion is uD" foi-tunate. ^leycr's exegesis is hampered throughout bjr his view of edfttTo*. — B.J 212 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. is certainly assumed here ; but the " uprightness which is iidjuiiged to heliuvers iu the judgment" is gradually develoijcd to its completion from obedi- euce as the form of the new life.* (On the con- Btruction of this verse with vers. 17, 18 [Riickort and Reiche], by which ver. 16 is the propofHio major, ver. 17 the minor, and ver. 18 the conclu- Bion. Conip. Thohick.) f Ver. 17. But thanks to God, &c. [/aQot; Ss rot k)f(7t, z.T./..]. It may be asked, whether the first proposition is a mere introduction to the second as the principal proposition, so that the thanksgiving refers merely to obedieuce (Grotius, Estius, and oth- ers) ; or whether the thanksgiving refers to both propositions (Meyer, Tholuck).| Tholuck says, in favor of the latter view : " Since t/r? precedes, and fiiv is wanting, ijTi must be read with all the more emphasis ; as 1 Oor. vi. 11 : y.al rauTa rlvfi; tjTf ; Eph. v. 8 : ijTf j'«(> noTf a/.OTOi; ; and the imme- diate object of thanksgiving is that this time of the boPidage to sin is past." Evidently, the deliverance from the service of death is in itself already a satis- factory ground for praise and thanksgiving ; yea, we naturally thank God for this with the gi-catest emo- tion (God be praised : delivered !), although this negative side of salvation cannot be regarded as sep- arate t'lom the positive. But ye obeyed from the heart [imrixov- ffarf ()e tx y.a^dla(;'\. They were only con- ditionally voluntary in their bondage to sin ; but they have become obedient from the very bottom of their heart. That form of teaching whereunto ye were delivered [ f i' c; uv n a(j t ()6 tjt f t vnov cV t - iiay_~i«;« from shi — earlier and better than this full conse- quence : ye became the servants of right- eousness. Ver. 19. I speak after the manner of men. The ai'OitMTnvov is analogous to the /.ar arOi^Ko 7701' in chap. iii. 5.* By slavery, which was in full bloom in Rome, the Apostle clearly explains to them the absolute Ibrce of the new principle of life. Because of the infirmity of your flesh [(5't« rijv aaOivf-oav rTji; aci^xot; I'/twv]. The flesh, or the sensuous and susceptible fulness of the body, is not only negatively weak, but also posi- tively diseased and disturbed, both of which facts are expressed by the anOivna. It may be asked, however, whether the Apostle means here the weak- ness of intelligence arising from this infirmity, by which he was compelled to represent to them the highest liberty under the figure of servitude (Ben- gd, Meyer, aud De Wette, with reference to 1 Coi: iii. 1) ; or whether he meant their practical infirm- ity. The first view — that is, the reference to intelli- gence — appears also in the intimation that the Apo:*- tle aunoimces a popular explanation (Vatable, Eir- nesti, and Rosenmiiller). The latter view is favored by Origen, Chrysostom, Theodoret, Calvin, &c. : " I require nothing which your fleshly weakness could not do," or the like. The thought here could not be unintelligible to the Roman Christians ; therefore the practical reference by all means preponderates ; but not in the sense already given : " I require of you nothing too difficult ; I require only the degre* of obedience which you formerly rendered to sin.** * [Hodge : " The former characterizes as human th* thing said, and the other the manner ol saying it." Comp* Meyer, however. — This apologetic forui of expression con- cerns the description of " true freedom" as a 6ouAeta. — B.-- CHAPTER VI. 12-28. 21 The Apnatlu's thought can rather be explained by what follows : "Yield your members sM7nvov, y..r.}.. [With Bengel, Olshausen, De Wette, Hodge, Al- ford, and many others, I am disposed to give a de- cided preference to the first view, viz., that this clause refers to what precedes. Commentators differ as to tlie force of the terms, but the following posi- tions seem most tenable. Infirmitii means intellect- ual weakness, growing out of their carnal con- dition {ndo/.o^, gen. auctoris). The ethical reference is in rrceoi, not in aaOivfia, On adoi., see chap, vii.— R.] For as ye have rendered your members [tit a 71 ( Q y « o n aQ tm tj(T at ( t « ft i). r^ v /i (7) v . I'djj is explicative (Tholuck, Meyer). JoTka, used as an adjective, only here in New Testament (Hodge). — R.] To servitude. The apparently free pleasure was, in fact, a hard bondage under sin. — To uncleanness [t^ d/.a&uQaia.'] We hold that azwiO-a^ff/ft has especial reference to the heathen portion (according to chap, i.), and to in- iquity, «ro/(/«, on the contrary, to the Jewish portion (according to chap. ii.). ileyer makes this distinction : d/.af>. is sin as ethically defiling man ; and dvQii. is sin as violation of the Divine law. Spener, De Wette, and others, distinguish thus : Uncleanness as defilement of themselves and of sin toward others. Tholuck considers d/.aO. as speciea, and dvofiia as the generalizing genus of sin. But the genus is declared in what follows. The d/.aO., or fleshly sin in the narrower sense, and the dvoiua, or violations of the law in the narrower sense, con- verge in the dvo/ (HoT'Xa T i] dixatoavvri fit; a y tot (T/i 6 v]. Righteousness, as tlie new principle of life, should bear unconditional sway over the members ; holi- ness should be the end and result. Meyer translate, dyi,atr/t6^:, holiness. To present holiness. Even Tho- luck does not understand the word to mean an effort to be holy. He refers to ver. 22 ; but there aytwir- II 6<; is still distinct from the re'/oi,- as movement toward the rtlo^. He then quotes Heb. xii. 1-4. But this passage does not decide positively for the exi)ression holiness. For completed holiness is no! tlie preliminary condition for beholding the Lord, but its fruit. But, according to this very passage, dyvars/ioi; cannot mean a striving; otherwise we would have to translate : strive after the striving of holines.s. The expressions quoted by Tholuck from Basil and CEcumenius do not both prove the same thing. CEcumeiuus understands by the word, abso- lute purity ; Basil, thorough consecration to the holy God. And this is the sense, '^-/yiadfioi; means, first of all, the act of consecration (" According to Bleek, on Heb. xii. 14, it does not occur among the classics ; but Dion. Halic, i. 21, as in the Sept., has it of acts of consecration ;" Tholuck), then the con- dition of being consecrated, or of holiness — an idea which does not perfectly coincide with the idea of completed holiness, and in which there is at once ex- pressed the constant ethical movement, rather than a substantial and quiescent condition. [On the lexical grounds Lange advances, mndi^ cation is the preferable meaning — one which accords with the context. The issue (not, the end ; the use of the phrase in ver. 22 is against this) is siinctifica- ticn, which indeed results in perfect holiness, but comes into view here rather as a progressive state than as an ultimate one. Undoubtedly righteousness describes the principle, and uyi,. the actual condition (Philippi), but in the sense given by Lange above. Meyer says the word always means holiness — never sanctification — in the New Testament. Compare, on the contrary, Bengel, Rom. i. 4. — R.] Ver. 20. For Tvhen _ye were servants of sm [oTf yd,Q ()'oTi).oi ijn rT^q a/(«^T/«(;]. According to Fritzsche, the yd() indicates the elu- cidation of ver. 19 ; but according to Meyer and Tholuck, it announces the establishing of it. It is, however, rather a continued elucidation of the pre- ceding than an establishment of what follows.* The Apostle answers the question : wherefore should the service of righteousness be a bond-service ? An- swer : because ye, who were formerly the servants of sin, became free in relation to righteousness. They were not the freemen of righteousness, as though it had made them free, but iu relation to it ; therefore the dative. The argument lies in the ne- cessity of the complete reversion of the earlier rela. tion. Since sin and righteousness preclude each other, they were free in relation to righteousness, because they were the bondmen of sin. Therefore, since they have now become free from sin, they * [The difficult connection of the verse is satisfactorily explained in Webster and Wilkinson: "yip restates ths view siven of theu- former condition in respect to siu and righteousness, in preparation for the final and most accu- rate statement of their present spiritual condition (ver. '2.')." _ Steyer (who has chansjed his views), in Jth ed,, also finds in this verse a preparation for the full statement of a motive for obcyintr tlie preecpt of ver. 19. He gi-oups vers, 20-2.! as one in thought, calling attention, however, to th« somewhat tragical force of our verse, with its emphatii words in the parallel clauses. — E.] 214 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. must be the bondmen of righteousness. The fearful expression, free as regards righteousness [ e / f r - i)•f^t];'(.iwa, wages of the servant and the soldier ; therefore pos- sibly, though not necessarily, a continuation of the figure of military service ; comp. on?.a, ver. IS. Under this supposition, Grotius, Bengel, and Wet- stein made •/a{ii tare. Yet the technical word for such a gift is r tni()o(nq (Fritzsche)." The figurative character of the antithesis lies in the fact that sin pays its soldiers and slaves miserable wages (Erasmus : ()\tt<>vt.a, vile verhum), namely, death; but God (as King) pays His children and servants, not a reward, but the honor-gift of His favor, which is eternal life. Tho- luck defines the antithesis thus : as far as sin is con- cerned, her due is according to justice ; but, on the other hand, what is received by the believing accept CHAPTER VI. 12-23. 21fl ance of God'* saving blessings can be regiinicd only as a gift — namely, tlie imparting of salvation, tlic eternil completion of life. Tiiis autitlie.sis is cor- rect so far as it is not pushed beyond the proper measure, so that justice does not appear as mere arbitrary authority. In the present passage, how- ever, tiiis antithesis recedes ; for the question is not concerning the righteous punishment of sin, but the way in wliich sin itself, regarded as false dominion, pays the reward. The gift of (lod also, at all events, presupposes the merit of believers, but yet remains a gift, because the whole idea of gain falls to tlie ground where merit is not considered, and where even the preliminary conditions of good conduct are bestowed as a gift.* For the idea of wages, see 1 Cor. ix. 7. " Tiie plural (more usual than the sin- gular) may be explained from the manifold elements of original natural reward, and from the numerous coins of later money-wages ; " Meyer. In Christ Jesus our Lord [iv XQiarm Jrinov ro) y.v(>i(i) rj/4 0)v. Stuart follows the inexact sense of the E. V. : " through the redemp- tion or atonement of Christ." True ; but not what Paul says here. In Christ Jesus is an expression which has a full, rich meaning of its own. In this case, we may ask whether the phrase limits God, or gift of God, or is used more generally. Meyer says : in Christ it rests, is causally founded, that the gift of God is eternal life. Webster and Wilkinson : " in Him, by virtue of His relation to Deity, God is the giver ; in Him, we, as united with Him, having an interest in Him, are recipients. — R.]. He is not only the source, but also the central treasure of our eternal life. DOCTEINAL AND ETHICAL. 1. It is certainly not accidental that the word to i-ule, fiaffilfvevv, occurs so frequently in the Epistle to the Romans (chap. v. 14, 17, 21 ; vi. 12) ; likewise the word weapons, o tt A « , here, and in chap. xiii. 12. See the £xrg. N^otes, where refer- ence is made to the Apostle's similar allusions to local relations in the First Epistle to the Corinthians, as well as in the Epistle to the Ephesians. His epis- tles in general abound in these evidences of truth to life. In the Epistle to the Galatians, for example, we see very plainly the Galatian fickleness ; in the Epistles to the Corinthians, we see the city of Cor- inth portrayed ; and in the Epistle to the Colossians, the Phrygian popular spirit, &c. Such evidences of authenticity are regarded by the critics of Baur's school as mere cobwebs, while they convert cob- webs of the barest probability into important and decisive evidence. 2. In this section the Apostle passes from the figure of military service to that of servitude, in order to portray, in every relation. Christian free- dom in its contrast with the bondage of man in sin. 3. On ver. 12. The despotic dominion of sin in the mortal body of the unregenerate, is an ethical cop/ of physical demoniacal possession. Sin, as a foreign force, has penetrated the individual life, and riots there as lord and master. Christianity now consists essentially in raising the shield of the Spirit against this usurping despotism, in the power of the triumph, dominion, and fellowship of Christ. • [On xapitriia, see v. 15 fF.— The antithesis is differ- etit here, yet related — there, fall, trpjisgression ; here, wages, but of sin -E,.] 4. Ver. 13. If the real Christian should agaii serve sin, his conduct would be a voluntary, coward- ly, and inexcusable surrender of his arms to a hos. tile power already overthrown. But, according to the Apostle's view, the whole life of humanity is a moral struggle of the spirit between righteousnesa and unrighteousness, in which all the human mem- bers are arms that contend for either righteou.snes* or unrighteousness. Man, physiologically regarded, is born nidvcd, without weapons or arms ; ethically considered, he is " armed to the teeth ; " his mem- bers have throughout the significance of moral arms. 5. The conclusion made by non-legal impurity, that sin is made free, because we are not under law, but under grace, is reversed by Paul, who says that, for this reason, sin is to be regarded as abrogated and excluded. The law does not make sinners, but it suits sinners ; bondage under the law corresponds to bondage under sin, and the law cannot annul this bondage. To him who stands under the law, hia own inmost nature is still a strange form ; for the inmost nature, in its living character, signifies the inwardness of the law, freedom from the letter of the law, liberty. To be estranged from one's self is, therefore, to be still in the bondage of sin, and there- fore under that of the law also, as the foreign form of the inmost norms of life. But in grace, man haa become at once free from sin and the law, because by grace he has come to himself (Luke xv. 15), and because it has written the law, as the word of the Spirit, on his heart.* On the power of sin, see Tho- luck, p. 313 ; on the nova obedientia, p. S14. 6. On ver. 16. Life is throughout a consequence of an established principle, either for death or for life, whether man may have made this principle — his self-determination — more or less clear to himself. Christianity is a thoroughly synthetical view of life — a view of life in its grand, complete, and funda- mental relations. Adam, Christ — the state of bond- age, the state of freedom, &c. 7. On ver. 17. When the Apostle thanks God that the Romans have not merely become Christiana in a general sense, but have become obedient to the doctrinal form of the freedom of the gospel from the law, the application of this to the evangelical confession lies very near. The Apostle speaks here of definite doctrinal types, not so much in the for- mal as in the material sense. The antithesis is juda- iziug Christianity. 8. On vers. 19, 20. That the members should be servants to righteousness, is not merely a figura- tive expression arising from the antithesis that they were enslaved to sin. Rather, this is a demand which follows from the fiict that, in consequence of serving sin, they are afflicted with weakness of the flesh ; and therefore, notwithstanding the freedom of the Christian spirit — yea, by virtue of it — the morbid and blunted natural forces, the animal na^ * [Stuart: "Christians are plncod in a condition of which ^fflfe is the prominent fenture : grace to sanrtify as well as grace to renew the heart ; prace to purify the "evil affections ; grace to forfrive otieiices thongli often repented, and thus to save from despair, and to excite t') new efforts of obedience. Viewed in this light, there is abundant rea- son for asserting that Christians, under a sy-t' m of grace, will much more effectually throw off the dominion of sin, than they would do if uiidci- a mere law di.'-,;cnsation." Yet, if there be one point where there is rno-t obscuiity in the minds of the majority of professing Cliri^tians. it is here. That it has largely arisen from an obscuratio'i of the doo trine of snrctification by grace, or rather the nuwise sun- dering of justifica*'on and sanctificat on in discussing thii Epistle, is painfullj- true. — E.] «16 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. tures, must be subjected, watched over, and con- tro'led. Augustine teaches that the little tree, which has grown crooked on one side, is thereby stretched BO that it can be bent a little toward the other side. 9. The fruit of the service of sin is first of all represented in bitter disappointments, confusion, dis- grace, and shame ; finally, in death. The reward of Bin is, from its very nature, the low wages for slavish or military service, and in addition to this, further contemptible pay, viz., death. How glorious does the honorable gift of eternal life appear in compari- 6011 with this wretched reward ! See the Exeg. Notes. We must here reject the exaggerations of the idea of gracious retribution, as well on the side of arbitrary authority as on the side of reward. In human relations, gain is a lower form than merit ; but the donation goes far beyond the merit, since it, as the gift of personal magnanimity, will more than outweigh the work of personal worth. Everywhere ill the kingdom of love, to say nothing of the king- dom of grace, all idea of merit falls to the ground ; but the appropriateness of the reward to the dignity of the child and the worthiness of the servant, which ftre bestowed by God and religiously and morally appropriated, do not fall to the ground. Grace is not thereby so glorified that it is absolved from jus- tice.* On the Zm'h atoinoi;, see Comm. on the Gos- pel of John, iii. 15. HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. The well-established apostolical admonition to a moral course of life : 1. To whom is it directed ? 2. What does it require ? 3. By what is it estab- lished ? — Our body is mortal (ver. 12). — In whose service should our members be? 1. Not in the ser- vice of unrighteousness ; but, 2. In the servce of righteousness (ver. 13). — In which service do our weapons hold out better ? 1. Many believe in the service of unrighteousness ; but there they are de- stroyed ; 2. Christian experience teaches, on the other hand, that it is in the service of righteousness, for there they remain untouched (ver. 13). — Under the law there is death, but under grace there is hfe (ver. 14). — Law and grace. Should we sin, since we are not under the law, but under grace ? (iod forbid ! Because freedom from the law is (1.) not lawlessness, but (2.) obedi- ence to righteousness [comp. Luther's work on the Freedom of a Christian Man], (vers. 15-23). — What is it to be obedient in heart to the form of doctrine with which we are connected ? 1. Not only to be orthodox, but also believing (ver. 17). — The form of apostolical doctrine, 1. What must we under- stand thereby? (The Apostle Paul's doctrine of justification by fiiith.) 2. How far is this form of importance for us? (ver. 17). — Christian preachers should never forget to so speak after the manner of men that everybody can understand, chap. iii. 5 ^ver. ID). — The fruits of serving sin and serving God: 1. The fruit of the former is death; 2. The fruit of the latter is eternal life (ver. 21). — What is the fruit of sin? 1. A fruit of which one must be tshamed ; 2. One whose end is death (ver. 21). — What is the fruit of righteousness ? 1. One of holi- Bess ; 2. One whose end is eternal life. — The pre- * [It is well to note hero the saying of Augustine : Ora- 'ia nun eril gralia ullo moilo, nisi sit graluila nmiii modn ; " Grace is not grace in any sort, if it be not free in every •ort.— R.] clous fruit of holiness. It is not only to be regard- ed as (1.) lovelv, but (2.) it makes wise, and joyous, and blessed (vt,i-s. 21, 22). — Death, and eternal life. 1. The former is the wages of sin ; the latter in God's gift in Jesus Christ our Lord. LuTHKR : In His death^ that even we should die like Him. Observe that believers have still wicked lusts in the flesh, which they do not obey (ver. 12). — So long as grace rules, the conscience remains free and controls sin in the flesh ; but without grace, sin rules, and the law condemns the conscience (ver. 14). Starkk : Sin still arises even in the regenerate, and they can again fall under its dominion ; there- fore they need the warning (ver. 12). — The pious are never without law, and yet not under the law, but ic it (ver. 14). — Whoever still permits sin to rule ovei him, cannot be under grace (ver. 14). — To be a ser vant of sin, is the greatest misery ; but to have been a servant of sin is the greatest blessedness (ver. 17). — Justification impels, moves, and powerfully awak. ens toward the exercise of godliness ; Ps. cxxx. 5 (ver. 18). Hedinger: To have piety from compulsion, fear, or politeness, in order to please others, or through one's own inclination, desire, praise, and advantage, was the delusion and bondage of Ishmael. The chil- dren of God are not under the law ; 1 John iv. 18 (ver. 15). — Christians are not libertines, who can do what they please : they are servants, but servants of God ! But where are such servants ? How great ia their number ? Servants of court, fashion, passion, men, the state, self, and the devil, can be seen ia abundance. Cramer : We shall never have a better fate than Paul, all of whose words have been perverted, misinterpreted, and made sinful. — Nothing is more becoming in a servant than obedience. Because we are now the servants of God, we must be steadfastly obedient from the heart until the end, according to God's word, and not according to our own notion (ver. 16). — Quesnel : As the heart is, so is the use of the body. He serves the Lord who has chosen Him from the heart. A true Christian dedicates himself wholly to God, his heart by love, and his body by good works (ver. 13). — blessed servitude with which we serve God ! The service of men makes miserable people ; but the serf.ce of God makes us saints in time and kings in eternity ; Isa. xiv. 3 (ver. 22). — Ml'ller: God will have no com- pulsory service ; a willing heart is the best offering ; in the weak flesh a willing spirit, in the small work a great will ; Ps. ex. 3 (ver. 19). — He who is free from righteousness has no part in Christ fver. 20). — As the fruit grows from the seed, so does ignominy grow from sin, outwardly before the world and in- wardly in the conscience before God (see ver. 21). Spener : Earnest and true Christianity consi.sta herein : although sin is present, it does not reign (ver. 12). — We dare not think, th;it though the wages of sin is death, Christ has redeemed us from death, so that it will not finally injure us. For the redemption wrought by Christ will not help us any, if we do not become obedient to Him (ver. 23). Gerlacii : The body, with its impulses and mem. bers, is like a house fall of arms or implements, for war or every kind of labor. In the service of sin, these members, the sinful impulses then become themselves members unto sin (ver. 1 ^). — The servi- tude of obedience is also true freed )m (ver. 17).— Since, by the gospel, man iu'comcs a servant as well as a freeman, license is ju&t as much excluded as CHAPTER VII. 1-6. 21' slavish obedience to a foreign power (ver. 18). — If righteousness, so rules in ns that all our members become its instruments, they will work together for the increase of our holiness (ver. 19). — A single glance at the fruit and the reward of sin must fill the Christian with shame, and therefore with abhorrence of the false fieedom which abuses grace (ver. 21). — The perfect sanctitication of man in body and soul is also his true, eternal life ; for by the perfect com- nmiiion of his whole nature with the Fountain of all life, God himself pervades him spiritually and bodily with the lulness of everlasting life (ver. 22). Lisco : Earnest admonition to holiness of life (vers. 12-2.3): 1. Its import (vers. 12-14) ; 2. The impulse to a more zealous sanotification is the grace of redemption (vers. 15-23). IIeubnkr : Freedom liom the law is not liberty to sin, or lawlessness (ver. 15). — In Christianity, the law of the letter, with its worldly power, does not rule, but the free law of love (ver. 15), — Obedience, the practice of God's will, awakens in us increasingly the spiritual power of life, and obtains spiritual health (ver. 16). — Purity and beauty of soul arisi only from sinlessness (ver. 19). — The remembrance of earlier sins never becomes wholly effaced, but, 1. It keeps the converted person humble and watch- ful ; it awakens, 2. thankfulness fur the love and grace of God ; 3. sympathy for others. Besser : Believers are servants cf righteous- ness (vers. 12-23). — Unrighteousness is a tyrannical master, who does not release his slaves according to their pleasure, but drives them ever farther from God's commandments (ver. 19). — Servtium Dei suinriid libcrias (ver. 19.) — The wages of sin is as manifold as the wages with which a general rewards his soldiers (bread, clothing, money) ; but its sum is death, empty death. Lange : The service of sin, at first apparently a voluntary life of warfare, but afterwards plainly a mercenary condition, and finally a state of shivery. — The fearful self-deception in surrendering one's Bell' to sin ; 1. At the outset, slavery instead of free- dom ; 2. In continuance, always backward instead of forward ; 3. Finally, death instead of life. — Vol- untary return to bondage is the deepest guilt of sin. — Real death is exiilained by its opposite. It is not contrasted with the present, but with eternal life- Eternal life as the fruit of the true service of Goo in righteousness : 1. As redemption ; 2. As gift. [Tii.LOTSON : Sin is the blindness of our minds, the perverseness and crookedness of our wills, and the monstrous irregularity and disorder of our affec- tions and appetites, the misjtlacing of our f)owera and faculties, and the setting of our wills and pas- sions above our reason ; all which is ugly and un- natural ; and, if we were truly sensible of it, a mat- ter of great shame and reproach to us. — Bukkitt : Sin, as a raging and commanding king, has the sin- ner's heart for its throne, the members of the body for its service, the world, the flesh, and the devil for its grand council, lusts and temptations for its weap- ons and armory ; and its fortifications are ignorance, sensuality, and fleshly reasonings. — Death, as the^ punishment of sin, is the end of the work, though not the end of the worker. — Grotius : It is the na- 1 ture of all vices to grow upon a person by repetition. — Clarkk : Let God have your hearts, and, with them, your heads, your hands, and your feet. Think and devise what is pure ; speak what is true, edify, ing, just, and good ; and walk steadily in the way that leads to everlasting felicity. — Every sinner has a daily pay, and this pay is death. — The sinner has a hell in his own bosom ; all is confusion and disorder where God does not reign. If men were as much in earnest to get their souls saved as they are to pre pare them for perdition, heaven would be highly peopled ; and devils would have to be their own. companions. — Hodge : The motive to obedience is. now love, and its aim the glory of God. — When a man is the slave of sin, he commonly thinks himself free ; and, when most degraded, is often the most proud. When truly free, he feels himself most strongly bound to God, and when most elevated, ia^ most humble. — J. F. H.] PuCRTH Section. — The transition, in principle and reality/, of Christians from the service of the letter under the law into the service of the Spirit under grace, by virtue of the death of Christ. Believers should live in the consciousness that they are dead to the law. — Tholuck : " Your marriage with Christ, having taken the place of the dominion of the law, necessarily leads to such a dominion of God in a new life.'''' Chap. VII. 1-6. Know ye not, brethren (for I speak to them that [those who] know the law), how [omit how] that the law hath dominion over a man as long [Icp ooov XQOvov., for as long time] as he liveth ? For the woman which hath a hus- band [the married woman] ' is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth [to the living husband] ; but if the husband be dead [have died],^ she is loosed from the law of /ler husband. So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress : but if her husband be dead [have died], she is free from that law ; so that she is no [not an] ' adulteress, though she be married to another man. "Wherefore [Accordingly], my brethren, ye also are become [were made] * dead to the law by [through] the body of Christ ; [,] that [in order that] * ye should be married to another, even to him who is [was] raised from the dead, that we should bring '8 THE EPISTLE OF PAT7L TO THE ROMANS. 6 forth fruit unto [to] " God. For when we were in the flesh, the motions [pa* sions] ' of sins, which were by [by means of] the law, did work [////(^j'tiro, wen 6 efficient, wrought] in our members to bring forth fruit unto [to] death. But now we are [have been] delivered from the law, that being dead [having died to that] ' wherein we were held ; that we should sei-ve [so that we sen-e] * in new- ness of spirit [the Spirit],'" and not in the oldness of the letter. ' Ver. 2. — [The E. V. renders viravSpo^ : which hath a huaband ; which is less forcible than the sinele word married. It is true tliat neither renderings convey the exact sense of the original, so well as : das vTO^ ToO avSpof (av yeVrjTai avSpi irepif * ed;' £e airoBavj) b dfijp, cAevde'pa iariv ano toO ro^ou, ToO ftij t1va^ avT^v /biotxaXifia, yevofiivriv avSpl irepio. So then, as long as her husband liveth, She shall be called an adulteress. If she be married to another man ; But if her husband be dead, She is free from the law so as to bo no adulteress. Though she be married to another man. * Yer. 4. — [Were made dead (Amer. Bible Union), though not very elegant, is perhaps the best rendering e iOavaTiiiBriTe. Mnrtifij, would be ambiguous here. Were slain, is preferred by Alford, because the more violett Oreek verb is uued, recalling the vio'ent death of Christ ; but this would point to the act of killing, rather than to tha fii't of being deprived of life, which is the prominent thought here. * Ver. 4. — [Both clauses are final, though differing in form. By changing the first that of the E. V. into in order that, the force of the Greek is preserved, and its varied form in a measure reproduced. ' Ver. 4.— [As untn Ond is the usual rendering of eis tov 6i6v, In Go I will serve to represent the simple diti"e : Tcp 9eiZ. The meaning seems to be : tn the glory of God. — The dative, tw Bavdrw is also found at thp close of ver. 5. ' Ver. 5. — [The E. V. usually renders Troe^/xara, sufferings. Here, passimis (Wordsworth, ai-l others; Lanire : Leidenschaften) is etymologically exact, and, on the whole, preferable to molions, fnotitnii (Amer. Bible Union), stirringa (Alford). 8 Ver. 6. — [The Rccepta reads awoSavovr o s ; a conjecture of Beza's, arising irom a misunderstanding of the text, having no uncial support. D. E. F. G. (Vulgate, and some Latin authorities) read tow Bo-votov ; a gloss, to get rid ol the participle, which was regarded as disturbing the structure of the sentence (Meyer). N. A. B. C. K. L., many ver- Bions and fathers, warrant the correctness of Airoflai'dvTes, which is now almost universally adopted. (The English text is emended to correspond.) » Ver. 6. — [The clause is ecbatic and present : Sxrre iouAeveiv. •• Ver. 6.— [If the reference be to the Holy Spirit, the above emendation is necessary. If not (as Dr. Lange holds), the clause should read : in newness of spirit and not in oldness of letter. See Excg. Note; on lx>th visws. — R.] EXEGETICAL AND CBITICAIi, Summary.* — a. The figure of marriage and the law of marriage to describe the relations of believers to the law (vers. 1-3) ; b. The application of the fig- ure : the marriage did not remain pure, because sin, whose motions were by the law, insinuated itself. It ifl dissolved by death (vers. 4-6). Ver. 1. Know^ ye not. ["H ayvoflxf. Comp. vi, 3. The particle ^ implies a doubt, and connects always with some preceding categorical clause (Winer, p. 474). — On the connection. Meyer deems it a resumption of vi. 14, but immediately linked to last main thought (vi. 22), viz., that the Christian had his fruit unto holiness, and the end, eter- nal life (which is proved in vi. 28). — R.] Since the ri assumes a doubt at the beginning (chap. ii. 29 ; vi. 3) ; the Apostle intimates that not all the believ- * (On the difficulty respecting the figure, see the full lemarks of Prof. Stuart in loco.- R.] ers in Rome are conscious of the wbole conclusion, that the gospel has made them free from the service of tlie Mosaic law — a conclusion that he w'U now make clear to them by the figure of the law of mav- riage. Therefore the question, Should you not fully know the consequence of the right of marriage in case one of tiie couples dies ? has this meaning : Should you not fully know the consequence of the death of believers by and for the law ? The course of treatment is tliis : Alter having shown that they are no more under sin, with more particular refer- ence to the Gentiles, the Apostle now declares, with more particular reference to the Jews, that tliey too are no more under the law. The unity warranting this transition consists in the fact, that one cannot be under sin without being under the sense of the law, and that he cannot be under the law without being under the sense of sin. So far, therefore, our de- duction extends back not only to chap. vi. 14, but even to chap. v. 20 ; iii. 9 ; ii. 17. That is, the law comes into consideration here so far as it is the power of the letter, which kills (2 Cor. iii. 6) — tlj» CHAPTER Vn. l-«. TSITJ phenomenon ia completed as the experience of sin (see ver. 24). Singular views : 1. Reiche : The x\iqi,h'ih,v in ver, 1 refers to the xvitiot; in tlie concluding verse of cliap. vi ; 2. Meyer: The freedom of Christians from the law follows from the truth of the foregoing verse. But the Apostle's transition consists in his design to show that Christians are just as dead to the Liw by baptiam in tlie death of Clirist, as they are dead to sin. This arises from the fact that they have received eternal life as tlie gift of God in Christ. They are therefore dead, by the death of Christ, to death, as a result of sin, as they are dead to death as a result of the law, according to chap, vii. 24. [Meyer's view in 4th edition is indicated above. — R.] Brethren. Certainly not merely the Jewish Christians (according to Grotius, and others ; also Tholuciv, in a qualified way) are meant in this ad- dress (Meyer). Yet Meyer, in denying this, over- looks the fact that the Jewish Cliristians are regard- ed most prominently, because the point in question is respecting the law (see chap. ix. 3). [The only limitation being " those who know the law," it must be remembered that in the apostolic age, as well as since, the knowledge of the Old Testament on the part of Christians in general is presupposed. — R.] For I speak to those who know the law. [Parenthetical, as in the E. V. Explanatory of brethren. — R.] Of what law does he speak ? It must not be overlooked, that what the Apostle fur- ther adduces as the design of the law, already re- minds of the law of nature. Therefore Koppe : every law is meant. Glockler : the moral law. But though the Roman law miglit have a similar pur- port, the Apostle nevertheless means the Mosaic law itself; for the point of his argumentation is, that, according to the principles of the Mosaic law itself. Christians must be regarded as having been made free by this law. It is not npcessary to prove that the Mosaic law in general, but not the law of mar- riage in particular (Beza, Carpzov [Bengel], and others), is meant here The Jew did not have a sep- arate marriage-law ; yet the Mosaic law, with refer- ence to tlie marriage-law, is meant. — And who are tliosc who know Uie law? Explanations: 1. The Roman Christians, the majority of whom were Jew- ish Christans ; 2. The Jewish-Christian portion, to ■whom Paul addresses himself in particular (Philippi, and others) ; 3. In addition to these, the Gentile Christians, who, as Jewish proselytes, had been en- trusted with the law (De Wette, and others) ; 4. Thohiek calls to mind, that the Gentile Christians became acquainted with the law. [As the customs of the synagogue remained to a large extent those of the early Christian assemblies, the Old Testament was read to all believers, as indeed was necessary to their Christian instruction. One could not be a Christian even then, and remain ignorant of the law. — R.] The question in general here is not a difficult specialty of the Mosaic law, but a principle evidenced also by natural law, which, for this very reaeon, does not result from one passage, but from the connection of the Mosaic law. Tholuck : " One of the legal maxims current among the Jews ; Este endeavors in vain to prove it from the Old Testa- ment." Yet the example of Ruth, Abigail, and even of the second marriage of Abraham, is more than one legal maxim current among the Jews. Moreover, the legal principle in chap. vi. 7 is of kin- dred nature. That the law hath dominion. We must not connect 6 vo/kk; roti avOQuin-v (Mosheim, and others), but v6fio(i with »v{)i,fvn,. Man i| certainly, however, the man in question placed un. der the law. [Wordsworth explains : " The law (of Moses) is lord over the man — the human crea» ture — whether man or woman. Comp. Chrysostom, Theodoret, Augustine."' This takes the verb in the literal sense : to be lord, and introduces the figure of the marriage at once, thus avoiding any difficulty about the special law, for the whole law is personi. fied. Meyer seems to favor this view also. — R.] For as long time as he liveth [tip bo, so long as man lives, the dominion of the fofiot ovei him remains." Of course, this means previj js to the deatb to the law (ver. 4).— E..J 320 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO TEE ilOilANS. eelf as the dead part ? Clearly, because of the sec- ond marriage. Tliis explanation of Fritzsciie and Meyer (concinnity) is established by the Apostle, and also rendered emphatic by his language. As the woman is not dead, but is killed in respect to hei marriage relation, or is situated as dead, by the natural death of her husband, so believers have not died a natural death, but are made dead to the law, eince they are crucified to tlie law with Christ. Tlie idea, dead in a inarriage. relation, is therefore the tertiurn comparationin. The OararovaOai, in ver. 4 is therefore like the y.araoytlcj&ai, of a widow, in which a'.so a death-like orplianage is indicated. That the law itself is also dead, as a letter, by its statu- tory application to the crucifixion of Christ, follows, without any thing further, from what has been said. Tholuek, not being satisfied v/ith Meyer's removal of the difficulty, seems desirous of placing himself on the side of those wlio give an allegorical interpreta- tion to the passage commencing with ver. 2. Ex- planations : 1. The wife is the soul, the husband is sin ; sin dies in the fellowship of believers with Christ's death (Augustine, and others ; Olshausen). 2. Only the vofiot; can be regarded as the hus- band (Origen, Chrysostom, Calvin, Fhilippi). Like- wise, witli special reference to the sense of guilt (Luther) ; with special reference to sin (Spener). De Wette and Meyer have properly rejected the introduction of allegory in vers. 2, 3 ; it destroys all legal evidence of the figure. The Apostle did not avoid saying lO^avartoDtj 6 i'o.koc,- because he wished to give a more pregnant expression to tlie thought, and to include in one the otlier side also, but because i)avarov(T&ai, is different from a simple anoflvt]- a/.fi.v, and because the retroactive inference from the act which the adnliuistration of the law has com- mitted on the body of Christ is proximate to tlie dying of the law (according to Heb. viii. 13 ; de- cayed and waxed old). The gospel is eternally new, because it refers to only eternal relations. The law grows old from the beginning, because, in its out- ward and national character, it relates to transitory and ever-changing relations. Application to Catholi- cism and Protestantism. (All they that take the Bword, &c.) "Y nav(i()0(;, viro suhjecta ; the wife Lad no right to separate herself* But lif the husband have died, she is loosed from the law of her husband [eav dk an o- ■&■ a.vi\ 6 avi^ Q , nart] Q y tjx ai a no r ov vofiov tov avUgoq. On the conditional clause. Bee Textual Note ^. On the verb, comp. Gal. v. 4, ^•ange's Comm., p. 12V. The genitive is one of ref- erence, of the object respecting which, see Winer, p. 177. — R.] That is, which relates to her husband. On the relationship of the expression xari^ityrjTcci, to the ifyavanoOtjTf, comp. Meyer's translation : " Slie has become undone, and thereby free and ab- Bolved from the law which related to her husband (united her to him)." (See Gal. v. 4.) Ver. 3. She shall be called an adulteress. She receives the name in a formal and legal way. And therewith she is subject to the .severest punish- ment of the law — stoning. [Levit. xxi. 10 ; comp. John viii. 5.] [She is free from that law, ikm&i^a * [She is bound to him by the law— i'. e., the Mosaic law —which made no provision for her loosing herself (in Deut. xxiv. 2 it was the power of the husband, not the wife, to repudiate the rehition). Ilere the l?w it no longer spoken jf figTiratlvclj'. — R.) i(T Tiv a no Tori vo/«oi). The arti ele ehoiri that the reference is to (he law of the hunband. hencc the E. V. : (hat law, is correct. — R.] So that she is not an adulteress. Meyer in- sists upon the idea of design : Iti order that she ba no adulteress ; and declares this to be the design of the Divine legal ordinance — which Tlioluck there pedantically finds. Yet the expression here might certainly have been chosen with reference to this application. The Judaists assuredly charged tho believing Jews with apostasy, and therefore with religious adultery. Hence Paul says fir at, instead of /^ijiiaTii^n, ; * and Fritzsche has strikingly made the ToT ft ij lira I, dependent on e/frflt^a. [All these views are alike grammatical. That of Fritzsche is harsh, however, while Meyer's seems to be adopted more to prepare tiie way for the parallel he makes (ver. 4) : iw order that ye should be mar- ried to another. It is not necessary to press the figure to this extent, however. — R.] Ver. 4. Accordingly, my brethren. ["/2«TTf, see Winer, p. 283. — R.] The explanation follows here first ; tliis is not allegorical, but si/mbolical, because inarriage represents, in the external .sphere of life, what religion does in the inward and higher (Eph. V. 32). — Ye also, as the widowed wife. — Were made dead to the law f [ e 5^ a i- a t oi - & tj T I n't vo/ti)). See Textual Note *. The verb is aorist, referring to a definite act in the past, viz., the release from the law at justification. — R.] That is, in relation to the marriage-covenant. The ex- pression t avarii) & t] T f is chosen, not merely because Christ's death was a violent one, but also because it describes the death of Christians to the law as a death incurred by virtue of the administra- tion of the law. Through the body of Christ [<)t.a roTi (T(i),M«Toi; T o r XqkttoTi^. In, and, at the same time, with Him, as He was put to death. The atoning effect of tlie sacrificial death cannot, at all events, be the premise here, although it is included. [The aorist shows that the reference is definite ; the proposition indicates the means of the death to the law. Two opinions prevail : (1.) That it refers to the atoning death of Christ as the ground of justifi- cation. So Hodge, and others. It may be urged in favor of this, that this is the means or ground of justification, and that thus the antithesis to "was raised " is preserved. But tlie Apostle generally speaks of the death of Christ in plain terms, when he refers to it. Col. i. 22, which Hodge quotes as an instance of " His body," meaning His death, adds the qualifying phrases, " of His flesh," " through death." (2.) With Tholuek, Meyer, Lange, and others, it may be referred to the fellowship with Christ in His death. This view accords better with the point which the Apostle has reached in his argu- ment, as well as the idea of union with Christ under- lying this passage. This does not deny, but implies the atoning efficacy of His death, which is always latent, if not patent, in the Apo.stle's argument. It has been the fault of some commentators, to insist * [That is, they miorht be and were so called, but yet were not guilty of relijjious adultery. — R.] t [Dr. Ilodge at some lenirth combats the view, that tha Mosaic law (or rather the Jewish economy) is alone referred to throughout this passage. He rightly says : " Puil here means by the law, the will of God, as ;i rule of duty. Low* ever revealed." See on iii. '20, p. 122 (also Oal!, aniOavtv v/iiv. This explanation does not regard the difference between natural and violent death, nor self-destruction. Tiie law could not be dead ; this would have been revo- lution. As a Divine form of revelation, it had to grow old and vanish away (Heb. viii. 13) ; but as a human ordinance it has itself inflicted death. Tliere- fore the law still retained its former historical and ethical (not religious and essential) force toward those who were not dead to it by the fellowship of Christ. Through the body of Christ, Sta rov amfiaroQ SctvaTioO fvToq. It may be asked, in what relation this beiiiff dead with the body of Christ stands to the beinft reconciled by the body of Clirist. Tholuck : " Fellowship with the death of Christ includes free- dom from the xarafjd of the law (Gal. iii. 10), and this latter, which is brought to pass by thankful love in return, includes the death of the old man to sin (chap. vi. 6) and st'-engthening to a new life." Tlie becoi/iinr/ free from ib«! vo/ioi; is consummated with the devt'loi)ment of refy^ntance and faith — that is, with justification ; the having become free from the old law is decided when the new law, the law of the Spirit, the righteousness of faith, appears (Eph. ii. 16). In order that ye should be married to an- other [fii; TO yfrtoOai, v/iui; trf(>(o. The clause seems to be final. In order thai ; the pur- pose of the death to the law was union to Christ. — R.] rivfaOai, riroq, to become the possession of a husband. The figure of conjugal communion of the believing Church with the Lord (2 Cor. xi. 2 ; Eph. v. 2, 5 ; Rev. xxi. 8). To another. The stronger trtqu) is here used. [And it is more closely defined, even to him who was raised from the dead, t w ex v t xq mv iyf^O-ivri,. ■ — With good reason is this added. — R.] Not only do Christians belong to the risen Christ because He has acquired them by His death (1 Peter i.), but also becauxe they themselves, having been dead with Him.^ have become a heavenly race, a Riiper-terredrial people^ who, as risen ones, can be united only with the Risen One; therefore their C07>ti)iue ' connection with the law of this life would be a misalliance. The common element of this new communion is the new life. That we should bring forth fruit to God [I'va x aQ :t (fi o (> t'j J',- ITO. — R.] Which were by means of the law. Ta Si.a. roTi v6ftot<. Grotius supplies ((iat,v6u(va, wliich is too little; Meyer, xc., ovra, wliicli is far too much. According to ver. 9, aval^iovTa. Tholuck : " Many of the older commentators, in order not to let the law apijcar in too unfavorable a light, exi)laiiied thus : of the knowledge of sin communicated by the law (thus Chrysostom, Ambrose, BuUinger, and oth- ers). Yet, thus construed, diet v6 fi ov would stand beyond the pragmatism of the passage." Tho- luck, like Meyer, would also supply the v/rh. subd. [The proximity of ver. 7 supports the obvious mean- ing : occasioned by the law (Meyer : vermittelt), not causi'd, however. — R.] Wrought [tv*;^ yf Tto]. Middle. Were efiB- cient in a fruitful manner. In our members [ £ v t o T? n i).fa iv tj fKov. Hodge weakens the force, by making this almost = in us. — R.] Single productions between individual passions and individual members, in which the cen- tral consciousness was enslaved for the production of individual miscarriages. To bring forth fruit to death [fli; rb xa^7io(fo^^(Tai r (J) & av dr to . This clause expresses not merely the result (Hodge), but the final object of the energizing (Meyer, Alford,), being parallel to the last clause of ver. 4. — R.] Meyer : To lead a life term natincf in death. Expressing but little, almost nothing, here. That false fruit, abor- tions, or miscarriages, might arise (wherefore the Bubst. y.a()7T6i; itself must be avoided). Erasmus : ex infelici matriinonio infelices fcetun sustutimus^ quidquid nasceretur morti exi'ioque pignentes. Lu- ther : Where the law rules over people, they are in- deed not idle ; they bring forth and train up many children, but they are mere bastards, who do not belong to a free mother. Meyer would also here limit death to the idea of eternal death ; see above. [He also carries out the figure of progeny, which Lange retains here, so far as to make " death " here a personification. This is less justifiable than tlie reference to eternal death, which conveys a truth, and forms a fitting antithesis to rm OtiJj (ver. 4). — B.] Ver. 6. But now we have been delivered from the law [vwi i)k (antithesis to oxf, ver. 5) xaTt](>yiid'r]/ifv a no rov v 6 ft o v. No- tice the aorist, which Paul uses so constantly in reference to the accomplished fact of justification. — R.] VVe are annulled in relation to the law, and therewith the law is annulled to us. (On the read- ing anoOavovTO'^, see the Critical Note on the Text ; also Tholuck, p. 3.30.) Having died to that wherein we were held [ ci TT o <9-ai'o I'Tf (,' iv m /.ar f iy6fiff)-a^. We must understand toi'/tw before iv to. Meyer explains : in which we were confined as in a prison. More in harmony with the former view is this : whereby we were chained as by a legal and even matrimoniid obligation. Wherefore we certainly do cot need to refer iv to merely to vo/fOs' (with Ori- gen, Koppe, De Wette, Philippi [Hodge], and oth- ers). Tholuck : " The law, therefore, is regarded as Tione/iov, as a chain, analogously to the itf^ovffov- tit&a avvy.tni.n.aiiivoi'^ Gal. iii. 23, so far as it holds its subjects in Joi'Afi'a (Rom. viii. 15 ; 2 Tim. i. T)b The direct reference of the iv to to sin (accortling to Chrysostom, G'^cun enius, and others) is too strong on the opposite side. ' — The cause of the chaining of man by sin on one side, as well as by the law on the other, was the totality of the tivai iv rfj aaiJxL, as it expressed itself in mere divisions of iust and legality. This is clear from what follows : in iJu olduens of the letter. So that we serve [w<7Tf Sov).iv tiv ^/tciq. The clause is not final, as the E. V. indicates ; the service is a present state, already resulting from the accomplished fact of deliverance from and death to the law. Serve God, is the meaning, tlie omission of &H0 being due to the self-evident difference of reference in the two phrases which follow. The consciousness of the readers would tell them that the old service was one to sin, the new one to God (so Meyer). — R.] The do v /.f v f tv can be spo- ken ironically in only a conditional manner. We have really our external life to enslave, but not after the old way, in single portions and acts, according to individual precepts, motives, and affections, but in the newness of the Spirit ; therefore by virtue of the perfect principle of the Spirit, which is ever new, and always assuming a new form. The iv denotes not merely the sphere of activity (Meyer), but the power, the principle of activity itself. In new^ness of the Spirit [iv xui.v6TTjri nvfvftaroi;. Untenable views: That ev is re- dundant, and the dative the object of the verb cyoc- ).n'ifi,r ; that there is a Hendiadys [tiew spirit, Hodge). The E. V. is fond of Hendiadys, and very often mis- construes it', but has avoided these mistakes in tne present instance. Alford correctly remarks, that the datives " are not" as in vi. 4, attri utes of the geni- tives which follow them, but utatcs in iihich those genitives are the Tiling elements. — What is the pre- cise force of TTv i v ft ar oii'i — R.] Meyer: " It is the Holy Spirit, as tlie operative principle of the Christian life." Clearly, it is the spirit as itself the inward Christian principle of life, which is certainly not to be thought of without the communion of the Holy Spirit. For the Holy Spirit as n v fv n a. sim- ply, operating objectively, was also the producer of the y Q c't, ft ft a , which here constitutes the antithe- sis. This principle is itself an eternal newness, and has, as a result, an eternal newness as the principle of the absolute renewal. Tholuck : " The spirit of grace produced by God's gracious deed." [With Meyer, Alford, and others, it seems best to refer this to the Holy Spirit. The absence of the article is not agiiinst this view ; as the opinion of Harless, that nvfT'iia without the article is subjective, is not well established. (Comp. Meyer on Rom. viii. 4 ; Har- less, Eph. ii. 22; Lange's Comm., Gal. v. 16, p. 137.) This passage seems to point to chap, viii., wliere Ttvtriia occurs so frequently, in the sense of the Holy Spirit ; the more so as trdui occurs just before (ver. .5). The objection, that the Holy Spirit, work- ing objectively, was the author of the letter, and hence that the antithesis requires another meaning, has not much weight. See notes on Rom. viii. 4 ff. -R.] And not in the oldness of the letter [ xai oi' na).cti,6Trjri' (only here) y q ci ft fi ar oi;. Not = old letter (Hodge), nor yet — under the law, in the Jlesh, though these latter thoughts are im. plied. The genitive seems to be pen. auctoris, aa nvtvfiaioti in the previous clause. — R.] On th« Y Q d/ifiay see chap. ii. 29 ; 2 Cor, iii. 6. The law CHAPTER VIL 1-6. 223 viewed externally, and, by its historical and subjec- tive externaliziition, become an old and dying object, TTa/.atort/i;. Meyer writes somewhat unintelligibly : The 7taJMi,6T7j(i, according to the nature of the rela- tion in which the yfjciufia stands to the principle of Bin in man, was necessarily sinful (see ver. 7 ff.), as, on the other hand, the xatroTC/i; must be necessarily moral in consequence of the vitally influencing nvti'iia. [The service which resulted from the rule of the letter, was not merely their old service, but a service having in it an element of decay. The ser- vice under the law, precisely the written law (when viewed as the y(jdiifia), was a killing yoke, is still, when the service is in the oldness of the letter. Meyer evidently means, that a law with external pre- cepts, of the letter, necessarily so acts upon man's sinfulness, that the very service he attempts to ren- der is sinful. The letter killeth (2 Cor. iii. 6). — Such a characterization of the service under the law forms a fitting warning against a return to legalism — au appropriate conclusion to this section, and a point of connection with ver. 7. — R.] DOCTRINAL A^^) ETHICAIfc 1. The connection with sin, according to chap, vi. 12-23, was a slavish state ; the connection with the law, on the other hand, according to the present section, was comparable to an earthly marriage-state. The connection of believei-s with Christ now appears, in comparison with this, as a super-terrestrial mar- riage-covenant (see Eph. v. 32). 2. It is only by keeping the figure of the law of marriage free from an allegorical interpretation, and by distinguishing between the figure itself and its historical application, that the evidence clearly ap- pears which the argumentation of the Apostle con- templated, and particularly for the Jewish Christians. But tliis evidence still continues in force. The standpoint of external legality, and that of living faith, cannot be confused as religious principles. Both standpoints are sundered by the death of Christ. Where they seem to be united, the confes- sion of the law, or the legal confession of faith, is the dominant religious principle ; while the opposite principle has the meaning only of a historical and ethi<;al custom, which, from its nature as a legal cus- tom, as much limits the Catholic man of faith, as it, in the character of an evangelical custom, burdens the legal, Romanizing Protestant. 3. Tholuck : " The law is annulled in relation to believers, not in its moral import, but, as Calovius remarl s, quoad rigorem exactiojiia, quoad maledic- tionem et quoad servilem coactionem." According to the lermon on the Mount, as well as according to Paul, i» is done away so far as it is fulfilled ; it is annulk I in a negative sense so far as it is annulled in Chri tian principle, the law of the Spirit. An in- ward pi (nciple has come from the external precept ; an inwt fd rule from the external form ; an inward tendenc / from the external law ; a unity from multi- plicity ; a synthesis from the analysis ; and from the ordinan e, " Do this and live," the order, " Live and do this." It must be borne in mind, that Paul here speaks .if the finite, formal character of the law, and not )f the law as a type of the New Testament, as it hi J become transformed into the law of the Spirit. [Comp. Doctrinal Notes on Galatians, iii. lO-aiJ J p. 88, 89.— R.] 4. t»ie figure of marriage, which extends through the Old Testament in typical forms, is here employed in reference to the relation between Christ and the v\hole body of believers. The individual believer participates freely in the marriage-bond of this body, yet not in a mystical, separatistic isolation of his re* lation to Christ. 6. In ver. 5 Paul speaks especially concerning the passions of this, which are excited and occa- sioned by the law ; and there is no reason for under, standing among them the abnormal forms of pas- sionate excitement. The history of Pharisaism, and of fanaticism in general, from the crucifixion of Christ down to the present day, teaches us how very much additional weight is also added by the normal forms. In this direction there has arisen the odium generis hnmani, as well as the increasingly strong warfare of hierarchical or ecclesiastical party-law against the eternal moral laws of humanity, in which the nature of God iiiiuself is represented, while in the statute only the distorted apparent image of the Church, and not its eternal pith, is reflected. 6. The abortions of ordinances at enmity with the gospel and humanity reached the centre of their manifestation in the crucifixion of Christ ; but they everywhere reappear, where Christ is again crucified, in a grosser or more refined sense. And this not only occurs where the written revealed law is per- verted into fanatical ordinances, but also where the ideals of the natural law (Rom. ii. 14) are distorted to fanatical caricatures, as is shown in the history of the Revolution of 1848. 7. On ver. 6. Tholuck : " yQanfia, nvivnn (chap. ii. 29). The former is chiefly a designation of the external principle ; the latter, of the inward- ly operative principle. And this inwardly operative principle is the gracious spirit produced by God'a gracious act. Calvin: Spiritum litterce opponit, quia antequam ad dei voluiitatem voluntas nostra per spiritwn sanclum format a sit, non habemus in lege nisi externam litteram, qucE frcenum quidem externia nostris actionibus injicit, concupiscentice autem nos- trce furorem minime cohibet. And Melanchthon : Ideo dicitur litiera, quia non est verus et virus motus animi, sed est otiosa imitatio interior vel exterior, nee ibi potent esse vera invocatio, ubi cor non apprehen' dit i-emissionem peccatorum." 8. How the law, in its letter or finite relation, began to grow old immediately after the beginning of legislation, is shown to us clearly by the history of the Israelites ; and Deuteronomy even gives the canonical type of this truth. The history of the Christian Church teaches, on the other hand, how the newness of the spiritual life becomes constantly newer in its power of renewal. But the same an- tithesis is again manifested in the continual obsoles- cence of the Church in the Middle Ages, and in the continued rejuvenating of the evangelical Church. HOMTLETICAl, AND PRACTICAI*. On Chap. vii. 1-6. As Christians, we belong no more to the law, but to Christ. 1. Because we are dead to the law by Jesus, who abolished the power of the law ; 2. Be- cause we are united to Him by the same fact, in order to bring forth fruit to God (vers. 1-6). — Mar. riage as a type of spiritual relations : 1. As a type of our relation to the law ; 2. As a type of our re. lation to Christ (vers. 1-6). — As the relation of maa 224 THE EFISTLJ!. UF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. to Christ is altogether different from that to the law, BO is Cliristian marriage, on tiie other hand, alto- getiier different from that of tlie Old Testament {vers. 1-6). — How death divides, bnt also unites ver. 4). — Union of heart with Christ the Risen One is the condition of the liappy union of human iiearts with eacli otlier so as to ijring forth fruit unto God (ver. 4). — How miserable it was to live under the law in the flesh ; how liappifying it is to live under grace in the Spirit ! Proof: 1. Dcseription of the elate under the law : a. we were in bondage ; b. sin- ful lusts worked in our members to bring forth fruit unto death ; c. we served the letter. 2. Descrip- tion of the condition under grace : a. we are free ; b. the newness of the Spirit incites us to bring forth fruit unto God ; c. we serve the Spirit, and not the letter any more (vers. 5, 6). Starke : As a thistle-bush is full of thistles, so are unconverted and carnal men full of the fruits of the flesh (ver. 5). — Christ frees us from the burden of the law, that we may take His yoke upon us (ver. 6). — HEniNGER : We are free from the law, not as a precept of duty — which remains perpetually — but in its condemnation, compulsion, and sharp- ness (ver. 1). — Where there is not a heart and ready will, there is only external labor and weariness ; where conversion of the life and spiritual increase are not exhibited in the inner man, it is lost work and the service of the letter, even if one should wear out the temple-floor with his knees, give his body to be burned, and become a beggar and a her- snit ! Spener : Our perverted nature is such, that, when any thing is forbidden, we have all the greater desire to have it. We have often seen children think less of, and have no desire for, a certain thing, for which they have all the more desire when for- oidden. So, when the law forbids this and that, we are prompted toward it by our wicked nature (ver. 5). — We are not so free that we do not have to se.'ve iiny more ; only the kind of service is differ- ent. Formerly it was compulsory, now it is ren- A.^"ed with a joyful will ; then it was the letter, now it is the spirit (ver. 6). — Roos : The truth which Paul here portrays (vers. 1-4) is this : that nothing but death annuls the dominion of the law. Lisco : The complete freedom of man from the law promotes his true sanctification (vers. 1-6). — The relation of man to the law. — Application of this relation to believers (ver. 4).— Advantages of the new state above the old one under the law (vers. 6,6). Hkdbner : The Christian is free from the co- ercion of the law (vers. 1-6). — The death of Christ became freedom from the compulsory power and curse of the law : 1. As abrogation of the Levitical Bacrificial system ; 2. As inducement toward free and thankful love toward God (ver. 4). — Irreligious Doliticians express only their ignoble and servile manner of thinking, when they deem all religion to be only of service as a bridle for the people (ver. 4). — The nature of the Christian is spirit : 1. In refer- ence to faith ; 2. In reference to action. The lat- ter stands in contrast with this spirit in these same respects (ver. 6). Besseb : Here, for the first time since chap. i. 18, Paul addresses the saints at Rome as hrethreiif— brethren " in Christ Jesus our Lord " (ver. 1).—* " But now " — Jiis ^low is an evangelical key-note of the Epistle to the Romans ; comp. chap. iii. 21, and other places (ver. 6). Langk : The death of Christ a serious boundai/ between the legal and the evangelical, believing, standpoints: 1. The meaning of this boundary itself; 2. The application: no religious confusiont of the two standpoints. By a customary connection of them, one is made to mean only a moral limita- tion, which, after all, is not in conformity with th« internal relations. — The sensuous power and spirit* ual weakness of legalism consists in its being an earthly relatiop, confined to this life, though in the fear of God (in this life the head, the city of God, the apparent image of the kingdom, &c.). — The mar- riage-ljond of the free Church of God is a super- terrestrial relation, and therefore the power of the renewal of the earthly life : a. Christ in the next life and in this one ; b. Faith also ; c. The Church as well. — The reciprocal action between the law and sin unto death, a counterpart to the reciprocity be- tween the Spirit of Christ and faith unto new life. — The contrast between the Old and New Testament in its full meaning : 1. The Old Testament growing old and making old from the beginning ; 2. The New Testament renewing itself and the world from the beginning. — But a New Testament is in the essence of the Oldj as wefll as an Old is in the manifestation of the New. [BuRKiTT : All the wisdom of the heathen, and of the wisest persons in the world, was never able to discover the first sinful motions arising from our rebellious natures ; only the holy law of God makes them known, and discovers them to be sin. Such is the holiness of the law of God, that it requires not onJy the purity of our actions, but also the integrity of all our faculties. — Scott : Self-righteous pride and antinomian licentiousness are two fatal rocks on which immense multitudes are continually wrecked, and between which none but the Holy S[)irit can pilot us ; and the greatest objections of open ene- mies to tlie doctrines of grace derive their greatest plausibility from the unholy lives of many professed friends. — Clarke : The law is only the means of discloshuf our sinful propensity, not of -produnng it; as a bright beam of the sun introduced into a roona shows millions of motes in all directions — but these were not introduced by the light, but were there be- fore, only there was not light enough to make them manifest — so the evil propensity was in the heart before, but there was not light sufficient to discover it. Literature, chiefly Homiletical, on the Vth Chapter of Romans: Arminius, Dissertatio?) on the True and Genuine Sense of Romans VII., Works, 2, 471 ; E. Elton, Complaint of a Sanctified Sinner Answered, or Explanation of the Ith Chapter of Romans, London, 1618 ; J. Stafford, Scripture Doc- trine of Sin Considered, in Twerdy-five Discourse* on Romans VII., London, 1772 ; J. "Glas, The Flesh and the Spirit, Works, 3, 142 ; J. Eraser, Scripiun Doctrine of Sanctif cation ; A. Knox, Letter to J, S, Harford, Esq., on the Seventh Chapter to the Ra mans. Remains, 3, 409. — J. F. H.] CHAPTER VII. 1-25. 226 FiTTH Section. — Synopsis : The Jaw, in its holy design, by the feeling of death, to lead to the new life in grace. The development of the law from extmit how] to perform 19 that which is good I find not ['^r, is not].' For the good that I Avould [wish], 20 I do not : but the evil which I would [wish] not, that I do [practise]. Now [But] if I do that I* would [wish] not, it is no more [longer] I that do 21 [perform] it, but sin that dwelleth [dwelling] in me. I find then a [the] law, 22 that, when I would [wish to] do good, evil is present with me. For I delight 23 in the law of God after the inward man : But I see another law in my mem- bers, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to* the law of sin which is in my members. 24 O wretched man that I am ! who shall deliver me from the body of this 25 death [or, this body of death] ? '" I thank God [or, Thanks to God] " through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself [I myself with the mind] '^ serve the law of God ; but with the flesh the law of sin. TEXTUAL. • Ver. 7. — [The E. V. renders tniBv ix.iav here hisf, in ver. S, concppiscnce, ard the verb eniOvftria-t it, eottt. In order to preserve the correspondence, the Amer. Bible Union translates the noun covethig in both places. We ai« forced to retain anvt in rendering the virb, but it seems hotter to give the noun a more exact ti-anslation, even at ;av cost of variation from the verb. Lust is too specific, coiicvpiscmce too rare, desire would be indefinite without u.« adjective ev.'l. " The misfortune is that we have no English noun that corresponds well to the generic sense of the yera covet " (Stuart). ' Ver. 10. — [The italics of the E. V. are virtually a gloss. Was only need he supplied. For is a favorite emendap tlon, but unto brings out the telic force of eis quite as well. — The passive form of the Greek is restored in the secon4 clause. ' Ver. 13.— [v. A. B. C. D. E., Lachmann, Mtyer, Alford, Wordsworth, Trege'les, read eyevfro instead of yeyoy% (Rm., K. L.). The correction probably arose from not understanding the historical aorist (Alford). The Amer. Bibl* Union follows the latter reading, which is now considered incorrect. • Vi-r. 14.— [N>. A. B. C. D. E. E. G., Grieshach, Lacbmaim, Scholz, Tischendorf, Meyer, ■WjrasiTorth, Tregelles, and Lange, read a-apKivot instead of a-apKiKo^ {Re/:., N". K. L.) ; the latter being very naturally ELbstltuted to correspond with TTj'cufiaT IK d s . It was also more familiar. On the meaning, see Exeg. Kotes. • Ver. 15. — [Three Greek verbs of kindred signification : xarcpyd^ofiai, irparroj, iroieo), occur in this veree, recurring throughout the section. The E. V. renders all three, do, except in ver. 18, where the first verb is translated, perfiirm. It is better to retain this throughout, and reader jrpdTTw , practise, as etymologically exact. Alford deuiei any distinction between the last two verbs. 15 SRJ6 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. ♦ Ver. 15. — ( WouUl (E. V.) is an inexact remlcrii p of 9 e Au . The choice lies between wiU and wish. 1 ; c formei l8 t l>e preferreil, if the idea of simple, spontanoous volition is deemed the proiniiiont one ; the latter is favored hy tha presence of fitato, indicatinsr an emotional featuie in the vol tion. See Exij/. Note.'. ' Ver 18. — [\. A. Is. C, many versions and fathers, Laeliman^, Tisclieiulorf, Alford, Trcpelles, omit evpio-Kw. I*, ta inserted in 1). F. K. L., Re, by many father.*, Meyer, Wordsworth, L;int;e, and others. Meyer deems the omission due to the transcriber's hastily passing over from ovf^ to ov at the beKiuninp of ver. 19. Lai ge holds that €upi. . B. has xapi« t T(u fxiv vol SovXevia vofiif @6oS, T)7 &e crapKL, vofiu ap-apTLOi. So then I myself With my mind serve the law of God, But with my flesh the law of sin. Lange, however, seems to take p.iv , . . Se as — either . . . or. See Exeg. iVbtes.— E.] A. — T/ie development of life under the Imv as de- velopment of the knoiohdge of sin. Summary. — 1. The law in lelation to .«in ; vers. 12, 13. a. The liolhiess of the law in its re ation to the sinfulness of man; vers. 7-12. b. Tlie effect of the law in harmony witli its design : Disclosure of tlie deadly eft'ect of sin, in causing it to complete itself as well in facts as in the consciousness ; ver. 13. — 2. The sinner in relation to the law ; vers. 14-23. a. The revelation of man's carnal nature or tendency in general under the spirituality of the law ; ver. 14. b. The disclosure of tiie sinful ob- scuration of the understanding ; or the dispute of knowledge ; vers. 15, 16. c. The disclosure of the sinful obsciuation of the will ; or the disptite of the will ; vers. 17, 18. d. Disclosure of the sitiful ob- ecuration of feeling ; or of the unconscious ground of life; vers. 19, 20. e. Disclosure of the darken- ing of the whole hutnan consciousness by the oppo- sition of God's law and a mere seeming law ; or the deadly rent in the wliole man; vers. 21-23. — 3. The unhappy pretnonition of death, in the sense of the entanglement by the (seeming) body of death, and the release from it ; ver. 24. 4, The transition from death to life ; ver. 25. a. The redemption, in the former lialf of the verse, b. Conclusion in relation to tiie starting-point of tlie new life ; second half of ver. 25. B. — Tlie same development as transition from the law to the Gospel, from ruin to salvation. (Eph. v. 13 : " But all things that are reproved are made manifest by the light : for whatsoever doth make manifest is light.") a. The holy design of the law to discover the root of sin, and with the sense of guilt to awaken the sense of death ; vers. 7-12. — b. The wholesomeness of this complete unmasking of sin in its absolute sinfulness ; ver. 13. — c. View of the conflict between the S!)iritual and divine character of the law, and the carnal character of tlie sinner ; ver. 14. — d. Consciousness of the want of cle?rnes3 and supremacy of understanding ; vers. 16, 16. — e. Consciousness of tlie want of firmness tud energy of will; vers. 17, 18. — /'. Consciousness of the weakness of the nobler sentiments, and tlie Buperior power of the lower ; vers. 19, 20. — g. The consciousness of the chasm between the inner man and the outward life ; of the rent between the two reciprocally contradictory laws; vers. 21-23. — \. The fruit of this development : the consimimated consciousness of the necessity of deliverance ; ver. 24. — i. Deliverance and the iieiv law of life: clear distinction between knowledge and fl"sh ; ver. 25. The / is distinguished, first from sin in knowledge, then in the will, then in the feeling, then in the whole consciousness of the inward nature, but finally in the inquiring cry for the Redeemer. General Preliminary Remarks. — We come first of all to tlie questitm, In what sense does the Apos- tle speak in tiie first person si-igular? what does the tj"" mean? Different views: The espres.-ion is a fitraa/tjiiciri,rrii6..:, s-eo 1 Cor. iv. 6 — that is, the rep- resentation of one C/'.ro in another. Thus the Greak fathiTS applied llie passage to the fall of Adam, or of the liuinan race (Tlioltick : " By way of exami)le, the introduction of man into tlie para- disaical condition "). — Others believed the Jewish people before and under the law denoted (Chrysos- tom, Tunetin, Wetstein, Reiche). The view of the Socinians and Arminians (Grotius, and others) was a modification of this one, that the hominex plerigue are meant, who, under the legal economy, have sur- rendered themselves to a gross life of sin. But the Apostle evidently speaks of a human condition of soul, in wliich the inward conflict of life is very ear- nest and great ; and the language of his own expe- rience is unmistakable. Even if he spoke of the human race in general, or of the Israelitish people in particular, he could not speak of a mere fitraa- X^/iaTia/wi;, wliich would be excluded from the organic connection by the Apostle's theological view. But since the Apostle uses the most forcible lan- guage of his own experience, his expression is ISlo)' (Tw; {xoi'VonoHct) ; that is, he expresses in his expe- rience a universal human experience of the relation of man to the law (Meyer, and others).* For it ia self-evident that the Apostle could have no occasion to describe a special experience concerning himself alone. But now the second question arises : What state of the soul has the Apostle portrayed? Does thii * [Wordsworth, less correctly, says: "By the prononn 7. the holy Apostle personifies Iluman Nattire, and iden- I titles it with himself, and says, in his own name and person, 1 what he means to be applied to Mankind generally, in theil unregenerate slate." This author follows his usumI patris- 1 tic bent, in implying that this is a descri)'tion, not of what was, but miffhl hive been Paul's experience. This seal foi I the lienor of " the holy Apostle" is undoubtedly at the ea> I pense of Lis sincerity. — K.J CHAPTER VII. 7-28. 227 passage refer to tlie coudition of the unregenerate, 3r of the regenerate ? Vieirs. — 1. The unrer/enerate : The Greek fiithers, Augustine before his controversy with the Pchigians [prop. 44 in Ep. ad Ii>.iit.) ; also Jerome, Abelard (to a certain extent), and Thomas Aquinas ; then Erasmus, liucer, Musculus, Ocliino, Faustus Socinus, Anninius (on Afl'ehnan, see Tlioluck, p. 1^28) ; the Spener school (according to tiie suggestions of Spe- der) ; and later exegetical writers. [Among tiiese, Julius Miiller, Neandcr, Nitzsch, Hahn, Tlioluck, Krehl, Hengstenberg, KUckert, De Wette, Ewaid, Slier, Stuart, Ernesti, Messner, Schmid, Lechler, Kahnis, and Meyer (most decidedly). Some of these, however, really support the modified view up- held below (4).— R.]. 2. The r I generate : Methodius in the Origmianh (see Tlioluck, p. 336) ; Augustine in the controversy with the Pelagians (on account of vers. 17, 18, 22, 25 : Retract, i. 23, &c.) ; * Jerome, Luther, Calvin, Beza, the orthodox school ; recently Kohlbriigge, Das Ite Kapitel des Brlefex an die Romer (1839). 3. The first section, from vers. 7-13, treats of the unregenerate ; vers. 14-25, of the regenerate : Philippi [whose careful and thorough discussion [Conun., pp. 249-258) is one of the ablest in favor of this reference. — R.]. The ider.tity of the .subject is against this view. Hoi'inann, ScliriftbewnSy i. p. 469 : '• The Apostle does, indeed, speak of his pres- ent condition, but apart fi'om the moral ability to ■which he had grown in Christ." According to Mey- er, this is the earlier Auguslinian view (of the unre- generate); but it seems to be scarcely an intelligible one. [This view (referring only vers. 14-25 to the regenerate) is that of most Scotch expositors (latterly Brown, Haldane, Forbes) ; of Delitzsch {Bibl. Psy- chol,, pp. 368 S"., 2d ed.), and is ably defended by Dr. Hodge. As the current Calvinistic interpreta- tion, it requires further consideration. Mention must be made also of the modified form of it held by Alford.f The arguments iu favor of making the • [Tholuck, Stuart (Meyer, Lange, apparently), attrib- nt* the change in Augu.-tire's views to the Pelagian con- troversy ; Dr. Hodge, on the other hand: "to a deeper insight into his own heart, and a more thorough investi- gation of the Scriptures." In the Exposiiii} Quurundam Prop. Ep. Rom. Prop. 4J (not the incomplete commentary) the ear'ier view is stated (394). It is repeated in Ad S,mp. (307), Omf. vii. 21 (100). The Pelagian controvcr.-y began about 412. It is not until 420 that the other view is pre- neiited (Contra duns EpistaUts Pi-I. ad Bomfnc, i. 12). It is tf'peated in i?. trae'alwn".'', i. 23, i. 1 (427), and in Omtra Ju>., Vi. 13 (about the same time). ITie language of Augustine is as follows (in Relrnc.) : qux posira lectis quihtisdum divin- orum traclalorihua utoquiorum, quorum me. movent niiclnrilas, conxid ravi dihgentius el vidi eliam de ipso apos'.olo posse infelliji quod ait " (ver. 14) ; " quod in (is hbr.s quos rontrn PeViflianos nuper srripsi, quon'tim po'ui diligenter ostendi." The tone of tlie whole section is polemic. This fact, in con- nection with the dates above given, shows that tlie prob- abilities are strontrly in favor of the vi-w of Stuiirt. A general change may have been going on, but, as regards this passf.ge, the change seems due to the exigencies of the oontroversv. Comp. Migm's edition Augustini Op'ta, i. 620, iii. 2071, &c. ; also Schaff, History of the Christian Church, iii. pp. 9^8 ff.— R.] t [Tliis view is :is follows : Prom vers. 7-13 is historical, tamal self under the convictions of fin in the trnnsition etate. Ver. 14 is ptill of the carnal self, but Paul, in pass- ing forward, transfers himself into his present position by the change of tense. Speaking in this tense, he begins to tell of the motions of the will toward God (ver. 15, which is tme only of the regenerate). Then an appment verbal con- Jiisztn arises, the tgo having a wider meaning in ver. 17 than in ver. 18, &c. After ver. 20, the subject is the actual Ihrn existing complex self of Paul in his state of conflict This view »3 more easily justified by the exegesis of cepa- rato verses than that of Dr. Hodge, yet the " confusion " is sharp transition at ver. 14, are as follows, as urged by Hodge : (1.) The onus probavdi is on the other side (on account of the first person and present tense). (2.) There is not an expres.>:ion, from the beginning to the end of the section, ver. 14-25, which the holiest man may not and niust not adop* (3.) There is much which cannot be as.-erted by an) unrenewed man. (4.) The context is in favor of this inter|iretalion. Tlie positions (2) and (3) must be discussed in the exegesis of the verses as they occur (especially vers. 14, 15, 22). It will be found that there is very great difficulty in ai)|)lying all the terms in their literal sense exclusively to either class. Philippi is most earnest in upholding the 3d position of Hodge. In regard to (1), it n.ay be observed, that the first person is used in vers. 7-13, so thai the change from the past to the present tense alone enters into the discussion. Is this change of tenst .sufficient to justify so marked a change in the sub ject ? A consistent attempt to define the subject throughout on this theory, leads to the " confusion," which Alford admits in the view he supports. — The context, it may readily be granted, admits of this view ; for in chaps, v. and vi. the result of justifica- tion, the actual deliverance from sin, has been brought into view, and ver. 6 says : we nerve, &c. But, on the other hand, it must be admitted that vers. 7-13 recur to the ante-Christian, legal position. Not until ver. 25 * is there a distinct Christian utter- ance, while chap. viii. sounds like a new song of tri- umph. If the Apostle is holding the distinctively Christian aspect of the conflict in abeyance, though describing tiie experience of a Christian, in order that he may give it more force in chap, viii., he is doing what is not usual with him as a writer, still less with a struggling believer in his daily experi- ence. The context, we hold, points most plainly to the view given next, and adopted by Dr. Lange. — R.] 4. The Apostle is not describing a quiescent state, but the process in which man is driven from the law to Christ, and an unregenerate person be- comes a regenenite one. So Olshausen : " The state under the law cannot coexiet with regeneration, ard without question, therefore — as chap. vii. 24 is to express the awakened need of redemption, and ver. 25 the experience of redemption itself^ — vers. 14-24 are to be referred to a position before regetieration, and to be understood as a description of the conflict witliin an aiialcened person. i^ince, however, the Apostle makes use of the present for this sfction, while before and afterwards he applies the aorist, we are led to the idea that he does not intend lo have this state of conflict regarded as concluded with the experience of redemption. In the description (vers. 14-24) itself, also, as will afterwards be more par- ticuiarlv shown, an advance in the conflict with sin is clearly observable ; the better / stand out in the man, more and rhore the pleasure in God's law gradually increases. This is the case in a still higher degree, as ver. 25 expresses, after the experience of the redeeming power of Christ, where the conflict with sin is described as for the most part victorious on the side of the better part in man. But a battle still continues, even after tiie experience of regeu- eration," &c. — In all this, the antithesis, iinder the law and being free from the law, does not bear being confounded. It only admits of the condition, that the Christian must again feel that he is weak, so fat * [Forbes defends this view, however, from the parallel ism in the latter part of ver. 25. — B.] 228 TEE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. OS he falls momentarily under the law of the flesh, and thereby under the law of death. Even Bengel ♦iuds in this section a prottress, but lie does not cor- rectly descriL>e it : Hensiyn snspirat, connititur, enititur ad liber lalem. hide pn'latbn serenior Jit cratio. But after tiie combatant experiences deep conviction, he declines, rather, into despair ; but then this is the way to complete deliverance, Tholuck properly remarks : " As the question is usually raised, whether the regenerate or the unre- generate person is spoken of, it produces misunder- Btanding so far as the status irregeiiitorum compre- hends in itself the very different states of soul of the status exiex camnlis and of the status legalis ; then, how far the relation of Old Testament believers to law and regeneration is regarded differently ; and finally, how far the idea of regeneration has been a self-consciously variable one." [Tills view is, on the whole, the most satisfactory. It admits the conflict after regeneration, but guards against the tiiougiit that this is a description of dis- tinctively Christian experience. It is rather that of one under the pedagogy of the law " unto Christ," whether for the first time or the hundredth time. It is the most hopeful state of the unregenerate man ; the le;ist desirable state of the regenerate man. Of course, it cannot be admitted that there is a third class, a terlium quid, tiie awakened. This view seems to be the one wliich will harmonize the polem- ics of the past. Jowett adopts it, Schatf also, while Delitzsch, after advocating (3), says : " He speaks of himself the regenerate — i. e., of experiences still continuing, and not absolutely passed away — but lie does not speak of himself qua regenerate — i. e., not of experiences which he has received by the specifi- cally New Testament grace of regeneration." He further admits that such experiences might occur in the heatlien world, according to Rom. ii. 15. The advantages of this view are very numerous. It re- lieves the exegesis of a constant constraint, viz., the attempt to press the words into harmony with cer- tain preconceived anthropological positions. It agrees best with the context. Its practical value is beyond that of any other. See Dodr. Notes. — R.] On the literature, see the Introduction. Also Tholuck, p. 339, where the explanations of Hun- •jus and Aretius may also be found. Winzer, /*ro- ^rai/im, 1832. A treatise in Knapp, Scripta varii arffiiinenti. EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. First Paeageaph, tees. 7-12. Ver. 7. What shall we say then ? [Ti n vv iooT'ftfv; see the note on this expression, iii. 5, p 118. Comp. also ix. 30, where the use is differ- ent. — R.] Intimation that another false conclusion must be prevented. Though the Christian be dead to the law, it does not follow that the law is not holy. But it belongs to a preceding stage of de- Telopment. Is the lavr sin [6 vo/toi; a /« a p t «' a ] ? Ori- gan [Jerome] : the lex iiaturalis. Tholuck : the Mosaic law. Certainly the question is respecting the justification of ttie latter. [Jowett paraphrases : Is conscience sin ? — which seems almost an exegetical caprice. His reason for it, that the consciousness of sin, rather than a question of new moons and ikbhaths, is undc pouaideration, betrays an entire misapprehension of the ethical purpose of the la^l of Moses. It may be admitted that an inferential reference to all law can be found here, but the pas* sage is an account of an historical experience, which took place under the Mosaic law. — R.J Sin. The usual interpretation : cause of sin Metonymically, the operation named, instead of tb« cause, as 2 Kings iv. 40 ; Micah v. 1 : Samaria is six for Jacob. On the other hand, De Wette and Meyei say : Is the law sinful, immoral ? After what pre. cedes, it may well mean : Is it the real cause of sia and, as such, itself sinful ? [Bengel: ^' causa pee. cati peccaminosa." "'0 vo/ioi; itself being al^stract, that which is predicated of it is abstract also ' (Alford). — R,] Even this conclusion is repelled bj the Apustle with abhorrence, /< // y £ r o i. t o . Nay, but. The uX/.d is taken by some in the sense of duAyi : hat ccrtaiidy. He repels the thought that the law is sin, but yet he firmly holds that it brought injury (Stuart, Kiillner, and others ; Meyer, Hof'raann). Tholuck, on the other hand (with Theodore of Mopsvestia, Abelard, and others), sees, in what is here said, the expression of the op- posite, viz., that the law first brought sin to con- sciousness. It may be asked whether this alterna- tive is a real one. If the law be really holy, because it has driven sin from its concealment and brought it fully to manifestation, then there is no alternative here. [This seems decisive against Stuart's view. Me.yer (4th ed.) renders d).).a, so7idern. The law is not sin, but its actual relation to sin is that of dis- coverer of sin. This is much simpler than Alford'a view : / sai/ not that, but wliat I tman is that. The objection that this implies a praise of the law (De Wette) is without force. He might well praise it as leading toward ver. 25 ; viii. 1. — R.] But it may be asked, in connection with this view. How are the words, I had not known sin [ T >/ r a/ta(JTtar o v ■/. tyrmr], to be ex- plained ? According to Cyril, Winzer, De Wette, Philippi, and Tholuck, this refers to the knowledge of sin alone ; but, according to Meyer, and others, it refers to the becoming acquainted with sin by ex- perience. Meyer : " The principle of sin in man, with which we first become experimentally acquaint- ed by the law, and which would have remained un- known to us without the law, because then it would not have become active by the excitement of desires for what is forbidden, in op[)osition to the law." This explanation lays too much stress upon the sec- ond point of view. According to chap. v. 20, vi. 15, and ver. 8 of this chapter, it is, however, not doubt- ful that the Apostle has here in mind not only the knowledge of sin, but also the excitement of sin. But he does not have it in mind as the increase of sin in itself, but as the promotion of its manifesta- tion and form for the judgment. Except through the law^ [li juij rfta ro- /loi']. Olshauscn : "The law in all the forms of its revelation." Meyer properly rejects this. AU though the law further appears as immanent in man, yet, ever since the Mosaic law, by which it waa awakened, it has the character of the second, threat- ening, and deadly law. The moral law of nature, ideally conceived, is one with human nature. [The citation from the Decalogue, immediately following, shows what the reference is. — R.] For I had not known evil desire [ t ?; v t « yctQ tTZi'&vfiiav ova i\dfi-v. See Textual Note *. r a. (J confirmatory, not = for example On Tf, see Tholuck, Stuart, Winer, p. 404. It ii CHAPTER VII. Y-2B. 229 untranslatable in E.iglish ; here a sign of close loai- tal connection. On the distinction between the Verbs, Bengel says : tyvMV majux est, oti)a minus. Hinc posteriun, cum ctiam minor f/radus veyahir, Cft in incremftito. Tlie verb is strengthened also, in this conditional clause, by the abt^cnce of otr, which would usually be inserted. — R ] We cannot trans- late this, with Meyer : " For I would not have known doeire," &c. This would make the law the producer of luat, wliich is not the Apo.^tle's meaning. That lust was present without the law, he had sufficiently asserted in chaps, i. and v. But now he lias become acquainted with the corrupting and condemnatory character of wicked lust, uniler tlie prohiliition : Thou Shalt not covet (Exod. xx. 17), \^()l/. i n 4 fl I' /' >i(T f ii;. On the prohibitory future ol' the law, as quoted in the New Testament, see Winer, p. 290; Buttmann, N. T. Gramm., p. 221. — R.] As tliis was to him the principal thing in the law, he thus first understood the inner character of the law and the inward nature of sin ; but thus also was the propensity to evil first excited, in the most manifold way, by the contradiction in him. The desire was now to him universally and decisively the principal and decisive thing. The first view of the iimer life, or of the interior of life, had now occurred. Tho- luek remarks, that Augustine and Thomas Aquinas regarded the concipisceidia as the generale peccatujn from which all the others proceeded ; but he ob- serves, on the contrary, that the t e in the sentence suggests rather a subordinate relation. But is the »j f) f i,v subordinated or separated in relation to the whole sentence ? For I never once understood the meaning of wicked lust wii^hout the law. To what period of Paul's life does this belong ? To the time of his childhood (Origen) ; or of his Pharisaical blindness (" the elder Lutheran and Re- formed exegesis down to Carpzov ") ? Tholuck gives rea.sons for the latter. According to Matt, v., Pharisaism was narrowed to the act. He cites per- tinent expressions of Kimchi, and other Jewish writers (see also the note, p. 352). In Jarchi, the explanation of the Tenth Commandment is wanting ; in Aben Ezra there is a dwarfish construction. But then he raises the objection, that a person like Paul must have earlier come to a knowledge of the sin- fulness of the tniOi'fiia. But the knowledge of the sinfidness of the tntfli'/dn has its first awakening eignificaiice, W'hen wicked lust is recognized as the root of supposed good works, and thereby leads to a revolution of the old views on good works them- selves. Even the fanatic rejects not only wicked works in themselves, but also their root — wicked desires. But he defines wicked desires and g(jod affections according to evil and good works, while the awakened one begins to proceed from the judg- ment on inward affections, and afterwards to define the works. Therefore we cannot say, that o e x Ity^nov and OCX. i]iarii(jy. (Riickert, Tholuck, Meyer), and not with a(fio(j/i.. Xa/i. (Luther, Olshausen, Tholuck). ^f The sentence contains the declaration how sin took an occasion for itself. It operated just by the com- mandment [the single precept referred to ver. 7], since it regarded the categorical commandment as a hostile power, and struggled and rebelled against it. The immediate design of the commandmtnt in itself was the subjection of the sinner; but the |)ros- pective result was the rising of sin, and this result should bring sin clearly to the light in order to ca- pacitate the sinner for deliverance. Meyer saya ambiguously : " Concupiscence is also without law in n)an, but yet it is not concupiscence for what is for- bidden." Certainly the positive prohibition first ap. pears with the law ; but the variance of the s'.nner with the inner law of life is already perfectly pres- ent. But now refractoriness toward the positive command makes its appearance, and enhances and consummates sin. All manner of evil desire [nciffav tni,- & V /I i,av'\. The tTnOvfiia was already present; but it now first unfolded and extended itself to the contrast. Zwingli, and others, interpret this as the km.wledge of lust ; Luther, Calovius, Philippi, and others, interpret it properly as the fxci/eme)i/ of lust. Tholuck : "According to ver. 11, sin deceives, as ia exhibited in the history of the fall of man ; to man every thing forbidden appears as a desii'able bless- ing ; but yet, as it is forbidden, he feels that hia freedom is limited, and now his lust rages more vio- lently, like the waves against the dyke ; " see 1 Cor. XV. 46. [Philippi well says of this : " An immova- bly certain psychological fact, which man can more easily reason away and dispute awav, than do away." t— R-] ♦ [Stuart makes afiapna here almost = eyto (rapxiKot (ver. 14 if.). If an oquiv.ilent is necessary, croipf i- a preferable one. For fiill, almost fanc'tu', ii. 'te* on the presumed personification, see Wordsworth in /ceo. — E.] t [The proof of this connoctiin is, tli.Tt Ud is never joined with a<^. Aa/n/S. (« is u>ual) ; that vers. 11, 13 seem to require it. — R.] X [The following citations from the classics suppr rt th» universality of the principle set fcth in this verse (comp, Prov. ix. 17) : C:ito (Livy xxsiv. i) : Nolite eodem loco exis'imare, Quirilcs, futuram rm, qvn furl, aiilequum lex de hoc /(■}■• rrlur. El homincm imprubum iian occusure Itdiiis est, qmim ahsolvf, et luxuria not) mulii Inlerchilior ensi't, qunm evil iiunQ ■ipsis vincuHs, siciilf.rn brsHa irrilcln, deind*: tm>ss,i. Sen* eca (de Clemeiitia, i.li) : Purricidie (■jim Uge cap-.runl, ei illis facimis posua monUravU. Horace (Cirm., i. '6\ : 2^0 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. For without the law sin is dead [/<» ^ ii; Ya(j V o fi o I' diia(>Tia v f x (j d . A general propnsition, hence, with the verb omitted. Beza aud Kfiche incorrectly supply »Jr ; so E. V., was. It will readily be understood that v f >t q a. is not used in an absolute, but rehvtive sense, = nopera- (ivii (or unobserved, if the reference be limited to the knowledge of sin). Against this the antithesis of the following verse may be urged. — K.] Meyer, incorrectly : " not activch/, because that is wanting whereliy it can lake occasion to be active." Rather, sin cannot mature in its root ; it cannot come to naodllaaa;. Man has, to a certain extent, laid him- self to rest with it upon a lower bestial stage, which is apparently nature ; the commandment tii-st mani- fests the demoniacal contradiction of this stage, the actual as well as the formal contradiction to God and what is divine (see chap. viii. 3). It is incorrect to limit the statement, with Chrysostom, Calvin, and others, to knowledge — it was not known ; or, with Calovius, to the conscience (terrores consci entice) ; or, finally, to limit the idea to the sphere of desire (Tholuck). It has not yet acquired its most real, false life, in the ;ra(m/?«(Tn,-. Reference must here be made to the antithesis : Sin was deid, and I was alive. [The clauses, however, are not strictly anti- thetical. — R.] Ver. 9. Now I Was alive without the law once [«/"' ^^ t^Mv y II) (J is vofiov nori. For (E. V.) is incorrect ; di inust then be rendered bid or now {i. e., moreover), as it is taken to be adversative or continuative. The latter is to be pre- ferred, on the ground that this clause continues a description of the slate without the law, while the real antithesis occurs in the following clause, for which the particle but should be reserved. — R.] In ordi;r to deline the sense, we must apply the twofold antithesis. Paul could only have lived first in the sense in which sin was dead in him, and also be dead in the sense in which sin was alive in him. I was alive. The / must be emphasized : " the whole expression is pregnant (Reiche, on the contrary, merely //v)". Explanations : 1. Videbar mihi vivere (Augus- tine, Erasmus [Barnes], and others). 2. Securns eram (MLlanchlhon, Calvin, Bengel [Hodge], and others), I lived securely as a Pharisee. 3. Meyer says, to the contrary : " Paul means the life of chihllike innocence which is free from death (ver. 10), (conip. Wiiizer, p. 11 ; Umbreit in the Stud/en iind Kriiikeii, 1851, p. 637 f.), where (as this condition of life, analogous to the paradisa- ical state of our first parents, was the cheerful ray of his earliest recollection) the law had not yet come to knowledge, the moral spontaneity had not yet occurred, and therefore the principle of sin was still in the slumber of death. This is certainly a status secnritatis, but not an immoral one." * Tholuck re- Au'lax omnia perpHi G ns humana ruitpir vetitum nefas. Ovid (^mor., 2, 19, 3) : Quod licet ingrnlrim est, qund nnn vei-t acrius tiril; (3, 4) Nilitnur in vetitum semper cupi- To (his may well be added the remark of Goethe (in a letter to liavatev) : Ih vioch'e das Element wornus des Miiixrheji Sre.le gebi'det iH uiid wnrin sie leb', f.iti F^gfeuer neiineii, wurin alle, hoUixrhen nnd himmtisclien Krdfie diirch- eiuaii'ler gfhrn und iiiirken (I might call the element, out of which the soul of man is formed and in which it lives, a pnrfr:itory, in which all hellish and lieavenly powers oon- hisedly walk and work). — R.] • [The lepitimate re., beyond itself; as the sac- rificial offering, &c. JS'ow I was alive. This means, according to Mey- or, "Man, during the state of death {Todtsein) of the principle of sin, was not yet subject to eternal death. Certainly he became subject to physical death by the sin of Adam." We have already re- futed this distinction. The condemned are first actuallfi subject to death at the final judgment ; in principle, the children of Adam are subject to it ; but the living man, of whom Paul here speaks, had not yet fallen into it, in the pei-sonal consciousness of guilt and the personal entanglement in the Tra^d- But when the commandment came [ « A - &ovarj(; (Vt T^s ivTokTji;. The specific com- mand, not the whole law. Came — i. e., was brought home to me. — At this point the older Lutheran and Calvinistic expositors found a reference to the con- viction of sin immediately preceding conversion. But the use of Ivro'/.i] is against this, as well as the drift of the whole passage. A writer, so loving in his repetition of the name of Christ, and in direct ref- erence to the work of Christ, would not have left such a meaning obscure. Conip. Philippi on the psychological objections. — R.] When its inward character became known. This certainly has an his* pome degree ideal and imaginary." There is no such tim* of innocence, but rather a time oi securily, "before the deeper energies of the moral natm-e are aroused." All that period, in the individual consciousness, as well as second:!* rily ill the historical development of redemption, is refeiTed to by iroTe. Grantiiig, an a fair exegesis of the whole con- text compels us to do, that the termination of this period was not at the entrance of Christian knowledge of the Inw. we may well include the thought urged .so strongly by ProJ Stuart : " Before an individual has a distinct and vivid per- ception of the nature and spirituality and extent of tha Divine law, he is less aciive and desperate in hifl sin and guilt than after he comes to such a knowledge." The view of vers. 7, 8, as including excitement of sin, ccmmite ns !■ advance to this position.- -U.] CHAPTER Vir. 7-25. 23 torical application to the gift of the Mosaic law (Reicho, Fritzschc), but a psychological ap{)lication to the designated inoiiients ot introspection. Sin sprang into life [>/ a nai>Tia av ittj' atv^ Tlie explanation ol the av itrja tv^ re- viled [id Riickert, De Wette, and others. Tho- luck : * " The avd stands, as elsewhere in com- pound words, in the strengthened meaning of sur- itum ; ojni[). avaiikirtdt in John ix. 11," &c.), is opposed by Meyer, in accoriiance with the elder ex- positors, and by Bengelaiul Thilippi. Bengel makes this explanation : skut vixtrat, cmi per Adammn intrasset in niundum. Certainly the a/ia()ria became pei'fectly alive first in Adam as Trn^^ct/j'affK.', »nd then as such vty.(j(i, until the gift of the Mosaic aw again brought it to life. But tliis is also repeat- ed p.sychologieally in the individual so far as the Adamic 7TCi(jcii'/a(Ti,q is psychologically reflected more or less strongly in his first otl'ences ; thus an indi- vidual /.«//,'>. of the fall takes place, but then, until the awakening light of the law penetrates the con- Bcience, a false state of nature enters, connected with an active sense of life. [Here, too, must be included both the knowledge of and excitement to sin. — R.] — Some Codd. read tL^iyiTf, because the ex- pression ctrau'Tjt' did not occur in the classical Greek and in the Septuagint. Origen thought there was here a reminder of a pre-terrestrial fall. Cocceius j ev dentins apparuit. And I died [iyih Si dniOavov^. In the eame sense as sin became alive, did the sinner die. That is, with the sense of conscious [and increasing] guilt, the sense of the penalty of death has made its appearance. Meyer makes an inadequate distinction here : " We must understand neither physical nor spiritual death (Semler, Bohme, Riickert, and oth- ers), but eternal death, as the antithesis, ? li; cwz/r, requires." Tiic sense of the penalty of death makes no distinction of this kind. [The aorist points to a definite occurrence. He entered into a certain spirit- ual state, which he calls death. Calvin : IJors pec- cati vita est honiinis ; sursum vita pcccuti mors fiomi- nis. — R.] Ver. 10. And the commandment, which ■was unto life, the same was found by me to be unto death [ k a t e {• ^ i .9 tj /ioi, ij I v -rol'tj »7 fit; L. II) tjv, avxtj f iq f) dv ar ov . Ka i introduces the verse as an epexegesis of died, with the addition of a new circumstance (Stuart). — R.] Supply orffa before unto life. In what sense was tlie coiiiniandment thus found ? The commandment oas certainly promised life to the one observing the law; Lev. xviii. 5; Dent. v. 33; Matt. xix. 17. It is, however, easily misunderstood when there is such a general explanation as this: " tiie promise of life was connected with the observance of the Mosaic commandments" (Mej-er). The sense is rather Irora the beginning, that the kind of promise is condi- tional on tlie kind of observance. External obedi- ence has also only an external promise, or a promise of what is external (Exod. xx. 12). But this is, for the pious, only the figure of a higher obedieixe and promise. The seli-righteous man, on the other hand, made a snare for himself out of that promise. Now, in the highest sense, life according to the law of the Bpirit — that is, in faith (^which is tlie end of the law) •—results in the tot} aulivioi;. Only the transition ♦ f So Stuart : «« to gafhfr new life, tn show addiljonal vigor, not merely a renewal of life wliich had before e.K- sted." On the lexical objections to this view, Bee PhUippi in loco.—S,.\ from death to life lies between the two. It is just the most intense effort to fulfil the law that re^ult^ in death. This is a circumstance which stems t4 contradict the k'i,- tw^/r, and yet it lioes not contra^ diet it, but is quite in harmony with it. The same. We hold that, according to th« sense, we must read ctvrr, (with Liichniai.n, De Wette, I'hilippi), and not ai'T//, with Meyt-r and Tiscliendorf [Alford, Tregelles]. For the law hai only teni[W)rarily become transformed, as the sani« law of lite, into a law of death ; it has not perma« nently become a law of death.* Ver. 11. For sin, &c. [^ ya(> ot/i ctQrla, x.T.A. The yd (J introduces an explanation of ver. 10. The first words are similar to ver. 8, bit ctftafjria here st.inds emphatically first. The position of Su't t^<,' tvTo'/.Jq is also .slightly emphatic. — R.] Not the commandment in itscK lias become a commandment unto death ; sin has rather made it thus. How far ? Sin took occasion, or made itself an occasion. That it took it of the commandment, is assumed, and is explained by what follows. Tlie following y.ai fU' arT/'c, &c., fav()rs the connection of the Sid T /j i; ivroJ.Tji; with i'itjTTdTtjai fi e , deceived me. It first made the command- ment a provoeation, and then a means of eotidemna- Hon. Thus what applies to Satan, that he was first man's tenipur, and then his accuser, applies likewise to sin. This passage calls to mind the serpent in Paradise, as '2 Cor. xi. 3. But in what did the de- ception of sin consist ? Philippi : " Since sin made me pervert the law, in which I thought that I had a guide to righteou.sness, into a means for the promo- tion of unrighteousness." f Not clear. It deceived me, in that it represented the law to me as a limit which seemed to separate me from my hiippineas. Behind that limit it charmed me to transgression by a phantom of happiness. Accordingly, it is not satisfactory to explain the following elause : And by it slew me [ z a t <) t' a rr ij t; dni x-rti' vfv\ thus: sin gave me over to the Inv, xo that it slew me. In this respect sin rather falsified the law, since it represented to nie my well-merited death as irrem.rdiable, or my jvdge as my e7iemy (see Gen. iii. ; Heb. ii. 15; 1 John iii. 20). [^* Brongfit m,« into the stale of sin and miser;)/," already referred to in ver. 10. The allusion to the temptation is to be admitted here also. — R.] Tholuek : " Decision of Simeon Ben Lachish : The wieked nature of man rises every day against him, and seeks to slay him (Vitringa, Obsirv. Sacr., ii. 599) ; also by the yin ■'^^ is denoted the angel of death." Ver. 12. So that the law is holy, &e. [oiirrf o ft e V V 6 /I o <; d. y lo q , y..r.}.. The m a r f in- troduces the result of the whole discussion, vers. * [It is more difficult than important to decide thii point. AvTT), }iif(', Ihis; avrq, ipra, ihe snme.. The formeri thoujrh not in itself so emphatic, here takes the piereding Rubjcct, //(IS rrrji comma'ndment, }£iving it a tragical forre (i-n Meyer and f hilippi, whom Lanpe cites in fnvor of the other view). The a' alopy of vers. 15, 16, 19, 20 (toOto) ia against Lanpre's preference. — K.] t [So Hodpe : "Tire reference is not to the promised joys of sin, which always mock the esiieotation and dis- appoint the hopes, but rather to the uttri- failure of the law to d.iwhat he expected from it." Tlii^ view consistg with the assumption, that the point in exj-erience here reached is one neressaiily and immediately preceding con- version. Dr. Hodge doen nut thus assume, yet he appeaW to Chrislian experience in confirmation. If the excitement to sin be allowed throujriiout these verses, the other inter« pretation, adopted by Dr. Lange. is preferalde. f!omj.., however, a beautiful settina; forth of the first Tie\r in Neander, Pflanzuiig, ii. 681 (quoted in Tholuek).— E.] 232 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMAXS. 7-11. It is not = ergo, yet of a more general con- clusive character. To /ter, the corresponding di is wantiii '. Tiie antithesis we should expect, ac- cording to Meyer, is: but sin broii(/ht me to death through the law, wh-ch was godd in itself. This is the thought of ver. 13 ; but as the form is changed, ili. does not appear. — R.] Not only innocent (Tho- liick), but also absolutely separated from, and op- posed to, siii. And this applies not only to the law in general, but also to its explanation in the shigle conun.indiiient. [And the commandment holy and just and good, /.(xi tj evTokt] ay in xat ()iy.ai(x xai ciya.9/y.] The commandment is first holy in its origin as God's commandment ; secondly, just, as the individual determination of the law uf the sys- tem ol' righteousness (Meyer: * " rightly constituted, just as it .should be"); and good — that is, not in the vague sense of exci'llcnt (Meyer, Philippi, and oth- ers), but according to the idea of wliat is good : 'beneficial promotion of life in itself, in spite of its working of death in me ; indeed, even by its work- ing of death. The term good refers to the blessed result of divine sorrow, and to the gospel.f The elaboi'ate apology for the commandment is certainly ■(according to Meyer) occasioned by the fact that the ivro/.t'j has bee» described as precisely the object of Bin, iu ver. 7 Second Paeaqkaph (ver. 13). The Law in relation to the Sinner. Ver. 13. Did then that "which was good become death unto me? [7' 6 ovv nyaOhv ill oi f y e r f T o & « r a t o <,• ,• See textual Note ^. j Thohiek : " The ^iv in ver. 12 prepared for the an- tithesis fj <)k HitnfjTta, h.tJ.. Yet the Apostle again presents his thoughts in the form of a refuta- tion of an antagonistic consequence. The ayaf>6v should lead us to expect only wholesome fruits." Undoubtedly, the expression ayaf)rj (ver. 12) is the new problem now to be solved. It was not so much to be wondered at that the commandment, as holy and just, brought death ; but it was an enigma that it, as ayn.Otj, should bring forth death. Tiie expla- nation of tills enigma will also show how the law has brought about the great change : Through Death to Life ! Was that which is good, of itself and im- mediately, made death unto me ? This conclusion, again, is to be repelled by Let it not be ! fiij y £ r o ^T o . But sin [dAAa r t^ia^ria (supply Ifiol lytn-To OcivciToq). So an modern commentators. — R.] Namely, that was made death unto me. " The construction of Luther, Heumann, Carpzov, Af , is totally wrong: aU.a tiattafiTia ()vct toP ayafloo //ot y.nTf(jya^n/itvfj (rjv) Odvarov, 'iva ifav'i] aiiaitria " (Meyer); so also the Vulgate. That it might appear sin [irct ipav^i a u ail r la. The ivct is telic ; (favri, be shown to 6e (Alford). This second d/iai>Tia is a predi- cate ; anarthrous, therefore, and also as denoting • [Tbis is a mistake. The quotation is from Philippi. Meyer says : " right, with respect to its requirement, which 001 rc.spoiiQa 3xa >tly with holiness."— R.j t (Bengel is excellent: SavcUi, jiisia, bona, rotione eausm I'fficifiitis, forinm, finis. His second view is less ex- act : re.ipi'ctii, officiorinii rrga D'lim, ntprclu proximi, rr- iiiectu uiiliir.r iii'ie. Coinp. Culoviu-s (in Tlioluck and Phi- appi), and Thoodoret (.in Alford).— E.J character. — R.] This was therefore the most imme diate design of the law : Sin should appe ir as si» (E|)h. V. 13 ; Gen. iii. : Adam, where art thou?). [Working death to me, by that which ia good, r) nt Tor d y a D oil not, y.aTtQyato' II iv rj 5 « r a T o v.] The idea of perfeetly di* closed sin is just this: that it works death by th€ misconstruction and abuse of what is good. Thut the law is first made to serve as a provocation to sin unto death ; second, the gospel is made a savor of death ; and third, the truth is made a mighty anti« christian lie (2 Thess. ii. 11). Tholuck : "The na- ture of sin should thereby become manifest, that it should appear as something which makes use of what is even good as a means of ruin, and in this manner the commandment should Ijecome a means of exhibiting sin in all the more hideous light." Scholium of Matthfeus : " JVa ttiV// ku'T/jV e/.fj'Sjj, 'iva 6).fj rijt facT/^i,' nt.y.(Jiav t/.xn/.i'ixi'ri." In addi- tion to this, these pertinent words : "'/n fact, as it is the sovereign right cf good to ocerrn'e evil results for good, so is it t/v curse of sat to pervert the effects of what is good to evil." Thus an emphasis rests on the iVta rod dya&ov, for which rea- son it comes first. Meyer correctly urges, against Reiche, that this 'iva is telic, in opposition to the ecbatic view. Death was already present before the law, but sin completed it by the law; y.ar t (} yato /i iv tj. The law is not sin ; sin disclosed itself completely as sin in making what is good a means of evil. That sin through the commandment might become exceedingly sinful \^iva yivfjrat y.a& V n f {> poliiv afia(ir/(a, rather than with acifii, because the idei of an organism is more prominent in the former term), must be interpreted accordingly (see Col. iii. 6 ; Bibelwerk, p. 64, Amer. ed.). In any case, the thought that the body is the chief source and seat of sin, must be rejected as unseriptural, unpauline, and untrue. We must also avoid a dualist ic sunder, ing of die material and immaterial in man's nature. II. 'i''i'/?j, Soul. Tliis term is from ri'v-/«u to breathe, to blow, and, like 1I."S3 , its Hebrew equivalent, originally means animal life (see the New Testament usage, especially in the Gospels), but, like the Hebrew word, it also is frequently referred to the whole immaterial part of man's nature, in dis- tinction from ffijiua. By synecdoche, it is put for the whole man, in enumeration (Acts ii. 41 : about three thousand souls), and in the phrase, nacra ^i'vyr], every soul. As the word occurs but four times in the Epistle to the Romans — twice in the sense of ^i/e, and twice in the phrase, every soul — it would not be necessary to discuss it further, did not the precise meaning of TrrtT'fia depend upon a further discrimination. Twice in the New Testament (1 Thess. V. 23; Heb. iv. 12) the word is distin- guished from TTVH'/ia. As both passages may be re- garded as Pauline, the one occurring in his earliest written Epistle, and the other in an Epistle of much later date, which is Pauline, even if not written by Paul, the question of a Pauline trichotomy cannot be avoided. The fuller discussion will be found under nvtr/ia, below, but here we must define rfr/ij more closely. Although it is true that the term does mean the animal soul, it is very doubtful whether it means simply this in the two passages above referred to. If " animal soul" be restricted to the principle of life, then aio/ia, in such a connection, should include this; and a wish that the principle of life be " pre- lerved blameless," is singular, to say the least. If. lowever, " animal soul " be taken to include more than this — viz., what we share with the brutes — then it is highly probable that this largely includes the intel- lectual part of our nature, and i/'i'/vy must then be =z the seat of the Understanding, in distinction from the Reason. That some wide sense is involved, is evident both from 1 Cor. xv. 45, " the first Adam was made a living soul," and from 1 Cor. ii. 14, whsre the adjective t/'i/txo? undoubtedly includes the intellectual part of man's nature. In both the.se cases the antithesis is nvf'na in the ethical sense ; hence the greater necessity for enlarging the idea of yv/f}* Passing over many distinctions which have * [Akin to the view under discussion is that of Goschel : "that fbe soul prncoecis at once from body and spuit to niiite the two '■ Ibis contradicts, or, at least, confuses the been made, we consider the view of Olshausen. wha makes xi'i'/ij the centre of our per^^onality, the jf.ttle- field of the flesh and human spirit. In this view, also, i and (T<7}iin are almost identical, thougb he admits that, in the unrenewed man, the V'/'/ i* under the dominion of the adiji. It exchdes th« voT'q from the i/'i'///, making it the organ of aetivitj for the human spirit. This view still restricts i;''7»j too much, even admitting the trichotomy.* It con« fuses psychological and ethical terms. It leana toward the error which makes the body the source of sin, while, on the other hand, it excludes the human spirit from the dominion of sin (and ita organ, the rort,). It cannot be justified by Paul's language, for the very passages which indicate a trichotomy imply the sinfulness of the human spirit, while it is altogether unpauline, as already remarked, to refer sin to the body as its source. The use of the word ^n'/i,y.6i;, as quoted above, is equally op- posed to this view, which probably grows out of the attempt to find in ■U'v/tj and nvfTfia, terms analo- gous to the Understanding and Reason. We there- fore object to this view, and claim a still wider sense for ii'i'/ij. How nmch can be claimed for it, will appear from what follows. III. llviT'fia, Spirit. This term, from nvko, to blow, to breathe, means (like the Hebrew n*in \ breath, then wind, then anima, lastly animus, spirit, in all the various meanings we give that word. It must first be discussed in its strictly psychological meaning. A. Besides the secondary meaning, temper, dis- position, it is used by most of the New Testament writers to denote man's immaterial nature, including,, together with mZiia (Rom. viii. 10; 1 Cor. vi. 20 ; vii. 34), and also with a(i(ti (2 Cor. vii. 1 ; Col. ii.. 5), the whole man. In the phrase, " gave up the ghost," it is doubtful whether it means the whole immaterial nature, or simply life ; in Luke xxiii. 46 ; Acts vii. 59, the former seems to be the mean-, ing. But there are a number of passages where th»j exact signification turns on the previous question •.: Do the Scriptures assume or teach a trichotomy in; human nature ? — that man is a unity made up of body, soul, and spirit ? It is essential to the proper understanding of chaps, vii. and viii. that this ques-^ tion be discussed. f 1. First of all, it must be admitted as a fact that the Scriptures recognize the dualism of spirit and matter, and that man is both material and immaterial,, without any tertium quid, which is neitJier material nor immaterial. The presumption, then,, is against the trichotomy, so far as it would ignore this fact. The presumption is also against any view which classes soul under the material part of the complex nature, since both soul and spirit are used to include the whole immaterial part of man. On the other hand, Plato and Aristotle undoubt immateriality of the soul, and makes a living body ante cfdent thereto. Hegclianifm regards the soul as only the band that connects body and spuit.— E.] * [Against so limited a view of i^vx'ii ''^^ TLolnck, p. 302, wlio includes under it the vovi and eaia avBpumoi. Comp. Irenfeus, c. hie/es., v. 304. — K.] t [On the trichotomy, see Pelitzsch, Bi'bt. Pn/ch., pp. S4-98; Olshausen, Jioowns, pp. 271, 27J, 2d ed. ; De natnrm hum. trirhot'imin, &c., Opiiscc. Thi'nl., Berlin, 1S34, pp. 143 fr. ; Messner, Die Lehre dcs Apmlel, Leipzig, 1856, p. 207 j Bishop Ellicott, Sirmnn on the Destiny of (he Crealinn; Notes on 1 Thess. v. 23; Lange's Comm. on Grnesis, pp. 211 f., 285 £ ; Tholuck, Momana, ■p\\ 288-302 ; J. B. Heard, Tri- paiiile XaUtre oj Man, 2d ed., Edinb., 1868; Lauge, Dog^ malik, pp. 307, 1243.— B.l .234 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. edly held that there was a trichotomy (for their views, see Dditzsch, p. 93 ; Eng. cd. p. 212). This fact may be used to explain 1 Thess. v. 23 as popu- lar language, but " we must needs turn to the Holy Scriptures, and accept without prejudice what it answers to us, be it Platonic or anti-Platonic." Borne such view was held by Origen, by the Apolii- narians and semi-Pelagians. All these, like the mod- ern rationalistic notions on the sulyect, were extenu- Etions of human corruption. Vain speculations on the subject are abundant, but this should not be to tho prejudice of truth.* Turning to 1 Thess. t. 23, we find a distinct as- Bumption of a tripartite nature in man, all the more •weighty because it is not in didactic form. To say that this is merely popular language, does not meet the case. For, while it may be said that Paul does not profess to teach metaphysics, the question then recurs : Was the popular language of that day cor- rect, or that of another age ? Besides, it is a hazard- ous method of dealing with a writer so uncommonly exact, and with a book which concerns itself with human salvation. Experience has proven how large- ly the diffusion and acceptance of biblical truth are dependent on correct anthropological views. If we believe that Paul chose his words wittingly, much more, if we hold them to be inspired, this text, taken by itself, assumes " that in the original structure of man there is something — yet remaining, needing and capable of sanct\ficaiion — corresponding to the three terms, bod^, soul, and spirit." f The same is implied in Heb. iv. 12. Leaving these passages, we find little else in the New Testament to support this view. Of course, when accepted, it must modify to some extent the Bignification given to these terms in other places ; but there is no other passage in the New Testament which could be relied on to prove tlie trichotomy were these absent. Hence we infer that the distinc- tion, if real, is not of such importance as has been thought, and cannot be made the basis of the start- ling propositions which human speculation has de- duced from it. This does not deny that, from other sources, the trichotomy may receive important sup- port ; it refers simply to the place it should take in biblical psychology. Judging from the rare allu- sions to it, the prevailing dichotomic tone of the Scriptures, we infer that, while it may be necess.iry, in order to explain these passages, to accept a trichoto- my, the advantages of so doing are incidental, rather than of the first moment.:]: 2. Admitting that there is a tripartite nature in man, the main difficulty is a precise definition of these three parts. Here the German authors are in a very Babel of confusion. For the sake of clear- ness, we first of all reject [a.) All views of the human spirit which make It the real soul over against a brute soul, termed Miv/tj, for the reasons given above under II. (6.) All views of the human spirit which make !tt a higher uiifallen part of man's nature, over • [The anthropology of Swodenborg assumes a trinity rather than a trichotomy, and by his doctrine of torre- Bpondenees, spirit seems to lose its real significance.— P.] t (It must he noted how this pansage assumes (1.), that the spirit needs sanctiflcation ; (2.) that body and soul are also to he preserved lor God ; thus guarding against Pela- giaaism and rationalism on the one hand, and asceticism and mysticism on the other. — R.] ± [Any .argument from the analogy of the Trinity must be left out of vi 3W, since it can prove nothing, though it may be pleasing '.o some minds to trace such an analogy. — IJ.J against a soul under the power of the ff«^i. Thu^ which is the view of Olsliausen, and, witli modi- fications, of many others, is not borne out by th« anthrojjology of Scripture ; is contradicted by tho very passages which alone can establish a trichoto- my, and is in the very face of 2 Cor. vii. 1, wlijre " filthiness," /7ro^ in tliia chapter). That, besides, he has, in liis unity of nature, a spirit which is of the same nature aa the soul, of a higher capacity, yet not separated or separable from it. This spirit is the capacity for God, God-consciousness (Heard) ; but in man's present condition it is dormant, virtually dead in its depravity, needing the power of the Holy Spirit to renew it. After such renewal it becomes spirit in the sense intended in the proposition : " that which is born of the Spirit is spirit " (John iii. 6), This seems to be, in substance, the vit-w of Miiller, Delitzsch, and Heard.* It admits a dichotomy, and also a trichotomy ; claims that the soul is spiritual rather than material ; that there is no gulf between soul and spirit ; that the human spirit is powerlesa for good, yet that here, where depravity is really most terrible, redemption begins. " In consequence of sin, the human spirit is absorbed into soul and * [Of course, the term will he given a more or less ex- tended meaning by different authors ; but if the two posi tions lie held fast : (1.) That this spirit is tlie point of con- tact with Divine influences ; (2.) That it, too, has been depraved, all erroneous conclus'ons will be avoided. Dr. Lange {Geni'sis, p. 213) seems to coincide with tlie view here presented: "It must be held fast, that man could not receive tho Spirit of God, if he were not himsell a spiritual being ; yet it is a supposition of the Scrip- ture, that, since the fall, the spiritual nature is hound in the natural man, and does not come to its actuality.' -It.l CHAPTER VII. 7-25. 235 flesb, and man, who ought to pass over from the pooitioii of the i/'c/f/ liocra into the position of the nvH'/n-n L.i'ioTToi'Oi'v, has become, instead of nvni/ia- Ttxoi;, a being tfii/i'xoq and an^ixi-Koq ; and further, just for tliat reason, because tlie spirit stands in im- mediate causal relation to God, ail the Divine opera- tions having redemption in view, address themselves first of all to the nvH'ficc, and thence first attain to the rf'r/r/ ; for when God miinifests himself, He ap- peals to the spirit of man " {Bib/. J'si/c/t., p. 9rt, Eiig. ed., p. 117). It may be urged tiiat this pre- sents no real distinction ; I reply, that it is not claimed that the distinction is of essential impor- tance. But as Paul uses the word nvtvua in prefer- ence to V''7'/» when he speaks of man's immaterial nature, especially as regenerated by the Spirit of God, there seems to be no otlier way of accounting for it except on this view. (The objections to that of Philippi have been considered above.) Delitzsch Tery properly remarks ; " Should any prefer to Bay, that the Apostle, by nvfvfia and V''7'/, is distinguishing tlie internal condition of man's life, and especially of the Cbristian's life, in respect of two several relations, even this would not be false." It is, indeed, the nearest expression of the truth ; for the human spirit is not brought into any special prominence by Paul, save as in a given relation in the Christian's life. Hence we have a second mean- ing of nvu'fta. B. The human spirit as acted upon by the Holy Spirit, and thus becoming the seat of those Divine impulses, which are the means of redeeming the whole man. Of course, as opinions differ respecting the first meaning, they will vary from our definition. Philippi makes this identical with A, while others would claim that we should distinguish here rather a new principle of life (Lange), than a part of our re- newed nature. Dr. Lange seems to prefer this mean- ing throughout chap. viii. There, however, the reference seems to be mainly to the Holy Spirit, the objective agent. In vers. 10, 16, the subjective meaning is undoubtedly the correct one, as in John iii. 6 ; iv. 23, 24 (so Rom. ii. 29, see p. 115, where Dr. Lange gives a different view), 1 Cor. vi. 17 ; Phil. iii. 3. In many other passages this meaning is implied, as indeed it is even in 1 Thess. v. 23, though this cannot be explained satisfactorily, with- out presupposing a human spirit antecedent to re- generation. C. The most common use of the term is obvious- ly the strictly theological one : the Holy Spirit. Opinions vary as to the propriety of this meaning in certain passages. No definite rule can be laid down. The absence of the article is by no means a certain in- dication that the reference is subjective (against Har- less). The reason for preferring this meaning, rath- er than " spiritual life-principle " (Lange), in chap. viii., is that, in ver. 2, the Holy Spirit is undoubtedly referred to, over against sin and death. When, then, «r(X(Ji afterwards occurs as the antithesis to 7irf7'/etKOs ; for in tlie only case where such an ethical sense is undoubted (1 Cor. ii. 14), the antithesis is not simply 7ivfvuarv/.6(i (applied to spiritual things and persons as proceeding from, or influenced by, the Holy Ghost), but also " the tilings of the Spirit of God." (3.) Whatever ethical sense is to be at- tributed to the word adiii, must include the whole man, body and soul, or body, soul, and spirit. This agrees with the scriptural delineations of human na- ture, the use of the word above referred to, and its usual antithesis, when the ethical meaning is intend- ed, viz., the Spirit of God; never the human spirit irrespective of the influence of the Spirit of God. This antithesis is not always expressed, but it is in- variably implied. (Comp. Rom. vii. 5 ; viii. 3, 4 tf. ; Gal iii. 3 ; v. 16, 17, 19, 24; vi. 8 ; Col. ii. 18, 23.) If it be claimed that, in Rom. vii. 18, 25, the ex- pressed antithesis is, in tlie former case, the inward man (ver. 22), then we reply, that the real antithesis is stated in ver. 14 : " spiritual," " carnal," and that, under the influence of this spiritual law, any antago- nism to the aa.i)l has been awakened. Of course, if the reference to the regenerate be admitted, this objection disappears. So in ver. 25, although rori,- is the expressed antithesis, it is the roTs under the influence either of the Holy Spirit, or the spiritual law. .2? c( ^ i , in its ethical sense, tlierefore, means, not merely an earthly or fleshly tendency, or direc- tion of life, but the whole hu/na)i nature ; not, as Olshausen thinks, so far as it is separated from God, but as it is separated from God, body, soul, and spirit, as sinfuh Being in the flesh, is being in an ungodly state, a state of sin. (This view has obtained from tiie times of Augustine until now, among the mass of theologians.) B. What, then, is the precise significance of this ethical sense of cra^S ? 1. Its usual antithesis indicates what the Scrip- ture doctrine of sin so strongly asserts, that human nature, thus described, has become alienated from God. As love to God is the only true moral im- pulse, apostasy from God is sin, and the natural, car- nal condition, is thus to be regarded. The Deca- logue, Rom. i. 5, are sufficient to support this posi- tion. In the law, holy, just, and good, love to God is the chief requirement ; in Rom. i. 21, wilful rejec- tion of God is described as the seed of all the vices, subsequently catalogued, ending in the most fearful Bensual excesses ; in Rom. v. 12-21, sin is described as entering through one man, through his act of dis- obedience, and this is the immediate cause of the carnal condition of humanity. Yet this does not exhaust the meaning ; it is rather its negative ex- pression. 2. The positive principle of sin and the ruling principle of the flesh is undoubtedly sc/Jishness, for, God being rejected, some personal object is required by the human personality. It is found in self ; its Interests become paramount. This is not, however, very prominent in the ethical term under considera- tion, but nrust be assumed in order to reach the fur- ther idea which it involves. * [Comp. Delitzsoh, Bib. Psych., pp. 374 f., Engr. ed., pp. 140 fif., aa:ainstthe view of Giinther, that there is a fleshly soul in distinction from the spiritual suul.— K..J 3. The human nature, thus alienated from God, with selfishness as its ruling principle, must, how. ever, seek gratification. There is but one resource, the crejture. As adfioiTi,y.6(; £(TTH']. It is the specific knowl- edge peculiar to Christians that religion is hiward ness ; that the law is incorrectly understood, when it is changed by the ffa(j| of external feeling into a ad()i of external precepts — a complication of finite objects, while its nature is of a spiritual character ; I CHAPTER VII. 7-25. 231 that i8, revealing in every tittle the infinity of God's Spirit, and leluting to tlie Spirit. The ydf) de- clares the stiff-neeked and malignant nature of sin. The law is yi^td/ifia only in form; its nature is divine and spiritual (Mcytr). Explanations: I Ins|iired by the Holy Spirit (Thcodoret). 2. Kcciuiring a heavenly and angelic rigiiteous- ness (Calvin). o. Relating to the higher spiritual nature of man in different applications, by Beza, Reiche, De Wette, and Riiekert). 4. Jn siio gencre prcccJarum et egrcgium (Koppe, and others). 6. The si)iritual, and not the literal sense of the law, is meant (Origcn). 6. Operating spiritually, SiSaamaloi; afJirTiq, &c. (Chrysostom). 7. Presupposing the presence of the Spirit as the condition of its fulfilment (Tholuck). 8. Identical in its spirit with that of the Holy Spirit (Meyer). JlvfVfiaTunoi; describes its wAofe spirituaiitq (James ii. 10), the absolute unity of its origin, its elements, and its purpose in the Divine Spiiit (which reveals itself in the human spirit), in contrast with the presupposition of its finite force, its finite and sundered parts of membership, and its finite design. [The view of Meyer is the simplest and best : in its nature it in diviiie. (So Ilodge.) This undoubtedly accords best with the antithesis, adfjuivoi;, made of flesh. — R.] But I am carnal [tyo'i fik aaqxivix; tlfti,. See Textual Note* ., Ai\A below.] The tywi ^^ ^^- cordance with the lf)ioi(rii; mentioned above, is Paul himself, iu the exhibition of his standpoint under the law, for the exhibition of the historical develop- ment of man standing under the law. Meyer : " The still undelivered iyin, which, in the great need that presses upon it in opposition to the law, groans for deliverance ; " ver. 24. The same writer properly maintains, against Philippi, that the subject is iden- tical through the entire section. On the other hand, Meyer incorrectly distinguishes the past tenses of vers. 7-13, and the present tenses of vers. 14 ff., by saying that, in the former case, Paul has described his psychological history before and under the law, and in the latter, that he portrays his nature stand- ing in opposition to the spiritual character of the law. But down to ver. 13 he has rather portrayed the genesis of the really internal and legal stand- point. But after ver. 14, he describes the whole de- velopment of this standpoint ; that is, the inward conflict of the sinner who has perceived the inward character of the law. Carnal (fleischern). ^Jd^xuvoc, made of flesh, like flesh (2 Cor. iii. 3 ; 1 Cor. iii. 1). The word could also be translated flesfdi/, if this were not a conventional term for carnalli/ minded, aa^/.i,- noi,-. Meyer thinks that nd^xivoi; " gives a deeper shade " than (rcc^ztxdc;, with reference to John iii. 6 ; but the case is about the reverse, since we mnst Dnderstand by ffa^xmdt-, carnally minded, and by aaQxirot;, carnally formed, inclined, and disposed ; a being whose natural spontaneity and view of things are external, according to the ad^t. (On the oppo- sition of the readings, comp. Tholuck, p. 363.)* • [The Greek adjectives ending in -tvot (with the accent on tlie autepenult) describe the material out of which any thing is made (comp. the English -. [For not what I w^ish, that I practise ; but w^hat I hate, that do I. O 1' yuQ 8 & i X w , T ovr o n (> da (J M , akk o fi i,e of the flesh." I prefer (1.) ; but (3.) should be adopted by those who insist on the Augustinian view. Otherwise, the first time tha present tense, upon which so much stress is laid as indi- cating a change in the state of the Bubject, occurs, tha predicate must be tampered with, and made to mean, not simply, I am carnal, but, I wim, I am so to a certain ixfent, I am slill carnal, though not as formirly. Dr. Hodge deems the extreme (i. e., simple) sense of the words, "inconsistent wi h the context," but the immediate cectest has to ba limited in the same lay to itiake lais applicable, especially exclusively applicable, to a regenerate person. — R.] • [Thi> interpretation is altogether uLtc.able on philok logical giounds. Dr. Hodge justifies it, by saying : " With regard to moral objects, knowledge is not mere cognition. It is the apprehension of the moral quality, and involves, of necessity, approbation or disappiobation." But a coi> rect inference is not always a correct intei-pietation. — R.J 238 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS, (1.) Has it here a reference to the leill in the strict eense (either = velleitas, Tholuek, and others, or = a full determination of the will, Philippi) ; or does it mean, I desire, wish ? The former is, per- haps, favored by the psychological character of the whole passage ; but the latter is preferable, since fiiai!) is so opposed, tliat botli words must be re- ferred to the same faculty ; and it is easier to class dihi) within the region of the emotions, than to transfer /(kt(7> to that of the will. (2.) How intense Ls its meaning ? Here u ta m is undoubtedly in itself a stronger word. Perhaps the use of two dif- ferent verbs (TT^aTTd), ttom) in the main clauses would justify a difference of intensity in the anti- thetical verbs diho, /iktm {i. e., the desire for good is less strong than the hatred of evil) ; or finro) may be taken as = ov Oi/.m (/ do not ivish). Ver. 16 Btrongly favors the latter. Either of these views is preferable to that which strengthens the antitliesis into / love, I hate (Hodge). For this forces a mean- ing u[)on &i/.(i) which the Apostle could have ex- pressed far more plainly by another term. — R.] The wish here is the better dasire and effort of the man awakened to his inward state. First of all, the sinner becomes a gloomy enigma to himself in the contradictions of his doing and leaving undone. (See Meyer on the odd explanation of Reiche, that the sinful Jew does the wickedness which the sinless Jew does not approve of. Also on statements kin- dred to the foregoing, in Epictetus : o /itv Oihi, (6 ananravmv) on novu, xai o utj OtXfi,, noift \ and in Ovid : Video mdiora proboque, deteriora se- quor. Still other examples in Tholuek, p. 366.) On Philippi's interpretation of this passage as applica- ble to the regenerate, see Tholuek, p. 355.* The choice of the expressions is very delicate ; from the real &i/.nv in spirit he does not come to the con- sistent and vigorous miaaaiw ; but even the /niTftv cannot prevent a weaker TToi^ttv of the rebellious one. Ver. 16. But if what I wish not, that I do [ f I d k o o V Q- till) , r ov r o n o k') . // « is perhaps logical, and marks a step in self-discovery •vith respect to the law. — R.] The mental consent to the law now appears above the perceived dissen- sion between willing and doing. As the sinner places himself, with his judgment, on the side of his awakened will, he places himself, with his judgment, on the side of the law. [I agree with the law that it is good, ar/f - q)rjfii, TO) V 6 fi i>) oTt X a ). 6 <; . The verb may not here imply more than an intellectual acquies- cence in the high moral character of the law, yet that acquiescence extends as far as the &t).n,v. Tliat this mu,if be actual in the case of an awahmed man, is evident. How, else, could the sense of sin arise ? — R.] This is the first step on the way of self- knowledge : Acquiescence in the law in opposition to his own actions. But at the same time, the law is acknowledged to be good in an eminent sense, as • [Dr. Hodge is certainly correct in saying, " that every Christian can adopt the language of this veise;" but when Alford (fol. iwing Philippi) asserts, that nn such will exists in ike citrrjil, unrfgenerafe man, the remark is incorrect, unless 9iM.-) be referred either to a full determination of tliewill.orto the strongest possible desire. That neilherof ttiBe is a necessary conclus on, is evident not only from the language of Epictetus, but from the close connection with ver. 14 (yap ■ ■ • yap), as well as from ver. 16, where •V 0i\(i) IS evidently used as explaining ixiaio. It is a gratuitous inference, that a reference of this verse to the unregciierate implies a contradiction of the depravity of the human will. — B,.} noble, standing ideally above the life — xa/.dg. Mcy er : " The usual construction, / (/rayit that the law h good, neglects the crer." Against the reference ot the Tiji vofim to (Ti'T', see Tholuek ; see hiui also fol quotatioi.a from Chrysostom and Hugo St. Victor oil the innate nobility of the soul. The illuinination of the darkness of tfie vnU (vers. 17, 18). Ver. 17. Now then it is no longer I that perform it \_vvvl (5' e o v x It i iy m xar i ^ y a- Co fi at ai'T 6 . N vv L is logical, not temporal (so all modern commentators). If temporal, then it might mark the transition into a state of grace. The same is true of orxt'rt. See Winer, p. 574. " Since I consent to the law, that it is good, it can no longer be affirmed that 7," &c. (Meyer). — R.] Tholuek: '■'■ Nvvl Aug. nniic in statu grutix — rath« er a designation of the inference." But it denotea not mert-ly a continued movement in the treatment, but also in the subject discussed. The understand- ing has first entered upon the side of the law ; now this is done also by tlie real will of the ego. The sinner distinguishes between his ego — which now emerges from the darkness of the personality — and the sin [the principle of sin perscmified] dwelling in him — now like a foreign and wicked co-habitant. He places himself, with his ego and his will, on the side of the law, and abjures the bad part of his con- dition. The f j'o), as well as the xar t^ycOlo/tai, must be emphasized. The ahro is that which he, according to ver. 16, now no more wills with his real will. [As yet, however, there is no indication that this state of things docs or ca7i lead to " what is good," save in powerless desire, even if, with Meyer, we take the ego here as = the moral sulf-conscioua- ness. Ver. 18 acknowledges this. — R]. But sin dweUing in me [dX/.a tj olxoZaa iv i fi o I a.Ha^Tta]. The Apostle distinguishes between the iyio and an individuality in a wider sense, described by in me, in which sin dwells. [Stuart takes in me as referring, not to the wider in- dividuality, but to the carnal self, which here begins to appear over against the better self. It may be doul)ted whether there is such a better self as is re- ferred to in the first clause of this verse, in the un- regenerate man. But all men under the law feel such a discord as this. — As the attributing of the doing to indwelling sin by the Christian is not a de- nial of responsibility, so, in the case of one not yet a Cliristian, it is not the assumption of a power to do right. There is no sign of release as yet. Even if we limit in me to the narrower sense it has in ver. 18, the whole personality seems to be under the power of sin. — Wordsworth finds here, and in the succeeding verses, a vindication of God from the charge of being the author of sin ! — R.] Ver. 18. For I know^ that in me, that is, in my flesh, good doth not dwell [ o i rV a yaq 6 T t o V •/. ol ■/. f I iv i /I o i , T r T i (J T uv iv T-jj a a (J X i n o V , ay a & 6 v . For I know, ia regarded by Philippi as an expression of Christian consciousness ; yet some such consciousness is the very result which the law is designed to produce. — R.] More special definition of the dwelling of sin in him. This arises from the fact that good does nol dwell in him — that is, in his flesh. The negative expression is noteworthy : If in a moral being no good dwells, the opposite (sin) does dwell in him. The aa.(j% is here established as the other side of the ego, which, with this, constitutes the whole man. But we cannot identify the (xa^ij, either with th4 CHAPTER VII. 7-26. 239 body, or with the lusts of the body alone (the Greek fathers). Tlioluck cites, in favor of this view, the different expressions, " in my members," " body of death," ver. 24. But these terms must not be un- derstood materially. Tlie (ja^^l is the external, finite nature and mode of relation and view ; it is the finite tendency in both its immaterial and sensuous character, which certainly has its substantial basis in the external (jri()^. Calvin interprets crce^^ here as human nature. It would be better to say : in my naturalness. [See, on xaxov , T o r T o n (1 d a a (» . This strong expression ia new. It points to a fountain of wicked action which proceeds immediately from the unconscious life in opposition. And this is the darkness of the sensuous [the carnal] life. Ver. 20. [Now if I do that I would not, ft <)'« o on Oilm iyo), Tooro noim. El de = since, then, hypothetical only in form. On syoi, see Textual Note ". There is undoubtedly a progress in thought. Alford thinks the ego is here perceived to be the better ego of the inward man ; but this progress is perceptible in the case of the awakened, only, however, to produce the cry of ver. 24. — R.] This verse, then, specifies also the real author of these actions of the man against his will : it is sin dwelling in me [^ oixovaa iv i^inl d/ia^- Tta], the habitual life of sense [i. e., of the flesh]. This, in its obscurity, he now renounces in his con. sciousness ; in his /. But now, to a certain degree or apparently, a foreign personality with a foreign law arises in him, against the awakening personality of his inner man. [The condition is not in itself, as yet, more hopeful. The progress is still toward wretchedness, despite or even because of the better desire. — R.] Disclosure of the inward rent in man in. general ; the dissension between the ti-ue personality and the false personality toith its false law (vers. 21, 22). Ver. 21. I find then the law [iv()iaxoi aQa rov v6nov'\. The difficulty of the passage has led Chrysostom to call it d(ja(fii; il^^i/iivov, and Riickert to give up its explanation. Explanations : a. The Mosaic law is meant ; oTi for because. " I find, then, the law for me, so far as I am willing to do good, because evil is present with me." That is, the law is designed for me, be- cause I have the will to do good, but evil, &c. (Ori- gen, Chrysostom, Theodore of Mopsvestia, Theophy- lact, Bengel, &c. ; Meyer,* and even Ultilas. See Tholuck's Note, p. 372 : Invenio nunc legem, volenti ndhi bonum facere, nam mihi adtst malum). We may say, in favor of this, that it certainly describes also the origin of the law ; that contradiction has made the law necessary. Still, this exposition is thoroughly untenable. 1. Since the beginning — that is, from ver. 7«— ♦ [Meyer (4th ed.) holds that the article requires us to understand the Mosaic law, but his view of the constiuo tion is as follows : (hf law is joined with the participle, tha infinitive is the infinitive of design, and the last clause in- troduced by oTi is the object of I find: "I find, then, while my will is directed to the law in order to do good, th:it evil is present with me." As he well adds : " Wha< deep misery ! " But this seems forced, and is only an at« tempt to preserve consistently his dictum, that to;/ vo/jior must mean the Mosaic law. See, however, his full gram* matical justification.— B.] 240 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. the speaker has known that the law is appointed for him. 2. Here the question is no more concerning the law for the sinner, but the relation of the sinner to the law ; the explanation is thus totally against the connection. 3. The explanation, now I have dhcovered the law to be a km for mi', would be strange. 4. The law is previously tor him also, whose willingness to do what is good has not yet devel- oped, while the legal stnge for the condition here de- scribed soon terminates. Hofmann's modification does not help the matter : That to do evil is ever present with me, shows me that the law is good to me, who am willing to do it. lie lias already said this more plainly in ver. 12. But, strictly, it is not yet decided here that the law is also good to him. Another view of the Mosaic law : I find, then, for me, who im willing to do the law, the good (namely, the law) tna: evil is present before me (Homherg, Knapp, Klee, Olshausen,* Fritzsche, &c.). Unim- portant repetition of the foregoing. Likewise the TioKtv r 6 xa^.ov must not be separated. b. " The law denotes here a general rule, a ne- cessity." I find, then, for me, who am willing to do good — the law — that evil is present with me (Luther, Beza, Calvin, and many others ; De Wette and Phi- lippi [Stuart, Hodge] ). Thus the sense would be the same as in the expression, tTf(jo<; vo/ioq iv ToTt; (lihav. Meyer remarks, on the other hand, that, according to the whole context, ro/fOi; can be noth- ing else than the Mosaic law. Another law appears first in ver. 23. Also, the ori, i/iol to jca^tov Tzn^d/.fiTai, could not be described as i'o/(o? ; it is something empirical — a phenomenon. But why, then, can the Apostle call even the motions in the members a law ? Why can he call the old man, who is nevertheless not a man, a man ? Accepting this view in general, we may ask whether the sense is : I find in me, or, for me, will- ing to do good — the law, &c. — as formerly ; or, I find the law, that, when I would do good, &;c. (Gro- tius, Limborch, Winer). •]• This construction is de- cidedly preferable, because it suits the expression as well as the sense. For here the one law resolves itself even into a group of laws. The law of God now becomes to the Apostle the law of his miud ; the foreign law in his members becomes in its effect the law of sin. But this antagciaism of law to law is so fearfully strong, that it appears to the Apostle himself as in itself a law of moral contradiction ; and this a terribly strong contradiction, for, just when he would do what is good, and high, and great (for example, protect the Old Testament theocracy), evil is present to him (persecution of the Christians). Therefore the one law is resolved into two. [This view involves a slight trajection of ort, and then the dative is not governed by ivQiaxo), but an anacoluthon is accepted, which causes the repetition of i/tol. Though, in general, the view Is the same as that of Luther and Calvin, yet this lavi B thus distinguished as neither the law of the mind nor the law in the members, but the contradiction • [Obhausen (2d ed., p. 280) rejects this view as harsh ; iut what his precise opinion is, is not very obvious. — R.] t [Winer (7th ed.) favors the other view (that of Lu- ther), while Tholuck (5th ed.), Philippi (2d ed.), and appa- rently Olshausen (2d ed.), adopt this, which is that of the £. V. Our English and American commentaries combat Many authorSj who have already given up the opiposed opinions on this verse. — R] of the two. Vers. 22, 23, taking up, a= they d'\ th« two sides of this contrariety, favor oi.r view also. It maybe added: (1.) The presence of the article does not decide that the Mosaic law is meant ; for the article occurs in ver. 23, where it is certainly not meant. (2.) The article has a sufKciently deiion strative force {this law) without Torror being insert- ed. (3.) The phrase, law of God (ver. 22), seems, by its definiteness, to point to anothei' sense here. Our English version, therefore, presents the best sense -K.] Ver. 22. For I delight in the law of God [a vvri()o fiai, ya^i tij) voiim rov Otov. The y(XQ introduces the two verses as an antithetical ex- planation of ver. 20. The aw in (ji>ftj()o/iai, is as in (Ti'Xlt'7Tov/(froi;, Mark iii. 5, after the analogy of (7tivoi (I) nov.^ The effo avO^JioTToq is not so much the roPs or to vof^ov (Theod. and Gaunad.) itself, as the man choosing in the vovq his standpoint, his [irinciple (which is not really gained until the con elusion of ver. 25). It is also so far the inner man as that he withdraws alnicst desperately from the outwork of his external life. Lyra explains similar- ly to the Greek writers : In homine duplex pars, ratio et sensualitas, quce alitcr nomina?itur euro et spiritiis, homo interior et exterior. This reminds us of the Platonic use of language : In Plato and Plo- tinus we find the termini, 6 fiaio avOjJWTToi;, 6 Iv Tot; «., 6 a/.ijO-tji; a. Tholuck, on the other hand, understands by the 6 eau) avO-g., after the anal- ogy of 6 y.aivoi; dvfy()., 6 y.(>vnTl)(; rtji; y.a(^<). a. (1 Peter iii. 4), rather the inward / of the man than a .single attribute — the inward man, who permits him- self to be controlled by his conscience, the man of conscience. But this does not remove the difficulty. For the question is not, that the real and true man is created for God ; for this holds good of flesh and blood, ontologically considered. But it may be asked. What actu.al standpoint does the Apostle here denote ? According to his antithesis, it is this : he distinguishes his inward nature, as the true man, from the antagonism and conflict of the law in hit members. It is in this self-comprehension that he now has his delight in the law, which is more than the (TiV((jp//,Ht of ver. 16. Meyer also sees in the aiivii<)o/;()o/( at, seems to indicate that tlie inward man is the new nuin, under the infiueiice of tlie Spirit (see Philippi, Hodge, Al- ford in loco), bin this view is beset with diliifuities also. Why is this influence purposely kept in the buckground ? Alford answers : To set the conflict in the strongest light. But that is not like Paul, who can hardly refrain from his references to grace in Christ. As a matter of fact, tlie conflict under the law produces a divided state, where something in the man does not only consent to the law, but, in aroused feeling, delights in the law. Such a state may be the result of gratia j>rcevenien.% or may always result in deliverance ; but its present effect, as here described, is only " captivity," helplessness. An abnormal condition in the ease of the Christian, though his delight, even in this introspective quasi- legal condition, is more pronounced. This inward man, independently of gracious influences, leads only to misery. Notice, too, that when, as here, an ap- parent reference to the Christian occurs, it is imme- diately followed by language that seems totally inap- plicable to him. This confirms the view that this distinction is not prominent. — R.] Yer. 23. But I see another law [/S/e'tto) lik tTf^ov v6/(ov. Paul here represents himself as a looker-on upon his own personality (Meyer). Ji adversative or ;'isjunctive. — R.] His seeing indi- cates his surprix. Gal. i. 6 and V serves to explain how the eTt()ov is here distinguished from the ti/J.ov. As there the 'irf^ov tt'ay. is not a true gospel, so this eTf(JO£; ro/io? is not a true vo/ioq. How could the o)ie real law of God be in perpetual conflict with tlie other ? [As indicated above (ver. 21), tliis is not the law there found, but that law is the rule of contradiction between the two here re- ferred to. — R.] In my members [Iv roTi; ftilfal fi oi<. This is to be joined with v6/iov, rather than with the participle avTi(TT(jar. — R]. Namely, operative in my members. Fritzsche construes thus: Which opposes in my members. Incorrectly : For the con- flict is not decided in the members. The dd^i, which, being spiritually disordered, has become the basis of the desires, has its essence in its dismem- berment, in the division of its members ; therefore the false law is operative in the members.* [Warring against the law of my mind, ai'Ti,(Fr(jarfv6/ifvov rijt vofio) ror root; nov. The form vooi; belongs to later Greek (Meyer). See Winer, p. 61. — R.] Earlier, this law was master, and the tyio servant ; now, after the iyo) has become distinct from the sinful ffa(>i as the inner man of himself, sin carries on a formal war by ti»j members, but with the force of a law which it describes as the law of nature, or one similar to it. Simultaneously with the fict that the combatant has recognized the Mosaic law again as the expression of his inward steadiness, and has made it the v6/io(; of his ro"?, of his personal consciousness, sin has tssumed the semblance of a law of nature dominant in the members. [And bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members. See Textual * [Phi'ippi holds that "memhers" here has a meaning between the physiological anil ethical. Hodee makes it — in my flesh ; but the phrase seems purposely chosen to indicate the locality where the opposing law is most evident, rather than its precise seat.— R.] 16 Note ^. The participle ai/fia/.<»xi^ovta (latei Greek : to take by the spear in war, to take prisoner) is very strong. — R,] Sin, in this semblance, opposes the inward man, and conquers him ; the 1 finds itself the captive of another law, which now auda- ciously appears as the law of ain ; that is, sin will now assert itself as an insurmountable fatality.— Meyer will not accept the genitive t6/iO(; rov rod? as subjective, but local. He would distinguish it fur. ther from the I'o/ioc; to*' {)k>7< (against Usteri, Kbll. ner, &c.), without observing that " the law of God '' has reproduced itself in " the law of the mind." [The diii'erence is thus expressed by Bengel : dio tainen mentis meu: Urje divina deUdatie. There seems to be two pairs of laws here, each pair closely related : The law of God, with its answering law in the mind (taken locally) ; the law in the members, subservient and causing subserviency to the law of sin. The parallelism is not strict, for the conflict is evoked by the law of God, and ends in the law of sin. It is unlikely that this is a peculiarly Christian state. — R.] The roTs' denotes the thinking and moral con. sciousness, which constitutes the essence of person- ality. [Meyer : " the reason in its practical activ- ity." Olshausen, and others, find here the organ of the unfallen spirit; the Augustinian interpreters, the organ of the renewed man, the spiritual nature ; all agree that it answers to the inward man (ver. 22). It that means renewed nature, we would expect here some expression of the Spirit's influence. The choice of another word, as well as of another phrase than " the law of God " here, where it would seem so appropriate were the reference to a Christian, confirms the view held throughout in our exegesis. -R.] Meyer says further : The inward man is not brought into captivity, for he, considered in and of himself, always remains in the service of God's law (ver. 25) ; but the apparent man is. Then the war- fare would be carried on by the apparent man ! It is indeed correct, that in tw vofno r'^q a/iuQ- Tt'ae the dative is not instrumental (according to Chrysostom, and others), but is dat. commodi* On the different distinctions between the law in the members and the law of sin, see Meyer, p. 288 (Kollner : Demands of the desires, and tlie desires themselves). We distinguish between the fiist ap- pearance and the final manifestation : The law in the members passes itself ofi' for, or appears to the sinner first as, the law of nature ; therefore it brings him into captivity, and appears to him finally as the Law of sin — the law of anomy, of unnaturalnesa Parens' understanding of the ntKr] as the pars no^u dmn regenita, coincides with the reference to the new-born man. When Calovius and Socinius held that the facxdtaies interiores are included, they inti' mated that not the fiO.rj of itself, but only in coii- nection with spiritual dispositions, could form the semblance of another and wicked law. FoTJHTH Parxgeaph (vehs. 24, 25). The Transition from the Law to the Gospel. It is a characteristic of the interpretation of thi* passage, that some have made vers. 24 and 25 paren- * [If ev he accepted in the text, then this would not b« instromental, hut describe the department in which tb« taking captive has place (Alford). — K.] 242 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. thetical down to ijnm' ; Grotiiis and Flatt, ver. 25 to ///((T))'. Tholiick: "As, in tlie case of the morally fiekle, such an expeiicnce, daily renewed, calls t'ortli the renunciatory exclamation to virtue, ' Thou art too hard for nie ; take away n)y crown, and let nie Bin , ' so, from the morally earnest warrior, is there called forth the cry of distress for deliverance and the power of victory." He adds to this : " Knight Michaolis gives this cry of distress a very moderate sound : ' It is the lamentation of a distressed Jew which Paul answers thus: I thank God that I do not have to lament so.' " — But the deeply moral warrior, who has once arrived at this degree, does not readily turn back. De Wette says, very ])ertinently : " From what has occurred, there now follows the need of de- liverance, which has been satisfied by the grace of God." Ver. 24. O wretched man [TaXalrzMQOi; eyo) arfl'^j o; TTOs ]. l'a).aiTi(ii (> oc;, strictly, ex- hau.tted by hard labor (r/.^cctt. Trw^oq, callnni paii). Similar to the expressions in Matt. xi. 28. [The nominative is the nominative of exclamation (Phi- lippi, Meyer). The word occurs only here and Rev. hi. 17 (of the Laodicean churcn) ; there joined with thn,v6i;, to which it is almost equivalent in popular usage. The corresponding verb occurs in James iv. 9, and the noun, Rom. iii. 16 ; James v. 1. From these passages it would seem that here the promi- nent idea is of helplessness and misery ; the cry for help Irom without follows. Bengel is certainly in- correct : "me mifierum, qui homo sim ! " — R.] It is the desperate cry for personal righteousness, and also of the completed repentance now about to be transformed into faith — but a faith which the law cannot give. Repentance asks, faith responds. (Reiche's explanation : Tiie cry of Jewish humanity for help, to which a delivered one responds in chap. viii. 1. With this view, the passage from n'/a^jtffTw to ri/i(7)v is said to be a gloss.) Who shall deliver me [t/<; /i i ^rfrtrat.. Simple future. Not = would that I were delivered. Dalvin thinks it expresses no doubt, but only the ab- sence of the deliverance at the time. Yet Olshau- sen seems nearer right in making it imply : who can, with a reference to a personal deliverer. — R.] 'Puo/iav, Septuagint for bx3 , r^ITin, &c. It re- fers both to the fundamental deliverance (as in the E resent passage), and to the continued and final de- verance ; Matt. vi. 13. [Comp. Col. i. 13, where the reference is to a definite act of deliverance. — R.] From this body of death ? ['^x roi^ (to)/* a- roi; ToTi Oavdrov tovtoi' ;]. Explanations: Connection of the to v tov with rr i,) « a t o ^• . 1. The tiniversilas vitiorum (Amt)rose, Calvin) ; mors velut corpus quasi res per se subsistens (Pisea- tor, Crell). As the Rabbinical Cll5 corpus mortis pro ipsa 'niorte (Socinius, Schottgen). Wolf: mor- tifera peccaia massn. Flatt : The system of sensu- ous affections, which is the cause of death. Tholuek observes, against these explanations : But the read- er will suppose that (Tio/ia is meant in no other sense than as (riiiua ti/i o^Q6vtjfia ; chap. viii. 6. 4. The , which is not a real rit'fia ; tlio present passage. 6. The v6/io(i iv roty fti^tO'; which is not a real rO|Moe ; chaj). vii. 23. 7. The /ii}.>], which are not real /ui^.tj ; Col. iii. 5. 8. The (Tiiiti, which is something else than the external (rriij'i ; Rom. viii. 8. 9. The f)^xvaroi;, which is something else than physical death ; Kom. viii. 6.* Tlioluck : On the exclamation of ver. 24 : " The ex.^laniation does not appear to us explicable merely fr( ill transition to earlier occurrences, but only be- cauic tlie continuously felt reaction of the old man has, so to speak, set oft' the preceding descrij)tiou." [Alford thinks, with De Wette, that the cry is uttered *' in lull consciousness of tlie deliverance which Christ has eilected, and as leading to the expression of thanks wiiich follows." A turning-point is reached, whatever be the reference, and no view is correct which docs not admit that Paul here ex- presses what he feels, as well as what he has felt. -R.] Ver. 25. Thanks to God [;>'«()(-(,• rio &f(7>, or, I thank God, tlxafti^aro) rot Qnji. See 2'extuai Note "]. This reading corresponds to the previous exclamation much better than i v'/a(i lart'i does. Tliose wlio continue the reference to the un- regenerate to the conclusion, get into difficulty with this second exclamation. Hence the adoption of a parenthesis (Riiekert, Fritzsche), or of a conditional construction (Erasmus, Semler). If that had not taken place, I would have been snatched asunder, with the spirit to serve the law of God, but with the flesh the law of sin. Meyer observes: "■For what he thanks God, is not mentioned." But the for what is plainly enough indicated by the context, as Meyer himself subsequently brings out. It is also uidicated by his thanking God through Jesus Christ. So then I myself vrith the mind [a.Qa ovv avToq lyi'o riZ /nev voi]. In the consideration of this difficult passage there are two questions : 1. Is what is here said connected with the previous thanksgiving, or with ver. 24 ? 2. What, accord- ingly, is the meaning of avroq ty"'' 1. Some think that the thanksgiving does not come at all into consideration ; the words are con- nected with ver. 24 (Riiekert, Fritzsche). This makes the passage only a final opinion on the miser- able condition under the law, a declaration of the consummated dissension in which man is situated Under the law. Others (De Wette, Meyer, and oth- ers), on the contrary, very properly take the thanks- giving also into consideration, although both De Wette and Meyer find in the passage only a recapitu- lation of what has been said from vers. 14-24, which, according to Meyer, should follow from the immediately preceding t\r/a()i,arm. But the Apos- tle's language does not declare the dissension pre- viously described, but the alternative now finally es- tabli.-ihed. By accepting the probable breviloquence, and supplying the words which are at hand, we are telieved even here of the apparent obscurity. We *ead Tw fikv voi' (dovhvoiv) rfoi'Afi'w; the ♦ [Many will feel that Dr. Lange here gives ar. expla- jation wliicli is not a real explanation. Sin, and flesh, and tlK old man, are real enough ; but if he means that over against tlism is something, which is the ideal man, to be made real ihrouch the grace of Christ, then his remarks ar^j siguifioant. That the true explanation of this passage is o be sousht in a discovery of modem science, anticipated bv Paul IS improbable. Com'). Docir Nolt '" — R ■" Apostle has even omitted the ^'ocP.fi'w from the ti| dk aa()xi — a proof that both can be mentally sup- plied. Thus : //" / serve in the I'ort;, th it I servi in the lata of God ; but if 1 serve (or, / would serve) in the fesh, theit 1 serve the law of sin. Either, or i This is favored, first of all, by the avrix; iyd). A recapitulation of the foregoing cannot De uiited with this view. For in ver. 20 we read : rwl di oixitu iyii'), &c. (comp. ver. 20). The fdicwing ia the inference from the previous verses : that now there is a definite distinction between standing in the vo'i; (that is, in the principle of tlie rort;) and stand- ing in the flesh (tiiat is, in tlie principle of the flesh) ; but that, tlu-ough Christ, he has gained the power to stand in the principle of the vor^;. From this there arises the following thesis : I, the same man, can have a double standpoint. If I live with the voT<;, I serve the law of God in truth ; but if I live in tlie flesh, even in the form of tlie service of the law, I serve tlie (false) law of sin. In other words, the life in the roT(; is the life in Christ, the life in the Spirit, and, like love, the fulfilment of the law (see chap. xiii. 8). It follows, therefore, on the one hand, that there is nothing condemnatory in the man of this standpoint. But there also follows the conclusion that they must live decidedly in harmony with their principle. But if they live purely in the rorc, the body, as a principle, must be dead — that is, rendered merely indifferent as a principle, and have nothing to say, on account of the sinfulness in- herent in it (see chap. viii. 10). But this appliea only to the present body, which is burdened with the propensity to .-in. It is not to be trusted ; it is devoid of pure harmony with the law of the Spirit, and therefore the Christian must keep it, as a bond- servant, under discipline and oversight. But this order is also temporary, so far as mortal bodies shall again be made alive by the Spirit of the risen Christ. As now the resurrection itself belongs to the future and the one piriod, so also does the completion of the purity of the body, its removal to the glorioua liberty of the children of God, belong to the same future. But as the germ of the resurrection-body has already been made alive and increased in the be- liever in this life, so is it also the case with religious and moral purity in his body. In every conflict of the body with the law of the Spirit this alone should be decided ; yet not carnally, in legal mortifications, but spiritually, in a dynamical reckoning of ourselves to be dead (see chap. vi. 1 ff'.). That is, in a power- ful departure bey(md the n^dtiii; of the body with the works of the Spirit (see chap. viii. 13). 2. Different explanations of the cci'toi; eyoj. (1.) / myself, Paul. The Apostle's description of himself as an example for others (Cassian, Parens, Umbreit) ; (2.) Ego idem. Tiie dissension in one and the same man made prominent (Erasmus, Cal- vin, and others) ; (3.) Hie ego. Reference to what he had earlier said of himself (Fritzsche, De Wette) ; (4). 1 alone ; that is, so far as I am without the me- diation of Christ (Meyer, Baur, Hofmann) ; (5.) What he had heretofore described as the expeiience of mankind, he now describes as his own (Kollner) • Olshausen's explanation is the nearest approach • [The explanation of Jowett is altogether untenable : " lin my true self serve the law of God ; the remainder ol the sentence may be regarded as an afterthought." The presence of iiiv totally overthrows this. Jowett accept* It in his text, too, without even taking advantage pf itf omission in N. F., to give a seeming propriety to his iuten »)retation ! — It. ■ 244 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. to correctness : " He thanks the Author of the work of reden)i)ti<)n, God the Father, through Christ, whom he can now call his Lord from the heart. With this experience there now appears a totally changed condition in tiie inward life of the man, whose nature tlie Apostle describes in what follows, until its perfect completion, even the completion of the mortal body" (chap. viii. 11). He further holds, that the Divine law was reflected in the voTi; ; and in tiie inward man there arose the wixh, yea, even the joy, to be al)le to observe it; but the principal thing was wanting — the y.aTtiiydi^taOai-. "But by experiencing the redeeming power of Christ, by which the rori,- is strengthened, man finds himself able, at least by the highest and noblest power of his nature, to serve the Divine law." Yet the found corruption of our heart, whieh is oppored t« the law :f God, and feel wretched in this couditioD 248 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. — The conflict described in vers. 14-25 occurs, be- fore the new birth, in the heart of a man awakened by the hnv ; yet, in the life of the regenerate per- Bon, similar conflicts and phenomena arise, in which, however, he is ever triumphant. — The Apostle was far from holding tlie erroneous view, tiiat sin dwells only in man's body, and not also in his soul (ver. 21). — I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord ! Through Him, lie has delivered me in and from all this wretchedness (ver. 25). — Hkubner : The best thing can be made an injury to the wicked will (ver. 13). — Every thing becomes impure in the impure heart. Corrupt'w opt:ini est generatio pessimi (ver. 13), — Description of the evil propensity (vers. 14- 25). — It is the best people who confess, that strong sensuous impulses in them are sinful (ver. 14). — The inward contradiction of man with himself. The conflict between knowing, willing, and doing (ver. 15). — Even the immoral man feels that it would have been better if he had kept the law (ver. l(i). Bes.ser ; The twofold way in which sin becomes exceeding sinfid by the commandment: 1. Its wick- ed, ungodly nature, plays a prominent part in the transgression of tlie plain commandment ; 2. Tlie flentenee of death which transgression effects, drives sin into the conscience of man, so that he feels and perceives it to be a horror and abomination before God (ver. 13). — The conflict between spirit and flesh in believers (vers. 14-25). — " Believers know and feel," says Luther ( Works, viii., 2747), " that no good thing dwells in their flesh, so that they may become more humble, and let their peacock-tail fall ; that is, do not depend on their own righteousness and good works," &c. (ver. 18). Lange : Tlie way of the law from sin to grace : 1. Apparently, ever darker and deeper toward death ; 2. Really, always nearer to light and life. — Tiie sad revelation of sin a preliminary condition of tiie joy — bringing revelation of salvation. — The develop- ment of self-knowledge under the law : 1. Clear view which reason has of the authority of the law ; 2. Earnest wrestling of the will ; 3. Outburst of deeply-affected feeling (oh, wretched man that I am). — How the proverb, " Man's extremity is God's opportunity," is most gloriously verified in the con- version of man. — The struggle between sin and the law ; 1. The deception which sin practises with the law ; 2. The unmasking effected by the law through the apparent charm of sin. — How the law becomes always more inward to the candid person, until he has perceived it as his spiritual I, his consciousness, his reason. — The fearful, false power of evil: 1. It assumes all the features of personal life ; 2. In order to exhaust and destroy personal life in all its features. — The cry for deliverance occurs in close proximity with thanksgiving and praise to God. — On ver. 25 : Either, or I [Jeremy Tayloh (condensed from sermon on the \!hristian'8 Conquest over the Body of Sin, Rom. vii. 19): The evil natures, piinciples, and manntrrs ol the world are the causes of our imperlect williugl and weaker actings in the tilings of God. Let no man please himself witli perpetual pions conversa^ tion or ineffective desires of serving God ; he that does not practise, as well as talk, and do what he desires and ought to do, confesses himself to sin greatly against his conscience ; and it is a prodigious folly to think that he is a good man, because, th(,ugl; he does sin, it was yet against his mind to do so. Every good man can watch always ; running from temptation is a part of our watclifulne.-s ; every good employment is a second and great part of it and laying in provisions of reason and religion be- forehand is a third part of it ; and tiie conversation of Christians is a fourth part of it. — Matt. Henry, on vers. 24, 25 : When, under the sense of the re- maining power of sin and corruption, we shall see reason to bless God through Christ and for Christ. Through Christ's death, an end will be put to all our complaints, and we shall be wafted to an eter- nity without sin or sigh. — It is a special remedy against fears and sorrows, to be much in praise. — Scott : A proper knowledge of the holy law of God is the two-edged sword which gives the deatii-vvound to self-righteousness and to Antinomiani.sm ; for it is perfectly fit to be the rule of our duty, written in our hearts, and obeyed in our lives. — Clarke : We never find that true repentance takes place where the moral law is not preached and enforced. The law is the grand instrument, in the hands of a f\iithful minister, to alarm and awaken sinners ; and he may safely show that every sinner is under tiie law, and consequently under the curse, who has not fled for refuge to the hope held out by the gospel,— Hodge : It is an evidence of an unrenewed heart to express or feel opposition to the law of God, as though it Were too strict ; or to be disposed to tiirow the blame of our want of conformity to the Divine will from ourselves upon the law, as unrea- sonable. — The Christian's victory over sin cannot be achieved by the strength of his resolutions, nor by the plainness and force of moral motives, nor by any resources within himself. He looks to Jesus Christ, and conquers in His strength. The victory is not obtained by nature, but by grace. — Barnes: We have here : 1. A view of the sad and painful conflict between sin and God. They are opposed in all things; 2. We see the raging, withering effect of sin on the soul. In all circumstances it tends to death and wo ; 3. We see the feebleness of the law and of conscience to overcome this. The tendency of both is to produce conflict and wo ; 4. We see that the gospel only can overcome sin. To us it should be a suliject of ever-increasing thank- fulness, that what could not be accomplished by tiia* law, can be thus effected by the gospel ; and tliat God has devised a plan that thus effects complet« deliverance, ami gives to the captive in sin an CTMr lasting triumph. — J. F. H.] CHAPTER VIII. 1-17. 249 BiXTH Section. — Christian life, or life in the Spirit of Christ as the new life according to the law of ih« Splr:t, is a blessed life in the adoption of (Jod ; is free from condemnation and death; and lead* to perfect blcusedneSs in the glory of God. TJie principle of the new life as the principle of the free' doiii and glorijication of the Christian, of believing humaniti/, and even of the creature ; chap. viii. Divisions : I. Life in the Spirit a life of opposition to the flesh ; and the Spirit as witness of adoption ; vers. 1-17. //. 2Vie renewal of the body by the life in the Spirit, and the Spirit as the security for glorification; vers. 18-39. I. Life in the Spirit in opposition to the flesh, and the Spirit as the witness of adoption. Chapter VIII. 1-17. 1 There is therefore now no conden\nation to fhera which [those who] are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit [omit aii after Christ 2 Jesus].' For the hiw of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free 8 [freed me] "^ from the law of sin and death. For what the law could not do, in that [because] it w-as weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in tha likeness of sinful flesh \_hieraiiy, the flesh of sin], and for \or, on account of] sin, 4 condemned sin in the flesh : That the righteousness [or, requirement] ^ of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not alter [according to] * the flesh, but after [according to] the Spirit. 5 For they that [those who] are after [according to] the flesh do mind the' things of the flesh ; but they that [those who] are after [accordmg to] the Spirit,. 6 the things of the Spirit. For to be carnally minded [the mind of the flesh] ^ is death ; but to be spiritually minded [the mind of the Spirit] is life and peace.. 7 Because the carnal mind [the mind of the flesh] is enmity against God : for it is not subject [doth not submit itself] ° to the law of God, neither indeed can 8 be [it]. So then [And] ' they that [those who] are in the flesh cannot please- God. 9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have [hath] * not the Spirit of Christ, he is 10 none of his. And [But] if Christ be \is] in you, the body is dead because of 11 sin ; but the Spirit [spirit] is life becaixse of righteousness. But [And] if the^ Spirit of him that raised up Jesus'* from the dead dwell [dwelleth] in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall [will] '" also quicken [quicken even] your mortal bodies by [on accoimt of] " his Spirit that dwelleth in you. 12 Thei-efore, brethren, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live after the flesh. 13 For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die : but if ye through [by] '* the Spirit 14 do mortify the deeds of the body,'' ye shall live. For as many as are led by- 15 the Spirit of God, they are the \j'm,ii the] '^ sons of God. For ye have not received [did not receive]'* the spirit of bondage again to_ fear ; but ye have '[omit have] received the Spirit of adoption, whereby [iv cp, wherein] we cry, 16 Abba, Father. The Spirit itself beareth witness with [or, to] '" our spirit, that 17 we are the [omit the] children of God: And if children, then [also] heirs; heirs of God, and joint heirs with Christ ; if so be that we sufier with him, that we may be also glorified together [glorified with him].'^ ' Ver. 1. — [The clause, added in Rec. : fxij Kara aapxa jrepurarouaiv, dAAa Kara wveviia, ts HOW rejected by the beet tritics as a gloss from ver. 4. It is not found m N. 15. C. D.' F., most older versions and fathers. The fiist half oj.ly u tdded in A. D.*, some versions. W' adds the whole. The MS. authority is sutficiently agrainst it to warrant a de:ided rejection. Forb?s : " The results of Parallelism coincide with the decisions of criticism, and Tiith the authority cf ttu vert HS8., in rejecting the words." 1. OiSev apa vvv KaroKpifia Tot9 ev Xptarui 'Irjaov* 2. 'O yap vonos toO wi-ev/aaTOf Tijs ^co^S €V XptO"Tip 'Irjaou jjAeu^epoxjei' jllc ano Tot) vop-ov Trjs afjiapTLas koi toD OavaTOVt 3. To yop aSvvarov toO rd^ou. if li i)(T9€vei 6ia t^s J/ai iv bfiOiuifLaTi aapKoi; auapriat Kal irepc anaf/rlat KoriKpiviv TJ)v anapriav ev Tg :i>e!:s, very indefinitely, to translate several words of kindred meaning, lleic li Is obviously incorrect, as SiKaiio ij.a means, literally, a righteous decree, ordiiiancc, statute, act (see pp. li, 184) ; and in this case refers to the summing up of all the requirements of the law, as fulfilled by Christ. Lange : (3 rechisun^ requiremeni, is not strictly exact, Ijut is adopted by Alford, Amer. Bible Union. Version of five Eugiish clergyTnsa: righteous demand. See Exg. A'otes. * Ver. 4. — [According lo, is the phrase which now best expresses the meaning of Kara, though after (GeimaJty nach) is literal. It is becoming unusual in this sense. * Ver. 6. — [The K. V., with its usual fondness for hendiadys, has departed from a literal rendering in vers. 6 and 7f at the expense of both accuracy and force. * Ver. 6. — [Is not sutijecl (K. V.), is correct, but the above emendation biiiigs out the middle force of uiroTa. E. F. K. L., many cursives and fathers, by Griesbach, Scliolz, Fritzsche, Jlill, Bcngel, Tisohendorf (in later editions), Meyer (who cites Lachmann also in its favor), Tholuck; Riickert, Alford, Wordsworth, Tregellcs, Lange. It will be seen that a majority of critical editors adopt the latter reading. The reasons which have determined this decision seem to be, that two such readings could not liave existed without one being a premeditated corruption. The question then arises. Which reading would best serve a polemic purpose, and hence be most likely to have been the corrupted one 1 That question is answered by the controversy between the Macedonians and Orthoflox (latter part of the Icm-th century) respecting the Divinity of the Holy Spirit. The Macedonians charged the Orthodox with an alteration of the text into the genitive. The genitive can only mean, by menns of ifis Spirit, &c. ; while the accusative mny include that idea of agency in connection with the thought, oti account of His Spirit, &.r.. It is plain that the Macedonians had less motive to alter the text than the Orthodox. Alford thinks the variation dates back of this controversy, and is not due to either of the then dispntant parties; but the same reason would hold good at a previous pnint of theological discussion. Lange well remarks, that, in any case, "the raising act of God is distinguished in this verse from the working of the Spirit." Hodge sums up the inteiiial evidence in favor of the common reading; but all Ids remarks only prove that the other is a more unusual reading, and hence likely to have been altered. It is better to follow the ciuTent of criticism, and adopt the accusative. 12 Ver. 13. — [The simple dative nvev naTi is best rendered, 6i/ Wic « is quite phiin, if we liave perceived the alternative in the preceding verse : If I am in the roTc, 1 serve God. If we ignore tliis alternative, tiie meaning of tlie pi'esent passage must be doul)tful. Tholuek : The older expositors do not generally furnish any proof of tiie connection of tliis w^m with tlie preceding cliapter. Yet the following connection of it witli chap. vii. 25, by Augustine, is, in tiie main, correct: " To him, now, who, as a Cluistian, iion arnpUus covsentit pravis desideriu^ and is planted in Christ by baptism, the prava disiJeria can no more be con- demnation." The Catholic expositors follow him. Bucer, Beza [Alford], and others, connect ver. 25 witli tiie thanksgiving ; but tliis assumes that the second half of ver. 25 is an interruption. Caiixtus, Bengel [Stuart], and others, go back even to chap. vii. 6 ; others [Ilodgo, Ilaldane], to the wliole argu- ment for justification by faith. Meyer: If I am left to myself to serve the law of God with my reason, but the law of sin with my flesh, then it follows that, since Christ has interposed, there is no con- demnation, &c. — [The question of connection is main- ly decided by the view of the preceding section. Those who refer it to the regenerate, connect this either with the whole preceding argument, or, with Philippi, with the preceding verse, in the sense : Al- though I am thus divided in service, still, being in Christ Jesus, there is now, therefore, &c. ; or with the thanksgiving. If Lange's view of the alterna- tive be admitted, we must also accept his view of the connection. It seems to be an unwarranted breaking up of the current of thought, to go back as far as chap. vii. 6 ; and to refer to the-whole train of argument, seems out of keeping with the con- tinuous experimental character of the whole passage. It is best to connect, therefore, with the thanksgiv- ing. — R.] — NT'v, the intervening state of faith, ex- pressed last in ver. 25. [Nvv is temporal^ in dis- tinction from ovv (ver. 25), which is inferential. Hence the continuance of this state is implied. — R.] No condemnation. [y.ardxQi,/(a, Verdam- mimgsurllieil, lenience of condemnation (Lange). See p. 184 (v. 16), where it is used in antithesis to di-y.alni/ia. It may be limited to the justifying act of God at the beginning of the Christian life, but, joined with ortU'r, seems to have a wider reference here. — R.] Origen, Erasmus, Luther, and others, explain : nothing worthy of condemnation ; but this is opposed by the rori;. See also ver. 34. Comp. chap. v. 16. Koppe generalizes nullce poence [Al- ford : no penal consequence of sin, original and actual], which so far at least belongs to the affair that even the temporal punishment, as 7 iminhtncnt, and as prelude to the final condemnation, is abol- ished in the case of Christians. And this is so, not only because their sins are forgiven (Parens), but because they are in Christ in consequence thereof. [The question of the reference to justification or sanctification must affect the interpretation of condemnation^ since ver. 2, beginning with y«^, eeems to introduce a proof. The position of the chapter in the Epistle, as well as a fliir exegesis of the verses, sustain the reference to sanctification. (Not to the entire exclusion of the other, any more than they are sundered in Christian experience.) We must, then, take no condemnation in a wide iense, either as deliverance both from sin and death (Forbes), or as having indeed a reference to the jua tifying act already past, but meanuig, rather, the continuance m a state of justification, culminating in final acquittal and glory. The point of conneo tion with ver. 24 (" death "), is the former refer, ence ; with the succeeding proof, the latter. Thii avoids sundering salvation into two distinct parts. Tlie significant phrase which follows favors thig view. Still, the position of the verse warrants us io finding a very distinct reference to the act of par don, as preceding (and involving as a gracious con« sequence) the work of sanctification. — R.] [To those wrho are in Christ Jesus, t 1? iv X (liar (J) ']tj(ToT<\ This does not mean pre- cisely, to have the Spiiit of Christ, or Ohrist in you (Meyer), but it denotes the permanent continuance in justification — a life whose effect is the life of Christ in us. [Tliis deeply significant Pauline phrase must never be weakened or limited. As to its be- ginnings, Augustine is excellent : ChristuK in )(omi- ne, iihi Jiden in corde. As to its continuance, Bucer: A Christo pendere aique ejus ■•■piritvs in omnibus ar/i. But the best explanation is John xv. 1-V, and Eph. i. 23, kc. Hodge says : in Ilim federally, vitally, by faith ; but the vital union seems alwaya prominent ; especially is it so here. — R.] On the addition, see Textual Ivoie. [Besidea what is there remarked, the question of connection suggests, that the interpolation may have been occa- sioned by a desire to relieve the apparent difficulty in making ver. 2 prove the justification of the be- liever. To do this, the clause which makes promi- nent the Christian walk, so easily borrowed from ver. 4, was inserted. — R.] Ver. 2. For the law of the Spirit of life, &c. [6 ya^ vofioq rov nvfVfiaroi; rTji; uoitj^ tv X()iaT<~) 'J 7/ (7 or]. Ver. 2 specifies the ground * why Christians are free from condcmna^ tion. The principal question here is, whether t» A'(;kttw is to be referred to the following tj/.trOi- Q(f)(Tfv, or to the foregoing, and how far to the fore- going ? Meyer, in accordance with Theodoret, Eras- mus, Riickert (not " Tholuek "), Olshausen, Philippi, and De Wette, has also connected the Iv X()i.ot6i with fjhvO. But this distorts the thought, as if that Spirit of life could possibly deliver withou) Christ. Certainly iv X^iano refers not alone to the foregoing Ce'^i; (Lutlier, Beza, and others) ; and L(r)i^ here is not the believer's subjective life in Christ, but Christ's original divine-human life itself. We must also not go back to tov nrn'/i. rTjq Cc^s alone (Flatt), but to the whole 6 i'6/'0<,- tot nnvfi, T. ^. (Calvin, Kolluer, Tholuck).f The fulness of life in Christ is the Spirit (see John vi. 63) ; it \i complete in itself, conscious, actual, and communi- cates itself as a unity with the Holy Spirit. It \i just for this reason, also, the glorification of thn the side of the law." This talves it as nominative absolute, passing judgment in advance on what God did, so as to give pronilnence to the inability of tho law, as well as a reason why God did it. On the grammatir cal objections to taking it as accusative alisolutc, see Meyer. 'ASvvaTOv maybe either active, = ij aSwafiia, or p.assive, = what was impossible. Tholuck urges the genitive in favor of the former, while Meyer contends that usage sup» ports the latter. — R.J CHAPTER VIII. 1-1 T. 2J>3 mar, nature ; tlie ethical force, however, lies in the genitive, which defines it: w/iose attribute and character was sin (Alford). The Orthodox fatliers (coiiip. Tiieodorct, Tlieophylact, Tertulliaii) rightly use this text. " Christ diil not appear in the flesh of sin, which was the Ebionite view, nor in the like- ness of fiusii, which was Docctic, but in the likeness of tiie flesh of sin, which is the Biblico-Pauline view" (Philippi). — K.] As He became truly man. He appeared in the full likeness of sinful flesh (Phil, ii. 7), and yet not in eciuality with it. Meyer : " So that He appeared in an external form, which was similar to human nature, contaminated with sin. Christ did not appear iv aa(j/.l a/iaiir., but also not Doeetically (contrary to Krehl)." See Tholuck's citation of the views of the Doeetoe, and of the Mystics (for example, Valentine Weigel, who held that the external body of Christ came from the Vir- gin,* but His inward body from heaven), as well as the opposite views of Dijjpel, Hasenkamp, Menken, and Irving. "According to them, 6/iolo>fia does not denote liJi-ouss, hue etpialiti/. But although Ofioioi; combines both meanings, yet that of like- ness alone belongs to tlie substantives o/ioun/ia and oiinidxni; ; besides, the othi^r meaning is contradicted by the analogy of Scripture in Heb. iv. 15." And on account of sin [y.ai nfftl a/taQ- tiaq. The xai connects with the preceding. If this be forgotten, tlie interpretation may be too largely affected by the clause which follows. — R.] This was the motive of His mission. But the con- nection by xai expresses a second condescension of God and His Son. The first was, that Christ appeared in the form of a sinner, of the servant of sin (see chap, vii.), of the aa^Jt a/iaijriai;, of the f\ilse (jl d/iasjt. itself has been vari- ously interpreted. Thomas Aquinas, of the passion of Christ on account of its likeness to sin ; Her- vxns, of death; Origen, Pelagius, Melanchthon, Cal- vin, Bucer, Baumgarten-Crusius, of the sin-oliering-j- rxan ; Theophylact, Maier, and others, the de- struction and removal of sin. Meyer : " It is rather t/ie vh le rcliition in which the mission of Ciirist stood to human sin ; " but this is already indicated by the foregoing explanation (see 1 John iii. 6). The mission of Christ was related to sin ; its aim an every side was its abolition. But tlie immediate effect of His mission was, that God, by the inno- cence of Christ's life in the flesh, distinguished and separated sin, as a foreign and damnable object, from the flesh. Condemned sin in the flesh {■/.arty.Qo'ufv xi]v aiia(>riav iv rv^ aaQxi. The article is • ['Wordsworth finds in our phrase an argument against the dojrm^ of the Inira;iculate Conceplion. — R.] t [This interpretation, adopted h\' Hodge and Stuart, is reiected by every Gennan comineutator of note, even by Philippi and Alford. The passages in the New Testament (Heb. X. 6, 8, 18 ; xiii. 11 ; Gal. i. -1) which seem to favor it, all contain a distinct reference to sacrifices, independently of TTcpl i;u.ap. In Gal. .. 4 (see »n /"co p. 13), the "gave himself" iutioduces the same thought. The wider mean- ing, of course, implies such an cxpi:\tion ; but it is not brought promin'ntly forward in this expression. (Philippi : Mm die Siiiiil'' mliiniid zu tilgend ; to which Meyer unne- •essarily objects, eiuce his own view includes this.) — R.] used here with anaoriav, the sH already re ferred to. This is a final argument against inter preting " sin " as = sin-offering, in the clause above. Wiietticr '• in the flesh " is to be joined with "coni demned," or with "sin," is a matter open to discus, slon (see below). — R.] To the general idea of tht mission of Christ : on. accotud of sin, this declara- tion is now added, as a specific idea, to describfl what His mission effected in relation to sin in tht Jlesh. And we must criticise the different interpret tatlons accordingly. Since the Redeemer, or God tlirough Him, performs a condemnatory deed, w( must especially avoid an incorrect generalization of the idea. Erasmus, De Dieu, and Eckermann, have very apjiropriately pointed out the thought, that He represented sin as damnable ; yet we must empha- size sitt in the fcsh, and add : He separated it from the flesh fundamentally in Christ, in order thereby to east it out from the flesh in the life of believers. Tills is, therefore, the sense : Christ, by becoming man in the flesh (which appeared to be the source of sin), and yet having a sinless fleshly nature, so maintained this slnlessness, and even holiness of Hia flesh, through His whole life, that He could give Hia flesh to His followers as a seal of His favor and aa the organ of His Spirit. By this means He made it manifest : 1. That sin does not belong to the flesh in itself, but is inherent in it as a foreign, unnatural, condemnable, separable, alienal^le, and abstractly spiritual element ; 2. That sin in the flesh is con- demned and rejected in its carnal appearance ; 3. That sin in the flesh should be separated from the entire human nature by means of the Spirit proceed- ing from Christ. Other explanations : 1. Allusions to the eradi- cation of the guilt of sin. This " is the prevailing ecclesiastical view in Origen, Chrysostom, &c. So, too, the Catholic expositors, with the exception of Justin ; the Protestant, with the exception of Beza ; even the Arminian and Socinlan writers, and, in- deed, the most of the later ones — Usteri, Riiekert, Baumgarten-Crusius, Philippi,* and Schmid (BibL Theoiy^ ; " Tholuck. For what has been and can be said in favor of this explanation, see, at length, in Tholuck, p. c92 ff. " Yet the absence of the orToD from Iv rfi aa^y.l (comp., on the contrary, Eph. ii. 5) is an obstacle." We may add, that the context is also an obstacle. The question has been, chap, iii., concerning Christ as the propitiator. Here He is represented as a " fountain of holiness." 2. Allusions to the removal of sinfulness. " The procession of the delivering Spirit of life from Christ is only clearly proved by ver. 3, in case there is in this verse the thought that Christ has gained the victory over sin by His pure and holy personality in His own humanity, and that this sinless Spirit now passes over by faith to believers ; " Tholuck. Thfl same writer adduces a number of the defenders of the obedientia aciiia ; especially Beza, of the Refor- mation period ; the following later expositors seem also to belong here : Winzer, Stier, Neander, Meyei De Wette, and Hofmann.f — Yet Tholuck finally turns to the allusion of this passage to the guilt of • [See Philippi's view below. Hodge is decided in hM preference for this iiterpretation, regarding all others aa arbitrary, and contrary to the context. — R.] t [So Alford, Schaf}'. Stuart makes this antithesis with ver. 1: "There is now ro KaTdxpi^a. for Christians; hii< there is a (caraKpi/na of their carnal :ippetit(S and di sires." This he justifies by finding here "a paranomasial use of words ; " but this mode of interpretation is of doubttUi propriety.— R.] 254 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. Bin, and thus we musL understand by frdoi (p. 394) not the i of Clirist, but " the shilul human na- ture, wliich, although only za.O' o/Koimua, was also possessed by Christ (Philippi, De Wette)." Tiie lat- ter does not belong here. But then there would also follow from this an atonement xa.9' 6/toio>iLici. The interpretation of the y.arix()ivf by interfeeit (Grotius, Reiehe, &e.), does not suit the nature of Christ, Meyer properly observes, that the y.aTi/.qivf has been ehosen in referenee to the xara/.^uHct in ver. 1. If we thus condemn ourselves, we shall not be con- demned ; and if that condemnatory process against sin in the flesh has passed from Ciirist upon us, tlie object of the future condemnation is removed. [Besides these views, Philippi advocates a pri- mary reference to the death of Christ, but includes the fact that thus sin is eo ipso done away and extir- pated, so that those who are in Christ Jesus liave both the pardon and the removal of sin, because of the indissoluble unity of botii in Him.* This suits the wider meaning of no condemnation (ver. 1). All interpretations deviate from the strict meaning of the verb ; the reference to punishment involves an added thought, not less than that to the extirpation of sin. Besides, the law could condemn sin, and, to a certain extent, punish it ; but its great weakness was its inability to remove sin. It is perfectly gra- tiitous to infer that the modern interpretation im- plies that we are justified on the ground of inherent goodness, since this assumes that ver. 1 refers only to declarative righteousness, and overlooks the fact thit the controlling thought is union to Christ. StU, should any prefer to find here an allusion to Christ's passion as a penal condemnation of sin, it mu;t be allowed as involved, though this must not thew be used to force the same meaning on the next ver5»^ — R.] [ hi tlie flesh. This is referred by many to the humun nature of Christ. Were this the exclusive reference, we would probably find ai'Tor. The ethi- cal sense must be adopted by those who join it with sin ; but against this is the meaning of sin as a prin- ciple (Alford), and also the indifferent sense of ffcij^S in the earlier part of the verse. It is better, then, to join it with the verb, and include in it human na- ture, our human nature, which Christ shared. f This eeems to be Dr. Lange's view, though he adds to it eome remarks which seem to echo his pseudo-plas- matic interpretation of chap. vii. We paraphrase the whole verse : " What could not be done by the law (was thus done), God sending His own Son in the likeness of that flesh, wiiich was characterized by sin, and, on account of sin, condemned entirely (both as to punitive and polluting effects) in that flesli (which He shared with us) that sin." Yet this is not an accomplished fact as respects our release from the power of sin ; that is to be fulfilled, and this end (iVa) is set forth in the next verse. — R.] Plainly, this verse declares the condemnableness of the sinful propensity. An expression of Irenaeus • [So "Wordsworth, "Webster and "Wilkinson, For'ies. This view is, indeed, open to the cliarRO of ii.definiteness; Dut as the chiuse sets forth both what the law could not do, and what Ood did do in sending Jesus Christ, there can he little ohjeetion to a wide mcaiiing here, provided ver. 4 be applied definitely to the work of sanctification. Dr. Lanae himself in the next paraRraph reaches the same point. — E.] t [Wordsworth: "Sin had tyrannized over us in our Resh, as the seat of its empire ; and by our flesh, as its in- litrument and weapon. But God used our flesh as an in- strument for o'ar deliverance, and for the condemnation of lin, and for the estatlishment of his own empir* in us." -SL] is important for the interpretation of this passage . condeinnav t pcccatu/n it jam fjiiasl condrmnafum ejecit extra carnem. The beautiful words of Augus- tine denote the objective medium by which the sin. lessness of Christ becomes our liberation : Quontodo liberq/vit? NiA quia reatum j xcatorum omnium remissione dlssolvit, ita u , quamvis adhuc ma. eat^ in peccatum non imputetur. Yet Bcza properly ol> serves : Neque nunc Apostolus a;iit de Christi inoi-te^ vt nostroruin peccatorum expialione, sed de Chrisfi incnrnatio7ie, et i^aturce nosirce corruptione per earn sublala. tonly, as far as the transmission of sinless- ness from Christ to us is concerned, we must bear in mind chap. vi. 1 &. By virtue of the connection of Christ with us. He has redeemed us; by virtue of His connection with us in our guilty misery, He has atoned for us ; and by virtue of tlie connection of His nature witli our flesh. He has given His flesh to die, in order that, in His spiritual position toward us, He might make us free from the flesh by the comnmnion of His Spirit as spiritual man, and, with the flesh of His risen life, implant in us a sanctified nature for the future resurrection. Ver. 4. That the righteousness [or reqmre. ment] of the law [Ira to ii i, ■/. a i nt ft a toT' vofiov. "]va, telle, introducing the pm-pose of the condemnation of sin in the flesh. Lange ren- ders duxaio)/! a: Gerechtsein. On the word, see p. 184. Stuart: the prece/d of the law; Hodge: the demands of the law (and also, the sentence of justification) ; Alford (following Meyer) : all the re- quirements of the law combined here as one. Per- haps it is more exact to paraphrase : that righteou«i act (viewing all the acts as a unit) which meets the requirements of the law. This is I^ange's view. — R.]. Meyer explains the duxaiioua ("quite simply, as chap. i. 32 ; ii. 26 ; comp. also chap. v. 16 ") as the requirement of the law ; that which the law stipu- lates. Yet we have seen above, that dy/.ciliniia is that which satisfies and fuliils the law. The right- eousness of life shall proceed from the righteousness of faith. Or, as the former proceeds originally from the latter as freedom in Christ, so shall it also pro- ceed actually from it in more gradual fulfilment — in the holiness of our life. The surprise of the expos- itors at the explanation of Chrysostom and Theodo- ret, 6 (Txunoi; to? ro/foc (see Tholuck, p. 396), is therefore without ground. Certainly that cannot mean, that the purpose of the law is to justify, but that ic is its limit and end ; see Rom. xiii. 10. Ex- planations : 1. The impnfatio of Christ's righteousness. Cal- vin : The transferrence to us of the destruction of guilt which Christ effected (Bidlinger, Beza, Calix- tus [Hodge], and others). Also the transferrence of Christ's obedience to us (Brenz, Aretius [llaldane, apparently] : therefore also the obed'entia actira). Kollner, Fritzsche, and Philippi : The smtcntia ab' solutoria is meant. Tholuck properly suggests, that the n/.ijiJoTiv and the tv are against these iiiterpre- tations. 2. The principle of the righteousness of life im- parted to believers. This view seems to indicate a slight fear of the thought that Christians shall be holy in the form of believing spontaneity. Tholuck cites Meyer's view: "in order that this fulfilment of the law become apparent in the whole conduct," and adds (in accordance with Olshausen), " then Christians would be regarded as though they were only the possessors of a principle fulfilling tho law." (MAPTER VIII. 1-17. 25C 8. The real holiness of believers proeceding from the principle of the rigliteousnetis of faith. [So Tholuck, Olshausen, Meyer, All'ord, John Brown, and Biaiiy otliers ; among tlicm some who refer the pre- vious verse to the vicarious sacrifice of Ciirist. — R.] The passive form (instead of nhii>iit(!«>i&ri iv flfiiv. The verb is passive. The fulfilment is wrought by God. In us ; not by us, not on us (some shade of this meaning is involved in all those inter- pretations which refer the verse to imputed right- eousness or holiness), and certainly not ammig us. The only objection to be considered is that of Cal- vin, and others : that, in this sense, the fulfilment docs not take ])lace. Granted — not at once, nor in this life, perhaps ; but surely this must be the end (comp. Eph. ii. 10 ; Col. i. 22), and that it is in the Apostle's nund here, is evident from the latter part of the chapter. — R.] Who walk not according to the flesh, &c. [ T o r i; /( // Kara a a ^ y. a 7r f ^ <• tt a t o T' i, since the most direct antithesis would be man's unholy spiritual life ? Universally, wherever the question is the an- tithesis of spirit and flesh in man himself, man is nevertheless considered as man, and not merely as flesh. [To this position of Dr. Lange there are de- cided objections. On tlie whole subject, the reader is referied to the Excursus, p. 235. It is better to hold (with Meyer, Alford, Hodge, and many others, against Stuart, Philippi, Lange, &c.), that nrf''/ta here refers to the Holy Spirit, and not to the spirit- ual nature imparted by the Holy Spirit, or the sub- jective spiritual life-principle (Lange). This seems to be required by ver. 2 (" the law of the Spirit of life ") and ver. 5 (" the things of the Spirit "), where nvivfia evidently means the Holy Spirit. — The E. V. has very properly expressed this by the use of the »pital letter. — R.] • [This peems douMful. It is true that this is n condi- tion of the final fulfilment, a condition which implirs the Divine Spiritual power as its cause ; hut this is not tha idea Which is prominent here. The method is now introduced, 80 as to point out, in what follows, the difference between the workings of the law of the Spirit of life, and the law of sin and death, which find their corresponding expressions in the phrases : according to the Spirit, according to the fteab.— R.l Second Pabagbaph, vxbs. &-S. Ver. 5. For those who are according to the flesh [oi y«^ xara ad()xa ovxfii^. The fivai, xard adfj/.a is identical with the tivnt iv aa()>ii, and the latter means, to be iii the carnal princijile, under the supposition that the cr«^J ia the absolute princij)le of life. This flrai, as the controlling tendency of life, is the source of the qijovfiv, and the c/'^ovfiv is the causa effidens of the 7Th(Jt.7Tarttv. — Meyer says that tiiis expression is a wider notion than that conveyed by " who walk after the flesh," which is not the case.* Tholuck explains flvai, y.ard ti : " To bear in one's self the qualities of something ; therefore = oi (Ta()>it.xoi." But it is these, first of all, in their principle of life, which then certainly results in the walk in the flesh. [It may be admitted that the principle of life is more prominent than the ethical state in this verse. Yet the phrases, " in the flesh " and " according to the flesh " (especially the former) include the character, istic state as well. Hence the view of Tholuck is preferable. — R.] Do mind the things of the flesh [ta t^S aaq Koq, qi (I ovo I' a t,v . The verb means, think of\ care for, strive after (Alford). Meyer notices the presence of the article, making ffc<(Ji objective, as though it were something independent. Tliis ac- cords with the view, that Spirit here is the objective and operative Holy Spirit. — R.] The false objects of the desires of the false independence of the flesh. The antithesis, those who are according to the Spirit, oi (>£ y.ard nvfv/ia, completes the thought that the two tendencies totally exclude each other. — [It also follows that tm roTi nvfi'ifiaroi;, the things of the Spirit, iihich belong to the Holy Spirit, and hence to the spiritual life, exclude the things of the flesh. Dr. Hodge well remarks, there- fore, that the latter phrase means " not merely sen- sual things, but all things which do not belong tc the category of the things of the Spirit." — R.] Ver. 6. For the mind of the flesh is death [to yaQ if:()6v7jiiia rtji; aa()x6i; ^-ai'aTov]. The connection here formed by yd^ is singular. Tholuck : " It could serve to prove only the second half of ver. 5, while the correspondence of the mem. bers of the sentence leads us to expect a proof of both halves of ver. 5. Thus the view gains proba- bility, that, according to the Greek and Hebrew (^3) use of language, the proof in ver. 6 performs for that in ver. 5 the parallel service of assigning reasons for the rolq nrj, x.r.).., in ver. 4." Meyer makes the j'a(> the proof of the second half of ver 5, ol (U y.ard TTVfT'/^ta. "Motive why they make the interests of the nviTnia the end of their eSbrts." f _ We regard, however, the yd^ as proof that the tivai, xard has a corresponding qqovtZv and (f^6rri!ia\ as a result. For the adfj^ has a q>^6vtj/iia., yet all its q^ovTiua is notuing but death ; • [It were better to say that it is the eame idea under a different aspect. In ver. 4, with reference to the outward life ; here, with reference to the actual state. — R.] t [In tth ed., Meyer ag:rees with Tholuck, taking thii second yap as explicative, according to classical usage. So Euckert, Stuart, Hodpe. (De "Wettc, Alford, follow the view attributed to Meyer above.) The contrast, already indicated in ver. 4, is continued here. — B.l X l^povriixa (Lange: Gf^ivvnvg ; Bengel: sentiment, in the French) means the disposition, which manifests itself in the ^pofetv (ver. 5). The E. V. is therefore conect ii thought, though not in form.— R.l 256 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. oot only ainiiig at death against its will, but also proceeding from death, moving in the element of death ; that is, in constant dissolution of the unity between life and its source of life, between spiritual and physical life, and even between the opposition of the desires of the individual members. The copula, to be supplied here, is not, has as its results, Out, is, ainoimf.s to. Fliili[)pi : " Death is here con- ceived as present (comp. 1 Tim. v. 6 ; Eph. ii. 1, 5), not merely as a result, but as a characteristic mark, an immanent definition of the carnal mind." — R.] [But the mind of the Spirit, to di (/. (j 6vtj- fia roTi nvfvfiaroi;.] The opposite is the tf^ovrifta ToTi nvf Vfiaroq (for the tivai, xara Tiv. is itself TTi'.) ; it is life and peace.* It is therefore from true life, moving in life, directed to life. Peace means the soul of life. Ojjposition is the separation and dissolution of life ; peace with God is connection with the source of life ; peace with one's self, a blessed sense of life ; peace with the government of God and His world, an infinitely richer life. The third characteristic must be special- ly emphasized in both clauses : directed to the end : life and peace. Ver. 7. Because the mind of the flesh. [Ji,6Tv introduces a proof, here confined to the former half of ver. 6. This proof hints at an an- tithesis to both life and peace, the latter being more evident, as it is in human consciousness also. — R.] The reason why ((<(>6vtjiia, &c., == &av., lies in its opposition to the source of life, its enmity against God [£'/"9('a ili; i9f6i'], with which the dis- pleasure of God necessarily corresponds. f Since the Apostle does not prove the second half, it fol- lows that here the effort of the flesh constitutes the principal point of view. Enmity against God is, in the first degree, the actual opposition to God in almost unknown (but not unconscious) form ; but afterwards the opposition established also in the consciousness. Melanchthon appropriately says : " Loquitur Paulus principnlrter de cogitationibtm de deo, quales i,unt in mente non renafa, in qua simnl magna confusio est diibitationum, deinde et de affec- Hbus erga deum. In socuris est contemtus judicii deiy in perpere factis indignatio et fremitus adversus deum.''^ For it does not submit itself to the la-w of God [tw 5'«C V 6/1(1) To'i /.6i; ; that is, a adi>i morbidly excited and deraon- ized by a selfish spirituality. [Cumi). the Excursus in cliap. vii. That chapter is a proof of thi;-. decla- ration. The fact is undoubted. Paul is but declar- ing the cause of the manifestation of enmity to God in the form of opposition to His law, the inability of the carnal man to be subject to it. The question of ability to believe is not under di.scussion, yet Pe- lagianism and legalism are obviously precluded by this statement. — R.] Ver. 8. And those -who are in the flesh cannot please God [oi <)« iv aaQ/.i iJvTff fy f (J) d(j ta ai, v d I'l %' avT ao. The E. V strengthens di into so then, following Beza, Calvin, and otl*ers, who made it = ovv. (So Hodge.) Ii is much belter, with De Wette, Philippi, Jlcyer, to consider it metabatic. It continues the thought of the first clause of ver. 7. There seems to be no ne- cessity for assinning a supjjressed /({')•, as Alforc. does. On tliis account we render and instead of but. — R.] "OvTfi; iv (Ta^/.i =: ovr*^* -/.ard (Ta^» y.a., but the expression here is stronger ; see above. The incapacity in ver. 8, then, follows from the in- capacity of ver, 7. It is saitl, in a mild way, that they are objects of the Divine displeasure, children of wrath. But the expression is significant, in that it destroys the notion of those who are legalists, and rely on the righteousness of their works, and who, although oTTft,- IV aa^jxt, fancy that they can merit the pleasure of God by their works and endeavors. For we must by no means lose sight of the fact, that the Apostle does not speak merely of the gross ser- vice of sin, but also of an observance of the law, wliich accepts the law as merely external, as y(idiifia and adfji. [The connection renders obvious what is distinctly stated elsewhere, that this is no negative position, involving only negative results. The mind of the flesh is death. — R.] Third Paragraph, vers. 9-11. Ver. 9. But ye are not in the flesh, &c. [('/(fit; (it, z.T.A. /It is distinctive (Stuart).— If so be that the Spirit of God dwell in yoii, ilntQ nvfvftci. Ofov oixti iv h/ilvl. The antithesis. The more specific exhortation does not appear here, but in ver. 12. The t'lntQ may be thus distinguished from uy( : it (= " provided that") generally expresses slight doubt, while nyi expresses rather an assurance in the sense of if in- deed. Yet the fXni^Q here must be understood as only purely coiulitional, in conformity with the an- tithesis by which the Apostle represents the stand- point of the spiritual life of believers as purely fun- damental and ideal. AV^ith such a representation, the application to individuals can only take plaeo with an tXTii^i) ; likewise without positive doubt. Chrysostom and Olshausen take it as innStjnf^, qunndo quidcm ; Tholuck and Meyer prefer the hor tatory construction, on account of the antithesis. [It seems most natural to account for the condi- tional form, by admitting " an indirect incitement to self-examination" (Meyer). JlvfTfta is without the article, yet it must mean the Holy Spirit ; henc« CHAPTER VIII. 1-17. 257 we claim this as its usual meaning throughout tlie passage. The use of TTviv/ian, seemingly in (lis- Unction from nvtvfia, is not against tliis, since, iu the first clause, tlie Spirit is represented as the ele- vievt in which tliey live ; in the second, as tlie in- dwelling power causing them to live iu tljis element. ■ — On o I x f r, comp. 1 Cor. iii. 16; vi. 17, 19; 2 Tim. i. 14 ; John xiv. 23. — In you must not be weakened to among you. — R.] Now if any man hath not, &c. [ft di rtt; nvirfia X(Ji(JToTi ova e'/ft. The antithesis is not very strong; (Vt may well be rendered n?ri, 60 can because of righteousness [()Kt ()'t xcttoffrr (ji'] only mean, to nniiiitain and develop the righteousness of laith in the rij^hteous- ness oi life. According to Meyer, the junHtia i n- putata is meant, as the foundation ol the Ui>>j. (The most of the elder expositors, together with Riickert, &c., favor tiie same view.) But then the Am would iuive to be construed with the genitive. Tiie reference to tlie righteousness of life (Erasmus, Grotius, De Wette, Pliilippi [Hodge, Alford], and Others) is opposed by Meyer in the words : " lie- tause the rigliteousness of life can never be perfect. It can never be the ground of the uotj. But the question is not the ground of the ^id/j, but the greats er promotion of life, so that it may prove itseif to be purer life. The concern is, to preserve spotless the white robe of bestowed righteousness, and, being clad in it, to strive for the crown of righteousness." (Meyer holds, according to this, that the a/ia^T. does not imply our own individual sin, and thus, too, that the tSix. does not imply our own " righteous- ness.") In harmony with the sense, many exposi- tors, particularly Calixtus, connect i\\e justit.a impu- tata with the inchonta* Ver. 11. But if the Spirit [?t Sk rb nvfv- ficc^. The Apostle here prepares his transition from his description of adoption, regarded ax a /.arfial tpirltual life, to his description of the glory in whicii hod I and xpirit i^hall be in perfect hormo7ii/, when the body shall be glorified into the perfect organ of the Spirit. Meyer thus construes the connection : "After ver. 10, death still retains some power — that over the body ; Paul now removes this." Of him that raised tip Jesus from the dead, &C. [ T o r tyt i(javTOi; J tjn o Zv in vi- x (j w v , x.T.A.]. The spiritual resurrecticm must be followed by the physical ; it is a prophecy of the physical resurrection. For the author of the spiritual resur- rection is the Spirit of the wonder-working God, which has raised Christ, and elevated Him to the majesty of tlie glorifled lite. What the Spirit [now dwelling in you] has done to Him, in conformity with the connection of body and spirit, He will also do to His members (see Eph. i. 19 S.). He has raised Jesus from the dead — that is, as the first-fruits of ti>e resurrection. Therefore He Will quicken even your mortal bodies, &c. [ C ") 77 o t // fT f t ncii T « x) r >j T n (J 10 H m a Vfimv, x.r.).. Tlio use of the word Ovijrci, mor- tal, immediately after vfy.jjov (ver. 10) seems to jus- tify the reference of the latter to physical death ; as, indeed, ffo7zoifj Cfu also refers to the resurrection, the choice of the expression yet indi- cates, at the same time, the holiness of the cor- porealness by the operation of tlie resurrection- power of the Spirit, as this holiness constitutes the transition and interjiosition for the final miracle of the resurrection (see 2 Cor. v. 5). From the very nature of the case, the question here can be neither an etiiical vivifieation alone, nor a physical one alone ; but the idea of vivifieation comprises both these (according to Calvin, De Wette, Philippi, and others). Calvin : " Non de ultima resurredione,* (]uce momeiito fiet, habdur sermo, sed de contitnia spiritus opera'ione, quce rclinquias carrds paulathn mortifieans coelestcm vitam in nobis irniiaurat" But De Wette properly observes, against the notion that the spiritual power of resurrection alone can con- summate the process of renewal (in conformity with the reading €tA€'Tat (so Fritzsche). This is harsh, and most commontiiiors take the genitive as that of design or result, according to a very common usage. — E.] t [Tlie most cumprehensive ide:\ of death seems to he demanded by the context. Granting that the antithesis is iiari (ver. 10)", the present and spiritnal reference is still re- quited Vor. 6 foiTQs the best guide to the meaning of the terms here (so Tlioluck).— E.] J [The New Testament uses the word generally in ma- lam pitrtrm ; and so here, whether in a more or less re- ttnetcd sense. It does not refer to the definite acts so strictly as ep-va, but includes the general conduct, &c. (Phi- Ulli)-E.l section requires a general interpretation of the word. [Of the body, t o r< a di /< « t o g . See Textual Note ".] Tiie expression (ji!iiicito^ has been verj strange to many ; therefore Coud. D. E, V. G., and tiie Vulgate, read ) his statement. The verb is aorist, referring to a definite time (when they became Chris- tians). — 11.] Meyer translates : " A spirit of bond- age, adoption." We hold that the definitions are sufficiently united by the exclusive antithesis. What must we unilerstand by the expression, spirit of bondu/e? Tholuck : "The negative form of this clause caused the earlier expositors great difficulty, since the question is not a comnmnication of the spirit in the Old Testament, and since the spirit there imparted, so far as it was a spirit of bondage, could not be derived from God ; and finally, as the 7TVH'/ta, which, in consequence of the antithesis of 7TVH\ua vloO talas, must be viewed as the Holy Spirit, could produce the spirit of bondage." Ex- planations : 1. Augustine incidentally : The devil is the au- thor of the slavish spirit (lleb. ii. 14, 15). Luther: The spirit of Cain in opposition to Abel's spirit of grace (Fritzsche : mahis dcemon, &c.). 2. Ciirysostom, Tlieodoret, and (J"jcumenius : The gift of the law itself, as nvH'nan-y.ij, according to chap. vii. 14. Likewise Augustine, elsewhere : The spirit of the external gift of the law : idem, spiritus in, tahiilis lap dels in liinore, in tabulis cordis in dilcctloiie. 3. Most of the later expositors : The same Holy Spirit is described in His twofold operation ; here, as far as He exercises His penal office (John xvi. 8). In that case, the operation of the mere attritio not designed by the Spirit is made prominent. 4. Grotius, Philippi, and others : nv. is in both cases a subjective spiritual disposition. [Philippi defends this view very ably. Stuart : a servile spirit ; a filial spirit. Alford admits also the subjec- tive sense. De Wette remarks, that tiie objective Bource is indicated in the verb " received." — R.] 5. Fj'itzsche, Meyer, and Tiioluck : nv. dovk. denotes what the received filial spirit is not. Like- wise Monachus, in the seventh century. Therefore the spirit of bondage is regarded as a hypothetical antithesis. This is undoubtedly correct, in a meas- ure, so far as the Spirit which they have received can be regarded only as a Spirit of adoption ; but a spirit of bondage would be really a perverse spirit. [It should be remarked, that all views which give TivtT'iiii, a subjective meaning, must either take it in the fiist case as = disposition, and, in the second, = the human spirit as influenced by the Holy Spirit, thus having no exact correspondence ; or, assume a hypothetical antithesis in the first case. It may be added, that it is difficult to account for the use of the word " receive " (especially the definite aorist), if these views be accepte, wherein, refers to a state or element of life. Out of this comes the subjective feeling, the cry, Abba, Father. The genitive then points to an effect as in bondage, which also has a descriptive clause appended. — R.] De Wette: '■'■ v'loOtaia, strictly, adoption instead of a child ; " which meaning can be so urged, that they who were by nature the children of wrath (Eph. ii. 3), have been adopted, or appointed (Eph. i. 15), the children of God (Fiitzsche, Meyer, and Olshau- sen). The same commentator says : " But it is a question whether — as even in the Old Testament (Deut. xxxii. 6), and in the New Testament (John i. 12 ; 1 John iii. 9 ; 2 Peter i. 4), and also in Paul, agreealjly to the new creation (Gal. vi. 15), the idea of transformation into children of God occurs— there is not, consequently, in v'lof). rather the idea of sonship, of the real relation of children to the father (Luther, Usteri, &c.), than of adoption (Fritzsche, Meyer, and Tholuck). The expression, nvfT'fta I'ioO^., and the use made of the word in ver. 23, harmonizes better with this view." Tholuck, on the contrary, appeals to Eph. v. 1 ; Rom. ix. 4 ; to the designation of the adopted child by vioq f)iT6(; {nioi; tianohjTOi;) ; and to the adoptio filio- rum of the Vulgate. But Chrysostom, Theodoret, and other Greek expositors, on tiie other hand, have taken the word also in the sense of tioriji;. It is easy to see that the Apostle chose the expression in order to distinguish the children of faith, as adopted through grace, from the riot; iVy^o^•. But he had the further reason of not wishing to press the idea : for then he could not have said, with reference to the Hebrew law of inheritance, " And if children, then heirs." Likewise, the new birth by Christ and His Spirit denotes real t'lol. [The actual sonship has already been mentioned in ver. 14. It seems more natural, then, to take this expression in the confirma* tory verse in its literal sense, adopiiov, as implying the method of their becoming sons ; the more so, as an appeal is made to the experience of the readers, CHAPTER VIII. I-IY. 261 irhioh experience would revert to the time wlien they passed out of one state into the otlier. — R.] Wherein we cry (1 Cor. ii. 3) [iv oi y.(id- toftfv. Tlie E. v., u'herebi/, is not exact. Ilodge: " wliich enables us to address God as our Father." Sucli an instrumental sense of the preposition is very doubtful. The first person is here used, proba- bly from the deep feeling of fellowship which the thought awakens. — K.] The iv here designates the tipirit as 1)lie principle [element] of life, which has the full Tia^otjrfla as its result (Hcb. x. 19-23). Jv^ce^fM', loud prai/uig ; the voluntary, chil'.like ex- clamation. " Chrysostom raises the doubt, that, even in the Old Testament, God is called the Father of Israel ; and he replies to it, by saying that the Jews did not use this term in their prayers ; or, if they did, it was only t| olxtlai; liiavuiai;, and not a;i6 7ivfr/.iaTi.x7ji; tyf^ytlat; vavovfifvoi. Yet God certainly has the rtame of Father in the Old Ti^sta- nient, only in the same inconjplete sense as the peo- ple tlie name of son — namely, as founder and pro- tector of the people (Jer. iii. 4, 19, and elsewhere), and always in reference to the community, and not to the relation of the individual ; " Tholuek. In the Apocrypha, lie is first addressed thus by indi- viduals (Book of Wisdom xiv. 3 ; Sirach xxiii. 1 ; li. 14). But we must not overlook the fact that, even in the Old Testament, the centre of the filial relation is the Messiah (2 Sam. vii. ; Ps. ii. ; Isa. ix.); and that, consequently, from the perfect New Testament centre of the relation of the Father to Christ, all via !) fata, extends. Abba, Father. 'Jfifia [ X2X ], the Syriac name for father ((Jul. iv. 6 ; Mark xiv. 36). Why is the TTurrji) added? Explanations: 1. The usual view (Riickert, Reiche, Kollner, ^e ) is, the nmiji) helps to explain the Syriac Abba. .'So Ilodge : " Paul chose to call God his Father, in lis own familiar tongue. Having used the one word, "lowcver, the Greek, of course, became necessary for Oiose to whom he was writing." But Paul does not dways deem it necessary thus to translate (comp. I Cor. xvi. 22) ; and in the three eases where this phrase occurs, the usual mark of interpretation iTorT trttv) is wanting. — R.] 2. The repetition of the name is an expression \( childlike fondness (Chrysostom, Theodore of liopsvestia, and Grotius [Alford] ). 3. An expression of God's fatherhood for Jews wfid Gentiles (Augustine, Anselm, Calvin, Estius, and t thers). 4. The name " Abba " has passed from Jewish into Christian prayer, and has received, through Clirist himself, the consecration of a special sanctity. Therefore the Greek-speaking Christians retained the word as a proper noun, and added thereto the naTt'j(> as an appellative, so that the Abba, Father, temained in force ; Meyer. [So De Wette, Philippi, liglitfoot; comp. Lange's Vomrn. Galatinns, p. 98. ■ — R.] This would be, in reality, a duplication arising from a misconception. Tholuek unites with Luther, iu favor of Chrysostom's view. Luther : " It is the calling to, just as a young child lisps to its father in ' simple, childlike confidence." If it be necessary to refer to the passage in Mark, the nar/](> there un- doubtedly serves as an explanation. It is without any admixture of misconception that a liturgical use (as Hallelujah, Hosanna, Amen) has been made of this pa&iage, because, in the most significant manner, Vhero is in one salutation an invocation of the Father of Christ and the Father of Christians, the Fathe/ of the believers of the Old Testament and the New, the Father of Jews and Gentiles, and thus of thr Father of all believers in all nations. Ver. 1(5. The Spirit itself [ai'iro to TTVfu fia. The parallel passage, Gal. iv. 6, is concl isiv» in favor of a reference to the Holy Spirit, even if th« context did not demand it. — R.] u-Jvt6. Not i/u same (Erasmus, Luther), but the Spirit itself (Vul. gate : ipue f

is added. But we thereby approach nearer the explanation, that the n%'6 ii o v^. We must supply i(T/ both times. The beiiiff Iicirs arises from the very idea and right of a child (Gal. iv. 7).f Heirs of G-od [^x/.r] (j ov6/i oi, /tev &foTi'\. The iulieritance is the kingdom of glory. God, as the eternally living One, is like the earthly testator, in that He gives His children every tiling for an in- heritance ; but He gives them himself as the treas- ure of all treasures. He will be their inheritance, as they are to be His inheritance — a relation prefig- ured already in the Old Testament (Exod. xix. 5 : Israel the peculiar treasure of God. Num. xviii. 20 ; Jehovah is the inheritance of the Levites, as they are His inheritance, clcrus). As He himself will be all iu all, so shall His children receive with Him, in His Son, every thing for an inheritance (1 Cor. iii. 21 ff.). In Luke xv. 12 the inheritance, in another sense, is spoken of. [Including in this the highest idea of eternal life, the declaration of the Apostle (ver. 13) : ye sliall live, is abundantly proven. — R.] And joint-heirs with Christ [a wx ).}]() o - voiioo fit XotrrToTi]. Conformably to the cio- lO-frr/a, the viol are in the most intimate fellowship with the rioc, to which the common inheritance cor- responds ; Gal. iv. 7. Tne second designation char- acterizes the Divine inheritance of believers in its majesty, its infinite extent, and its nature, as the kingdom of perfect love in the glorified world. The view urged by Fritzsche, Meyer, and Tholuck, that here Paul does not have in mind the Hebrew, but the Roman right of inheritance (with reference to adopted children), Philippi correctly terms " an tm- theocratic reference to the Roman right of inherit- ance." \ * [On the witness of the Spirit, see Doffr. N'ofe ", and the works iv.ferrcd to in the li-t of Homiletical Literature nn this section. — R.] t [In Gtlatinns, polemic necessity occasions a fuller and somewhat modified statement of this idea; see Lange's Corn in. in Inco. — B,.] i [The Jewish law pravc a douhle portion to the eldest Bon; the Roman law made all children (adopted ones also) equal. (So the Attic law.) The point of this controversy about the reference to Jewish or Roman law of inheritance, Is, that the former presents believers as heritors, sharing through the gnico of Christ, the chief Heir, the latter, in In virtue of ttitir souship. Philippi calls the latter "pro- If SO be that we suffer with him [iinf^ id it except him who feels it. It is " a new name," which nobody knows except him who receives it ; Rev. ii. 17 (ver. 16). It is a great dignity, indeed, to be heirs of God, and to stand with Christ as though in the possession of equal rights. For it is the inheritance of the Al- mighty God, and therefore consists of eternal pos. sessions. Yet such an inheritance has the certalc CHAPTER VIII. 1-lY. 265 eondition of having previously suffered with Christ !ver. 17). Rous : Being in Christ Jesus presupposes long- ing for Clirist Jesus ; flcuing to llini ; submission to Him ; being planted in Him as the Vine ; union with Ilim ; and, consequently, faith in Him ; just as even the continued being, or remaining, in Clirist Josus, rests upon a continuous faith in Him (vers. 1-4). — The man who is in Christ Jesus does not walk any more after the flesh ; and thus the right- eousness, or righteous requirement, of the law, which is spiritual, is fulfilled in him ; it is so far ful- Slled as his spiritual life and walk in the Spirit ex- tend (ver. 4). — lu short, just as the Spirit com- prises spiritual-niindedness, and walking after the Spirit comprises every thing which is good, praise- wortliy, holy, and well-pleasing to God ; so do the words flesh, canial-miudedncss, and walking after the flesh, comprise every thing wicked and sinful (vers. 6-8). — Suffering does not precede glory by mere accident ; it does so by God's design, and makes fit for great glory. It is only a nature crushed by suffering that can be glorified. But the suffering must be : 1. A suffering with Christ ; 2. In fellow- ship with Christ ; 3. In the likeness of the suffering and mind of Christ. Then will we be also raised to glory with Clirist, in whom we are by fiiith (ver. 17). — Bengel : The carnal mind cannot, and may not. Hence comes the pretext of impossibility with which those seek to excuse themselves who are even here convicted as carnal (ver. 7). Gerlach : What seems remote and difficult to man under the law, is made easy by grace ; indeed, is even accomplished by grace (vers. 2, 3). — Both flesh and spirit are mighty and active forces in man (ver. 5). — " The Spirit should be as much the Lord of our life, as the iielmsman is guide of the ship, and the driver is guide of his team ; " Chrysostom (ver. 14). — The Spirit of adoption is the Spirit of the S. to the final consummation to which it pointa. At the betinning of ver. 21, Lange reads denn, Alford, because, but Tholuck, Philippi, Meyer, Amer. Bible Union, Noycs, five Anglican clergymen, &c., favor lliaf, introducing the purport of the hope. * Ver. 23.— [^0, or 'hin should be suijplicd ; the meaning is: Act only is this so. The E. V. is therefore inexact. Ths latest revision* adopt so. ' Ver. 23. — [There is considerable variation in the test here, not affecting the sense, however. B. reads vet • vToi Ti)!/ a.na.pxh" toO jt yeiijiiaTos exofres Kai avroC; adopted by Tischcndorf, Steyer, Lai ge, Trecelles. The Bee. Inserts ^^et? after the second Kai; N. A. C, Lachmann, Alford before it, so Tregelles, in brackets ; While D. F. G., Fritzsche insert the same after the ./?.)•.<< Kai. The original reading was probably that of B. ; riiicii being in- serted as an expbmatory gloss, hence the variation in position (Meyer). As Kai avTot is" repeated, it is better to pett- ier even we ourselves in both cases. * Ver. 23. — [D. F. G. omit vio0efLe6a. ( aorist) ; D. K. !>., Griesbach, Tiscliendoif, Trpoo-euf o /xeSa. Both are grammatical, either may have been original ; but .ne former is slighU »y better attested. 's Ver. 26.— ['YTTep i)iiiav {Rec. N^. C. K. L.) is omitted by Lachmann, Tischcndorf, Meyer, Alford, "Wcidsworth, Lange, Tregclles, on the authority of N'. A. B. I). F. (j. Trobably added for closer definition. '* Ver. 28.— [N. A B. insert o fleds (as subject) after a-vvepyel . It is omitted in C. D. F. K. L., and rejected by most editors. The seeming necessity of some such subject led to its insertion, which was reudeted easier by the pres« ence of 6t6y ^immediately before). Laclimmn, who retains it, inserts to before ayaOov, on insuffic ent authority. >' Ver. 33.— [In vers. 33-35, Lange adopts the punctu;ition followed in the E. V., except in this trifling particular. Very many, however, place an interrogation point after each clause. (See Alford, who incorrectly quotes Meyer ai favoring ths view.) Tischendorf and Meyer place a cah/n after SiKaiwy, and al.so alter vnep rnxiov (ver. 04). Tregeiles a comma after the fonner, a colon after the latter. The relation of the clauses, which involves the punctua- tion, is discussed in the Exeg. Antes. '* Ver. 34.— [After Xpi< ie /cat (Ji'C.) is supported by D. F. K. L. ; icat is omitted in N. A. B. C. (by Jjachmann, Tregeiles, braoketted by Alford), but, as Meyer suggests, was easily overlooked between 6E and Ey. 1* Ver. 37. — [Instead of the well-supported toO ayaTrr'ia-avTOi, D. E. F. G., and many Latin fathers, read : to* ayanrja-avTa. ; objectionable on both critical and exegetical grounds. '''> Ver. 38. — [Tlie order in X. A. B. C. D. F. is cure €v«o-twto, outc /xeAAo vra, ovre 6 vvajaeis ; adopted by Grie.sbich, Lachmann, Tischendorf, Meyer, Alford, Tregeiles, and ciitical editors generally. The U'Cipta put8 cure fiuyd/iiets first (K. L., some versions). This may readily be accounted lor ; Suva^iis is associated with ayyikoi or apx"? in Eph. i. 21 ; I Cor. xv. 24 ; 1 Peter iii. 22, hence the sei'ming necessity for a closer connection here. In Ool. ii. 15, fiuva^eis is omitted, but in all the passages cited, efouo-i'a is found ; hence we find it as a variation here, but very •lightly attested. ^^ Ver. 39— [Tts ktiVis cannot, of course, mean creation here. — E.] EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. Summary. — ^The witness of Divine adoption, im- parted by the Holy Spirit to believers, comprises at the same time, according to ver. 17, the security that they will be heirs of future glory. Then, too, the physical body — which, in their spiritual life in this world, they mistrust, because of its enervation through sin, which they must strictly control by walking in the Spirit, but in which, even here, ac- cording to ver. 11, a germ of its glorification into the psychico-physical existence is formed — shall be transformed into the glory of the Spirit ; and all nature, at present made partaker of corruption, yet groaning and travailing to be spiritualized, shall Bhare in the glory also, as the transformed, illumi- nated, and appropriated organ of the kingdom of spirits. Ver. 17 serves as a foundation for the sec- tion which now follows, as it terminates the previous section as a final inference. A. The present and subjective certainty of future glory. _ Believers, from their present and subjective sense of life, iire certain of future glory ; accordingly, all the sufferings of the present time are to them as birth-pangs for future glory. This holds good, first, in respect to the pressure toward development, and the longing and patient waiting of nature in its pres- ent state ; and this pressure toward development corresponds with that of God's kingdom. It holds good, secondly, in regard to the birth-pangs of God's kingdom, as manifested, first, in the groanings, long- ings, and hopes of believers, and in the unutterable groanings of the Spirit, who intercedes for them. Although believers have the Spirit of adoption, it is because they have it that they still groan for its con- summation (2 Cor. V. 1). Tlieir principial salvation is not their finished salvation ; but the hitter is testi- fied by their hope and confirmed by their patience. But the Spirit proves himself in their hearts by un- utterable groanings, as a vital pressure, which har- monizes in this life with the sense of the future ex- ercise of God's authority, and points to the future objective certainty of glory as founded in the will of God ; vers. 18 (17)-'27. B. The future and objective certainty of ylory. The love for God by believers is the experience »f God's love for them. But therein lies the secur- ity of an omnipotent power for its completion — a power which nothing can oppose, but to which every thing must serve. The certainty of the deci-sive y./.Tjffi-i; is the centre and climax of the life, from which the groundwork, as well as the future of life, is glorified. It points backward to God's purpose, and forward to its consummation. The periods be- tween the pre-temporal, eternal purpose of God, and its future, eternal consummation, are the periods of the order of salvation (ver. 29). That this way of salvation leads through suffering to glory, accord- ing to the image of Christ's life, is secured by the omnipotent decision with which " God is for " (ver. 31) His children — a decision which is secured by the gift of Christ for them, by their justification, their reconciliation, redemption, and exaltation in Christ ; in a word, by the love of Christ. This love leads them in triumph through all the temptations of the world, because it is the expression of Christ's own conquest of the world (vers. 28-37). C. The unity of the subjective and objective cer- tainty of future glory in the glorious life of love already attained. Life in the love of Christ is exalted above all the powers of the world (vers. 38, 89). — Kindred sec- tions : John xvii. ; 1 Cor. xv., and others. Tholuck : " This inheritance will far outweigh all suffering, and must be awaited with steadfast hope (vers. 18-27). But as far as we are concerned, we can suffer no more injury ; the consciousness of God's love in Christ rests upon so impregnable a fotmdation, that nothing in the whole universe can separate 'him' from it "(vers. 28-39). — Meyer finds, in vers. 18-31, "grounds of encouragement for the avfind(r/ft.r, iva x. (T('V()oi. To wit: 1. The future glory will far outweigh the present suffering (vers. 18-25). 2. The Holy Spirit supports us (vers. 26, 27). 3. Every thing must work together for good to them that love God " (vers. 28-31). Undoubted- ly these tilings are grounds of encouragement ; yet the Apostle evidently designs to encourage by a copious and conclusive didactic exposition of the certainty of the Christian's hope of future glory, in face of the great apparent contradictions of this hope — an exposition which, in itself, has great value. [Alford (vers. 18-30) : " The Apostle treats of the complete and glorious triumph of God's elect, through sufferings and by hope, and the blessed renovation of all things in and by their gloriSca. tion." (Vers. 31-39): "The Christian has ue re» I CHAPTER VIII 18-39. 269 •oil to fear, but all reason to hope ; for nothing can separate him from God's love in Christ." — Hodge, making the theme of the chapter " the security of the helievcr," finds, in vers. 18-28, a proof of this " from the liict that they are sustained by hope, and aided by the S[)irit, under ail their trials ; so tiiat every thing eventually works toijelher for their good." Ill vers. 29, 30, another proof " founded on the decree or purpose of God." In vers. 81-39, yet another, founded " on llis infinite and unchanging love."— K.] First Paraokaph, vers. 18-27. Ver. 18. For I reckon, &c. [Xoyiiioftai, yd^f f.rJ.. I'df) connects this verse with ver. 17, introducing a reason why the present suftlrings 6liould not discourage (De Wette, Philippi). Cal- vin : Nique vero mo/esium nobis dibet, ni ad cce/eston gloriam per varina offiictionex proccdeu urn, est, quan- (loquiiJei/i, &c. Stuart prefers to join it to " glorified with Him ; " " we shall be glorified with Christ, for all the sutlerings and sorrows of the present state are only tem[)orary." The connection seems to be with the whole thought which precedes. The verb is thus expanded by Aiford : " I myself am ono who have embraced this cour.se, being convinced that." It is used as in chap. iii. 28; see p. 136. — K,] .Now by his view of the magnitude of future glory, as well as by his conviction of its certainty, he esti- mates the proportionate insignificance of the suffer- ings (certainly gi'cat when considered in themselves Alone) of the present time, since they, as birth-throes, lire the preliminary conditions of future glory. Insignificant, olix atua , not of weight ; a stronger expression lor avdtM. They are not synonymous.* The vvv y.ai()6i; is the final, decisive time of development, with which the aiwv oliro(; will terminate. In comparison -nrith the glory which shall be revealed [;r^6i; tijv fi iXXovaav (i6i.av aTTo y.akv(f' O-tjvav. On n^oq after ovk aita, in the sense of in relation to, in comparison with, see Tholuck, Philippi f« fcro. — R.] Ttjv //i?.).ov- aav is antecedent, with emphasis. [To this Aiford objects]. That glory is ever approaching, and there- fore ever near at hand, though Paul does not regard its presence near in the sense of Meyer, and others. — In us [see Textual Note ']. The fli; jy/zay does not mean, as the Vulgate and Beza have it, in nobis [so E. V.]; it is connected with the ano- xaXvifnO-tjvai,. If it is imparted tlirough the in- ward life of believers and througli nature, it never- theless comes from the future and from above, as much as from witliin outwardly, and it is a Divine secret from eternity in time — therefore aTroza/.in/'tc;. Ver. 19. For the patient expectation [/} yciQ a7inxn(tadoxia. On a7toy.a(>adoAia, comp. Phil. i. 20. The verb xa()adoy.fiv means, lit- erally, to expect with uplifted head ; then, to expect. The noun, strengthened by ano, refers to an expec- ation, which is constant and persistent until the time arrives. The idea of anxiety (Luther) is not promi- nent. (So Tholuck, Philippi, De Wette, Meyer.) * On the controversy between the Protestant and Cathnlic theolii^ims in reg:ird to the meriliim ciiniligni\ as connt'cteJ with this jjassage, see Tholuck, p. 421. [Comp. Philippi on both meritnm rondigni and merilum eaugnii. Also C:ih-in. A? Dr. Hodffe remarks, the idea of merit "is altogether for- Wga 10 the context."— B,.J See below also. Tiioluck remarke, that the strength, eiiing of the attributive notion into a substantive niaKcs a double prosopopoeia, " not only the creo' ture, but the expectation of the creature waits." — R.] The yuii introduces the first proof of his state- ment from the course of the whole xri grandeur (Chrysostom [Hodge, All'ord], and meal expositors), its certaintji (Fritzsche, Meyer), its near- ness (Reiche), or \ts futurity (Philippi)? Tholuck, in its grandiV,r and certainty.''* If both must com bine in one idea, then it is the truth or the realitj of the glory, as such. The elements of its grandeur, as of its certainty, are united in the fact that the de- veloping pain of the external xrifTit;, as of the in ward life of b(.-licver.s — indeed, the groaning of th« Divine spiritual life itself — labors for it and points toward it ; that it will consist in the removal of all vanity and corruption in the whole natural sphere of mankind. Of the creation, t^? xxiafox;. The great question is, What is the xtiait;? Lexically, the word may mean the act of creation, as well as what is created, the creation ; f but actually, the question here can only be the creation in the broader or more limited sense. Tholuck : " xriaii; in the passive sense can mean the same as xrifffia, the single crea- ture ; ver. 39 ; Heb. iv. 13. 'H xriaiq, Book of Wisdom ii. 6; xvi. 24; Heb. ix. 11; or even 0/7 t; y.riaiQ, Book of Wisdom xix. 6 ; naaa ?; xrian;, Judith xvi. 17, the created world. But in that case, as also with o/oy 6 Kocr/zoi; (John xii. 19), it is me- tonymically confined to the human world (Col. i. 23 ; Mark xvi. 15 ; and also with the Rabbis, ni<"'"i3 hs , &c.), or to irrational nature, exempting man." The explanations are divided into different groups : 1. J'he natural and spiritual world. The uni- verse. Origen : Man as subject to corruption ; souls of the stars. Theodoret : also the angels. Theo- dore of Mopsvestia, Olshausen : The whole of the universe. Kollner, Koppe, Rosenmiiller {tola re- rum universitas). 2. Inanimate creation, (Chrysostom, Theophy- lact, Calvin, Beza, Fritzsche : mundi niachina.) 3. Animate creation, a. Humanity (Augustine, Turretine,:]: &c. ; Baumgarten-Crusius : still unbeliev- ing men) ; b. unconverted heathen (Locke, Liglit- foot, and others). Rabbinical usage of language : the heathen : nj<"'~i3 ; c. the Jewish people, be- cause the Jews were called God's creation (Cramer, and others) ; d. the Gentile Christians, because the proselytes were called new creatures (Clericus, Nos- selt) ; e. Jewish Christians (Gockel ; for the same reason as under c.) ; f. Christians in general {y.cuvt] uTt'ffw,-, Socinians and Arminians). — Evidently there * [The primary reference seems to be to its grea/nesn; but a secondary reference to its certainty and futurity would necessarily be implied in "the patient expectation." — R.] t [The English word creation has precisely the same twcifold sense ; but it always has a general reference when used in the passive sense. Ktio-i* mdoubtidly has a miira special reference in many cases, but it w ould seem that tha more general signification preceded the more special one, and hence that the limitation of meaning m'Jit always b« derived from the context. — R.] t [This is the view adopted and defended at some leufrth by Professor Stuart in an Excursus on this verse. Not- withstanding his able argument, the interpretation is en- tirely too restricted to meet with general acceptance. Ar instinct of immortality is assumed, and pres>ed as the mail thought. Comp. Hodge, in opposition to Stuait's view — B.] 270 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. is no reference, on one hand, to the mathematical or uscronomical character of the licavenl}' bodies, nor, on tiie otlier, to the real rational or spiritual world, but to a creature-life, which can groan and earnestly expect. 4. Inanimate and animate nature, in contradis- tinction from humanity* (Irenueus, Grotius, Calovius, Neander, Meyer, De Wette) [Hodf^e, AUbrd]. — [Schubert: "Even in the things of the bodily world about us there is a life-element which, hke that statue of Memnon, unconsciously sounds in accord when touched by the ray from on high." — P. S.] But the distinction from mankind must be confined to the distinction from the spiritual life of renewed mankind ; for sinful mankind is utterly dependent upon nature, and even believers have their natural Bide (2 Cor. v. 1 ff.). Nor can the universe, in its merely natural side, be altogether meant, since the Holy Scriptures distinguish a region of glory from the region of humanity in this life. 5. Tholuck : " The material world surrounding man." The Scriptures very plainly distinguish be- tween an earthly natural world related to mankind, and a region of glory. (See the ascension ; 1 Cor. XV. ; Heb. ix. 11, &c.) The former alone is subject to vanity, and hence it alone can be intended. But there is no ground for making divisions in reference to this human natural world. The Apostle assumes, rather, that this creature-sphere is in a state of col- lective, painful striving for development, which ex- presses itself as sensation only proportionately to the sensational power of life, and hence is more defi- nitely expressed, appears more frequently, and reach- es its climax in living creatures and in the natural longing which mankind feels (2 Cor. v. 1). The real personification of nature iu man is the final ground for the poetical personification of nature. [6. The whole credion^ rational as well as irra- tional, not yet redeemed, but vced'nff and capable of redeinplion, here opposed to the new creation in Christ and in the regenerate. The children of God appear, on the one side, as the first-fruits of the new creation, and the remaining creatures, on the other, as consciously or unconsciously longing after the same redemption and renewal. This explanation seems to be the most correct one. It most satis- factorily accounts for the expressions : expectation, waiting, groaning, not wiVingly (ver. 20), and (he whole creation (ver. 22). The whole creation, then, ooks forward to redemption ; all natural birth, to the new birth. As all tiiat is created proceeded from God, so it all, consciously or unconsciously, strives after Him as its final end. What shows itself in nature as a dim impulse, in the natural man, among the heathen, and yet more among the Jews, under the influence of the law, comes to distinct consciousness and manifests itself in that loud cry after deliverance (chap. vii. 24), which Christ alone can satisfy ; and then voices itS'-lf in happy gratitude for the actual redemption. Olshausen aptly says : " Paul contrasts Christ, and the new creation called forth by Him, to all the old creation, together with the unregenerate men, as the flower of this creation. * [The reasons for exc'.udinp; man are : 1. Believers are Oistinj^uishod here from the ktiVi? (ver. 23). 2. Such an expectation does not exist in manlcind as a whole. 3. Ver. 20 rip-esents the subjection to vanity as unwilling, wUch is not true of man. 4. Ver. 21 implies that deliverance shall take place, and we have no evidence that this is true of hu- manity as a whole. If ver. 21 gives the pui-port of the "hope" (ver. 20), then this reason is of little weight.— E.J The whole of this old creation has one life in it^sclf, and tills is yearning lor redemption from the bonds which hold it, and hinder its glorification ; this on« yearning has forms different only according to the different degrees of life, and is naturally purer and stronger in unregenerate men than in plants and ani^ mals ; in them, the creation has, as it were, ite mouth, by which it can give vent to its collective feeling. Yet the most of these men know not what the yearning atid seeking in them proj)erly mean ; they imderstand not the language of the Spirit iu them ; nay, they suppress it often, though it is, meanwhile, audible in their heart ; and what they do not understand themselves, God understands, who listens even to prayers not understood. But how- ever decided the contrast between the old and new creation, yet they may not be considered as sepa- rated thoroughly. Rather, as the new man, in all distinctness from the old, still is in the old, so is the new creation (Christ, and the new life proceeding from Him) in the old world. The old creation, therefore, is like an impregnate mother (comp. ver. 23), that bears a new world in her womb — a life which is not herself, neither springs from her, but which, by the overmastering power that dwells in it, draws her life, with which it is connected, on and on into itself, and changes it into its nature, so that the birth (the completion of the new world) is the mother's death (the sinking of the old)."— P. S.] [This last view seems to be that of Dr. Lange himself. It is ably defended by Forbes, pp. 13 10-330. The limitalion to creation, as capable of redemption, implies that only so much of creation as is linked with the fall of man, and subject to the curse, should be included. Thus it differs from 1. Col. i. 20, however, gives a hint as to the extent of this con- nection with man. The context renders such a limi- tation necessary. On the other hand, it differs from 4, in including man in his fallen condition. The reasons for excluding humanity have been given above. It will appear that, against this view, they are of comparatively little weight. Certainly the burden of proof rests with those who adopt 4 ; for man is the head of the creation, to which they apjily xT(cri.c; ; not merely as the final and crowning work of the repeated creative agency which brought it into being, but as the occasion of its present groan- ing condition. Besides, man, viewed on one side of his nature, is a part of this material and animal crea- tion. It seems arbitrary to sunder him from it in this case. At all events, we may admit that his ma- terial body involuntarily shares in this expectation, to which his unregenerate soul responds with an in- definite longing. In this view the degradation of sin is fearfully manifest. Nature waits, but tlio natural man is indifferent or hostile. The ver} body which, in his blindness, he deems the source of sin, waits for glorification, while his soul uses its power over it to stifle the inarticulate desire. On the whole suliject, see Usteri, Stud, nnd Krit., 1832, pp. 835 ff., Tholuck, Meyer in loco, Delitzsch, Bihl. Psj/ch., pp. .57 ff. and pp. 476 ff. (a most profound and eloquent sermon on vers. 18-23). Comj). Doctr. Note-, and Dr. Lange, Das Land Jer Herrlichkeit. — R.] For ilve earliest expectation of the creature. Aa the y.a{ia(ioy.fZv means, strictly, to expect zvith raised head, it is very proper to regard the y.n^ai)nxiu (intense expectation), and the «7ro>!rt^m(yo)(t« (Phil. i. 20) (intense longing, waiting for satislactiou), as an allusion to the conduct of irrational creatures in CHAPTER VIII. 18-39. 271 reference to the future transformation of the sphere of nature. Is waiting [anixiH/frai-. Here, also, the preposition implies the continuance of the waiting until tlie time arrives. — K.] Even the poor crea- tures, whose heads are bowed toward the ground, now seized by a liigher impulse, by a supernatural anticipation and longing, seem to stretch out tlieir heads and look I'ortli spiritually for a spiritual object of their existence, wliicli is now burdened by the law of corruption.* Certainly this representation has the form of a poetical personification ; but it cannot, on this account, be made equivalent, as Meyer holds (p. 255), to the usual |)rosopopa'ias in the Old Testament, although these declare, in a measure, the sympathy between the natural and human world. Meyer would exclude from the idea not only the an- gelic and demoniac kingdom, but also Christian and unchristian nuinkind. But how, then, would Paul have understood the groaning of the creature, with- out human sympathy ? The revelation of the sons (children) of God [ T /; r a 71 o a ct ). V ■If' I. V r (7iv it , />v x o '• &foTi^. The children of God in tlie pregnant sense of His sons. The creature waits for its manifesta- tion ; that is, for tlie coming of its <)6i.a to full ap- pearance (1 John iii. 2) with the coming of Christ (Matt. XXV. 31), which wi',1 be the appearing of the doia of the great God (Titus ii. lo); therefore the absolute aTroxcc/in/'n,- itself,f the fulfilment of all the typical prophecies of nature — and not only as com- plete restoration^ hut aho as perfect development. Ver. 20. For the creation was made sub- ject [// KTiaiq v nfrdyr]. Dr. Lange takes the verb as middle. It is the historical aorist, at the fall of man. See below. Comp. Gen. iii. lY, 18. — R.]. God was the one who subjected (so say most expositors) — [This is evident from the curse, if the reference be to the time of the fall. — R.] ; — not Adam (Knachtb., Capellus); nor man (Chrysos- tom, Schneekenburger) ; nor the devil (Hammond). To vanity. JSlaraior rjt;. The Septuagint, instead of brin, NIC, p-'T . The word does not occur in the pi^fane Greek ; it means the super- ficial, intangible, ind therefore deceptive appear- ance ; the perishablo and doomed to destruction hav- ing the show of reality. Earlier expositors (Tertul- lian, Bueer, and others) have referred the word to the /.KXTaia ~ idols, understanding it as the deifica- tion of the creature. Yet the question here is a condition of the creature to which God has subject- ed it. Further on it is designated as fiovktia rTj^ (fOooai;. Tlierefore Fritzsche's definition, perver.ti- tas (Adam's sin), is totally untenable. But what do we understand by "subject to fiatat.6r t]i; " ? Ex- planations : 1 An original disposition of creation ; the ar- rangement of the corruption of the creature. (Gro- tius, Krehl, De Wette. Theodoret holds that the original arrangement was made with a view to the fall.) • [Comp. the analogous Old Testament exprescions : Dent, xxxii. 1 ; Job xii. 7, 9; Ps. xix. 2 ; Ixviii. 17 ; xcviii. I; Isa. i. 2 ; xiv. 8; Iv. 12; Ixv. 17 ; Ezck. xxxi. lo ; Hab. li. 11. Also Rev. xxi ; 2 Pinter iii. 13 ; Acts iii. 21.— R.] t [The reference to this event is undoubted. It is a new expre'-sion of the deep-seated consciousness of fel'ow- ihip with Christ, which leads thi- Apostle to call this "the revelation of the sons of God," not of the Son of God. It should be remarked, that our Lord calls it the coming of the S'ln of Man. The event is throughout regarded in a strictly Boteriological aspect. — E.] 2. A result of the fiill of n:an, (The Hebrev* theology, Jycrec lith Ji'abba, many Christian theolo- gians , (iJcumeiiius, Calvin, Meyer, and others). Ku, 1 is opposed by the {intrdyrj, &c. [by or/ szoeffo, a).}.d, whieli presupposes a different previous con- dition, and by the historical fact (Gen. i. lil) ; Meyer — R.] ; and No. 2 by the originality of the arrange, ment between a first created and a second spiritual stage of the cosmos (1 Cor. xv. 47, 48). 3. We must therefore hold, that Paul refers to the obscurity and disturbance of the first natural stage in the development of our cosmos produced by the fall.* As, in redemption, the restoration oc- curred simultaneously with the furtherance of the normal development, so death entered, at the fall, iia a deterioration of the original metamorphoses, into the corruption of transitoriness. Tholuck approach- es this explanation by this remark : " As tlie Rab- binical theology expresses the thought that man, born sinless, would have passed into a better condi- tion ' by a kiss of the Highest,' so, in all probability_ has Paul regarded that ciA/aj'^rcti. of which he speaks in 1 Cor. xv. 52 as the destination of the first man." Yet Tholuck seems, in reality, to ad- here to De Wette's view. Not willingly. The ot'/ Ixortra cannot mean merely the natural necessity peculiar to the creature-world ; it applies rather to an opposition of ideal nature, in its ideal pressure toward develop- ment, to the decrees of death and of the curse of their real developing progress (Gen. iii. ; 2 Cor. v. 1 ff.). Bucer : Contra g nam fert mgmhmi eorum, a natura enim omncs res a corrupiio7ie abhorrent. [But by reason of him w^ho hath subjected it, dkld. ()(.« Tov vnord'iavr a. Dr. Lange renders : the creature- world subjected itself to van- ity, not willingly, but on account of Him who sub- jected it, in hope. The force of <)m with the accu- sative is on account of ; but the E. V. is correct, in- dicating a moving cause — i. e., the will of God. — R.] This unwillingness is expressed, according to what follows, in the groaning of the whole creation. The translation : " it was made subject {vntrdytj, pas- sive), by reason of Him who hath subjected the same," is opposed to the logical conception. [The simplest grammatical as well as logical interpretation accepts the verb as passive, with a reference to God as " Him who suljjected the same." (So Meyer, Tholuck, Hodge, De Wette, Alford, and most com- mentators.) — R.] Moreover, the reference of the dia rbv imoTdinvra to man, to Adam,-)- does not remove this logical difficulty, since, in that case, the vTTfrdytj would have to relate to another subject than the {'nordiavra. We therefore find ourselves driven, with Fritzsche, to the middle construction * [The difference between 2 and 3 is slight. Both point to an actual curse at the fall ; the latter only adds the thought, th:>t the previous condition was not, after all, tho final one, thus preparing the way for an (splanation ot " not willingly." Both should, it seems, include the thought that the glorificatioi: to ensue will transcend both the origi- nal state and that which could be attained by a normal de- velopment. — R.] t [The objection to this reference is well stated by Al- ford : (i.) The verb implies a conscious act of intenticnal subjugation. (2.) The accusative (indicating the moving, rather than the efficient cause) is in keeping with the Apos- tle's reverence ; thus removing the supreme will of God to a wider distance from coiTuption and vanity. M'.yer sug- gests that the absence of any explanatory cause ])resupposes a well-kno^\Ti subject ; God had subjected it. Jowett make* Christ the subject : "on account of whose special work th4 creature was made subject to vanity." This is novel, so much 60, that it seems tar-fetcheU.— K.] 272 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. of InfTotyri. Thereby we gain tlie idea, that even the disharinony which nature had suffered has be- come, in turn, a kind of order, since nature lias been found in tlie so(jai;'\. We do not hold (with Tholuck, Meyer, and others) that rTji; ipOo^ai; is the genitive of apposition. For the question is, in the firs', place, concerning a bondage under vanity ; BO tha, the creature, even in its deliverance, will remain in a state of the Sovhla in relation to th< children of (Jud himself. The (fOooa is not alto- gether the same as //wTatoT/jc, but its manifestation in the process of finite life iv sickness, death, tha pangs of death, and corruption; while the fiarai.O' T^q, as such, is veiled i!i the semblance of a bloom ing, incorruptible life. [There seems to be no good reason for objecting to the view of Tholuck, Meyer, Philippi, and others, that the bondage, which results from the vanity, and is borne not w.llingly (ver. 20), consists in corruption. This preserves the proper distinctions. The corruption is the consequence of the vanity; the unwilling subjection to a condition which is under vanity, and results in corruption, is well termed bondage. — R.] The alteration of the expression cffld^a into an adjective, "corruptible bondage " (Kiillner), is as unwarranted as the trans* lation of the thvOt(jia r/ji; OoJ^'yc,- by glorious lib' erty (Luther [E. V.] ). [Into the freedom of the glory of the chil- dren of G-od, fi(,- rijv i).fvf}t(iift.v T /] s ()6itj<; T(T)v ri/.vmv Tor &ior. The construction ia pregnant. (So Meyer : Aecht Gricchische Priig' nanz. See Winer, p. 5*77.) We may supply: xai xaraaTaf) i^fTfTno, or fiqa/f) /jafrai^, shall be brought or in'roduced into, &c. The freedom is to consist in, or at least to result from a share in, the glory of the children of God. Hence the hendiadys of the E. V. (glorious liberty) is totally incorrect. It makes the most prominent idea of the whole clause a mere attributive. Besides, were the meaning that expressed by the E. V., we should find this form : fit; T//1' i)6iav r7jq tAfcOf^iac; t(7ji' t£x. t. Ofor. — R.] The fit; rijv ilfvO^niiav can mean only the sharing in the liberty of God's children by the or- ganic appropriation on their part, and by the equal- ity with the children of God produced by means of the transformation ; but it cannot mean an indepen- dent state of liberty beside them. Their freedom will consist in its helping to constitute the glory, the spiritualized splendor of the manifestation of (lod's children. As Christ is the manifestation of God's glory because He is illuminated throughout by God, and the sons of God are the glory of Christ as lights from His light, so will nature be the glory of God's sons as humanized and deified nature. Yet we would not therefore take the 7//(,' ()di//s' as the geni- five of apposition, since the glory proceeds outward- ly from within, and since it is here promised to na- ture as recompense, so to speak, in opposition to the corruption. It shall therefore share, in its way, in the glory belonging to God's children. But why is not the ai/'Oa^aia, incorruption, mentioned (1 Cor. XV. 45), in opposition to the (fif>6i>a, corruption? Because the idea of corruption has been preceded by that of vanity. The real glory of the manifesta- tion in which its inward incorruption shall hereafter be externally revealed, is contrasted with the decep- tive, transitory glory of the manifestation in which the creature-world in this life appears subject to vanity. The elevation of the children of God them- selves from the condition of corruption to the con- dition of glorification, constitutes the centre of the deliverance into this state of glory; but the creatart is drawn upward in this elevation, in conformity with its dynamical dependence on the centre, and its organic connection with it.* * [This verse, which, taken in its Piibjective sense, at the purport of the hope, seems to favor the reference ol KTtVis to humility, ami the longintr to the iusiinits of im- mortality (so Stuart, throughout), loses it* force if thus un- CHAPTER Vm. 18-89. 273 Ver. 22. For we know that the whole creation [oidafi tv ya(j oTt nuaa tj xri- 9 1.1;]. The Apostle furnishes, in ver. 22, for we hum, the proof of the declaration in ver. 21. Since lie has proved the proposition of ver. 19 by ver. 20, and of ver. 20 by ver. 21, Meyer, without ground, goes back with this for to ver. 20 : in' i/.nidi, ; De Wette [Philippi], to ver. 19. [If ver. 21 be taken as stating the purport of the hope, then Meyer's view is the most tenable one. Philippi finds here a more general affirmation of the existence of the " patient expectation," as an admitted truth. — R.] Tholuck asks. Whence does the Apostle have this ive know ? and he opposes the view tiiat it is an assumption of the universal hun)an consciousness (according to most expositors), or rather, that the Apostle seems (according to Bucer, Brenz) to speak from the Jewish-Christian hope which rested on the prophets, as, even in chap. ii. 2 ; iii. 19 ; vii. 14 ; viii. 28, the ou^ctfuv is understood best as the Chris- tian consciousness.* We nmst not subject the Apos- tle to the modern sense of nature. But we can still less reduce the Apostle's knowledge to that of the prophets. The modern sense of nature, in its sound elements, is a fruit of apostolical Christianity ; and as the harmony between spirit and nature has been essentially consummated in Christ, so, too, has the knowledge of the language (that is, the spiritual meaning) of nature been consummated in Him — a knowledge which was reproduced in the apostles as a fountain, and ready for enlargement. This knowl- edge is, indeed, universally human chiefly in elect souls alone, under the condition of Divine illumina- tion. Groaneth together and travaileth in pain together \_a w a x t v a.'C.ii, x a I a vv o) <) iv f t]. The anv in awarfvdtfi, and )()ivfo has been referred, by (Ecumenius, Calvin, and others, to the children of God ; KoUner, and others, have viewed it as a mere strengthening of the simple word. Tholuck and Meyer explain it, in harmony with Theodore of Mopsvestia, as a collective dispo- sition of the creature. Tlie latter : (ioihtai, di linnv, oTi. avuifun'oi; imdiix.vvrai' roTno nana ?j xt/'ctk;. Estius : genitus et dolor communis inter se partium creaturcB. On the linguistic tenableness of this explanation, by accepting the presumed organi- zation of nature in single parts, see Meyer, against Fritzsche. It is, indeed, against the reference of the aw to the groaning of Christians that this derstond. The striking phrase : "the freedom of the glory of the children of God," becomes very vapue, unless we adopt the view that nature is here personified as in ex- pectation. And it is easier to believe that the verse is true of all nature, than of all men. "Whatever may be our wishes, the sharing of nature in the future plory is more probable, judfring from the facts of the material world, th;in the participation of all men in the same, judginp: from ihe facts of the moral world. The sighs after immiatality aiuong the heathen are audible enough ; but had Paul re- ferrid to these, be would undoubtedly have spoken more disti ctly of the future conversion of the heathen, ile is too fond of references to his personal Saviour and His work, to omit every allusion to these, where his thought really concerns the salvation of perst ns. It seems, there- fore, in the highest degree improbable that mankind (as distinguished from the natuial world) is referred to at all. — K.] * [Professor Stuart urges that the longing of the natural world was not so familiar to all, that the Apostle could thus appeal to consciousness. But this objection is of weight only in case the meaning of olSaiiiv be extended to human eonsoiousncss in general. That Paul uses it in appeals to Christian cnnsciousness, is evident from Rom. ii. 2 ; iii. 19; vii. 14 ; viii. 26, 28 ; 2 Cor. v. 1 ; 1 Tim. i. 8 ; comp. lh« fre- (ueiit use of olSare in 1 Cor. vi. — R.J 18 groaning is introduced further on as something special. Reiche holds that (jvvdxVivfk refers to the escha- tological expectation of the Jews, the H-'C^n-^b^n , dolorts mexsiie ; against which Meyer properly ob- serves, that those dolores nussice are special suflep- ings which were to precede the appearance of the Messiah ; but the travailing of nature had takea place from the beginning, since Gen. iii. 11. Yet Tholuck remarks, with propriety, that tlie Apostle must have been acquainted with that term of Ral). binical theology. Likewise the developing suffering of nature will ascend toward the end to a decisive crisis (see the eschatological wiuds of Jesus). But the " dolores mcn.iice^'' coniprise also ethical conflicts. Therefore this continuous travailing of the world's development is related to the dolores messice, as the preparation is to the fulfilment, or as the judgment of the world, immanent in the history of the world, is related to the final catastrophe. T!ie m)ivii.v de- notes the birth-pangs of a woman in labor. The figure is happily chosen, not only because it an- nounces a new birth and new form of the earth, but because it reflects in travailing Eve the fate of the travailing earth, and vice versd. Tholuck : " By pain, it will wrest the new out of the old ; perhaps arevd^fiv has reference to bringing forth (comp. Jer. iv. 31), but better, as Luther explains the atf- vay/ioi, ver. 26, t/ie c/ronnincf, earnest expectation^ which is intensified by the being in travail which fol- lows." Yet the groaning also indicates the painful announcement of positive sufferings, which subse- quently arise from the groaning of Cliristians for re- demption {(TThvatoftiV fia^oi ft tvot., 2 Cor. v. 4). [Until now, a/(Jt toTi vT'v. Any reference to the future is forbidden by the use of ol'da/nfv, which refers to experience (Alford). While it is not necessary to insist upon an important distinction be- tween /iii/Q!, and dx^i, (see p. 181), it would seem best to consider that the idea of duration* is the prominent one here. If any point of time is em- phasized, it must be that of the beginning of the groaning, when the curse of wearying labor and travail came upon man, and through him the curse upon nature. — R.l Ver. 23. And not only so, but even we our- selves [oi'' ftovov de, d).ktx y.al ahtoi. See Textual Notes ° and '. The reading of the Vaticanus is followed here.] Meyer's mode of statirg the con- nection with the preceding verse is utterly incorrect : " Climax of the previous proof that the xt/ok; in ver. 21 is correct in the in i'/.niDi, on. Even we Christians would, indeed, do nothing less than unite in that groaning." The principal thought is, not the deliverance of the ytriait;, vers. 20, 21, but the future glory of the children of God, ver. 18. The first proof therefor is the groaning of nature ; the sec- ond, which now follows, is the groaning of spiritual life. Tlierefore Christians do not unite in anywise in the groaning of creation, but vice versa : the groaning of creation joins in the groaning of Chris- tians. Consequently, we must not translate : " But also we (Christians) 07i our part," &c., but : even we Christians ourselves — namely, we who are most in- timately concerned. The expression xai alnoi *» • [Calvin: " Parlicula Hactenus, velad hunc tisque diem, ad levandum diuturni larigunsis Imdium pertinel. Nam n lot sxculis duraruid in sun gemilur crealurse, quam in/;x* cusahilis erit nostra molUlies vel ignavia, si in bnvi l*wi» braiilis vil» curricula dtfici"itisf'" — £.1 274 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. eai'Tor<,- brings out proiiiineiitly the truth that these eaine Christians, wlio have the first-fruits of tlie Spirit, are also saved by hope, though at heart they must still groan and earnestly expeet. Thus ainoi; iyt'i), in chap. vii. 25, means : I, one and the same man, car. be so different ; with the mind I can serve khe law of (lod, but with the flesh the law of sin. Tholuciv : " The difference between the readings seems to have arisen rather from .purposes of per- tpicidi;/ or s.'i/le." Augustine, Cnrysostom, and oth- ers, hold that the connection — in which the subject is Christians in general — is decidedly against the odd limitation of tiie airoi to the apostles (Origen, Am- brose, Melanchthon, and Grotius. Reiche, and oth- ers : the Apostle Paul alone. Others: Paul, with the other apostles). The former expositors maintain that the second y.ai ///(f(\- avroi consists, in a more intense degree, of the apostles.* But the addition is rather occasioned by the contrast presented : saved, and yet groaning (" the inward life of Chris- tians shines "). Though we have the first-fruits of the Spirit [ T // 1' a n a Q / ?] V r o u n v t v ft a t o t; t/ovrn;. The participle maybe taken as simply defining the subject : we oicrselvcs, those who have (Luther, Calvin, Beza, Hodge) ; or be rendered : ihouffh we have, despite this privilege. The latter is more forcible ; the former sense would require the article ol (Tholuck, Philippi, Meyer, Allbrd). ylna^yrj in itself occasions no difficulty ; it means first-fruits, with the implied idea of a future har- vest. Comp., however, chap. xi. 16. — R.] The oiTiaijyt] Tor nvfVfi. is differently interpreted. 1. The genitive is partitive, having this sense : the apostles (they alone, according to Origen, fficu- menius, Melanchthon, and Grotius), and the Chris- tians of the apostolic period, have the first foretaste of a spiritual endowment, which, wiien complete, will extend to all future Christians (De Wette, KoU- ner, Olshausen, Meyer). But by this division the Apostle would not only have adjudged to later Clnis- tians the full harvest of the Spirit, which is contrary to the real fact, but he would also have oliscured rather than strengthened his argument by a superflu- ous remark. For it is a fact, which will ever remain perfectly the same from the time of the apostles to the end of tlie world, that tlie life of Christians in the Spirit is related to tiieir physical perfection and glorificatiiin, as tlie firstlings are to the harvest. But the following division has just as little force. 2. Our present reception of the Spirit is only preliminary, in contrast with the future complete outpouring in the kingdom of heaven (Chrysostom, and others ; also Huther, Calvin, Beza, Tholuck, Philippi [Hodge, Alford. Stuart] ). Apart from the fact that this view is imt altogether apostolical, it adds nothing to the matter in question, and removes the point of view : the inference of the future ()6J« from the present nvfvfia. 3. Therefore tlie genitive of apposition. f The ♦ [Afford, who adopts >;jucl« with tbe second Koii avToi, lays it is "inserted to involve himself and liis fellow- workers in the general description of the last clause." -K.] t [Both 1 and 2 take the genitive as partitive, which is undoubtedly the common usasjo. In every case in the Now Testament wlier(! airapx^ is followed by a penitive, it has this force; comp. xvi. 5 ; 1 Cor. xv. 20; xvi. 15; John i. 13. The same is true of the LXX. and classical authors. It is diiBcult to sustain any other view here. If we adopt the meaning: the first-fruits of a harvest, which ?.s- the Spirit given to us, and refer it to the common !?ift of the Spirit in this life, rather than to the gift of the Spirit iu that par- Holy Spirit is himself the gift of the first-fruits, if the completion of Christian life is regarded as the harvest (Bengel, Winer, Riickert, and others). The Spirit is the earnest, ai)[)ai](>>v, of the future perfeo tion (2 Cor. i. 22 ; v. 5 ; Gal. vi. 8). Epli. i. 14 , iv. 30 ; and 1 Peter iv. 14, to nvfi/ici -r^^' '^"J'/'j are of special importance. Meyer's only objection to this explanation is, that the Apostle's expression would have been misunderstood, since the a/ra^z/ij would have to be understood as a part of a similar whole. But the sheaves offered as first-fruits are not merely the first portions of the first sheaves collectively ; they are the precious tokens and sure pledges of the full harvest, to which they constitute, if we may so speak, a harmonious antithesis. But the doSa must be regarded as commensurate with the spiritual life ; ye^ not as a new and /lir/her out- pouring of tlie Spirit, but as the perfect epiphany of the operation of the Spirit. Tholuck admits, at least, that this third explanation is also admissible with the second. On the singular explanations of Fritzsche and Schneckenburger, see Meyer. Even we ourselves groan within our- selves [xai aiiTOt iv sai'ToTi; (Tt fvd^o- /ifv. We, although we have the first-fruits, are far from being complete ; despite this, we groan within ourselves. The inward, profound nature of the feel- ing is thus emphasized. — R.] Groaning is the ex- pression of the longing which feels that it is delayed in its course toward its object ; expression of the inclination contending immediately with its obsta- cles. Waiting for the adoption [vlo &fa iav MTTf HiVf/o/i f ro(.. Wait for, await, wait to the end of (Altbrd). The adoption is already ours (ver, 15) as an internal relation, but the outward conditioft does not yet correspond (Meyer). Alford para- phrases: aw ithig tlie fidness of our adoption. — R.]. The oljject of the longing is the vio 8 taia, which believers wait for in perfect patience. Tiiis is here identified with the redemption of our body. It is the perfect outward manifestation of the inward vloDtala; it is the soul's inheritance of the glori- fied life which is attained on the perfect deliverance of the body from the bondage of the first state of nature, and from subjection to death and corru])- tion ; see 2 Cor. v. 4. The Apostle's addition of " the redemption of our body," proves that he does not mean merely the entire v'toOKrict, but this I'to- OffTia viewed specifically as complete. [The redemption of our body, ta/v a no- ).vT Q 0)0 i,v r ov a oi m a t o <,• /; n (it v . Epexegeti- cal clause.] To'' (jm/taTOi; is explained by Eras- mus, Luther, and others (also Lntz, jBibl. Dor/m.), as redemption from the body ; but this is totally for- eign to the connection, and also to the matter itself. [Were this the meaning, there would probably be some qualifying term added, as Phil. iii. 21 (Meyer). — R.] Tholuck explains the redemption of the body as applying to its materiality ; this is also the object tioular age, all seems to be gained that Dr. Iia.iige seeks in view 3, wliile we do not unnecessarily depart from the usus hiqiirnili. The reference to the first Clirislians is perhaps slightly favored by adopting i^/ifis at some point in tlie text, although Meyor ri-jo'-ts it, and yot upliolds this rcfi'ience. In his comments on ver. 26, Dr. Lange says that liere the new spiritual life is spoken of, not the Holy Si)irit itself. This subjective sense can only be admitted if the partiiive sense of the genitive be given up. The term " body " ca'inot, in any case, be regarded as antithetical; did "tiesh" occur, there might be some reason for taking "Spirit" in this sense of "spiritual life," a nisaning foi which our author has an unusual fondness -B.] CHAPTER Vm. 18-89. 271 of the earnest expectation of the xt/cjh;. Perhaps this is from Origen and Rothe ; 'see, on the contrary, 1 Cor. XV. Tliohick's quotation from Augustine is better {De doctr. christ.) : Quod nonnuUi dicunt, malle se omnhio esse sine corjjore, otnnino faUimtu); non enim corpus suum xed corrupfiones et poiidus odeiunt; Phil. iii. 21 ; 1 Cor. xv. Tlie most unten- able view is : dehverance from tlie morally injurious influence of the body by death (Carpzov, and oth- ers). [It is so natural to refer tiiis jjlirase to the glorification of the body at the coming of Christ, that it is unnecessary to state arguments in favor of this reference (conip. Phil. iii. 21 ; 2 Cor. v. 2 fl". ; 1 Cor. XV. 42 if.). The redemption is not complete until the body is redeemed. Any other view is not accordant with the grand current of thought in this chapter. The fact that even here, where the long- ing of Christians is described, so much stress should be laid on the redemption of the body, the material part of our complex nature, confirms the view of xTtffti,-, which takes it as including material exist- ences. In fact, since " even we ourselves " are rep- resented as waiting for an event, which shall redeem that part of our nature most akin to the creation (in the restricted sense of Meyer, and others), it would appear that the suliject here is not necessarily in an- tithesis to " creation," but rather a part of it ; " sub- jected in hojie," like the whole creation, but also as iiaving the first-fruits of the Spirit, "saved in hope" (ver. 24).— R.] Ver. 24. For we were saved, {la m tj- IJifv.) Delivered, and participating in salvation. The dative t-Tj t).ni<)i,, in hope, does not describe the means, but the mode of the deliverance. [So Bengel, and many others. Conip. Winer, p. 203. The phrase is emphatically placed. Luther is ex- cellent : we are indeed saved, yet in hope. — R.] Even if we were to admit that the Apostle under- stood faith to be the hope here mentioned (Chrysos- tom, De Wette, and others) — which, as Meyer cor- rectly observes, is controverted by Paul's definite distinction between faith and hope,* — the admission of the dative of instrument would be too strong. But even if we accept the dative as denoting modal- ity, it does not denote " that to which the iut is in.«'-parably connected with it. Alford says the hope is '• faith in its prospective altitude." Philippi : " Inasmuch as the ohjeol of salvation is both relatively pres- ent and also relatively future, hope is produced from faith lind inJissohibly linked with it; for faith appichends the object, in so far as it is present ; hope, in so liar as it is still future."— B,.! " The word hope is used in two ways. In one cas« it means great courage, wliich remains firm in all temptations ; in the other, the finite salvation which hope shall get ; here it may mean both." Seeing means, here, the acquired presence of the oijject, which can be " grasped with the hands ; " however, the beholding also nuiy momentarily all'ord heavenly satisfaction ; see 1 Cor. xiii. ; 2 Cor. v. 7. For what a man seeth [8 ya() (j}.inn Tt\]. Thus the hope of believers pioves that they are to expect a state of completion, but that they must ii:ait for it perseveringly. Why doth he still hope for ? [ t i /.at D.nl'Cfi,; See Tixtwd J\'ijte '". Ailopting y.ni aa well established, it seems best to take it as = etiain (Meyer). Why does he still hope, when there is no more ground for it ? Comp. Hartung, Partikellelire^ i. p. 137, on this use of viaL Bengel: cum visione non est spe opus. — R.] Ver. 25. But if we hope for that, &c. Hope is no vain dreaming; it is proved as reliffious confi- dence in the ethical labor of patience. The vno' f(ov?'i denotes perseverance amid obstacles; there- fore always, also passiveness, or patience and stead- fastness. But the connection here authorizes the predominance of the former idea. And though complete salvation comes from the future and from above, patience in this life must cooperate with its future — therefore : to persevere.* Grotius : Spet isia non iyiffuctuosa est in nobis, sed egre;,iam virtu- tern operatur, malorum fortem tolerantiam. Ver. 26. Likevrise the Spirit also [dxrai'- Twc- iik y.ai to nvfTi/iia. Likewise {waav- Twi,-) introduces, as contemporaneous with the " waiting " (ver. 23), the divine assistance of the Holy Spirit (Tholuck).— R.] De Wette and Meyer explain : The Holy Spirit. The latter commentator appeals to vers. 10, 23. But, in ver. 23, the new spiritual life is spoken of,f which certainly consists in the fellowship of the human spirit with the Holy Spirit, but is, nevertheless, not the Holy Spirit itself. To say of the Holy Spirit in himself that He groans — indeed, that He gives vent to groanings which are unutterable by Him — is altogether inadmissible. Neither can we, with NiJsselt, substitute the gospel ; nor, with Morus, the Christian disposition ; nor, with Kollner, the Christian element of Ufe. Ac- cording to the opposition of nvfv/ia and rov(; in 1 Cor. xiv. 14, it is the new basis of life, which con- stitutes to the conscious daily life an oi)position of the life which, though apparently unconscious, is really the higher consciousness itself, the heavenly sense of the awakened soul. As, in the unconvert- ed state, the influences of the unconscious basis of the soul invade the conscious daily life with demo- niacal temptation, so, vice versd, does the uncon- scious spiritual life of the converted man come as a guardian spirit to the help of the daily life. There- fore the groaning of the spirit itself (see ver. 16) corresponds with the groaning of the consciousness * [On vnoixovri, see p. 162; also Col. i. 11; Lnnpe's Comm., p. 19. Cmisloncy seems to be always promin<^nt in the word. The preposition Sid with the genitive donotrs that through which, as a medium, our waiting takes jdaee (Alford). It is more than an accompaniment — it is the state which characterizes the waiting tliroughouT. On the connection of hope and patience, comp. 1 Thess. i. 3 ; Heb X. 36.-R.] t [Ag:iinst this, see notes in Inco, where Dr. Large him self does not defend this view. It is opposed to the mod natui-al erammatical construction of that piissnpe, ;ind ob- jectionable on other grounds. Comp. the additional notei , on vers. 16 23, and the excursus, chap, vii.— K.l •276 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. ir. its natural feeling. [This position of Dr. Lange is not in accordance with the view of the best mod- em commentators. Tholuck, De Wette, Ewald, Stuart, Hodge, Philippi, Meyer, Alford, Wordsworth, Jowett, as well as the older commentators in gen- eral, all refer it to the objective, Holy Spirit. 01s- haiisen, however, adopts the subjective sense. The proof must be very strong which will warrant us in referring it to any thing other than the Holy Spirit itself; for the Apostle uses to nvfvfia, as he has done in vers. 23, 16, &c., where the Holy Spirit is meant. The only reason urged against such a mean- ing here is, that the " groaning," &c., cannot be predicated of Him. But we have no right to de- part from the obvious meaning, because, in the next clause, that is predicated which, we fancy, cannot be predicated of the Holy Spirit. The predicate in this clause cannot, with strict propriety, be referred to any spirit save the Holy Spirit. That Dr. Lange's view weakens the thought, is also evident. — R.] Eelpeth our weakness [^a wavT i.).aii pd.- virai, T ■^ adOfviia fj /iiTiv. See Textual Note *', On tlie verb, comp. Luke x. 40, where Martha asks that Mary be bidden to help her — i. e., take hold of i?i connection with. It requires a weakening of its force to make this applicable to the new spiritual life. The subjective side has been brought out in vers. 23-25. Hence a reference to the Holy Spirit accords with the progress of thought. — R.] Meyer urges, with Beza, the ni'v in arvavrv).. : ad nos labo- rantes refertnr. At all events, it would refer to only the conscious side of our effort. But it is clear, from tlie further deiinition, that aaOivfia is the only correct reading. Tholuck understands this cKTOivfioL as referring to occasions of invading faint- ness. But the Apostle speaks of a permanent rela- tion of our weakness in this life, which certainly be- comes more prominent in special temptations. This is the incongruity between the new principle and the old psychical and carnal life. [The singular must be accepted as the true read- ing. It then refers to a state of weakness, already described (ver. 23). The dative, as in Luke x. 40, denotes not the burden which the Spirit helps us bear (so Hodge, and many others), but that which It helps. (Alford : " helps our weakness — xs who are yeak, to bear the burden of ver. 23." Meyer : " JUr lei/i init Hand an mit unserer Schwachheit") It should not be limited to weakness in prayer (Ben- gel), but is the general weakness in our waiting for final redemption. — R.] For ^xre know not what we should pray for as we ought [to ya(/ ri 7T()0(;fvio')/tf&a xafho fVfi oi'jt oida/ifv. To belongs to the whole clause. rd(i introduces an illustration of our weakness, and how it is helped. The aorist 7iQ0(;ft'^(i')/iffi-ct, which we accept as the correct reading, is more usual than the future, but either is grammatically admissible. See Winer, p. 280. — R.] Tholuck holds that this not knowing refers to special states of obscure faith, and has a twofold meaning : ignorance of the object toward which prayer should be directed, and the language in which we should pray. But the supposition of special itatos is incorrect ; otherwise the expression would be : we often do not know. But the language can by no means be under consideration, neither can a mere ignorance of the object be meant. Therefore De Wette and Meyer explain thus : we do not know what, under exidinp circttmntances, it is necessary to praj for. We refer the xad^o dil as well to the heavenly clearness of the object of redemption ai to the subjective purity, definiteness, and energy of desire corresponding to it.* The conscious, verbal prayer is related to the s[)irit of prayer, as the falli- ble dictate of conscience is to the infallible con- science. But the Spirit itself intercedeth [d).i.* arTo TO nvivnct v nf (j tvT vy/dvu. On ib.9 omission of {i7ii(j !jfn7tv (Jiec), which Meyer finds in the verb itself, see Textual Note '^ The verb oc- curs only here. The simple verb means, to meet ; then, compounded with iv, to approach in order to make supplication (Acts xxv. 24, ivriy/uvfcv) ; the iinf(j seems to show that the supplication is in favor of the persons in question. Dr. Lange rejects this, in order to avoid a reference to the Holy Spirit. — AvTo TO 7ivfv/ta brings into prominence the Intercessor, who knows our wants (Tholuck, Alford). — R.] Since the vnf^fvrvy/dvfi, must be read without the addition of the Jiecepta, we refer the imfQ to our want in not knowing what to pray for, as it is proper for us, and in harmony with our des- tiny. Tholuck regards the ti7Zf(j as merely a higher degree, as in v7Tf^n!-()u(j(Tftifi,v ; Meyer [so Philippi] sees here a l'7ii(j tjfioiv, according to the analogy of iiTifQanox^jh'oftai, &c. With groanings which cannot be uttered [^arfvay/tolg u/.u?.ijroi,i;^. Analogous to 1 Cor. xiv. 14 ; against which Tholuck remarks, that there the subject in question is the human nvi-T\ua. Meyer even declares that those explanations are rationalis- tic which do not interpret the nvtviia, to bo the Holy Spirit (Reiche : the Christian sense ; Kdllner : the Spirit obtained in Christ). Chrysostom's calling it the ydQi^fffia tv/^l'i, Jii^ Theodoret's not under- standing by the expression the I'/roffTacK,- of the Spirit, are declared to be an arbitrary alteration. Meyer does not accede to the opinion of Augustine, and most commentators, that the sense is, that man himself, stirred up by the Holy Ghost, utters groan- ings. It is rather the Holy Spirit himself; but cer- tainly He needs the human organ for His groanings. He claims that the analogy, " that demons speak and cry out of men," is adapted to this view. The anal- ogy of demoniacal possession ! Besides, Meyer, in his exposition of the aAa^.iJTon,-, prefers the inter- pretation of most expositors, unutterable, to the op- posite rendering, unuttered, dumb (Grotius, Fritzsche, and others), because it denotes greater intensity But we get from this the result, that the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of God in His glory, not only groans, but also cannot utter His groans. [Notwithstanding this attempt at a reductio ad absurdum, the view must still be held, that the Holy Spirit is here represented as interceding. To avoid this conclusion. Dr. Lange must first weaken the subject into the human spirit, and then the force of vTif^ in the verb. It is far better to accept the ob- vious sense, and then explain it in a way which escapes the extreme conclusions of Meyer. The Holy Spirit is here spoken of as dwelling in us ; in this indwelling He makes the intercession. This view presents no absurdity ; it rather accepts the • [Dr. Hodge refers to the fact that heathen philoRO- phers urged this as a reai'on why men ought not to pray The Apostle intimates that what is true of men in general is true still of Christians (oiSo/u.«i'), because their knowl- edge is as jet in no respect such as to make thfir prayej {KaOh Sei) as it ought to be. Hence the reference is t« a continuing state, rather than to times of ppecial weak- ness. — R.J CHAPTER VIII. 18-39. 271 prominent thoiiglit of the previous part of tlie chap- ter (vers y, 11, 14, 16), and implies not only that, by this indwelling, we are taught to pray what would Otherwise be unutterable (Calvin, Beza), but that the Holy Ghost " himself pleads in our prayers, raising us to higher and holier desires than we can express in words, which can only find utterance in sighings and aspirations " (Alf'ord). So Hodge, Stuart, De Wette, and most commentators. — R.] On the threefold view of u/.a/^^TOK,- (not utter- able, not spoken, not speaking), see Tholuck.* Ver. 27. But he who searcheth the hearts [6 (Hi t(jfvv(7iv raq x«()()ia§. //t is slightly adversative : These groanings are unutterable, but He, &c. The ijifwiTiv describes God according to the Old Testament phraseology (1 Sam. xvi. 7 ; Ps. vii. 10; Prov. xv. 11), as omniscient. — R.] In 1 Cor. ii. 10 it is said of the Holy Spirit that He searcheth all things ; here, according to the just cited reference of the groaning Spirit to the Holy Spirit, tliis very Holy Spirit would be an object of the searching God. [This objection is of little weight, since the object of the all-searching God is the mind of the Spirit, hidden (even to us) in the unutterable sighings, &c. — R.] The mind of the Spirit. His q^ovyjua', see chap. viii. 6. His purely divine and ideal striv- ing, but here as clear thought, denoting the excogi- tated sense of that language of groans. [If the reference to the Holy Spirit be accepted, then the sense not even excogitated by us is included. — R.] Because he pleadeth for the saints [on . . . ivTvyxuvfd V71S.Q ayi(i)v. How can the human spirit, even when possessed by the Holy Spirit, be said to plead for the saints ? — R.] The explanation of ort by for [because], according to most expositors (De Wette, Philippi, &c.), is opposed by Meyer (in accordance with Grotius, Fritzsche, Tholuck, and others), who urges instead of it, that. A very idle thought : God knows the mind of the Holy Spirit, thai He intercedes for the saints in a way well-pleasing to God. The olih is perfectly plain in itself, even if not taken in the pregnant sense (with Calvin and Ruckert).f He knows well that He, as the searcher of hearts (Ps. cxxxix. 1) and as hearer, is conscious of the thought and pure purpose of these holy groans. Wherefore ? be- cause il is well-pleasing; to God. [According to the will of God (uaia &f6v) is the correct paraphrase of the E. V. — R.] Not, according to Deity (Origen) ; nor before God, nor 2ijifh God (Reiche, Fritzsche) ; nor bi/ God, by virtue of God (Tholuck. — How can we hold that the Holy Ghost should intercede because of God's im- pulse ?), but according to God, in harmony with the Divine will (Meyer).| The Divine impulse is, in- • [The meaning unutferablf, which cannot be expressed In word^, is favored by the analoary of verbals in -toj, and is adapted by Luther, Calvin, Beza, Meyer, Tholuck, De Wette, Hodg-"e, Stuart, Alford, and many" others. Pbilippi admits this sense, but includes with it that of unnpok-en, which are not expressed in words. Comp. 2 Cor. xii. 4 ; 1 Peter i. 8.— R.) t [It is held by many commentators (among them Stu- , art, Hodge, Meyer), that if on be taken as causal, olSe must be rendered appnwes ; i. «., He approves what is the mind of the Spirit, becnuse, &c. Dr. Lange's estimate of Meyer's interpretation is very jnst, and he seems to be equally correct in denying the necessity for the pregnant »ense of olSe. Comp. AUord m Inco. The E. V. is exceed- ingly happy in its rendering of this verse. — Tt.] t [Alford: "All these pleadings of the Spirit are heard Bnd answered, eve i wh'-n inarticulately uttered. "We may extend the same comforting assurance to tlie imperfect and deed, indirectly implied here ; but then it follow! again, that the groaning Spirit cannot be idcnticii with the Holy Spirit. [Not with the Holy Spirit at without us, but as within us. — R.] Second Paeaoraph, vers. 28-37. Ver. 28. And we know [otSa^fv Si Meyer, Philippi, and others, take de as introducing a general ground after the more special ones in vers, 2t), 27. Alf'ord finds it slightly adversative, the an. titliesis being found in ver. 22. The former is prefer, able. Oi()afifv, Christian consciousness. — R.] The sulijective assurance of the future consumma- tion reaches its climax in the fact that believers are lovers of God. But in this form it indicates the objective certainty, which is its lowest foundation. However, instead of the most direct inference, that those who love God are previously beloved by Him, and are established on God's love (an inference con- trolling this whole section ; see vers. 29, 31, 32, 35, 39), the Apostle applies this inference to the condi- tion of Christians in this world. The whole world seems to contradict their hope of future glory. All things visible, especially the hatred of the hostile world, seem to oppose and gainsay their faith. And yet this fearful appearance can have no force, since all things are subject to the omnipotent and wise ad- ministration of God, on whose loving counsel their confidence is established. Still more, if all things are subject to God's supreme authority, and this au- thority IS exhibited in the development of His lov- ing counsel, they know, with the full certainty of faith, that all things work together for their good. Ti)is follows, first, from the decree, plan, and order of salvation (vers. 28-30). It follows, second, from God's arrangement, act, and facts of salvation (vers. 3 1-34). It follows, third, from the experience proved in the Old Testament, that the Lord's companions in salvation and the covenant are His companions in suffering, as His companions in conflict ; but as Hia companions in suffering, they are also His compan- ions in victory, for whose glorification all surmount- ed obstacles are transformed into means of advance- ment (vers. 35-37). The conclusion (vers. 38, 39) expresses so strongly the subjective, and also the objective certainty of the future completion, that we believe it necessary to make it prominent as a spe- cial paragraph. That aU things, navra; not merely all events (Meyer), or all afflictions (Tholuck) [Calvin, Hodge, Stuart] ; for, besides events (ver. 35), all the powers of the world are mentioned (vers. S3, 39). — Work together, o- rrf (> j'f i.* The beatitiful and correct term, serve for the good of, must neverthe- less follow the more specific definition. For the principal factor of the completion of Christians ia the central one : Christ over them and in them, the love of Christ or the Spirit of glory, the free and dominant impulse of their new life. With this first and central factor there now cooperates the second mistaken verbal utterance.'; of our prayers, whict are no themselves answered to our hiu-t, but the answer is given to the voii'e of the Spirit, which speaks through them, which we would express, but cuinw'." — E..] ♦ (See Tixunl JS'o'e '<. Tholuck would refer the avv to the loving God, but the simplest sense is that of coi>pcrat« ing (Bengel, Alfnrd, and others). Meyer, howovf r, finds in it the idea of the fellowship, in which He who supports necessarily stands to liim who is supported. So Philipp' and others, all taking (rvvipyel as = ^orjSet.- K.] 278 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. and peripherical one — that course of all things and all dediiaies about them whicli is placed under God's authority and Christ's power, and constitutes their guidance to glorification. For good, fti; uyctfyov. Strictly, for good. The article is wanting, for tlie Apostle has in mind the antithesis : not for evil, injurious, and destruc- tive worlcing ; and because every thing sliall be use- ful to them, and promotive, in a special way, of their good. For the good is, the prmnotioi of life. Every good thing of this kind relates, indeed, to the realization of their eternal salvation, but it is not directly this itself (Reiche). [Bengel : In bonum ad fflorijicntionein usque. — R.] Those who love God [toTi; ayanCi(Ti.v T 6 V O f 6v . Alford : " A stronger designation than any yet used for believers." Comp. 1 Cor ii. 9 ; Eph. vi. 24 ; James i. 12.— R.] The Apostle defines this expression more specifically with refer- ence to its purpose, by the addition : To those who are the called according to his purpose [roti,' y.atcc 7i^6di(Ti,v yiktixoli; oiWtr]. Yet the addition is not designed to fur- nish a definition for the explanation of the name, those who love God (Meyer) ; nor did the Apostle wish thereby to qualify the preceding clause (Riick- ert), but to represent more clearly the foundation of the life of those who love God, &c. (Tholuck, Fritzsche, Philippi, and others). The intention or purpose of God is the rock of their salvation, and the same purpose directs all things. The love of believers for God is therefore not the ground of their confidence, but the sign and security that they were first loved by God. But the Apostle uses for this another expression, wiiich indicates as well the evi- dence as the firmness of the love which has gone out for them. The evidence of their salvation lies in the fact that they are called by God to salvation (in the operative yJ.7j(Ti.i; with which the gospel has pervaded their hearts). This evidence refers to the firmness of their salvation in the purpose of God ; the genuine xlijan; of true Christians depends upon the n^d diauii, and testifies of it. See Doctr. N'oies.* * [^Tholuck : " They are not called merely according to a D vme decree {niid-j, but accordinp; to one whose stages are set forth up to the final goal of the eSdfatre." Meyer : " The 7rpd9€cris is the free decree, formed by God in eter- nity, of saving the lielicvi'rs throagh Christ (cbap. ix. 11 ; Eph. i. U ; iii. 11 ; 2 Tim. i. 9, a'.). According to this, the cult of God to the Messianic salvation tlirough the preach- ing of the gospel (chap. x. 14 ; 2 Thess. ii. 11) is promulga- ted to those wlio are included in that decree. When, therefore, Paul calls tiie Christians (cAjjtoc, it is self-evi- dent that the call, in their case, meets with success (1 Cor. I. 24), and hence has been united with the converting effect of Divine grace; although tbis is not found in the winl itself, which in that case would he equivalent to e/cAexToi. . . '. Weiss {.T.ihrbuch-j- fur D. Theologie, 1857, p. 79) aptly Bays: 'Election and calling are inseparable correlative ideas; where one takes place, the other does also; only the former, as a pre-temporal, internally Di\-ine act, cannot be perceived, but the latter, as a historical fact, is made mani- fest.' " The remarks of Alford in loco may well be ap- pended at this point in the exegesis of I he Epistle : "It may suilice to say, that, on the one hand. Scripture bears constant testimony to the fact th:it all believers are chosen and called by God — their whole spiritual life in its origin, pi;ogres3, and completion, being from Him; while, on the ether hand, its testimony is no less precise that He willcth all to be saved, and that none shall perish except liy wilful rejection of the truth. So that, on the one side, God's eovr.BBiQNTY, and, on the other, man's free will, is plain- ly declared to us. To rccrive, hc.liiive,, and act on both thexn, ia our du'y nnd our wisdom. They belong, as truths, no less to natural than to revealed religion ; and every one who believes in a God, mast acknowledge both. But all at- lempts to bridge over thn gulf betweKn the two arc futile, in Vers. 29, 30. In the following grand and glorw 0U3 exposition, the Apostle represents God's purpose as being unfolded and realized in its single elements. It is developed as the ante-mundane and eternal foundation of the historical order of salvation in th( two parts, foreknowing and predestinating, with ret erence to the eternal limit, the f/lori/. It is then historically realized in the saving acts of the calling and the justifying. It is finally completed in tba glorifying of believers. The foreknowing proceeds, hi truth, from eternity to eternity ; the predestinat- ing passes from eternity over into time ; and finally, the glorifying passes from time over into post-tem- poral eternity, while in the calling and justifying the two eternities are linked together, and reveal eter- nity in time. For whom he foreknew, he also predesti- nated [oTt 01/ <; 7T(Joiyviii, y.al 7r(j ooi^ tfff r ]. The twice-repeated tt^'o comes under the treatment before the examination of the single elements. Tho- luck : " According to a later view of Meyer, the 71^6 expresses only precedence before the call ; but it is against the analogy of n^ioyirdxr/.o) in chap. xi. 2 ; 1 Peter i. 20 ; and of 7T()oo^i2io in 1 Cor. ii. 7 ; Eph. i. 5, 11." It is certainly clear that the Apostle will here establish the eternal end, the doict, upoa an eternal beginning («('/?/). First elment: Wnom he foreknew. Tho- luck says, that " nQoyi,VM(rxn,v has been explained in four different ways, and in such a manner that each of the accepted meanings has its predestinarian as well as its anti-predestinarian advocates." These four definitions are: 1. To know beforehand; 2. To acknowledf/e beforehand, approbnre ; 3. To se- lect, or choose beforehand ; 4. To determine before- hand, decernere, prcedestinarc. The knowing beforehand was understood by the Greek and Arminian expositors in an anti-predesti- narian sense as the foresight of faith ; and by the Lutheran exegetical writers as the foresight of per- severance in the bestowed faith. Meyer : Fore- knowledge of those destined for salvation. A know- ing of the -predestinated beforehand, as, according to Tholuck, was accepted by Augustine in later life, and by Zwingli, is very tautological.* But this view passes over, in reality, into a second : approbavit ; and we then have Tholuek's arrangement, by which ei,f:ht antitheses — four predestinarian and four anti- predestinarian— must be limited, yet not carried out. The approbavit is, indeed, defended in both an Au- gustinian and an Arminian sense. But, in the for- mer, it coincides with the third view, ehgit (Calvin, and others). But if the decernere is also undei-stood in a predestinarian sense, to determine concerning a person, it is only a stronger expression for the elegit in the predestinarian sense. With respect to further treatment of this point, we must refer to the well- known commentaries. If we turn away from the verbal explanation, there are really but two constructions of this pas- sage, the predestinarian and the anti-predestinarian ; in addition to tliese, there comes at most only the the present imperfect condition of man." See chap. ix. throughout. He who would understand tlie Epistle to the Romans, rnxL^ assume this position, and remember that the diflBcuIty belongs to Theism, not to Christianity alone, much less to the Calvinistic conception of it. — K.] • [Jowettthus avoids the tautology : " Fnrekww, as the internal purpose of God — if such a figure of speech may be allowed ; and predeslinfd, as the tolemn external act by which He, as it were, set apart His chosen ones." See the view of Dr. Hodge, below.— R.J CHAPTER VIII. 18-39. 2'; 9 germ, or intimation of the possibility, of a tliird. Tlie predestiuarian explanation of the word niioyv- vuKTxnv by " to acknowlcdf^e," approbare (Beza, and others), or by dccervere, "to determine" (Luther: "ordained," not foreseen), is linguistieally nntena- ble ; but it is linguistically tenable when explained by 10 elect biforehand^ to choose (Calvin, Riickert, De Wette) ; * and now means predestination as a doc- trinal truth, now as a temporary Pauline view, and now, in the most universal sense possible, the gen- eral election for salvation (De Wette, and others). The aiiti-predestinarian interpretation of tlie ex- pression is also varied : the seeing or knowing before- hand of those who are worthy through faith, of those endowed with faith, &c. ; and again, in the sense of loving or approbans beforehand (Grotius, and oth- ers). As far as a third exposition is concerned, the ob- servation has been made that God's foreknowledge is a loving knowledge (see Tholuek, p. 449), or a creative knowledge, a being placed in the idea of Christ (Neander, Apost. Zeitalter, p. 822).f Yet Neander's explanation does not go to the bottom of the matter. It is this : " Those whom God, in His eternal view, has known as belonging to Him, through Christ, have been predestinated thereto by Him." We are, indeed, in want of a term which definitely expresses the truth that the loving or fix- ing knowledge is an absolutely original one, which determines the idea of the one to be perceived, but does not predetermine \t.\ Meyer's reminder, that 7i(Joyivwir God (Jer. xxxi. 3 ; Ps. cxxxii 9 ; cxlviii. 6). " To call by name " (Is. xliii. 1) " to grave upon the hands" (Isa. xlix. 10), and simi lar expressions, denote figuratively the unity of thai knowing and loving which fx in idea the subject in its peculiarity (certainly in Christ), in order tliat, in consequence of the idea, they may be called into existence. The distinction of prescience and pre- destination in the first foundation of the world, is connected with a defective comprehension of the peculiar character of personal life. (See the Doctr. Notes.) Second element : He also predestinated. The TTQ 00 (J itf vv presupposes God's first determination of man,* wliich establishes his individuality in rela- tion to other individualities, and to Christ, the cen- tre. Here the question is the predetermination of the historical destiny of the individual, the establish- merit of the historical gi idance to salvation, just as all kindred definitions, together with 7r^J00(;(l'ftv in Acts iv. 28 ; 1 Cor. ii. 7 ; Eph. i. 5-11 ; af/o^cLfiv in Rom. i. 1; Gal. i. 15; and osji'Cciv in Acts x. 42; xvii. '26 (where we have o^oOfaia also), are deter, mined by the fundamental thought of the 6()0(;, which is the limitation and condition in time and space, that are identical with the destiny in its rela- tion to salvation, the object of m.an — a relation which reaches its climax in the rdoaftv (Acts xiii. 48). Therefore the Apostle also adds here the des- tination to conformity to the image of God's Son, undoubtedly with reference to the definite conform- ity of the historical way of life — through sufferings to glory (chap. vi. 4 ff. ; 2 Tim. ii. 11 ; Heb. ii. 9-11), and to historical confirnsation and completion (Phil. ii. 5-11, and elsewhere). [To be conformed to the image of his Son, (J I' f( fi 6^ (foi'i; r ij t; fixovoi; toT ii'ior avror. The word oiiifio^qoi; is followed by the genitive here ; by the dative. Phi), iii. 21. Hence Stuart thinks it is to be taken as a substantive in this case ; but Alford remarks that it is like avfiqiioc (chap, vi. 5), in being followed by either. Comp. Kilhner, ii. p. 172. It is the accu.sative of the predicate ; see Winer, p. 214. — R.] Evidently, we have to deal here with a .specifically new ordination on God's part, though it !s in harmony with the previous one. The meaning of no(>(itj comes into consideration in order to explain more definitely tlie avii/ioiiq oiv (to which we need not supply an tivav, because the predestinar tion involves a predcsciiption). Tholuek : " The term fioiiqrj means frequently, but not invariably, the phase of the human form, as well as the form in general, and even the /(0(;(/^/ intMv (see Plato, • [Alford : ■' His forcTmowledge was not a mere heing previiiusly aware how a series of events would hajjpen, hut was co(3rdinate with, and inseparable from. His hs.7ing pre- f;rrf(7(«id all things." That the word means foreordained, predestinated, is certain ; that it is here applied to indi- vidu.als, is obvious; that it implies a pretcirestrial act of the Divine mind, is in accordance with the currdit of thought in the cb.-ipter, the scriptural eonci ptim of God'e purpose, and the use of the word in other passages. It is only one side of the truth, indeed, but the other side is rot more firmly established by ignoring this. The only recon- ciliation of the difficulty is in practical Christian experi- ence, and P:iul is addressing himself to this thronghcut i And wc A-)ioiu(ver. 28). — K.l 280 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. Phad,, pp. 10,3, 104) Aristotle distinguishes f?c5oc, tlie iuwurd forming power ; fio(jcfi/j, the plienomenal form ; and fvii^yna, its concrete reality, &c., and ai>fiyio(t(ioT'(TO^ai; from the conformity of appearance or situation." Tlie further definition, conformably to the image, or conformity of the image, which is still stronger, brings the idea of the phenomenal forn) still more elrongly into tiie light. Tiierefore Tlieodoret, Au- gustine, Fritzsche, and Meyer, would confine the ex- pression merely to a share in the glorified corporeal- neis of Christ (Phil. iii. 21), or to the data (ver. 10). Meyer and De Wette maintain, contrary to Calvin, Grotius, Calovius, and otliers, that '■'■fellow- ship of Kufferhtg is here remote ; " against which view Tholuck observes, that the object is expressed by tiie subsequent i()6la(Tf. Tholuck, p. 450, says, in speaking of atTn6(; in the biblica sense. This ()oiaff/(0(,- had therefore already begun for the compaidons of the Apostle, and, in his be« lieving confidence, it was ju.st as good as completed (see ver.s. 38, 39).* But if the Apostle had merely wished to describe this standpoint of the Christians of that day — that is, merely the standpoint of expe- rience — he would have had to connuence with the ore; txu/.nTfv, and return from the or<,' i(>i'Xaii>i(rn> to n(JOii)<>i.(Tfv, and finally to TT^ioiyvm. But he has changed the statement of his experience of that pe- riod into a doctrinal statement lor all time, in order to exhibit the n(>i')f)tan; of God in its full splendor. His sorites has then chiefly a historical meaning. Many had already completely passed over this sta- tioned way ; for example, Stephen, and James the Elder. In the same manner this way had, and will always have, to many, a distinguishing meaning;, that is, it applies to the secure developing progress, of the elect in a special sense. It has, finally, foe- all : a. a methodological meaning ; that is, they ex perience here the final consequence of God's saving acts in the ordo sulufis ; b. the meaning of evangel-, ical promise. If they stand in the circle of the x/J/ffic; and (iixaioxni;, they can be certain, retro^ spectively, of their election and foreordination (his-, torical determination), and prospectively certain of their guidance to glory. Paul assumes throughout the ethical facts and conditions tliat correspond to. these acts of God; but he does not name lihem here, because the connection requires that the superiority of the Divine ground of salvation tfl human weak- ness should alone be glorified -f- (see J)octr. ^^otes). Ver. 31. What then shall we say to these things ? [7'(' r V t ^ oT< fi i v tt ^ 6 q t avi a, _ On rl ovv i()ov/ifV, comp. chap., iii. 5; iv. 1; vi. 1 ; vii. V ; ix. 14, where it introduces a fitlse con-, elusion ; here, and chap. ix. 30, a correct one ; De Wette. — R.] Tholuck: " 7't i^o7i/niv is used here, contrary to the Apostle's custom, in a conclu-. sion which has not a doubtful character." But the apparently doubtful element lies in the conclusion- which might be drawn, that the Christian can have no opposition. He has, indeed, says Paul, no verk table opposition ; all the opposition that he really has, only helps him. What follows from the fecl^ that God has so securely established our salvation through all its stages ? ^ The conclusion is this : If God is for us, who is against us ? [El 6 & I 6q V 7T SQ ij n (')r , T ii; xa&' 7j /< oi v ; ] (Ps. xci. 1-7). Every thing which is against us, ia * [The omission of "them he also sanctified," which wo would expect to find in the chain, were "glorified" limited' to the future, is a suflicient ground for this posit on of Dr. Lange, and favors also the view, that the certainly ia prominent, rather than the completion of all these in the purpose of God. Of course, the objective certainty rests on this completion in God's purpose, but the latter is in- cluded only by implication. — K.] T [As the whole passage can only be of encouragement when viewed in this light, Wordsworth depiives it of ita force entirely, -nhen he says that the Church of England teaches: " She considers these things as do/.e; for in God's wi'l. and, on His side, they are done, for all members of the visible Church of Christ ; " and then makes the whole matter so depei dent on us, "that, unless we perform our part, all God's gracious purposes toward us will fail of their effect." See his lengthy notes, which touch (scarcely grapple) this difficult subject. — E,] t [Meyer takes vers. 31-39 as a conclusion from vers. 29, 30 ; " The Chri.stian has. then, nothing to fear that can ha detrimental to his salvation, but he is, wnth the love of God in Christ, certain of this salvation." This whole passage (notice the logical relation of on, ver. 29, and oi'v, ver. 31,1 is a commentary on Vrr. 28; — and what a coiomentary i -E.] 282 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. an earthly sense, must, in a heavenly sense, promote our welfare tliiough God's sovereignty. [How God is for us, has been set forth ; the question therefore implies, not doubt, but joyous certainty. Hence the E. V. is not strong enough. — R.] This confidence of the Apostle, in opposition to the hostile forces of the world, assumes a bold and almost cliallenging tone. Tholuck : " There begins with this expres- sion a series of victorious questions and triumphant answers, in reference to whicli Erasmus exclaims : • Quid U7iqua)n Cicero dixit graridiloqueutius ? ' Just such a triumphant acclamation is found in 1 Cor. XV. 54." [Philippi : " In fact, as vers. 19-23 may be called a sacred elegy, so we may term vers. 31-39 a sacred ode ; that is as tender and fervent as this is bold and exalted in matter and in manner ; that, an am- plification of ' we do groan, being burdened ' (2 Cor. V. 4) ; this, a commentary on ' this is the victory that overcometh the. world' (1 John v. 4). Augus- tine, De doctr. cftristi, iv. 20, cites ver. 31 as an example of the gravde dicendi genus, quod non tarn verborum ornatibus cerutum est, quatn violen- tum anirni affectibits. — Satis enim est ei propter quod agitur, ut verba covgruentia, non oris eli- qnntur induntria, sed peclor s scquantur ardorem. Nam si aurato gemmatoque ferro vir fortis arme- tur, intentissimus pugnce, agil quidem illis armis quod agit, non quia pretiosa, sed quia arma su7it." -R.] Ver. 32. He who spared not his own Son [o? yf T o Tr Id ion I'iov o c x e(fflanTo. Meyer, and others, take this as an interrogative an- swer to the preceding question. It does indeed an- swer it, but is, at the same time, an advance (see below). The enclitic yf has the force of even, quippe qui, but Alford is not justified in saying that this takes " one act as a notable example out of all ; " for this is the crowning proof of love, includ- ing all the others, and hence establishing tlie main clause : how shall he not, &c. — R.] After the Apos- tle has described negatively, in ver. 31, the eleva- tion of God's children above the hostile world, he portrays it positively in ver. 32. The logical con- struction is as follows : God, who has already estab- lished our dola, is for us, with the whole energy of His purpose. «. He is for us in person as our pro- tector, and therefore no person and no thing can be against us ; b. He is for us to such a degree that He gave His Son * for us. Ovx icpfiaaTo involves here two ideas : He did not save Him (Bengel : paterno suo amori quasi vitn adhibuit), and. He did not spare Him. But delivered him up for us all [a). I a VTISQ ijfiimv ndvriov n a()iiiM/.fv avrov. On the verb, comp. chap. iv. 25. On the prepo- sition vntQ, in behalf of, comp. chap. v. 6. — R.]. Deliverance to death for us, for our redemption.! The notion which would explain John iii. 16 as a • [His nwn Snn. Tholuck, Olshausen, Philippi, Stuart, Hodge, and many others, find an implied antithesis here, riz., his adopted sons (ver. 19, &c.), to which Meyer and De Wette object. At all events, the emfhasis resting on 'iiov requires us to uiidertitand it as son in a specific iense, n.ovoyevri';. The christological hearing of the pas- ■age is unmistakable. — R. ] ' [Most commentators admit the special reference to death. It is not necessary to restrict it to this, but the thought is certainly promi lent in Paul's expressions con- cerning Christ. — Us all, evidently menns believers here. Th«, value or the efficacy of tlie atonement is not brou'At Into view at all. To this commentators of all doctrinal tendencies agree. - B.] " deliverance to finlteness " (mentioned by Tholuck on p. 455), belongs rather to the pliilosophy of Schelling in his eaiTy period, than to the christologi- cal stand|)oint. [Freely give us aU things ? r a ndvra ^/ilv /afjiatTat,: A question a majori i; ov/i, not witli (t'w avrm. It is perhaps more grammatical, but the thought is still tne same: that with Christ, and because of Christ, all else shall coine. — R.] Td ndvra. Tholuck: "Every thing which we need." This is against Brenz, who explains thus : " All the blessings comprised in Christ." But why not simply, ererg thing, in har- mony with ver. 17 and 1 Cor. iii. 22 ? For, after all, we " need " every thing, and the " blessings comprised in Christ" are the whole universe. There- fore the avv is not merely based on the idea of the TliiOiiOtjy.ri. Vers. 33-35. Two lines of the certainty of sal- vation have been drawn from the one fiindamenial idea of the x/.^dtt; y.atd 7i(j60fai,v ; that is, of tlie assurance of salvation. There is, first, the lino of tiie certainty of individual, inward, and personal sal. vation (vers. 28, 30); the causa principalis : grace. Then we have, second, the line of historical salva- tion, wliich corresponds with the first line as the causa mediatrix. This latter appears as the almighty gift of salvation, in opposition to the contradiction of the world. As the Apostle looks at the fearful appearance of tiiis contradiction, he now presents throughout the negative character of the historical salvation. That is, he develops the thought placed at the outset — that nothing can be against us, be- cause God is for us ; so very much for us, that He delivered even His Son for ns. But the Apostle then brings out the fact, though more indirectly, that God will, with Him, also freely give ns all things. Thus there is, first of all, the exalted me- diation of salvation. " Who shall lay ang thing to the charge of God's elect ? " Different constructions of the following three verses (vers. 33-35) : a. Vers. 33 and 34 are antitheses which must be read as question and answer, according to our trans- iation. [So E. v.] (See Lutiier, Castalio, Beza, Calvin, Fritzsche, Philippi [Stuart, Hodge], and oth- ers.) b. The three answers also stand in the form of questions, thus : Wiio shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect ? Will God, who justifieth, do it ? Who is He that condeinneth ? Will Christ, who died for us, do it ? (This is the view of Augus- tine, Ambrose, Koppe, Reiche, Olshausen, De Wette [Alford, Wel)3ter and Wilkinson, Jowett], and oth- ers.) c. An altered form of presenting the antitheses : 1. Who shall lay any tiling to the charge? Answer: It is God that justifieth ; who, therefore, is He that condemneth? 2. Answer: It is Christ that ditjd, &c., who also maketh intercession for us ; who, therefore, shall separate us from the love of Christ ? This construction of the antithesis, which was laid down by Origen, Chrysostom, and Thcodoret, has been neglected by nearly all recent expositors, but is urgently reconmiended by Meyer. [Wordsworth follows it in his text, but is impressively silent on the subject in his notes. See Meyer, not only in defence of his own view, r.ut for a resume of othei opinions. — R.] Tholuck very properly remarks, in opposition to CHAPTER Vm. 18-39. 285 this third combination of sentences, as follows : " It can be Icnst satisfactory of all ; for, if we adopt it, that rhetori(.:il coiiforniity of the sentences is lost which is apparent in the other constructions," &c. But this construction not merely obliterates the prand simplicity of the antitheses, but also obscures their real order. The question. Who shall lay any thing to the charge ? remains totally unanswered. But, on the contrary, the question. Who is lie that condemneth ? would receive two answers : first, the expression, " it is (iod that justifieth," anil after- ward, " it is Christ that died," &c. In addition to this, the clear tlioughts, justijicatov, in ver. 83, the atonement^ in ver. 84, and koHness or ffloriJicatio7i, iu vers. 35-37, would be totally confused. The second construction appears to be favored by the fact, that tlie third question, " Who shall separate us from the love of Christ ? " seems, in turn, to be answered by a rhetorical question (tribu- lation, or distress, &c. ?). But the third question is continued through vers. 35 and 36, and the an- swer to it follows in a positive declaration in ver. 37. Tims elegance of both form and matter pro- nounces in. favor of the antithesis of three ques- tions and three answers. If it be objected, that the answers would be still strengthened by the form of rhetorical questions, we might reply, that they wotUd indeed be strengthened even to overstraining and obscurity. For there are, indeed, accusers and con- demners enough against believers, which is plain from what follows : tribulation, distress, persecu- tion, &c. But the principal thing is, that they stand as accusers against the justifying God himself, and as condemners of the future Judge of the world, Christ the Messiah, who is the Saviour of believers ; and therefore, that their charge and condemnation are not only impotent, but must even advance the glory of believers, just as tribulation, distress, per- secution, &c., are not only unable to separate them from the love of Christ, but nmst establish them in His love as decided victors. But Paul could hardly have expressed, even in the form of a rhetorical question, the thought that God could be the accuser of believers, and Christ could be their condemner, even if we consider the question apart from the fact that he would thereby have destroyed the antithesis: if God be for us, who can be against us? Meyer remarks, against the former construction, that Ofoq 6 f)i.i'.aLMv and tIi; 6 xaTaxj^uroir would be essen- tially correlative. This is altogether incorrect. The dvxa'uoabq removes the charge of condemnation ; the atonement made by Christ abolishes the condemna- tion itself. That Paul did not write i'k; y.araxQivfZ to correspond with the t/i,- iyxa/.iafi, is not only unimportant, but is based upon the supposition that there could be many accusers, but that there could be only one condemner at the tribunal. Meyer holds that, by the first construction, Christ must have been represented as Judge, in harmony with the 6 Karaxi^ivdiv in ver. 34. But apart from the consideration that Christ opposes all the worldly condemnations of men pronounced on unbelievers, by interceding for them at God's right hand, we hold that the reading A'(JtffT6!,- 'JrjrroTi; (the Sinaiti- cus favois the same), which seems to have been early given up from a misconception, serves as a satisfactory explanation. As, therefore, the first sen- tence is : God is the justifier, the second is this : Christ the Messiah, the expected Judge of the world, is 'Jrffovi 6 ano&avdiv. The article before '/lyfToTv is given with the adjective designations.' Tholuck has declined to decide concerning the punctuation. [The pointing adopted in the E. V. ha.s been s« fully defended by^Dr. Langc, that the following r* marks will suffice in addition. (1.) Even the most rhetorical style would scarcely indulge in sevent&'>r successive questions, without an answer, as view b, would maintain. (2.) View c, distuibs the flow of the passage, without adding to this force, (3.) The grand thought of the certainty of salvation secraf to be even more fully established by accepting ihret questions and three answers following each in turn, while there is no reasonable objection to the cor respondence thus claimed between each question and its answer. — R.] Ver. 33. Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect ? [ t t ^- iyxa/.ia it Kara, i/.lfy.n'iv & t ov ; The verb is usually followed by the dative, only here with y.atd. The article is omitted with ixhy.Tm', giving prominence to the attribute of the persons (Meyer). That it refers to the persons under discussion throughout, is obvious. — R.] The idea of the ix/.tytaOai, theo- cratically resting on the Old Testament "^na, cor- responds with that of the 7T^oyiv(i'iaxfi.v ; but in the concrete name of the tx/.fxroi, it denotes the deep- est establishment of the whole character of believ- ers in the ildoxla of God (see Docir. Notes). It is God that justifieth ! [ ^ ( 6 <,- 6 ^ i. • X a tJi r ! The expression is more energetic than Ofbi; (ii.xai,ov ; cornp. Matt. x. 20 (Philippi). The Of 6c, occurring immediately after &fo'\ has a rhe- torical emphasis (Meyer). — R.] According to Tho- luck, the question really is the interce^Kor in oppo- sition to tlie charge, and, on the other hand, the ()(,xai.oiiv in opposition to the xarax^ivftr. But this would not correspond with the connection. As the authorized accusers, the law and the conscience, are silenced iu the dixaiMtnc, which God himself exe- cutes, we must here have in mind principally the weakness of the unauthorized accusers, at whose head stands Satan, y.aTtjyo(JOi; (Origen), who opposes Christians not only in heathen adversaries (Photius, Theophylact, Grotius), but also in Jewish adversa- ries. The dixaiioT'v has evidently here also a forensic meaning. Tholuck : " Luther excellently says, in harmony with the sense, ' God is here.' " Ver. 34. Who is he that condemneth ? The o xar ax () IV III V declares, that in an authorized form there can only be one, the Messiah, but it is just He who is their propitiator and intercessor. It is Christ, &c. [A'^kttoi; ano&avo'iv, X.T.A.] The Apostle expresses complete deliverance from condemnation in four essential elements of Christ's redeeming work. In the two elements of His death and resurrection there is comprised full deliverance from the real guilt of condemnation (see chap. iv. 25) ; and in His sitting at the right hand of God, and in His intercession, there is comprised • [As remarked in Textual Note '•, this view is doubly doubtful. The reading is quite uncertain, and to render XpiffTo? 'I7) ia 1 1. a. no T fj i; dyo- Bition whch he had uttered in vers. 33-35. He ather proclaims here the absolute subjection of all tiic powei'S of tlie world to the conseiousncs.-', or rather conscious being, of God's love in Christ. The Apostle declares the immovableness of his /con6dence, first of all by the decided rttTtn-a fiai, I am persuaded. He follows this up by portray- ing the powers of the world in great antitlieses, which not only describe the victorious career of the individual Apostle through the world and through time, but, in prophetic sublimity, comprise the whole victorious career of God's people until the end of the world. Tholuck distinguishes the antitheses thus: 1. Hu- man events (death and life); 2. Suijcrhunian spheres (angels, principalities; afterwards dtn'dfitv<;)\ 3. Time (tilings present, things to come), in which he thinks that the ()te, which only the gospel and atoning blood can inspire." — On the parallelism between chaps, v. and viii., see Forbes, pp 333 ff.— R.] DOCTRINAIi AND ETHIC AIj. FiusT Pabaoraph, vkrs. 18-27. A. The groaning of the creature* (vers. 18-22). 1. The Scriptures ascribe to the whole universe, even to the heavenly regions, the necessity of the renewal of created being by transformation (Ps. cii. 26-28 ; Isa. li. 6 ; Rev. xxl 5) ; but they di.stin- • [This suhjeot has been a special study with Dr. Lanee. His notes, which are as profound as they are exhaustive, are left without additions, since to add would he to mar the unity.— R.] guish between the regions of glory, which are re- newed, and the present form of the world, which must be renewed l)y passing through corruption and the destruction of the world (2 Peter iii. lu, 23). The throre of God, the ascension of Christ. Even astronomy recognizes this great contrast between the regions of prevalent growth and of prevaleni completed existence in the nature of light (see my work, Da.i Land der Herrlichkeil, pp. 42 ft".). But also in reference to the sphere of humanity, which does not embrace merely the earth (also Sheol), we must distinguish between the pure condition of na- ture in its antithesis to perfection (1 Cor. xv. 47 ff.), and the obscurity which nature has experienced in consequence of sin ; see the present passage. Ac- cording to the nature of the avd^ionoi; /oizoi;, his whole sphere stood in need of development — in need of a metamorphosis (2 Cor. v. 1 if. ; 1 Cor. XV. 50) ; but this development has become abnormal through sin ; and the metamorphosis has, by a me- tastasis, become death in the pregnant sense, qfio^d, corruption. But from this correspondence of na- ture with the human world in the state of fall and decay, there also follows an expectation of their cor- respondence in the delivering restoration which will be also the completion of the normal development. 2. The Holy Scriptures everywhere render pron:ii- nent the coherence and correspondence between the spiritual and natural world. There must be a heav- en, because there are heavenly objects — because there is a God — because there are angels and saints. There must be a hell, because there are devils. Thus Paradise correspotided with Adam in liis state of innocence ; the cursed ground, with fallen man ; the Promised Land, as the type of the future Para- dise, with the typical people of God ; a darkening and desolation of the land with every religious and moral decline of tlie people (Deut. xxviii. 15 ff. ; Isa. xxiv. 17 ; Joel ii. ; Zeph. i. 14, &c.), and with every spiritual period of salvation an exaltation of nature (Dent, xxviii. 8 ff. ; Ps. Ixxii. ; Isa. xxv. 6 ff. ; Isa. XXXV.; Hosea ii. 21, &c.) ; and thus the sun was darkened at the death of Christ, and the re- newal of the earth was announced by the eartli- quake at His death. Now this parallelism extends in a more intense degree through the New Testa- ment period, both as to the overthrow of the old form of the world, and the sufferings preceding it (Luke xvi. 25 ; 2 Peter iii. 10 ; Rev. xvi. 1 ff.), and as to the renewal succeeding it (Isa. xi. 6 ; Rev. xx.-xxii.). 3. It corresponds to the connection of the im- personal creature-world with the personal life of man, that the former participates in the anxious ex- pectation of V)eli(!vitig humanity for perfection. Aa nature in spic^e aspired beyond itself, in so far as it received the impress of man's nature, so also i^oes it aspire, even in time, beyond itself, in so (iir as it shares with nian his progress toward the change or transformation into the super-terrestrial and glorified form. The waiting of the creature for that perl'ec- tion, as with erect head, just as it is with tlie human outlook, may be called prosopopreia ; the fundamen- tal thought itself, namely, its suffering, its sense of the impulse toward developnent — an impulse con- fined and disturbed by the abnormal condition — is a real relation, an actual course of conduct. "We do not include herein the normal forms of death in the brute world. The fundamental idea of this appear- ance of death is no selfish struggle for existence, but the idea of sacrificing love. The weaker beast CHAPTER VIII. 18-39. 281 which becomes a prey to the stronger, cannot and should not voluntarily otter itself" upon the altar of life, even though it be only a beast ; but when the beast in a tori)id state pays to the stronger, as though in a dream, its tribute lor the joy of its existence, there is reflected the voluntary deliverance to death in a higher region. The most apparent phenomena of the sufferings of the creature, next to the in- numerable sufferings of human nature in subjec- tion to diseases, wars, battles, pestilences, are the Bufferings of the brute world as they ajjpear to be immersed in the fate of tiie human world, and are represented in the noblest form in the sacrifice of the brute, and in the grossest form in the pangs of the brute. Yet not only over the brute world, but also over the whole realm of vegetable life, there has extended, with the morbid tendency of the human centre of the world, a morbid development of the most subordinate forms, such as we find in parasites and dwarfs, togetiier with the rapid increase of the common and lowest forms above the more noble, and, in fact, an increase of degenerations of all kinds. But the apostolical, as well as the mod- ern Cliristian and humane apprehension of nature, extends stdl beyond the perception of the real groan- ing of brutes and the degeneration of vegetable life. The sense of the most profound life perceives a groaning of the creature in the most general sen-^e, first, as a longing, developing impulse of the crea- ture-world toward perfection and to the second high- er form of existence, and secondly, as a painful suf- fering under the law of an abnormal and more in- tense corruptibleuess, and thirdly, as a mournful concert, a harmony of all the keynotes of the /.odfioi; in its homesickness for a new paradise. These key- notes were heard by the prophets (see No. 2, above) ; Christ has definitely characterized them in His escha- tological discourse (Matt. xxv. 29, and the parallels in Mark and Luke) ; and Paul sketches them here in brief outline, while the Book of Revelation speaks of them in great figures. Through all the periods of the Church there extends a profound sense of this earnest connection between the moral and phys- ical decline of the human world, and we notice its reecho in the voices of the poets (Shakespeare, for example), down to the Romanticists of recent date (Fr. von Schlegel, Bettina). But in the department of the most recent literature, in which the sense of this anxious expectation and sadness is blunted, there has arisen on the side of the degenerating extreme a fantastical and gloomy view of the " battle for ex- istence," and it would not be surprising if even this materialism should, in turn, degenerate into dualism. Moreover, the expectation of the last catastrophe refers back to the catagtrophes underlying the crea- tion of the world, and whose reflection in the Del- uge is still proved by our recollection of the most remote antiquity. 4. The Apostle has described the data in 1 Cor. XV. 54 as aqi!)ai>ata.. Peter speaks of an inherit- ance incorruptible, un defiled, and that fadeth not away (chap. i. 4). Here the doia means, on the one hand, the deliverance of the body, and, on the other, the freedom of God's children. The body, there- fore, in its new form, shall be exempted from the natural necessity of physical life ; for, as the real body, it has put off, at death, the old bodily form with its sinful propensities. In this life it has be- come in many ways, a source of temptation and hindrance to the inward life ; but in its higher form it shall become the perfect outward expression of the inward life. To be wholly adapted to the spirit, and therefore not only exempt fronj the corruption, but also the constraint of nature, and to be wholly an organ, an expression, and an image of the spirit — these are the individual ciiaracteristics of the glo- rification in which nature also shall participate, since it is rendered free to share in the freedom of the glory of God's children. In general, the conception of real ideality is the object to which they shall be raised ; that is, an ideality in which its idea shall not only be delivered from all deformity, but shall even be elevated above the symbolism of the Ijeautiful splendor in which poetry involuntarily becomes j)rophecy, into the real nature of the beautiful ap- pearance. We shall find an analogue to the repre- sentation of the new form of things, if we comparo the present form of the earth and of the creature- world with the rough forms of the earth and the gross forms of the creature, which, according to the testimony of paleontology, have preceded the pres- ent form of our cosmos (see my Land der Htrrlich- keit ; Vermischte Sc/irijien, vol. ii.). 5. The different eschatologies of antiquity here come in for consideration. As for the relation of the Persian to the Jewish eschatology, it seems, after all, demonstrable that the originality of the theo- cratic eschatology is reflected in Parsisni (Vendidad, Bundehesh), just as the Christian eschatology is re- flected in the old German Edda. On the develop- ment of the Old Testament eschatology, see The- luck, note on p. 422 ; Ps. Ixxii. ; Isa. xi. tj ; xxv. 8 ; Ixv. 66 ; Hosea ii. 21 ff. ; Amos ix. 13 ; Zephaniah, &c. ; and on the Jewish-Rabbinical eschatology, see Thoiuck again, p. 423. It is notewoithy that Rab- binical Judaism has even assimilated itself to hea^ thendom, in that its expectation has become chiefly retrospective, like the longing of the heathen for the golden age (that is, an expectation of the gro- tesque restoration of sensuous glory), while the Old Testament anticipation of Israel, the "people of the future," has been consummated in the eschatology of the New Testament. On the eschatology of the New Testament, we must refer to biblical and dog. matic theology (see Commentary on Matthew, pp. 418-434 ; 1 Cor. xv. ; 2 Peter, pp. 46 ff.). For re- marks on ecclesiastical eschatology, especially on Luther's discourses concerning the future form of the world ; on the question de duratione brntorum. ; on the distortion of the end of the world into the gross representation of an utter destruction of the world by the Lutheran doctrinal writers of the sev- enteenth century ; and on the restriction of the Apostle's entire description to mere human rela- tions, &c., see Thoiuck, pp. 425-428. — It is a beau- tiful idea of Theodore of Mopsvcstia, that " things visible and invisible " constitute a y.oafioc, for the comprehension of which (consisting, as it does, of all created things together), in one pledge of love, man (consisting, as he does, of both worlds) was created; that, after his fall, the higher spirits alienated them- selves from him ; but at tlie prospect of his restora- tion, they dedicated themselves to his service, and now rejoice in his restoration, &c. This idea is more in place in the passage relating to the original founding of the new world in the absolute atone, ment (Col. ii. 20), than in the present passage, relat- ing to the glorification of the present world. — We can avoid all fanciful ideas in regard to the question de duratione bnttorian, and apply Christian principlet only, by treating it in brief allusions : (1.) The morbid sundering of types analogous t» 288 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMAN'S the formation of human heathendom. The opposite must tiierefore be a return of nature to collective fundamental types. (2.) The morbid increase of individuals, analo- gous to tlie extravagaut generation of the human proletarian. The opposite is the preponderance of constant existence over an excittd growth. {'i.) Tlie rise of a preponderance, of the most eubordinate forms, of parasites, of forms doomed to decay. The opposite is the dynamical dominion of pure forms, the negation of parasites. (4.) The reflexive formation of the morbid form of death in original, ideal forms. (5.) The absolute connection of the creature thus idealized with man, and its appsopriation by man. Here, as well as to the following paragraph, be- long Ps, Ixxii. ; Isa. Ixv. 66 ; John Walther's hymn, " It makes one heartily rejoice ; " G. Arnould's hymn, " Breaker of all bonds ; " Schiller's poem, " Oh, from this valley's depths ; " and expressions of Fr. von Schlegel, Bettina, and others, on the anxious expectation of nature. 6. The most prominent view.s on eschatology may be distinguished thus : (1.) The Gnostic-dual- istic view, with which we must also unite the recent theosophic views in general ; (2.) The Positivist, which holds to an absolute catastrophe without in- terpositions ; (3.) The Rationallitic, which does not get beyond the notion of a gradual idyllic improve- ment of nature and humanity ; (4.) Tlie cliristo- logico-dynamical, which defines eschatology from the centre (which operates as a principle), of the death, the resurrection, and the glorification of Christ. This is also essentially the patristic view. To modern philosophical unbelief the beginning of tiie world, as well as its end, is sunk in mist and night, because to it the centre of the world — the historical Christ — is sunk in mist and night. The clnistological and dynamical view stands in particular need, at the present time, of a vigorous development. It appears everywhere throughout the Scriptures, and is strongly expressed in Eph. i. 19, and also in Phil. ill. 21. Tholuck : " It is note- wortliy that in Phil. iii. 21 the same i](tia, and ano).vTiJM(j(,ii, see Tholuck, p. 436. Theodoret has even perverted the antithesis into that of ovo^ia and Tr^ayfta ; the Socinians distinguished tenere fide and frui ; Tho- luck speaks, with De Wette, of a " partial definition of the idea of n'mOtala ; " and Luther translated thus : " We patiently wait for the adoption, and ex- pect," &c. The Codd. D. F. G., in surprise at the expectation of the adoption, leave out the v'toOt' aiav. 5. No grander and more glorious thing can De said of the original state of the human body, than that its full deliverance (from sinfulness, misery, death, decay, and perishableness) shall be its trans- formation to the glorious freedom of the children of God. That the resurrection of the flesh is also declared with the glorification of the body, comp. my Vermischte Schrifteu, vol. ii. pp. 232 ft'. C. The groaning of the Spirit imparted to he lievers (vers. 26, 27). 1. On the contradictions arising from the identi fication of the groaning spirit with the Holy Spirit itself, comp. the Exeg. Notes. We are led here to the antithesis which the Apostle brings out in 1 Cor. xiv. 15. It is the Christian, religious-ethical forma- tion of an antithesis, whose physical foundation is the twofold form of consciousness originally peculiar to the present human life.* Compare, on this point, Deutsche Zeitachrift fiir christliche Wissenschaft^ &c., 1851, p. 242. ■ 2. Aceordinr to Tholuck's view (p. 438), when the believer is in the greatest distress, he knows least of all how to find a verbal expression of hia prayer. But, according to the Psalms, necessity teaches how to pi'ay ; the greatest distress beeomea • [This view of Br. Langc is one to which exception hai been t iken throughout the Exeg. Nnlca, from chap. vii. W to the close of chap. viii. ; it is not necessary, then, to entei upon a new discussion of it here. — K.J CHAPTER Vm. 18-39. 289 prophetical when recourse is had to God. But it is just in the calaest states that the beUever needs most of all the interceding Spirit. Indeed, distress gives to prayer a strong expression of human feel- hig, and in so far Tholuck's view is applicable to the prayer of distress in a more special sense. The in- tercession of the Si)irit denotes the more direct ae- C(«s which God's children, in their inmost heart, have gikined to the Father through Christ, according to John xvi. 26. For the real Advocate witii the Father is Clirist (1 John ii. 1) ; tlie Holy Spirit, as Bucli, is the present Comforter of believers, in oppo- sition to the woild (John xiv. 16).* 3. Tlie real nature of true prayer is the union of the human and divine Spirit, prompted by God's Spirit. Hence the prophetical confidence of the Amen. This union, according to which God is not only the author and finisher, but also the disposer of i)rayer, is represented most of all in the mystical adoration of a spirit absorbed in communion with God. On this point, see the expression of Jelaled- iiin, in Tlioluck, p. 443. 4. On the groaning of the creature, see Bucer's beautiful expression, in Tholuck, p. 440. Second Paeagkaph, vers. 28-37. A. 77(e certainty of salvation in the saving pur- pose of Divine grace, as the causa primaria {efficiens') of salvation (vers. 28-00). 1. The certainty of salvation is divided into two lines, one of inward and individual life, and the other of external relations. Both have three start- ing-points in common : a. The causa primaria, tlie purpose of God (ver. 29) ; 6. The causa meritoria, the gift of His Son (ver. 32) ; c. The causa appre- kendms, or organica, faith in its development into the life of love (ver. 28). Believers are here called those who love God, because, in their love for God, the reflection of God's love has become manifested in them. Tlie progress of the expectation and joy- fulness of personal life toward the dark and con- cealed ground of life, as to the absolute and spirit- ually clear personality, which is one with love itself, \g not the ground, but the sign and evidence that )ur personal life has been appointed and called into being by God's eternal counsel of love and grace. In our love for God there is revealed His love for us, and in our personality there shines the reflection of His personality. But with this there appears the dynamical central line of life — that of the Divine determinations of the persons allied to God — to which the whole succession and course of things is made subservient. 2. The divine 7^()o0^f(T^^• denotes the eternal re- lation of God to the course of the world called into being by Him, but also called to free self-develop- ment under His authority ; just as is the ca.se with the two terms poi'/.tj and >ii)oy.ia. All these defi- nitions denote God's eternal thought and plan of the world ; but they denote it in different relations. The fvihxta designates the central point of the Divine purpose, its anticipating love, the ideal per- ception and contemplation of the personal kingdom. Beside it there stands, on the one hand, the poi'/.p], God's going to himself for counsel, the look of His intelligence at the necessities of the free develop- * [This distinction presents no v.ilid objection to th intercession of the Holy Spirit. For it is one made iu and Uuoush U5, as that of Christ is for us. — R.) 19 nient of the world ; and, on the other hand, tlicr* stands the n(t60tai.i;, as the establishment of Ilia government over the beginning, the middle, and the ultimate object of His institution of love. The iiidoKia settles the children of salvation ; the pov).ij perceives the conditions of salvation ; and the tzpo' Otaii; determines the stages of salvation. But that this is not the decree of fate, but rather qualified and communicated according to the stages of the free spiritual kingdom, is plain from the very teim used to describe Christians : that they are called according to the purpose — called, not compelled. Tholuck: " ;r(;o.9*ffti;-. The niio is not the tem- poral before, as in ntioiyvio, which Beza and Pareus liold, but as the prefix in tt^* or/. 9x1 .9 at. Yet they are not merely ««yi,vr us, all the liindranccs and restrictions to oar salvaiioii are nullified as sucii. Nothing can harm us. Ver. 32 : Since God did not spare His own Son for us, He lias given us already every thing in principle, in order to give it to us in His own time in reality ; all the aids for our salvation are given to us ; every thing contributes to our good. 2. The Apostle represiMits, in four distinct ele- ments, the coniplele security of our perfect salva- tion in Christ. His death removes our deserved condemnation. His resurrection raises us above the flense of condemnation into the confidence and sjjirit- ual life of adoption. His sitting at the right hand of God protects us against all condemning powers, and is the jdedge of our acquittal at the judgment. His intercession abolishes the last remains of con- demnation in our life, and secures us against relapse. On the disscntivs between the Reformed and Luther- an theology in reference to Christ's sitting at the right hand of God, see Tholuck, p. 458. Tholuck d(!cides in favor of the view that the right hand o<" God is ubique, and the sitting at the right hand of God indicates the Saviour's entrance into absolute freedom from all restriunt. But if we will not re- gard the "absolute freedom from all restraint" in a purely negative sense, we are driven with this free- dom itself to the positiveness of an absolute situa- tion and standpoint in glory. On the views relating to the inferccssio, see Tholuck, p. 459. According to Tholuck, the infercessio must be strictly regarded only with reference to Heb. vii. 25 ; i.x. 24 ; 1 John ii. 1 ; according to Meyer, it is voca/is et oralis. But it may be asked. Is it analytical, or synthetical ? The glorified Christ, in His eternal purpose of love, is himself, as the personal and complete Word, the personified intercession. He apptars in the pres- ence of the Father for us (Heb. ix. 24). For state- ments relating to this subject, see Tholuck, p. 461. C. Concluaion. 1. The Apostle has enumerated seven opposi- tions that can operate against us as temptations to relapse. There are seven, from the beginning of labor to rest. He here enumerates the forces which can oppose us in our fellowship of love with the Lord ; these are ten in number. But this is the number of the finished course of the world. By height we might have in mind the livfi/m, in the Bense of 2 Cor. x. 5 ; and by depth, Rev. ii. 24. Yet both terms are essentially the same, and we pre- fer the explanation given in the Exeg. Notes. 2. The assumption that different classes of angels are spoken of in this passage, has resulted in various changes of the text. Also in Eph. i. 21, the Apos- tle has chosen expressions which comprise as well present powers of the world as future spiritual pow- ers. The same holds good in reference to Col. i. 16. ftiost TJry acts, did these gracious acts, is beyond our com- ErehtBsioj . Jr/o/ He did, ihi'm, is answered, so far as it can e answered here, only by the reaponsive love of a be- liever's heart. We need only hold fast to the fact ; that it Is a fact in general, the .4.postle makes abundantly clear; that it is a ffict in our case, can only be clear according to the measure of o;tr conscicius less of being in Christ, "in wh m he hath chosen us, before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy, and without blame before him in love" (Eph. i. 4). Comp. chap. ix. on the more diiEcult phases of this subject. — R.l Paul has given no ground for a definite hierarchj of angels; neither has Peter done so in 1 Peter iii, 22. On Tholuck's discussion concerning augelif classes, see pp. 461 ff. 3. There is a special need, in our day, of bring ing forward the absolutely dynamical view of lh< world in opposition to a groundless and illiniitijbU atomistic one. But the vital way to bring about this view, is the experience and developed perception of the absolute operation of the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord. 4. Thus chap. viii. advances from the certainty of freedom from condemnation, in ver. 1, to the cer^ tainty of eternal salvation, in ver. 39. HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. Vers. 18-23. The groaning of the cret kirc. 1. What are we to understand by "creature" here! 2. \Vhy does it groan ? 3. For wl:at does it groan ? (vers, 18-23.) — The magnitude of the future glory of God's children. 1, It makes us forget all tha sufferings of this present time ; 2. It satisfies not only our expectation, but also the anxious expecta- tion of the whole creation (vers. 18-23). — Why are tlie sufferings of this present time not worthy to be compared to the future glory ? 1. Because our suf- ferings, however great, come to an end with this present time ; 2. The glory, on the contrary, will continue forever (ver. 18). — Comparison of the suf- ferings of this present time witti the glory which shall be revealed in us : 1. The former bring pain, cares, and tears ; 2. The latter brings eternal liealth, peace, and joy (ver. 18). — The revelation of God's children is a revelation of their life (^conccaled with Ciirist in God) of coiu'ageous faith, fervent love, and calm hope ; Col. iii. 3 (ver. 19). — The creature in the service of corruption (ver. 21). — The creature transformed to glory (ver. 21). — 13elievers in the possession of not only the first-fruits of the Spirit (faith, knowledge, love, patience, chastity, &c.), but also in the possession of God's full adoption, since the body also will be delivered from the bondage of corruption (ver. 23). LuTHEK : God will not only make the earth, but also heaven, more beautiful. This present time is His working garb; afterward He will put on an Easter coat and a Pentecostal robe (vers. 18-23). Stahke : Wonder and rejoice, ye cross-bearers, for your heavy and wearisome sufferings are only a drop compared with the boundless sea of joys, and as a grain of sand in the balance against hundreds of thou-sands of pounds (2 Cor. iv. 17). "iVo»i sunt condiffnce passiones hujus sceculi ad prceteritam cut pam, qua: remittitur ; ad prcencntem conso/ationiu gratiam, qncc hnmiititur ; ad futurain gloriam qua promittitur ;" Bkrmi., De Conveys, ad cleric, c. 30 (ver. 18). The creature will not be utterly annihi- lated, but renewed, and placed in a more glorious state (ver. 21). — Hedingek : Woe to those who re- vile, torment, and abuse God's creatures ! (ver. 19.) Spener: What would not a soldier suffer, if he knew that he should become a General? But here is a glory succeeding suffering, beside which all the glory of the greatest emperors and kings is only a shadow (ver. 18). — Roos : The suflorings of this present time are infinitely small compared with (his infinite weight of glory (ver. 18). — The glory is con- trasted with the corruption, and freedom with bond^ age. That which is glorious will last eternally ; and 202 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL 10 IHE ROi^A^o. tliai which is free may indeed be used and enjoyed by others, but is not in a state of bondage or slavery (vers. 20, 21). — Wliat is spiritual, will become com- pletely spiritual, and, consequently, will be revealed in great glory. Paul calls tliis state of glory the state of adoption, because God's children will then completely show their lionor in themselves, fully enjoy their Father's h)ve — in a word, will be heirs of God and joint-heirs witli Christ (vers. 22, 28). Gkrlach : As tlie mother in travail delivers the living child, as it were, from deatli, so does nature, groaning under the power of death, struggle to bring forth from itself a new and incorruptible creation. " Not you alone, but wliat is nuich lower than you are, and witliout reason and conscience, shall share witli you your blessings. The creation will be free from the bondage of corruption ; that is, it will no mor£ be corruptible, but will keep pace with the glorification of your body. For as it became cor- ruptible wliea you did, so will it again follow you when you become innnortal. As a nurse who fos- tered a king's son will herself enjoy his possessions as soon as he attains his father's throne, so will it be with creation. Do you see how man everywhere goes ahead, and every thing happens for his sake ? Do you see how the Apostle comforts the struggling one, and joints him to the unutterable love of God? But he does not merely comfort ; he also shows the certainty of what he savs. For if the creature which was created for your sake has hope, how much more do you have hope for whose sake the creature shall enjoy all these ble; sings ! Thus, when the son ap- pears in his glory, sh.ill men clothe their servants in more glorious robes to the honor of the son ; " Chrysostom (vers. 18-2S). Lisco : The magnitude and universality of the future perfection (vers. 18-23). — All the snfferivgs of this present time, both physical and spiritual, which we must endure on the way to our future glorification, bear no comparison to this perfection. The proof of this is, that the creature, the whole creation, both irrational creation and every thing which is still outside of feRowship with Christ, is anxiously waiting for the revelation of the still con- cealed glory of God's children, the truly new-born ; in which glorification the whole creation will partici- pate, for it is universal and great. The ground of this anxious expectation of the whole creation is partially owing to the subjection of the latter to vaiiiti/, and in part to the hcpe that it shall be deliv- ered from that state which is subject to vanity, and shall participate in the glorious freedom of God's children (vers. 18-21). Hkiunkr: "Temporal sufferings area differen- tial of the future glory which shall be revealed ; that is, they are so infinitely small that they have no value compared with the future glory" (Silber- 8CHLAG, fJreieiuir/keit, vol. iv. p. 138). — The suffer- ings of this present time are not worthy to be com- pared with the glory which shall be revealed in us : 1. In respect to duration ; 2. Quantity ; and 3. Quality. — The sufferings are a mote, the glory is a hundred-weight ; the former are but a drop, the lat- ter a sea (ver. 18). — Paul designs to show : 1. The certainty of this future in opposition to doubters, as in 2 Peter iii. 4, who say that all things continue as they were ; he answers, by saying : No ; nature does not remain unchangeable ; nature itself has a ten- dency to transformation and completion ; 2. The magnitude of salvation, for it is the object and limit •f the whole creation ; it muat therefore be exceed- ingly abundant. — Revelation of the children of God. W/uU will then be revealed ? 1. The inmost and deepest nature of tlieir hearts ; 2. The distin- guished grace of God toward them, which is the glo- rious destination to which God elevates them. To whom will the revelation be made ? To themselves, to the angels, to the believing children of God, to the world, and to all devils (ver. 19). — The vanitj to which the creature is subject is manifested sjxv cifically as follows : 1. The creation has lost its original charm, its beauty, its durablencss, and ita uniformity ; 2. It has become corrupted by much that is injurious or useless ; 3. It is now given over to abuse (vits. 20, 21). — How is the self-anxiety of nature to be regarded '? We must suppose nature to have a consciousness, a feeling, and that it would say: "What must I suffer ! how must I be abused !" Supposing particular objects to speak, the sun would say : " How must I shine upon the wicked works of men ! how am I compelled to see every thing ! " The earth : " What ujust I bear ! what blood must I absorb ! " The gardens and fields : " How are we wasted in excess ! " Gold and silver : " How are we perverted into idols ! " Beasts : " How are we tor- mented and abused ! " If the Almighty were to open the mouths of many beasts of burden, how would the irrational brutes complain against rational man ! (vir. 22.) — The Christian is Vhomme de disir (St. Martin), a man of longings. Bkssek : The martyrdom of the creature is two- fold, and its coronation will also be twofold : 1. It suffers death, under whose pains the elephant groans and the worm writhes ; 2. It suffers violence and injustice from the ungrateful and malicious ; and it suffers involuntarily, for it is subject to these through God's authority (ver. 19). The glory of God's chil- dren is freedom — freedom from sin and death — free- dom from the tyranny of the devil and the world (ver. 21). — The Apostle says: We art wniti7ig for the adoption. It is the mystery of Christianity, that we ivait for what we already have, or that we are and at the same time are not what we shall be. We are righteous and sinful ; we are holy and impure ; we are kings and slaves ; we are free and bond ; we are living and dead ; we are saved and condemned ; — we are all the former, apart from ourselves, in Christ ; we are all of the latter in ourselves, apart from Christ (ver. 23). Vers. 24-28. The salvation of Christians in the present life is a salvation: 1. In hope; 2. In pa- tience ; 3. In prayer (vers. 24-28). — The one Chris- tian hope in distinction from the many worldly hopes. 1. It has a good ground — Christ, on whom we can build; 2. A certain object — eternal salvation (ver. 24). — What a man seeth he cannot hope for ; if we therefore hope, the object of our hope must be in- visible (vers. 24, 25). — Christian patience : 1. In what does it consist ? 2.. In whom is it found ? (ver. 25). — Intercession for us by the Spirit of God. 1. How does it take place 1 2. With what results ? (vers. 26, 27). — It is only when we perceive our in- firmities that God's Spirit intercedes for us with un- utterable groans (ver. 26). — A glance at the inmost life of prayer of God's saints. We here perceive . 1. Our great weakness ; 2. The comforting inter- cession by the Spirit of God ; 3, God's friendly hearkening to our prayer (vers. 26-28). — Praise God for His compassion shown in the Spirit's helping ua in our infirmities (ver. 26). — The unutterable groan- ings of the Spirit (ver. 26). — God knoweth the heart (ver. 27). — Are we also saints? Does God's Spirit CHAPTER VIII. 18-39. 293 also intercede for us? Can we also hope that our prayer will be answered ? (vers. 26, 27). — Under what circuinstanci's do we, too, know tliat all things Work togetlier for our good ? 1. When we love God ; 2. When we are conscious of our call (ver. 28). — The Cliristian view of human destiny (ver. 28). — How many men are still very far from knowing that all things must work togetlier for good to them that love God! 1. Proof that such is the case; 2. Statement of the grounds of this phenomenon. Starke : Impatience in distress arises from want of hope ; 2 Kings vi. 29, 31 (ver. 25). — Spenek; We do not know what would always be useful to us, and, if left completely to our own choice, would often pray for tilings which might be injurious, ratli- er than useful. We also do not understand how prayer should be best formed, and in such a way as most likely to be heard, especially in seasons wlien ne(;essity is great, and tiie heart is perplexed ; but the Spirit intercedes for us in the best way, with un- utterable groanings (ver. 2*5). — We, in wiioni there are sucii gioans, often do not ourselves understand what we pray for, for the anxiety of the heart is so great that it can express nothing more than a sor- rowful but confident desire for the grace of God ; but the remaining prayer is sliaped by the Holy Spirit, and lirought before God's tiirone (ver. 27). — Roos : Here (ver. 27) tlie Holy Spirit intercedes for us as a wise father intercedes for his child, who does not know how to address a great nobleman as he should, when he puts into his mouth refined lan- guage and a fitting compliment. Bengel : In this purpose of God lie concealed the very first roots of the justification and glorifica- tion of believers (ver. 28). Gerlach : The personality of man is no passing show, and does not pass away into universal life ; but it only lives truly a life of the spirit when the personal Spirit of God is the soul of its life — when God is in it — when the Spirit of the eternal fellow- ship of the Father and of the Son, of God and of His creation, is in it (ver. 26). By this means the prayer of the believing Christian first receives a strong and sure ground that the Spirit prays out of him ; and by this means it becomes clear how such great petitions as the first three of the Lord's Prayer are placed by the Lord in tlie mouth of the weakest believer (ver. 27). — It is God who worketh all in all for our salvation (Phil. ii. 18); therefore all things, His creatures who live, move, and have tlieir being in Him, cooperate for the same end ; not with Him, or beyond Him, but in Him and tlirough Him. Even all the evil that takes place on the earth cooperates for good ; for the will of the creature, which tears itself asunder from its Creator, is evil, and the evil continues to exist in this will ; but the evil tliat re- sults as the work of this will is, in so far as it inter- feres with God's order of the world, God's own work, is overruled by Him for good. If a child or friend of ours is struck by lightning, or killed by a mur- derer, it is God's work in both cases, so for as the matter concerns us ; even God's own retributive judgments, which requite the evil deed with evil, become a blessing to him who learns to love Him tnder the blows of His rod, so that then His penal justice is no more revealed therein, but purifying love and grace (ver. 28). Lisco : Patience waits ; it is established on hope, which is the direction of the spirit toward a future goor the greatest and sorest sacrifice, so is the greatest ex- pression of God's love for us the gift of His Son ; it is an act of love whicli inSnitely exceeds all else that God has done for us as Creator, Preserver, and Ruler (ver. 32). — With the strongly established con- viction of God's grace toward us Christians, tem- poral sufferings, still less than those temptations (vers. 33, 34), cannot lead us astray in our certainty of salvation and glorification (vers. 35-39). Hecbner : Christ is the true and real Ideal of human virtue, to whon; we should bs conformed, and to whom we are appointed as Christians to be conformed. The higher we think of Christ, the higher must we think of ourselves (ver. 29). — The Christian is a l)rother of Jesus Christ (ver. 29). — " Faith," says Luther, " puts such courage into a man, that he can say, ' Though all devils should pounce upon me, and all kuigs, emperors, heaven, and earth, were against me, I nevertheless know that I shall be sustained.' He who has faith is in the Loid, and although he dies immediately, he must live again " (ver. 31). — Compare also Paul Ger- iiAun's excellent, hymn, " If God be for me, I tread on all against me" (vcr. 31). — The power of the Christian reaches further than Lis trials; his strength will never be wlioUy exliausted. And this strength is called love through Him who hath loved us ; He, whose love raises us above all sufferings, strengthens us (1 Cor. XV. 57; 2 Cor. ii. 14; 1 John iv. 4 ; V. 4). Bi-:ssF.R : The triumph of faith (vers. 31-39). Ilie Pericope for the ith Sunday after Trinity, vers. 18-23. Heuhner : How the Christian regards the evils Hnd impcriVetions of this world — the future rejuve- nation of the earth. — The history of the earth. 1. What was the earth ? A scene of God's glory. ?. What has it become ? A scene of sin and death. 3« What shall it become ? Renewed, glorified, and a part of heaven. 4. Who will live on it ? Matt. T. 5. — The comfort which the gospel gives the suf- cring Christian. — Appuhn : The connection of the ireation with man : 1. The creature has fallen with man ; 2. It serves him against its will ; 3. It bears his image in itself: as men contend and fight to- gether, so is it among the lower orders of creation ; 4. It anxiously expects deliverance with man.— • Genzken : The token of future glory : 1. The anx« ious expectation of the creature ; 2. Tlie experta« tion of believers. — Kapff : The deliverance of the groaning creature : 1. In nature ; 2. In humanity in general; 3. In believers. — Raxkk : The hope which Christians have of their iuture glory : 1. What is implied in this hope ; 2. Its connection with the life of the Christian ; 3. Its blessings. The New Rhoiish J'ericopes : 1. Vei'S. 24-80, for Kew-Yenr\ Day. Deiciiert : The great privi. lege of God's children, to be able constantly to hope for the best. 1. It is only God's children who know what is best ; 2. It is only they who hope for it in a proper way ; 3. Their hope rests upon the strong- est grounds. 2. Vers. 31-39, for the \?,th Sunday after Trin. ity. Deichert: The blessedness of God's child, who lies in His bosom in full fiiith of eternal love. 1. Such a child of God has every thing which can truly benefit him ; 2. He is no more afraid that any thing can Larm him ; 3. He continues unseparated Irom eternal love. On chap. viii. 28. Schleiermaciier : On im- proving occasions of public calamity. 1. They ap- peal to us to know ourselves ; 2. Th; y greatly bene- fit us by making us better acquainted with God him- self. (Delivered in Halle soon after the French occupation.) Lange : Christians, as God's children, are heira of future glory. 1. The right of inheritance estab- lished on the New Testament ; 2. Anxious waiting fur the decision ; 3. Its eternal institution ; 4. The opponents of the right of inheritance ; 6. Its assur- ance ; 6. The infinite value of the inheritance.— The anxious expectation of the creature, as contrast- ed with man without this expectation in our day, is the same picture on a large scale which Baliiam's as3 presents on a small one. The Spirit in nature in opposition to the worldly-mindedness of skeptical natural philosophy. — Unspirituality in the garb of pretended natural philosophy, judged by its declara- tions : 1. Nature was not called into being by the Spirit of the Lord ; 2. It does not testify to the do- minion of the Spirit ; 3. It does not strive for the revelation of the glory of the Spirit. — The true tneaning of the groans : 1. Of the creature ; 2. Of believers ; 3. Of the Divine Spirit in their new life. — How does the case stand in reference to the battle of your life ? 1. If God is not for you, every thing is against you, though every thing seems to be for you. 2. If God be for you, nothing is against you, though every thing seems to be against you. Noth- ing can harm us, for nothing can separate us. — Our fortress of rock : God's love in Jesus Christ our Lord. [BuRKiTT : How will God's adopted children be made manifest ? 1. In their persons ; 2. In their actions ; 3. In their condition. — The Holy Spirit in- tercedes for us : 1. By assisting us in duty ; 2. By quickening our affections ; 3. By enlarging our de- sires ; 4. By setting us to groaning after the Lord. — Groaning denotes the strength and ardency of desire, which, through its fervency, puts the soul to pain and to a holy impatience till it is heard. If we want words, let us not want groans ; Lord, let Thy Spirit help us to groan out a prayer when we want ability to utter it ; for silent groans, proceeding from Thy Spirit, shall be heard in Tnine ears when tha loudest cries shall not be heard without it. [Henry ; Though the seal be the principal pa.i CHAPTER VIII. 18-39. 29J of man, yet the Lord has declared liimsclf for the body also, and has provided for jt a great deal of honor and luifipiness. The future adoption of God's cliildrenis: 1. The adoption nianife8ted before the world, angels, and men. Tlieir lionor is now cloud- ed, but. God will then publicly own all His children. The deed of adoption is now written, signed, and BeaJtd ; then it will be recognized, proclaimed, and publisliod. 2. It is the adoption perfected and com- pleted. Tlie cliildren of God have bodies as well as souls, and the adoption is not perfect until those bodies are brought into the glorious liberty promised the children of God. — Difterence between faith and hope : 1. Faith has regard to the promise ; hope, the thing promised. 2. Faith is the evidence of things not seen ; hope is tlie expectation of them. 3. Faith is the mother ; hope is the daugliter. — Scott : All that we owe to the flesh is a holy re- venge for the injuries already done, and the hin- drances continually given us; and instead of ren- dering our state doubtful, by living after it in any degree, we should, by the Spirit, continually endeav. or more and more to mortify it, and repress all its actions. — Sin has filled the world with suffering, yea, with unspeakable disorder and misery ; all creatures seem to i)rocIaim man's fatal apostasy, and to recom- mend the inestimably precious salvation of Christ. But the gospel opens a brighter prospect ; a glorious crisis approaches, of which all things seem in anx- ious expectation. — Clarke: Fluency in prayer is not essential to praying; a man may pray most pow- erfully in the estimation of God, who is not able to utter even one word. The unutterable groan is big with meaning, and God understands it, because it contains the language of His own Spirit. Some de- sires are too mighty to be expressed ; there is no language expressive enough to give them proper form and distinct vocal sound. Such desires show that they came from God ; and as they came from Him, so they express what God is disposed to do, and what He has purposed to do (ver. 27). [Hodge : Observe, 1. As there is a dreadful pressure of sin and misery on the whole creation, we should not regard the world as our home ; 2. It is a characteristic of genuine piety to have exalted conceptions of future blessedness, and earnest long- ings after it ; 3. The reason why all things work to- gether for the good of God's cliildren is, that all things are under His control ; 4. The plan of re- demption, while it leaves no room for despondency, affords no pretence for assumption ; 5. As there is a beautiful harmony and necessary connection be- tween the several doctrines of grace, so must there be a like harmony in the character of the Christian. — The gospel is : 1. Wonderful ; 2. Glorious ; 3. Secure. — Barnes : Reasons why we are continued here in this st;ite of vanity : 1. Christians are sub- jected to this state to do good to others ; 2. Their remaining here shows the power of the gospel in overcoming sin, and in thus furnishing living evi- dence to the world of the power and excellence of that gospel ; 3. It furnishes occasion for interesting exhibitions of character, and for increasing and pro- gressive excellence ; 4. It is a proper training for beaven. — Reasons why Christians do ncn know what to pray for : 1. They do not know what would be real'j best for them ; 2. They do not know what God might be willing to grant them ; 3. They are, to a great extent, ignorant of the character of God, the i-eason of His dealings, the principles of His jovornment, and their own actual wants ; 4. They are often in real and deep perplexity ; and, if left alune, would neither be able to bear their own trials, nor know what to ask at the hand of (iod. — J. ¥. H.] [HOMILKTICAI. LlTKRATURK ON TlIK WliOLK CHAP- TER. — The honiilelical literature on this chapter ia very voluminous ; we select the following, as being most important. — Bishop Cowpkr, Ileavai Opened, &c., Wovkx, 11 (1619); E. Philips, Ver(ah,e GoUy Sertnonx^ 243 ; Enw. Elion, Trixniph of a True Christian l>cxcribed {Thne Hxcdlvnt and Pioui Treatises^ 1053) ; H. Binmno, The Sinner's ISanctu- aril, &c. ; being Forty-c yht Sermons on the Sth Chai.Ur of liomaiis, "UoW.s, 1, 267; T. Jacomb, Sermons Preached on the Whole 8th Cliaptcr of the li'pistle to the Romans (only the sermons on the first four verses have been published, 1672) ; T. Horton, Fortjf-six Sermons upon the Whole 8lh. Chapter of the Epistle of the Apostle Paul to tlie liomans (1674) ; T. Manton, Forty-nevin Sermons, Works, 2 ; J. Mestrezat, Sermons sur la 8e chap, de VEpitrt aiiz Fomainx (1702); T. Bryson, A Comprehensive Vino of the Rial Christian^ Character, Privdeges, and Obligations (1794); A. Short, The Wdness of the Spirit with our spirit, J llnslrated from the 8th Cliapter of St. PauVs Epistle to the Roman* {Bampton Let lures, 1846); 0. Winslow, No Con- dcmtiation in Christ Jesus, as u7ifo'ded in the 8th Chapter of the Epistle to the Romans (new ed., 1857). — Homilktical Literature on the Carnal Mind AND Man's Enmity to God. — C. Simeon, Works, 15, 195; Bishop Stillingkleet, Serm., 3, 294; B. Ibbot, Disc, 1, 365; J. Evans, Disc, 1, 93; J. Drysdale, Serni., 1, 213 ; R. Graves, Works, 4, 159 ; 27te Carnal and the Spiritual, Village Preach- er, 1, 181 ; C. Simeon, Works, 15, 199; G. T. Noel, Serm., 2, 452; S. Charkock, Works, 9, 175; Arch, bishop Leighton, Serm.., Works, 3, 195 ; J. Jamie- son, Sert.-u (4) on the Heart, 2, 263, 381, 439, 465 ; G. BuRDER, Village Serm.. 5 ; J. Venn, Serm., 3, 56 ; T. D wight. Theology, 4, 441 ; C. Scholl, Serm.., 158 ; E. Cooper, Prak. Serin., 5, 17 ; T. Chal- mers, Works, 9, 66 ; H. Cadlkield, Jrish Pnl/.it, 2,263; J. Cooper, iSecw., 28 ; C.Simeon, Work.<, 15, 202 ; E. Blencowe, Plain Sermons, 2, 362 ; J. Fknn, Serm., 52. [HOMILETICAL LiTERATURK ON LiFE AFTER THE Spirit (vers. 13, 14), and on the Spirit of Bond- AGK AND Adoption. — S. Clarke, Serm., 8, 23; Bishop Hall, Serm., Works, 5, 527 ; T. Jacomb, Mortiivg Exerc, 3, 585 ; R. South, Serm., 5, 298, 326 ; t! Wilson, Serm., 1, 389 ; L. Atterbury, S. Clanham, Serm., selected, 2, 173 ; M. Hole, On the Church Cat., 1, 55 ; N. Carter, Serm., 155 ; 1. Pearse, Serm,, 219; D. Waterland, Serm., V/i>rks, 9, 325 ; R. Robinson, Village Serm., 267 ; T. Bel SHUM, Disc, 1, 72 ; T. Biddulph, Plain Serm,, 3, 168 ; H. Draper, On the Collects, 2, 275 ; • C. Sime- on. Works, 15, 270 ; Bi&uop Hi-bI'R, Parish Serm , 1, 443 ; S. F. Suktees, Serm. ; T. Knowles, IHsc., 3, 267 ; A. W. Hare, Serm.,, 1, 77 ; W. G. G. CooKKSLEY, Serm., 2, 254 ; C. Neat, Disc, 223 ; A. B. Evans, Serm., 230 ; II. E. Manning, Serin 4, 27; A. Watson, Serm. (1843), 134; N. Meeres, Serm., 529; Bisiiop Wilbeufcrcf, Sern.,39-, W. HowoRTH, Se7-m., 32 ; Bishop J. Jackson, Witnesi of the Spirit, 145 ; I. Wid-.iams, Senn., 2, 145 ; C. J. Vaughan, Serm. (1847), 77 ; C. Bui.len, Serm.., 43 ; H. Alford, Serm., 3, 309 ; J. J. Blunt, Plain Serm., 56 ; W. Gresley, Parochial Ser?)/., 365 ; C E. Kennaway, Serm. at Brigl^ton, 1, 222 ; l>isi;ecOT. on Sev. Occ, 1 ; W. Richardson, Serm., 2, 146 ; T. Arnold, Serm., 1, 139 ; C. Marriott, Serm., 1, 179 ; R. Montgomery, Ood and Man, 311 ; E. B. Pusey, Serm., 2, 304.— J. F. H."! THIRD DIVISION. BIN AND GRACE IN THEIR THIRD ANTITHESIS (IN THEIR THIRD POTENCY): HARDEN- ING, AND THE ECONOMIC JUDGMENT OF HARDENING (THE HISTORICAL CURSE OF SIN), AND THE CHANGE OF JUDGMENT TO DELIVERANCE BY THE EXERCISE OF DIVINE COMPASSION ON THE COURSE OF THE WORLD'S HISTORY. THE HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF SIN TO THE EXECUTION OF JUDGMENT, AND OF THE REVELA- TION OF SALVATION TO THE EXHIBITION OF COMPASSION. THE INWARD CON- JUNCTION OF GOD'S JUDICIAL AND SAVING ACTS, AND THE EFFECTING OF THE SECOND BY THE FORMER. Chapters IX.-XL First Section. — The dark problem of Ood^s judgment on Israel, and its solution. Chap. IX. 1-33. 1 I say the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience also bearing me witness in 2 the Holy Ghost, That I have great heaviness [grief] and continual sorrow in 3 my heart. For I could wish' that [I] myself^ were accursed from Christ for 4 my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh : Who are Israelites ; to whom pertaineth [whose is] the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants,' and the giving of the law, and the service of God [o/ the sanctuary], and the promises ; 5 Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning [as to] the flesh Christ came [w Christ], who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen. d Not as though [rt is not however so, that] * the word of God hath taken none eflTect [come to nought]. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel [For 1 not all who are of Israel, are Israel] :* Neither, because they are the seed of 8 Abraham, are they all children : but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.' That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God [Not those who are the children of the flesh, are children of God] : but the CHAPTER IX. 1-SS. 297 9 children of the promise are counted for the seed [reckoned as seed]. For this is the word of promise [this word was of promise], At this time [season] ° will 10 I come, and Sarah shall have a son. And not only this ;* but when Rebecca 11 also had conceived by one, eveii by ['"nu even by] our fither Isaac, (For the children being not yet born, neither having [Without their " having as yet been born, or] done any [any thing] good or evil,'' that the purpose of God according 12 to election might stand, not of works, but of him that [who] calleth ;) It was 13 said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger.'* As it is writt*;n, Jacob have [omu have] I loved. But Esau have [omit have] I hated." 14 What shall we say then ? Is there unrighteousness Avith God ? God forbid. 15 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will [omu will] have mercy, 16 and I will have compassion on whom I will [«'»»« will] have compassion.'* So then it is not of him that [who] willeth, nor of him that [who] runneth, but of 17 God that [who] sheweth mercy." For the Scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same [very] purpose have I raised [did I raise] thee up,'° that I might, shew my power in thee [in thee my power]," and that my name might be de-. 18 clared throughout all the earth. Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will. have mercy [Therefore on wliora he will he hath mercy], and whom he will he hardeneth. 19 Thou wilt say then unto me. Why [then]" doth he yet find fault? For 20 who hath resisted [resisteth] his will ? Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God ? Shall the thing formed [or, moulded, nXucr^a] say to him 21 that formed it, Why hast thou made [didst thou make] me thus ? Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour 22 and another unto dishonour ? What [But what] if God, [although] " willing, to shew his wrath, and to make his power known [make known his power], en«. dured with much long-sufiering the [omit the] vessels of wrath fitted to [for] 23 destruction : And [Also, t. «., he endured for this purpose also] *" that he might make known the riches of his glory on the [o7nit the] vessels of mercy,, which he had 24 afore prepared unto [before prepared for] glory, Even us, whom he hath called [As such, i. c, vessels of mercy, he also, besides preparing, Called US] not of [f^'Otll amODg] the Jews only, but also of [from among] the Gentiles ? 25 As he saith also in Osee [Hosea],*' I will call them my people, which [who] were not my people ; And her beloved, which [who] was not beloved. [;] 26 And it shall come to pass,"^ that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people ; there shall they be called the children [called sons] of, 21 the living God. Esaias also [And Isaiah] also crieth concerning Israel, Though the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, A [The] remnant '^^ shall be saved : 28 For** he will finish the work [is finishing the word]," and cut [cutting] it short in righteousness : Because a short work [word] ''^ will the Lord make upon the earth. 29 And as Esaias said before [And, as Isaiah hath said]. Except " the Lord of Sabaoth had left us a seed, We had been [become] as Sodoma [Sodom], And been made like unto Gomorrah. 30 What shall we say then ? That the Gentiles, which followed not [who weit> not following] after righteousness, have [oviit have] attained to righteousness, 31 even the righteousness which is of faith. But Israel, which followed [follow^* ing] after the law of righteousness, hath not attained [attained not] to the law 82 of righteousness [mhVj of righteousness]." Wherefore? Because they soKfjht it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law [or, as by works].^* For* 13 they stumbled at that stumbling-stone [stone of stumbling] ; As it is written, Behold,^' I lay in Sion a stumbling-stone [Zion a stone of stumbling] and [a] rock of offence : and whosoever believeth [he who believeth] " on him sliall not be ashamed [put to shame]. 298 THE EriSTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 3. — [Lange renders : Denn ich that ja {einsl) das Of'ubde, /or I once indeed mad'i the vnto to 6«, &c. Foi the sion of this interpretation, see Ex'g. Nutea. The English text has not been altered to corr'pspond, Bicce tht « Vor. 3.- fill discussion » . _ - , oommon view of tjux''*")*' i^ upheld in the additions. — D. K. L. read evx6ij.r)v, which is generally rejected. 2 Ver. 3. — [The !{■€. has this order: aurb? iyio avdOeiia eli/ai (C. K. L.) ; but the preponderant authority N. A. B. I). E. F. G.) favors: avdOefia elvai. aiirbs iyui (a., however, puts eli/at first). So Gricsb ich, Laeh- mann, Tischendorf, Meyer, Alford, Tregelles, Lanfje. This order, if it has any special force, probably emphasizps th« fact, that he could wish liimsilf accursed, rather than that he hims.lj could wish it. Hence the Amer. liible Union ia ftnfortunate in placing myxflf after the first I. Noyes : Iconli/ wish tii be myself accursed. '■' Ver. J. — [B. D. E. V. G., Vulgate, and most fathers, read: i^ fia^TJKT). N. A. C. K. : ai fiiad^xai, now adopted by most editors. The alteration to the singular probably arose from a misunderstanding of the mean ng. The plui-al was referred to the Old and New Testaments; and as the latter was no advantage of the Jews, the singular waa substituted (so Meyer). * Vv Jjfw vpot o-i Kara rhv Kaipov rovrov ei? (iipas, icol ffei v'Cov Xdppa i) yvvrj ?i^."'^>? T-HV Alford thinks , a V, inserted in LXX., refers to pure mercy; Meyer, and many others, join it with ov: " wAomsofver, in whatever state;" thus describing i.ot merely the mercy, but the choice of its individual objects, as the free act of God ; for the emphasis in the relative clause rests on the repeated ov dv, since av generally has its position after the emphatic word (KQhner, ii. $457). We are certainly justified in making the relative clausespresent instead of future; lor the future force ox the Hebrew verbs is doubtful, while the Greek verbs (both in LXX. andThe text) are present. See Exig. Ko/rs.^ i» Ver. 16'.— [The Rer., B^. K., read eAeouvros (from tAeew) ; N. A. B'. D. K. L. eAetovTo? (from eKedai), The latter is adopted by Lachmann, Tischendorf, Alford, Tregelles; the former by Meyer and Wordsworth. Meyer urges that Paul would not use two forms, one here, and the other in ver. 18 (where thp reading iKeel is well established, only D'. F. G. having eKea), and concludes that u was substituted for ov through a mistake of the transcriber, and thus readily preserved, since it corresponded with a form in actual use. •' Ver. 17.— [Very freely quoted, especially this clause, from LXX., Exod. ix. 16 : iveKtv tovtov SierriprjBrif, on thit account thou werl preserved. Ets outo to to is merely a strengthening of the LXX. ; but ef^ ye ipa ore seems to be a purposed deviation. The form of the Hebrew Tj'P"1123.|n (Hiphil of TC^ , to stand), I Itave caused thee to stand, is better preserved by Paul's quotation. See Exfg. Notes, for discussion of the meaning of all three passages. " Ver. 17. — [Here Paul deviates from LXX., writing &vvaiLi.v instead of iax^v- " Ver. 19. — [There is some confusion about ovv. B. D. F. insert it in both clauses ; Rec, '•'. A. K. L. omit it the Bocond time. All have it in the first cl.ause, but the position varies. liec, D. F. K. L. put it before jioi ; N. A. B., Tregelles, after. \The above rendering adopts it in both clauses. »» Ver. 22.— [The participle diKiav is interpreted: since, because he was willing (t, p., purposed) or: aVhongh \t %oat Willi ng (i^nt yet purposing) The latter is adopted by Lange: obschon (bereits) des Willens ; I^cyer, and others.— After what, supply : w'lt tliou rephjf or something to that effect. See the Exrg. Notes on both points. '0 Ver. 23.— [It was necessary to supply this much in the text, in order to vindicate the view taken of this difficult passage. See Exig. Notes. »» Ver. 25.— [This is a free quotation from Hosea ii. 2.) (23, LXX. E. V.). The Hebrew text is followed more closely than the LXX. ; the clauses are transposed, &c. It is not necessary to insert the LXX. text here, as it diffeia in almost every word, though containing the same general thought : nns— 'BS "'aS'Xbb "'n"l'?N^ '^'r""' ^^"^^ "'^^"7? In rendering Lo-ruhamoh, Paul follows the LXX. '* Ver. 26.— [From the LXX., Hosea i. 10 (ii. 1, Hebrew), closely connected with the preceding, as if from the same filace, according to the usage of the Rabbins, who thus joined citations (^ven fi-oin different authors. The only varia* ion from the LXX. is the strengthening of icATjSijaovTai kox into eicei (cAijS^o-oi'Tai. The E. V., Hcsea i. 10^ lupplies there. CHAPTER JX. .-38. •299 *• Ver. 27. — [Isa. x. 22. Paul follows the LXX., which reads : koX eav yenp-ai o Aobj 'lo-paijA wi ^ aniiot i% faAao-o^t, to xaTaActfx/xa avrui' (7<«(6^dfxov {R(c.) are N'. D. K. L., a number of versions. It is omitted, however, in N'. A. B. F., by Lachmann, Tischendorf, Jleyer, L;tnge, Trepelles, Wordsworth. Aiford prefers to omit, but does not deem the evidence sufliciently strong to decide. The word would readily be inserted as an explanation. '" Ver. 32. — [Lange prctcrs to retain yap (/.'ec), mainly nn the ground tliat it must be supplied in thought, even if rejected. It is lound in N"- C K. L., many versions and la'hers ; retained by Tischendorf, Wordsworth, Lange. It is omitted in n'. A. B. D'. F., some cursives, &c. Lachmann, Meyer (with decision), Aiford, Tregelles, reject it. II omitted, the period also must be omitted, and the verse he rendered, as by Aiford : " Because (pursuing it) not by faith, hut as by lOcrkt, they siumb'ed, &c. " Ver. 33.— [Paul here combines Isa. xxviii. 16 and viii. 14 in one, varying, to suit his ptirpose, both from th« Hebrew text and the LXX. There is no variation in thought, except that the Apostle gives it as his exegesis, that the " stone of stumbling" of the one passage is the " corner-stone elect," &c., of the other. Comp. 1 Peter ii. 6-8. 32 Ver. 33.— [The Hec. inserts iroi?, on the authority of K. L., versions and fathers. It is omitted in N". A. B. D. F., by Lachmann, Tischendorf, Meyer (4th ed. ; Lange quotes him as retaining it), Aiford, Wordsworth, Lange, Tregellea. It does not occur ia the LXX., but, in chap. x. II, no MS. omits it. The probability is, that it was inserted here to conform to th.at passage. Lange suggests that the emphasis upon iros, were it retained, would weaken, that upon irtcTTe liw i*. — E.] [Preliminary Note on the whole chapter, and its connection with the rest of the Epistle. — In order to understand this chapter, which is in many respects the most difficult section of the whole Epistle, its connection witli the preceding context, but especially with chaps, x. and xi., must not be overloolied. Be- fore passing from the doctrinal part, which readied its cuhninatlon in the song of triumph at the close of chap, viii., to the practical exhortations (chaps. xii. ft"), the Apostle institutes (in chaps. ix,-xi.) a profound inquiry into the historical course of devel- opment of the kingdom of God, seeking especially to enlighten and satisfy his readers respecting the enigmatical phenomenon, that tlie greater part of the people of Israel rejected salvation in Christ.* The tliought might readily arise, that the promises given to the covenant-people had to come to nouglit, or that Jesus was not the Messiali, who had been prom- ised principally to the Jews. After expressing his Borrow at the exclusion of so many of his people from the Christian salvation, he shows : 1. That God's promise w«s not thereby rendered void ; for (a.) it refers, not to all of Abraham's de- scendants, but to those chosen by God of free grace, as Isaac and Jacob (vers. 6-13). (6.) God is not iinjust in this election, for He is the Sovereign over • [His theme, as announced in c'lap. i. 16, 17, necessa- rily led 1. im to Buch an inquiry. It concludes: "to the Jew :ling by his conscience, and by the strong and clear light of the Holy Spirit. Now, is this declara- tion an oath, according to most of the earlier and many of the later expositors (Keiche, Kollner, and others); or is it not, according to the exposition of Tholuck, De Wette, and Meyer? This much is clear, that the Apostle's asseveration is not a formal taking of an oath, and not in the form of an oath. /[The form of an oath would be 7T()6<4 with the accu- (sative. — R.] It will ;o remembered, in favor of tiiis view, that tlie 6f rtji; a vv ti^ H tj a k!) i; /iJt.(jfi6ii (Pelagius, Abelard, and others). In this case he appeals to his former blind zeal for Israel against Christ, in order to prove that he loves hia people, and, in his love, that he now sorrows for their fate. b. In my pain I have gone so far, as a Christian, that I wished, &c. (Signijicat, se aliquando hoc orasse, nimirum cum, dolor iste singular abilities, both lexical and giammatical, are very strong^ therefore, against such a meaning here.— K.] 502 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. aiirbi; iyo). It is very probable that he made Bome pledge, when he (aocording to Acts ix. 2) re- ceived from the high priest authority to persecute the Christians ; for a hierarch of exalted station does not confide in a young man without some such pledges. His present perception of the fearful im- port of that engagement is immediately expressed in avd (y I na, y..T.).. If we disregard such an acceptation, the exeget- ical difficulty Mili really begin with avd f fia. [Dr. Lange prefers, yet does not commit himself to, tliis view of tlie imperfect. It is (ar-l'etched ; and were there no other grounds to influence the inter- pretation than tliose of grammar, as Alford hints, any school-boy could tell that the imperfect does not refer to a definite past act, but represents " the act unfinislied, an obstacle intervening." In sup- port of the grammatical correctness of this view, see Buttman, .A'^. T. Gramm., p. 187 ; Kiihner, ii., § 438, 3 ; Bernhardy, Syntax, p. 373 ; Kruger, § 54, 10 ; Winer, p. 266. It seems perilous to give up the obvious meaning, / could win/i, for one barely allowable. The aorist was at hand, if Paul wished to refer to a past vow. If tliere be a difficulty in the i)assage, it is met most fairly by Meyer's view, that the verb implies an impossibility, or at least an insuiinountable obstacle, both as to the wish and the thing wished for. We can then take dvd- &ffia in its obvious sense, without putting it also on the rack to extort another meaning. See the final Exeff. Note on this verse. — R.] That I myself -were accursed from Christ [dvdO-ffia. ( i V a I, ahrbq i y m a n 6 t ov X() i,ffr o7'^. ^'IvuOf/ia, Attic dvdf) tj/ict, dedi- cated to God ; hence, also, dedicated to tlie Divine judgment, and consequently to ruin ; in the latter sense = Din (Gal. i. 8, 9 ; 1 Cor. xii. 3 ; xvi. 22). Though the later sense of n"'n " must not be con- strued as the Jewish curse of excommunication " (Meyer), yet the theocratic idea : to excomnmnicate from the Church of God, and to dedicate to ruin, cannot be separated. In the Christian sphere the avdO^t^ta is, indeed, in the ecclesiastical form, a temporally qualified exclusion : " for the destruc- tion of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved " (1 Cor. V. 5). [Excuiisus ON Anathema. — The proper under- standing of this passage' may be furthered by dis- cussing at this point the precise meaning of the word dvd&ffia. The following dissertation is from Wieseler, (Jommentart/ on Ga/atians (i. 8, 9, pp. 39 S.). The fact that it is ibunded upon another pas- sage, adds to its v/eight in determining the meaning here, .since the discussion of Gal. i. 8 is not beset with the prejudices which arise here. "'^vdO-f/ia* is the Hellenistic form for the Attic dvdf)>iua (comp. frijrj/ia and tr()f/ia, ni^on- ■dtjfia, and n^6 ently see more particularly ; comp. the Latin sacer. When any thing conseciated in a general sense It to be denoted, however, the form drdO>jfta, in the Scriptures and their dependent literature, is wonJ to prevail; in the other case, the form drd&ffict, although the genuine reading, on account of th« divergence of manuscripts, is often very difficult to determine. \-ivdO>ifta as translation of cin ig found, e.g., in the LXX., Levit. xxvii. 28, 29, where, however, the reading dvdDt/ia also appears. At all events, this use of dvdOtjiia is the exception throughout, as appears also from the fact that avo- tjfiaTiCn.v is nowhere used, but dvaO f/iariCttv. We are more apt to find dvdOt/^ia also in the sense of a customary votive offering ; e. cf., 2 Mace. ii. 13, and Judith xvi. 19, Codex Alex. Luke uses arci- d>jfia, Luke xxi. 6 (yet Cod. A. and D. [so j<.], and al.so Lachmann, read dvd&fna) of a customary vo- tive offering, and Acts xxiii. 14, dvdOf/ia, of a consecration in a bad sense. Suidas therefore says, with essential correctness : dvdOt/ia /.al to arari- fltfitvov riji OiiTi y.ai to fti,' aqiavia/tov iao/ifvov a/i(f6Tf(ja (Ttinaiviiy' /.cytrai. de y.ai avdO-rj /i a TO Tili flfw dvartOfi'/iivov. [^dvdOf/ia signifies both that which is hung up as an offering to God, and that which is destined to destruction ; but that which is hung up as an offering to God is called also dvdOtifia.^ So Theodoret, respecting the usage of his time on Rom. ix. 3: to dvdf)f/i a <)i,7i).>jV t/fHy rtjV dlavoiav ' xat yw^ to aiftfi^xontvov no Otm avd/)f]//na- goga aut Ecclenia penitns abscidit) and by Semler (fugite, abhorrete talem doctorcm) ; in which case we should at least have expected oxT/iff) dvdOfuct {iixTTTi-^ 6 di'af)tiiari(J/iii'Oi;) iato) vixlv; comp. Matt, xviii. 17." " In particular in recent times, it is explained (2.) almost universally and also correctly: ' to have * [" Morus even assumes a wider sifrnification of avaOeum ivTia : tavgul cum malum, rlec endiis, nn excommunifiiudus an alio modo diimnundus. For this im:igin;\ry sii;nifio:iticin he appeals to Gal. V. 10, where it is said of the same false toacbor : judi- cium ferel — i. e., 'He will soon find his reward.' Burger, who wavers between this explanation and that of Grotius and SemliT, thinks that Paul in both cases meiuit : liilem hiiminim. perqunm. esse sce'eslum ulque atleo punieudum, nnn vera iudirare, auANAM sil pcena plectendus. We see, in th« case of the avaO^fka, how thoroughly the unscientific exe« gesis of all times and all places is dependent on al2 t\« wishes and prejudices of the individual." — R.] CHAPTER IX. 1-38. 803 become obnoxious to the wrath or curse of God ; * Winer, Schott, Riickert, De Wette, Usteri, Meyer, Gildemcister ; so that, therefore, Luther, with his : * der tiei verjlucht^^ according to Krummaclier's in- terpretation, is justified. Luther would be riglit also in tlie main matter, according to Olsliausen's asser- tion, which he presents without proof, and whicii stands midway between Nos. 1 and 2, that in tiiis formula (3.) we are not merely to understand ecelcsi- aatical excommunication, but that this is only no far included in the signification as it presupposes Divine reprobation." " All these explanations, notwithstanding their diverg(;ncos, proceed from the correct assumption that this avdOtfta is the translation of the Hebrew D"in . The question is therefore this, what tliis D~n among the Jews was, and whether it denoted — /. e., in tiie time of Paul — the Jewish excommu- nication. If tiie latter were disproved, Nos. 1 and 3 would fall ; but if this should really be the case, the question would be whether avdOf/ia here is used of exconnnunication, or of what it is used. But, in the first place, it is clear that, in the whole Old Tentament, C^.n and CiPin are never used of excommunication. Indeed, they are used with at least as frequent reference to the idolatrous apos- tasy of the heathen nations, especially of Canaanitish ones, as with reference to idolatry and impiety wiih- in Israel. C"in is used of every thing, person or tliivg, which, on account of its worthiness of death, founded in God's Word — the thing usually in con- nection with, and on account of, its impious pos- sesxi.r — was, whether of free resolve, or at the ex- press command of God, consecrated to Jehovah, witliout capability of hthiff ransomed ; Levit. xxvii. 21, 28. The person who had become a D"in might not continue to live ; Levit. xxvii. 29 ; and only the thing — to which class, according to ancient view, the slave also belonged — could, if a living creature, remain alive, falling then forever to Jehovah — that is, to the priests ; Levit. xxvii. 28 ; Num. xviii. 14 ; Ezek. xliv. 29. From this it arises, that C^nn , as to its sense, signifies simply ' to destroy,' and is not seldom connected with -"in "'sb (comp. the Hebrew C'Ti?, which also originally signifies 'to be holy;' Exod. xxix. 37 ; xxx. 29 ; and D^n is rendered in the LXX. not simply by dvaOt^ia, or diioQi,(7fia, Ezek. xliv. 29, but also by d.(fdvi.aii,htv ; nor yet 1 Oor. xii. 3, since no one could have wished to excommuni- cate Jesus, no longer dwelling on earth ; nor Horn. ix. 3, as appears sufficiently from the defining dnb ToTi XsJi.(Trou. In the case of the verb dvaOtfta- XMi'V, indeed, it has not yet come into any one's head, in respect to the New Testament passages, that it signifies, to excommunicate ; but dvaOffi. oTt, Mark, /. c, signifies, ' under self-imprecations (by his soul's salvation) to attest, that ; ' dvaOffia- rii^iuv lai'Tov, Acts, /. c, ' under selt-imprecations to oblige himself.' Quite as little can drdOffta, Gal. i. 8, 9, be used of excommunication, on this account, if no other, because one cannot excommu- nicate an angel from heaven (ver. 8), but can very well call down God's curse of damnation upon him, in the dvdOf/na. Ver, 9 must have been used in the same sense as in ver. 8. Independently of the subjective participation expressed by the imperative, dvdOf/ia t(JTio expresses neither more nor less than Gal. V. 10, where Paul denounces against the same false teachers the juJgmeut of God at the end of days ; comp. 2 Thess. i. 9. In form, as in meaning, the Pauline dvdOtna, taxo) (or Jyrw, 1 Cor. xvi. 22) reminds us strongly of the "'nx, LXX. : tni,vi.ard- ()aTot,-, Dent, xxvii. 15 fF. ; only that not every "i1"iX in the Old Testament needs, like our dvdOi^fia, to be taken as invoking tiie highest and most intensive evil — eternal damnation — but may very well, accord- ing to tlie connection, be used of that ; comp. Gal. iii. 13 ; Matt. xxv. 41 ; it being, of course, under- Stood that, by the dvdOtua, the loss of eternal life and the blessed fellowship of God is meant to be invoked against the sinner, only so far and so long as he persists in his wickedness, or tiiis in its nature is irremissible. As to the rest, when Riickert and Schott, in the case of the dvdOtna in this passage, will iiave it that it does not mean excommunication, for the additional reason that that age was not yet acquainted with this among the Christians, this assertion is unquestionably erroneous ; 1 Cor. v. 2 if. ; 1 Tim. i. 20 ; 3 John 10 ; Jude 22 ; comp. Matt, xviii. 17, 18; 2 Thess. iii. 14; 2 John x. 11. The Church fathers afterwards used the am.Of/ia, doubt- less deriving the use through the Pauline passages, of CIn'istian excommunication, similarly as the Jews their Cin , but these commonly misunderstood the proper sense of this expression. Comp. the criti- cism of them in Fritzsche, /. c, torn, ii., p. 2t9, Noter With this well-established view of the meaning of our word, we can pass to the exegesis of this passage, remembering that the burden of proof now rests with those who, to avoid difficulties, assign any other meaning than that so ably defended by Wiese- ler.— R.] Meyer : " The destruction to which Paul would commit himself for tiis brethren must not be under- stood as a violent death (Jerome, Limborseh, Flatt, and others), but as the eternal dmlihi^a, as is re- quired by the dno r. X. It has often been ob- jected that tiie wish of this dnihhi^a is unreasonable, and Michaelis even savs that it would be a raving prayer. But the standard of selfish (!) reflection does not harmonize with the emotion of boundiesi self-denial and love in which Paul here spf.iks," (Comp. Chrysostom and Pengel in lorn.) Tholuck quotes Chrysostom's expression on thi:^ point, and adds : " Tims interpret the vast majority of exposi< toi'S of ancient and modern times, even the Socia- j ians, with Socinus himself"' We nevertlieless hol^ unliesitatingly that the explanation of Micliaelis U more admissible than Mejer's well-nigh uumeaniiig overstraining of the idea of self-denial. The justifiable hesitation in accepting the ex- planation, that Paul wished to be eternally cast out from Clnist. — that is, given over to the devil, to ba damned — has led to mitigations of the real meauitg of the dvdOtfta. It has been interpreted : 1. As temporal death, as already mentiorei. Analogies in 2 Cor. xii. 15 : the death of Christ sa y-ardoa (Jerome, Nosselt, and others). Thol'/'i, on the other hand : With temporal death as Civ f.'.m, there is connected the aceursing, which is adM'.ion- ally comprised here in dno r. /. 2. Banishment from church fellowship (s»iOtius, and others ; apparently, Luther also\ On the controversies arising from a s.-^non by Fr. Krummacher on Gal. i. 8, in regard VJ this ex- planation, comp. Tholuck, p. 471 ff. Tlu^ie is, now, no question that the supposition of an r.cclusion to injury is always connected with a true exclusion from church I'ellowship, But if we ^fplain the Old Testament Clierem and the ecclesiastical ban accord- ing to the New Testament — that is, specifically ac- cording to the words quoted from 1 Cor. v. 5 — then it becomes evident that the Old Testament Chcrem did not declare eternal condemnation when it de- clared extermination from the congregation of the people, and tiiat devotion to eternal condemnation could never have been the meaning of an authorized ecclesiastical Christian ban. If the explanation, 1 wished to be accursed from, Christ, were therefore correct, it would nevertheless not be the same as : I wished to be eternally damned ; but : I would be willing to be cast into boundless misery for the brethren.* From the overstrained interpretation of the accursed, it would follow, that the Apostle re- garded the brethren in question as eternally damned. See, on the contrary, Rom. xi. — Tholuck refers to the Jewish and Arabic manner of speaking : May we be thy ransom ; may my soul be the redemption of thine ! Evidently, hyperboles of Oriental polite- ness. He cites the reference of Origen to the ex- ample of Moses (Exod. xxxii. 32 ) : Paul has spoken like Moses, says Origen : devoVone, non pi-cevarica- tione. But Moses spoke thus at a moment of the deepest emotion, and just as Moses, in the Old Tea- tament sense of the theocratic judgment of repri»- bation. Jerome takes the value of many souia against one into account ; Cyril accepts a hypei- bole ; and Thomas Aquinas distinguishes between a separatio a damnatis per culpam and a srpar iHo a fruitione glorice.\ Tholuck remarks, that Feneloa * [So Hode:e, who, while advocatine the common inter- pret.ition, wnuld make the moaniiis very general, .and the words expioss not " definite ideas," but "strong and iudis- tinct emotions." — R.] t [There seems to be some abstract prround for this dis- tinction. The first, separation from Christ's hnli/ will, la opposed to love to Christ and striving; after sanr tifi:ation ; It is godless, and, of course, excluded here. 'J'lio second, separation from the enjoyment, nf Christ, is not in itself immoral, yet can, indeed, be distinguished from the firul only abK4.rif Christ that we become bltssed througli fellowship with Ilim.— P. S.] * [Comp;ire Madame Guion (died 1717) : "I consent that thou depart, Thoufih thine absence breaks my heart. Go, the 1, and forever, too ; All is risrht that thou wilt do." "My last, least offering, I present thee now — Renounce me, leave me, and br still adored ! Slay me, my God, and I applaud the blow." Cnvtper's Translation, The doofrine of disinterested affection has been sup- ^rted in America by Samuel Hopkins, D.D., :iiid his system is commonly called Ilopkinsianism. He holds that self-love, which cannot be distinguished from selfishness in h s view, "is the root and essence of all sin ; " that holines- consists in disinterested benevolence. He makes the pos- session of this benevolence a test of religion and relig ous exercises, and says, that though a benevolent person " cou'd know that God designed, for His own g^ory and the general good, to cast him into endless dcstructinn, this would not make him cease to approve of His character ; he would continue to be a friend of God, and to be pleased with His moral perfections. " {S>jsiciii of Doctrines, 2d ed., Bosto", 1811, i. p. 479.) But he puts certain limitatiais respecting proper personal iuteiest, and nowhere implies that one must reach tliis point of experience in order to be converted. The cnrrent opinion of his view is, that he teaches : "a man must be wildng to be damned, in order to be saved" — a logical sequence which he does not afRnn. Kor does he quote this pasagi-, which would seem to favor his position. It is probable that he, too, would admit the impossibility of such a wish being uranted, and claim no other meaning for this passage than that which many of the most judicious commentators adopt, and which is the most literal and obvious one. It may well be held that Paul reached such a pitch of feelmg as this, without insist- ins; that this is the constant and conscious state of the Christian heart.— li.] t [This obviates one difficulty, urged by Dr. Hodge, against tbo sense / iviyhcd: "No Jew would express his hatred of Christ and his indifference to the favors which He offered, by saying he wished himself accursed from Christ." But it makes the grammatical difficulty still greater. An iniperieot is made to do service not only as an aorist, but in a sense very unusu.il ; while what is closely joined with it — viz., the purport of the wish or vow — derives its signifi- oaiicc from the present standpoint. Extremely donbttul, to say the least 1 — R.] 20 to be accursed, anb top A'., away from Christ ; as he is not aware of any other ban from the Church of God than banishment from Christ. KiJsselt, and others, have understood by the expression, that Christ would be the author of the ban ; which would increase the harshness of the expression. With our view, the v ti i (> riTiv »n)i'/.ipoiv fi o f can only mean this : for mi/ brethren, as one zealous for their interests. Even with the opposite view, Meyer ex- plains !'7it(> as for the good of ; but Tholuck', oa the contrary, says that the idea of substitution un- derlies the 'vni{), at least indirectly. [Olsliausea makes i'tti^ = ctiTt. — K.] This would render the idea still more intolerable. Paul would not venture to utter tlie thought, that his ruin might still bring salvation to the peojjle for whom even the death of Christ brought no salvation. [The interpretations of this difficult passage may -jf be classified as follows : /^ (1.) Those which take t/i'/o/jj/j' in the past sense. The grammatical objection to this is so de- cided, that, unless the gravest difiiculties attend every other view, it must be rejected. The view of Dr. Lange, which makes it equivalent to a defi- nite aorist, is grammatically less admissible than that which takes it as ;= ojitaham, I was wont to wish. (2.) Those which give to avdO i fia some less strong sense than accursed, devoted to dedriiction. Dr. Lange has cited most of these. The least ob- jectionable among these is that which interprets the word as meaning : untold misery, not necessarily eternal. The lexical objection here is very strong ; see Excursus above. If Wieseler's statements are reliable, all of these are necessarily excluded. There remains, then, (3.) The obvious meaning, / could wish myself devoted to destruction from Lhiist for my brethreti'it sake ; implying either that the wish was not formed, because it was impossible to wish, or of impossible fulfilment ; vntiJ, involving, not necessarily substi- tution, yet such a suffering for the lienefit of others as would turn to their corresponding advantage ; for Paul often speaks of what he does for [vTiifj) his readers. The question then arises. Are the difficul- ties attending this view so great, that it must be abandoned for such doubtful exegesis as (1.) and (2.) present ? Dr. Lange objects : (a.) That it implies a senseless overstraining of the idea of self-denial. But who shall put the limit? " It is the expression of an aftectionate and self- denying heart, willing to surrender all things — even, if it might be so, eternal glory itself — if thereby he could obtain for his beloved people those blessings of the gospel which he now enjoyed, but from which they were excluded. Others express their love by professing then)selves ready to give their life for their friends : he declares the intensity of his affec- tion by reckoning even his spiritual life not too great a price, if it might purchase their salvation " (Alford). Surely we dare not let our assumption of how far his self-denial would go, limit words, which, if they do not mean this, have always borne this as their obvious meaning. (6.) It is further objected, that then the Apcistle would regard the brethren in question as eternally damned. But it is Paul who says that those out of Christ are already perishing (1 Cor. i. 18); and Christ himself speaks of the wrath of God abiding on men (John iii. 18, 30). This objection sunderi too widely the present and the future state of un- believers. Paul would, at all events, feel the power S06 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. of the future state of retribution in the case of these brethren, jusc to the extent that he attached a defi- nite nK'uuing to avd&f^ta ; so that tliis oljjection is of no weight. (c.) The implication suggested above, that Paul then would deem his ruin more powerful than the death of Christ, involves the strongest meaning of iTiio. If the idea of substitution be exciuiied, this objection falls to the ground. But if Paul could not use v7Ti() here, in the sense that his suflFerings might produce certain beneficial results to others, he could not use it elsewhere in the same sense (Eph. iii. 13; Col. i. 24 twice). The objection, in any case, lies not against the degree, but the quality of the suffering. (d.) Lange characterizes the current interpreta- tion as hiiperbolical. If it be, then objection (n.) has no weight, for a hyperbole would not overstrain the idea of self-denial. But this interpretation is not strictly a hyperbole. For Paul wished by this to express a degree of feeling which could be meas- ured in human expression by nothing less strotig than this. The objective impossibility did not de- stroy the subjective intensity of feeling. And al- though he may not have actually formed the wish, still any student of human nature knows that feel- ings often exist, never taking shape in definite wish, which are contrary both to what is possible and what is actually wished. The expression is, however, trutlii'ul in Paul's consciousness, hence not a hyper- bole. On the whole, the objections to this view (3.) seem of so much less weight, that the majority of commentators adopt it. Besides the grammatical and lexical grounds in its favor, it presents the great Apostle to the Gentiles tmder the influence of feel- ings most akin to the self-sacrificing love of the Lord he preached. And it detracts nothing from OUT estiraiite of his affection to know, as he did also, that such love flowed only from his love to Christ, his fellowship with Christ, which would itself change hell to heaven. — R.] My kinsmen according to the flesh [ruiv nvyyiVMV fi o V x«t« ad(>y.a\ This addition expresses both his former motive and his continued patriotic feeling (see chap. xi. 14).* [There is, how- ever, here an implied antithesis to " brethren in the Lord." Paul's patriotism is here justified, but, as the next verse shows, it has a deeper ground in the gracious gifts and religious advantages which the Jews had hitherto enjoyed. — R.] Ver. 4. Wlio are Israelites. O'ir w (<;. — Qu'ppe qui Tluis iie aimounces the characteristics of his kindred " according to the flesh," who lay so near his heart, and the decline of whose glory ex- cited his profound compassion. The collective glory of the Jews lies in the fact that they are Israelites — that they bear the honorable name of Israel, as those who are called, like their ancestor, to be "x people of God consisting of wrestlers with God — a people of wrestling prayer, [It should be remarked here, that the ground of the prerogatives afterwards enumerated was the free grace of God, not any su- perior natural excellence of this people as compared with the heathen. This is implied in the very char- acter of the prerogatives. Besides, in calling them " Israelites," there is a direct reference to the fact * In t>ie discussions on this subjoct, a second meaning of oiro has not been taken into consideration : otto jrarpos, on the paternal side, &c. that their advantages grew out of their relation to one directly chosen of God. So that the very glory of Israel shows the sovereignty of God, toward wliitb the chapter points, in discussing the enigma of the present position of this favored peoj)le. — R.] By a rhetorically forcible y.ai, xai, &c,, Paul now discloses six prerogatives, from t'iof)Kjla to iTTayYf/.itti,, after which he eitols the iiighest glory of the Israelites — that the fathers belong to them, and of whom, as concerning the flesh, Clirist also came. He calls them Israelites, and not merely Ismel (see ver. 6). Although the majority of the people turned away from Ciu-ist, and but a minority iden tided themselves witli Him, this minority neverthe- less constitutes, par excellence, the people of IsraeL See the xmt; in chap. iii. 3, and also chap. xi. 1. He can, indeed, call also the unbelieving majority "Israel" in a qualified sense (ver. 31). But the name "Israelites" is still placed as the name of honor at the very head of the advantages (see 2 Cor. xi. 22 ; Phil. iii. 5 ; John i. 47). On the use of the name in Josephus, see Tholuck, p. 47(3. Tholuek's division of the advantages into three pairs is well grounded ; but he is less warranted in legarding them as designations of their theocratic honor, their tlieocratic basis, and their theocratic hope, " to which the prerogatives of the fathers of the theocracy, and of their head, is connected as a fourth member." According to the import of the designations, the v'loOfnia indicates, at the out- set, the whole state of honor; then the first pair describes the patriarchal foundation, including the new calling of Israel as a people ; the second pair, on the contrary, set forMi the Mosaic legal constitu- tion of Israel ; tiic'j, again, the inayyf/.iai,, '■'■the promises,'''' denotes the collective transition from Moses to Christ by the pro])hets. To these real ad vantages of Israel there tlien corresponds the an tithesis of personal advantages: the true fathers of | the people down to Christ. i Whose is the adoption [mv ?/ v'loO f(Tia'\ God's acceptance in the place of a child, adoption ; yet not in the sense of tiie New Testament realiza- tion, but in that of the Old Testament typification (see Exod. iv. 22 ff. ; Dent. xiv. 1 ; xxxii. 6 ; Hosea xi. 1 ; Rom. viii. 1, 2). The foundation of this adop- tion was the election, calling, and sealing of Abra- ham. But in this right of the child there was not merely comprised the real enjoyment of " theocratic protection," but also the foundation and guidance to real adoption (Gal. iv. 1, 2) ; and, in relation to the promise for the remaining nations, the determination that Israel should be the first-born son of God (Exod. iv. 22). [It therefore comprises, though only ger- minally and typically, the close union which Christ, tlie Only-begotten, who was in the bosom of the Father from eternity, forms between God and men through the regeneration of the Holy Ghost. — P. S.] And the glory. The f5 6|a, r^)r^-] 11=?. This is that revealed form of Jehovah underlying the call to adoption throughout the Old Testament, which often stands out more definitely in the appear, ance of the Angel of the Lord (see Lange's t'omm. Genesis) [p. 385 ff., Amer. ed.]. Comp. Exod. xxiv. 16 ; xl. 34 ; 1 Kings viii. 10 f. ; Ezek. i. 28, and other passages). Untenable explanations ; 1. Th? ark of the covenant (Beza, Grotius, and others, with reference to 1 Sam. iv. 22). 2. The glory of Israel itself (Calovius, Kollner, Fritzsche, Beck, and othp CHAPTER IX. 1-33. 807 ere). For the still more untenable explanations of Michaelis and Ko[)pe, see Mej-er (the adoption itself as glory, the prtjinieed felkilas). Meyer's own ex- planation is totally unsatisfactory : " The symboli- cal and visible presence of God as manifested in the desert as a pillar of cloud and of lire, and as the cloud over the ark of the covenant, the same nj'zc;" (Buxtorf, Lexic, Talmud, &c.). For more {.articular information on Meyer's indefinite view, see Tholuck. — De Wette and I'liilippi do not really get bcNond " the visible and operative presence of God," or, the " symbol of God's gracious presence." [As Paul is enumerating the prerogatives of the Jews, a defitiiie meaning is to be sought for. Mey- er's view attaches a definite meaning to rVola, ex- tending it, however, over a wide period of time. Dr. Langii's objection to this grows out of his classi- fication of these prerogatives in chronological order. If this (S(>i.a, must be referred to patriarciial times, then Lange's view alone is admissible ; but the word is used by one who is glancing over the whole Jewish history, and in that history " the visible presence of God " seems most worthy of the title dola. — R.] And the covenants. ^41 dt.af)7jy.ai,. The compacts. Tiie ()6ia already announced itself at the call of Abraiiam. [If Meyer's view of f)6la be adopted, then the reference to the call of Abra- ham in lioOtaia is the point of connection here. — R.] The covenant with Abraham was renewed with Isaac (and this is of importance here, in contrast with Islimael), with Jacob (in contrast with Esau), and, finally, with the whole people through Moses. Various explanations : 1. Tiie two tables of the law (Beza, and others). 2. The Old and the New Tes- taments [see Textual Note '. — R.] (Auj;ustine, Je- rome, Cocccius, Calovins ; with reference to Jer. xxxi. 33). Meyer : " The compacts concluded by God with the patriarchs after Abraham." Comp. Book of Wisdom xviii. 22 ; Sirach xliv. 11 ; 2 Mace. viii. 15 ; Eph. ii. 12. [This is undoubtedly the sim- plest view. — R.] And the giving of the law. Opposite ex- planations; 1. Meyer, and others : the act of giving the law, not 6 r6/(0<,- itself. 2. Tholuck [Hodge], and most expositors: vo/io&tala, by metonyme for 6 V'jfioi;; vo/ v ol na- Tt()fc]. The fathers, the elect, the men of God, as preludes to the chief Chosen One, the Son of God ; the glorious root of the Israelitish parent-tree, as well as the fatness of the tree (see chap. xi. 17), referring to the only glorious crown (Exod. iii. 13 ; iv. 6). These are chietiy, but not exclusively, the patriarchs, but, in addition to them, the long line of the true lathers of Israel. And of whom as to the fiesh is Christ [zat fi Mv 6 A^JKTTOi; to z«tm ff d(j y.aj. It is the highest characteristic of Israel's glory, that Christ descends from it, or comes of it according to the flesh (Rom. i. 3 ; iv. 1 ff.). [Christ, the prom- ised Messiah, is the greatest of all the blessings imparted to the people of Israel, to whom all the others pointed typically and prophetically, and in whom they first obtained their full truth and reality. — P. S.] The TO y.ard ccc^xa is evidently a qualifying addition, and refers to an antithesis ; Tholuck: " oi'/ xaT« rijV flf6T(;Ta" (chap. i. 3, 4). [Alford marks the antithesis by rendering: " as far as regards the flesh ; " finding in to, accusative, the implication " that He was not entirely sprung from them, but had another nature." — R.] Who is over all [ 'O o)v in I n dvr mv. There are two renderings which are nearly allied : Who is God over all, blessed forever, and : Who is over all, God blessed forever. The doctrinal results are the same, whichever be adojjted ; but Lange prefers the latter, for reasons which will appear, and seems warranted in his preference. The E. V. gives the latter ; Luther, and most interpreters, the former. — R.] We explain the passage thus : He who is over all Israelites, believers and unbelievers, is that glorified One of our universally known syna- gogical formula : God, blessed forever. Amen. We must first of all accept a strong Pauline brevilo- quenee. Then we must call to mind Paul's expres« sion concerning the unknown God (Acts xvii. 23). As Paul could say to the Greeks : "You seek an J worship by your altar the one true God, wiii'^'it knowing Him," so can he say of the Jews : " civen those who reject Christ must render homnge to Him, though unconsciously, as, by the well-known dox- ology, they often praise Jehovah, the God of reve- lation, who has appeared in Christ, and thus rules supremely over all, believers as well as unbeliev. ers." The 6 mv therefore stands fcr 6? iat*^ 308 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. though with the additional strength peculiar to the participle. That the ini Tzcivnov liere refers to the Jews, according to their antilliesis of believing aud unbelieving Jews, is evident from the strong proiuiiience previously given to tliem {o'tTivic;, J>v, si (Of). [The form of tlie E. V. favors this view of ini navrotv. By taking it as nnisciiline, the whole clause is brought into closer connection with tiie context, an increased difficulty in the in- terpretation of the dosology is obviated, while tliis closer connection gives strength to the view that the doxology refers to Clirist. It seems preferable to the view which connects it with 5f6c, in the sense of the supreme God (Hodge, and many others). "Whether all that Lange suggests is included, is per- hai)s doubtful ; but comp. his remarks below on Ps. Ixviii. 19.— R.] Goi blessed for ever. Amen [©to? *r- A J' c; T <; f (' t; t o r g a I I'l v a c , a /( tj v ]. We must regard this clause as a ([notation from the synagogical liturgy, sufficiently well-known to all the Jews, and to Jewish Christians and believers in general. According to modern usage, it should, therefore, be written with quotation-marks. But the sense is this : Christ is the object of the Israeiitish doxology to the revealed God, Jehovah, for He is the (Voiw itself; is consciously praised by some, and unconsciously by the rest; for this latter class, not- withstanding their rejection of Jesus of Nazareth, cannot get away from the adoration of the Shekinah, and thus Christ also, the personally revealed God, rules over all (as they praise Him), even over un- believers, for their future salvation. This is there- fore the last advantage of Israel (see chap. xi.). For the details of ail the explanations, we must refer to the Cummentaries extant.* Every exposition is attended with great difficul- ties. Tlie strongest reasons are still in favor of the old one, transmitted to us by the early writers, all of whom favored it, with the single exception of Theodore of Mopsvestia (see Tholuck, p. 479). We may say, perhaps, that Julian maintained, with Cy- ril, that Paul never called Jesus " God," and that the Codd. 11 [5], 47 place a period after adi)y.n, and Cod. 71 places one after ini navnov. Here belong also Irenaius, Tertullian, Origen, &c., and the most of the later expositors (see Meyer). The passage is, therefore, a doxology to the divinity of (/hrist. This is most strongly favored by the re- quirement of the antithesis comprised in the to xaTct fTci^ita (see chap. i. 3, 4 ; 1 Tim. iii. 16). Tills explanation has been rendered unnecessarily difficult by regarding ini niivrov as neuter: "over every thing" (Beza referred it as masculine to the patriarchs, to tiie antitiiesis of Jews and Gentiles), thus giving up its proximate reference to the Jews. Since the time of Erasmus, this exposition has been directly opposed by another, the reference of * (Comp. a learned essay by Hermann Schultz (Professor in Basle) : Rom. ix. 5, in exc^i'lischer und bihlisch-lhenlng - ichr-r Bi'zii'hiiiig, erkldrl, in the Jahrhv-lvr fur Dcu'she Thenltigif for 1808, pp. 462-006, and the older exesetical liternture ou this passage, there cited aeainst the inter- pretation of the Socinians and Somler. Schultz refers the doxology to Christ, yet not to the preexistent, tut the theanthiropic, glorified Christ, to what He now is. This is tbo liighest glory of Israel, th:it lie who is exalted above all th ugs was born of it. This essay is exhaustive and convincing in its defence of the received punctuation. It closes, however, with some speculations, which imply a discrepancy between the simple Gospel narratives and the more profomul christological positions of the Epistles (and the Gospel of John).— E. J 'he clause to God. "The Codd. 11 [5], 47, of the 11th and 12th centuries, like Diodorus of Tar« sus, place a period after rsao/.a ; tliis punctuation has been preferred by Erasiiius, so that what follawi is a doxology to the Almighty God. This propoai tion has found favor with tiie major'ty of recent exegetical writers, with the Socinians, &c., with Reiche, Riickert, Meyer, and Fritzsche." Tholuck . A middle ground is occui)ied by the inttrpretatioc which unites with a second punctuation proposed by Erasmus, according to Cod. 71, as it places a peiiod after ini ndvTior ; this has been adopted by Locke and Baumg'arten-Crusius, a construction to which Tholuck also inclines to a certain degree. In addition to these three explanations are, the conjec- ture of Erasmus, that i)fot; is not authentic, and the reading mv 6 flfoi,' proposed by Crell, and oth ers. But, according to Tholuck, the detached char- acter of the doxology is against the third exposition. The following may be said against the second ex- planation : 1. In simple doxologies, without a relative form, the ti'koyijTot; generally precedes the .9fo<,-. See ex- amples in Tholuck, 483 ; Philippi, 3(59 ff. Tholuck regards it as a beautiful fact connected with Faustua Socinus, that his attention was first directed to this circumstance, and tliat, owing to it, he changed hia exposition of the passage. Tholuck, indeed, citea a passage in whicli tiie it'^.oytjroi; comes after the ^/o? (Fs. Ixviii. 10) — a passage which, in view of its connection, we regard as very important, and must hereafter return to it. 2. A doxology to the omnipotent God cannot interrupt the train of thought under consideration at its very outset ; least of all, can an elegy or funeral discourse be changed abruptly into a hyma. The doxology for the whole discussion in Rom. ix.-xi., is at the conclusion of chap. xi. 3. The expre.«sion, to y.ard ffa^/.«, which limits Christ's descent from the Jews to His human nature, requires, as an antithesis, a reference to His divine nature. We have here had special reference to Cal- vin, Tholuck, Neander, and Pliilippi. In the attacic on the old exposition, it is remarkable that the same critical exegesis which elsewhere urges the imme- diate context, and leaves the analogy of Scripture altogether in the background, here reverses its method. Meyer, indeed, only says, that both ex- positions miglit be equally right, according to the words. But he imagines that he can overcome the requirement of the antithesis in this passage merely by the assurance that divinity does not necessarily belong to the object represented. Tiie doxologiea to God which Meyer cites (Rom. i. 25 ; 2 Cor. xi. 31 ; Gal. i. 5 ; 1 Tim. i. 17), are fully occasioned by the connection, which would not hold good of the present doxology. Meyer contradicts himself when lie first urges that the present passage does not read 6 flfot;, but only the predicative .'>fdc, without the article ; and when he concedes that Paul, by virtue of his appropriate and real harmony with Joiin'g christology, could, just as properly as Jolm (cliap. ». 1), have used the predicative flfoi; (divine nature) of Christ (with reference to Phil. ii. 6 ; Col. i. 15 ff. ; ii. 9 ; 2 Cor. iv. 4), and jet urges that Paul never used the expression 5^fo'« of Christ, since he never accepted the Alexandrian form, like John, but adhered to the strictly monotheistical form. He seems, therefore, to regard that "Alexandrian form" as prejudicial to strict monotheism, lit should b« remarked that Meyer, who is usually so clear and CHAPTER IX. 1-33. 30f decided in his statements of the reasons for his views, halts here, as if the grounds against the reference to Christ were not sufficient to satisfy himself. This fact is suggestive. — K.] As far as thoac passages are concerned in which Paul brings out the divinity of Clirist, we refer to the Jjvdr. Notes. \V a i\ ). , oitoi ^] aQati).'\. The germ of the distinction between the true religious Israel and the impure and merely national Israelites, already lay in the Old Testament (see chap. s. ; Ps. cxii. 1 ; Ezek. xiii. 9 ; Jer. vii. 23, &e.) ; the distinction was already prepared by the relations of election in the history of the patri- archs. The Apostle's thought distinguishes, first of all, between Israel as the collective people of God, and the single apostate branches. But then he establishes this general diitiuction chiefly by the relations of election. Ver. 7. Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham are they all children [ore)' or* flalv a7ii(jf(a ^-ififjad/t, ndvrn; Ttxra], The antQfia \4 p (j . denotes here natuial pos- terity, but the tixva, on the contrary, his spirit- ual posterity, and directly from Israel. It may be asked here, whether the subject of the preceding verse {which are of hrael) still continues (Meyer), or whether the present clause generalizes the sub ject : not all those who are Abraham's seed are therefore also Abraham's children. We prefer the latter construction, because, otherwise, the verse cited would furnish no proof. The first clause — for they are not all Israel which are of Israel, God't people — is therefore supplemented by the second — likewise not all who are descended from Abraham, and thus, directly from Ishmael and Isaac, are tr'ie children of Abraham ; that is, not merely Individ", al believers, as in chap, iv., but rather the indiwduiiU chosen, elected beforehand through God's I'ree choice. This is now followed by particular proofs, which show that God's election, notwithstanding tlit prom ise given to Abraham, remained totally free, con- trary to the boast of a right of natural descent. First proof: Abraham's first born son was not Abraham's child of piomise, but, according to God'i disposition, the younger, with his seed. And that, indeed, was previously established by God. Refer 310 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. cnce could also be made here to the preference of Sarah to llagar; and, therefore, the second and more convincing proof follows: Rebecca. It is import- ant tliat Kebccoa, and not Isaac, appears in the fore- groinul, but then, also, that she conceived twins by Isaac ill one pregnancy ; and third, that a determi- nation is made respecting children as yet unborn, which gave the preference to Jacob. But (thus the promise reads) in Isaac [a/. A' '£v 'Jaadx. Gen. xxi. 12. !?ee Textual Note'' for the Hebrew.] Though the decisive promise u quoted directly and authentically, without a yfy(ia- nraiy or any thing of similar ira[)ort, as in Gal. iii. 11, 12, it is revertheless a simple logical require- ment to supply something of the kind mentally ; this, however, is contested by Meyer. The promise is quoted from tlie Septuagint. Meyer maintains, in accordance with Gesenius, that the original text pn:i-D would say : Through Isaac will the pos- terity be called ; but that the Apostle has conceived the sense of the passage according to its typical meaning, and confined it to Jsaac^s person. [So Philippi, Ewald.] The entire digression on this sup- posed antithesis rests upon a mistake of the signifi- cance of the typical collective name. The name of Isaac here can just as little exclude his posterity, as the Included posterity can exclude Isaac himself. Meyer says: all Jews belonged to the offspring of Isaac, and therefore the expression would be inap- propriate, if those whose claims are to be disap- pointed, are also described by it. But yet, in vers. 11 and 12, the election of Jacob is evidently meant at the same time with that of his posterity, but with- out the Apostle having designed thus to favor again the claim of individual Jews. The examples cited lerve to prove that the distinguishing process of election, in reference to the doscendunis of Jacob also, was not hindered by the election of their an- cestor with his (rni(j/ia, but rather that it took place with perfect freedom in reference to the posterity. Shall thy seed be called [y. ?. tj f)- 1] a trai a 1, (Tne(j/ta]. DilTerent explanations of the xXtj O- tjiT trai- {erit, xhall he; shall be awakened; shall be called from nothing); [Tholuck, Stuart; Reiche. Meyer objects to this, on the ground, that this promise was made after Isaac was born. As we are less warranted in referring the citation ex- clusively to Isaac's descendants, than to Isaac alone, this objection seems to be valid and conclusive. — R.] The y.a^.nv brings out the freedom of Divine choice ; not in the sense that he merely became the ancestor of the promised seed, but in and with Isaac the seed of promise belonging to Abraham was call- ed, according to the election. [Hodge, Alford, and most.] Freedom of election is thus distinguished by two characteristics : only in Isaac, and, o)Uy by virtue of free appointment. Ver. 8. That is, They who are the children of the flesh [T'oT't tfiri^v, ov ra rcxva TJjv. — R.] Between the twin children of cue marriage, by one husband, and from one con- ception or pregnancy {bed, xolrtj, see chap. xiii. 13 ; not emphasized as unity, but really so under- stood), the election already made the greatest diH'er- ence before birth. This leads to the third charac- teristic : Ver. 11. [Without their having as yet been born, or done any thing good or evil, /< // n lo Y a Q y I V V tj 0- ivr w v fi ^ d e n q a I dv r lo v r i ayaO 6v r} qiaTO.ov. See Textual Notes '" and ". — R.] Before the children had done any thing either good or bad.* This example denies once more, as though superfluously, the exclusive privi- lege of birthright. In view of all this, we think that the real explanation of the oi'' fiorov fit is con- tained in the second characteristic — not merely that Sarah, the unfruitful one, is a proof, but also Re- becca, in her pregnancy with twins. It is Sarah, in 60 far as the promise determines a year beforehand that the unfruitful Sarali, instead of the mother of Ishmael, should be the mother of the promised one; and Rebecca, in so far as the promi>e made even the greatest difference between the tw in-fruit of her womb. The expression, roT' 7rar()bi; -fj/nTn; indicates that also the paternity of Isaac did not guarantee any choice concerning the Jews. The /itJTtio^ ex- presses the f:\et that God's revelation concerning the preference of the younger before the birth of the twins (ai'iTo'jj' must be supplied) was intentional, in order That the purpose of God according to election might stand [i'ra tj xwt' t/.loyijv n(}60fan; roTi f)fov /(evij.] Meyer holds, ihat the I'va therefore determines, at all events, i purpose. But he incorrectly denies that the ix- loyi^ here precedes the n(j60 tan;. [Meyer op- poses this precedence, on the ground that the elec- tion is essentially pre-temporal (Eph. iii. 11 ; 2 Tim. L 9), objecting also to the view of Grotius, and others, that the phrase means : a decree considered with respect to an election. He holds that, as an * [It must he noticed that this expression contains nn Incidental argument against th<' Platonic and Oriprenistic doctrine of the preexistence of souls, and their exile mto this world in consequence of a previous fall. This theory, tevived again and again, is as unsatisfactory as it is un- •criptnral, hut must be coiipifered one of the many at- tein..e to solve the enigma which this chapter confronts. Cleaily, then, Paul rejects this solution. — K.] t TMejer: "Not oimut, because the negative relation is to he ex] r ssed suljeclively — i. e., as presented and con- lidered by God in the giving of His sentence." See Winer, p. 441 — R.] essential inherent of the purpose, zar' ixloyrjv ex presses the modality of 7t(iuOKTi(;. Perhaps it it not safe to affirm positively njore than this respect ing what belongs to the order in the mind of God Meyer also repels the strong view of Bengel : pro' poisitum Dei electiimm ; but after all has been ad. mitted, that must be respecting the primary refer- ence to theocratic privilege (Meyer limits thus), the Apostle's language fairly implies a choice of indi- viduals, and a free choice, whether we can reconcile this witii our systems, or our consciousness of oui own freedom or not. The emphasis throughout, it may well be admitted, rests on the unmerited choice of Jacob, rather than on the rejection of Esau.— R.] The f/.).oyt] is founded in the ni)o/.ia, and the 7T(i('i0tai^ joins witli the latter. Meyer's op- position to the explanation of the expression (of Rosenmiiller, and others) propositum Dei liberutn, is correct only so far as the electioii of love and arbitral-;/ freedom are different ; but the election of love is certainly free in relation to human claims. The following clause expresses a principal maxim of the ntJoOfGKi. Not of works, but of him that calleth [orz «i f.(jyii)v a A A' i/. 7 ov >; «/. o ri'T ot;]. The explanation of most commentators, that the n(j6&tai,i; is announced by this negation, is con- trary to Meyer's assertion, that this addition relates only to fiivr[: and indeed he has this, his strong assurance, not from works, &c., but of him that calleth. — Works cannot be the foundation of the call to salvation, but just the reverse ; it is only this call that can be the foundation of works. [This phrase seems to be " a general characteristic of the whole transaction " (Alford). Such a view is fa- vored by the peculiarly broken construction of the whole verse. In any case, it establishes the position of Augustine : " God does not choose us because we believe, but that we may believe." " Hen<'e, too, we are justified not on account of faith {prop- ter fidem), but fhrour/h faith {per Jidem), which God himself works in us through the Holy Ghost (Schalf). Any other view would contradict the obvious meaning of this verse. Comp. Hodge and Phihppi on each side of the predestinarian question as involved here. — R.] Ver. 12. The elder (that is, the first-bom) shall serve the younger [6 ^fi^oiv ()or?.iv- (7 ft roi i/.d(Taovi,] (Gen. xxv. 23, according lo the Septuagint). — Here, again, Meyer finds a differ- ence between tlie oiiginal sense of the passage and the Apostle's explanation. According to the con- nection of the original, the expression extends to the nations concerned (Jews and Edomites), and was fulfilled in David's conquest of the Edomites (2 Sam. viii. 14, &c.) ; * but Paul means, on the contrary, Esau and Jacob themselves. The adjustment of the difi'erence by regarding the two brothers as repre- sentatives of two nations, is insufficient ; rather, the indoles of Jacob was really continued in the Jewish people, and the indoles of Esau in the Edo- mites. [The reference of the original Hebrew, as shown by the context, is to the nations springing from the twin children (" two nations are in thy womb;" Gen. xxv. 23). Lange and Meyer agre« that there is also a personal reference, though differ ing in their mode of stating the relation of the two. • [Subsequent conquests of the Edomites are men- tioned ; 2 Kings viii. 21; xiv. 7, 22 ; 2 Chron. xxv 11; XXVI. 2. They were finallv conquered by John Ilyrciinu* and incorporated into the Jewish nation.— K.] 812 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. Neither should be excluded, though the whole pass- age seems to indicate tiiat the personal reference v/iis the more prominent one in Paul's mind. On the national rererence, Scliaff remarks : " At all events, in tlie passages quoted here and ver. 13, Jacol) and Esau appear a.s the heads of two nations. If tiie promised lordsliip of Jacob be not limited to the transfer of tlie birtluiglit and the theocratic biesaiinr to Jacob, but taken in its full, physical, and spiritual sense, the fulfilment did not take place until long after their death, in their descendants, when David con(iuered the Edomitcs (2 Sam. viii. 14). Since then the Ishmaclites and the Edomites, together with the other heathen, were at all events called to the gospel, though later than the Jews (comp. Gen. xxvii. 40, where Isaac predicts the fu- ture cessation of the bondage of Esau ; and Amos ix. 12; Acts xv. 16, 17; Rom. xi. 11 ff.) ; it fol- lows that Paul speaks here, not as man}' Calvinistic expositors niisundi;rstand him, of an eternal repro- bation, but of such a preference of one nation as ehall prepare for the final salvation of all nations (we do not say, all individuals)." The individual reference is also undeniable, though it by no means follows that it here implies eternal results. The point here is not what or /low much God did in His election, but that He had a n^o&ta i-t; xar' t/.- Xoy >jv. — R.] Ver. 13. As it is written, Jacob I loved, but £]sau I hated [7'c)v ^}axo)[i tj-/nn>i(Ta, Tor () t ' H J ati i /( i (T ij (7 a ]. Mai. i. 2 ft'. : " I have loved you, saith the Lord. Yet ye say. Wherein hast thou loved us? Was not Esau Jacob's brother ? saith the Lord : yet I loved Jacob, and I hated Esau, and laid his mountains and his heritage Waste for the dragons of the wilderness." Here the Btatement that Jehovah hate. Esau is proved by the fact that He gave a desolate land to the Edomites for an inheritance, and that He called it a wicked land, on which His indignation rested. Thus the people are placed first here, but with them also their ancestor, as in Gen. xxv. 23 the ancestor is placed first, but with him his peojile also. Tlie following is therefore assumed throughout : 1. Tlie continuity of the indoles in the ancestor and in the real substance of his posterity ; 2. The uni- versal connection between the ind(A(S and its reli- gious and moral conduct ; 3. The universal connec- tion between the religious and moral conduct and the historical decrees. The sum of these character- istics is now referred to the Divine purpose, and is applied to Esau in the sentence, " I hated him." Yet this sentence has, at most, oidy a relative mean- ing : God has hated Esau in the relation of Esau to Jacob, and in antithesis to the fact that He loved Jacob. God's whole arrangement, therefore, pro- ceeds from tiie primary rnjoOtavi; that He loved Jacob. In that fact lies the causality of Jacob's glorious history, the determination of his theocratic inheritance. I?ut the whole sentence depends upon yiiVous conditions on both sides : !. An economical condition. The question is not at all concerning decrees of eternal Sidvation and damnation, but concerning the economical relations of the ordination and call to the possession of sal- »;ition and to the economy of salvation in time. On t^e prospects of salvation for Edom, comp. Isa. xi. 14 (Dan. xi. 41); Amos ix. 12; Mark iii. 8, On the Oth(,r hand, Edom has become, on its dark side, a type of anti-christianity. See the article Edonuter, iu the Bibl Worterbuch filr das chri tllche Vollc. Likewise the pa.ssage in Heb. xii. 17 relates to Esau'l incapacity to inherit the theocratic blessing even with tears and penitence. 2. An indiv dual condition. There could be also in Edom individuals having the character of Israel, and in Israel there could be individual Edomitea. The LXX. has regarded Job as an Edon.iie prince. Allowing this to be uncertain, the Edomite nature of the Israelitish Judas is beyond a doubt. 3. A rchgious-cthical condition. Salvation ■was as little secured unconditionally to the indiviiual Jew by Israel's election, as the individual Edomite was pert-onally subjected to condemnation by that theocratic rejection of Edom (see Bengel). Meyer: " We must not attach such a merely privative mean- ing to the ef>iat](Tc<,* as not to love, or to love less (Grotius, Estius [Hodge, Stuart], and others), which is also not confirmed by Matt. vi. 24 ; Luke xiv. 26; xvi. 13 ; John xii. 25 ; but it expresses just the op- posite of the positive tiydn. — positive abhorrence." This would be still more than hatred ! Meyer also speaks of a becoming fond of and abhorrence even before the birth of the brothers. Yet here the mean- ing might be : I have loved the letter, but the spirit of the letter I have loved less ! f This, indeed, might be said of many of the results of modern criticism and exegesis. Philippi lessens at least the antithesis in relation to Jacob and Esau themselves, but yet without thereby becoming rid of the tradi- tional prejudices respecting the sense of this pas- sage. " Jacob's reception of the theocratic birth- right, and Esau's exclusion tiom it, constitute, in Paul's mind, only the type for the law of the recep- lion of eternal salvation and of abandonment to etrnal perdition." But the law of this reception and abandonment is not given here, but in Mark xvi. 16. The following interpretation is better, if we understand thereby not ab.solute, but relative an- titheses. Calvin well explains ayanav and /(urttv by a^sumere and repellere. The use of /nafiv ia similar (Gen. xxix. 30, 31 ; Dent. xxi. 15 if. ; Prov. xiii. 24 ; Matt. vi. 24 ; Luke xvi. 13 ; Matt. x. 37 ; comp. with Luke xiv. 20 ; John xii. 25). " To hate father and mother, and his own soul, docs not mean to love them less than the Lord, but to reject them altogether in a case of collision, or to so act toward them as if one po.«itively hated them (?) ; in which case there might still exist a great deal of love for them, though certainly less than for the Lord." — If, indeed, absolute love and a conditional love = loving less, are at variance with each other, then the disre- gard, which is similar to hatred, though not partak- ing of the nature of hatred, follows of itself ; it is * [It cannot be denied that hate, m the Scripture, does not always describe positive ahhorrence, but occas onally a less dcsrree, or, more accurately, the absence of love ; c. ff., Gen. xxix. 31 (whore the original tost says: "Liah was hnlt'd " by .Jaci>b — i. i\, less loved th.Tn Rachel ; comp. ver. 30) ; Mivtt. vi. 24, and especially Luke xiv. 24 ; compai-ed with Matt. X. .)7, where one evangelist says hulrlh noi, and the other, lnvedt mure. The word undoubtedly, even in those passages taken exactly, describes not merely an absence of love, but a formal putting into the background. -P. S.] t [This is an allusion to the strictly literal and gram- matical method of exegesis adopted by Meyer. But if we depnt from the letter, who is to be the discemrr of tha sp rit ? There are but two answers : that of Koine (eccle- siastical autlioriiy), and that of "RationaliBm (iiiduidual hu- man consciousness). The strict interpretation of Meyer ia adopted by Fntzsche, De Wctte, and others. Unquestion- ably the dealings of God with Esau indicate something positive, though, were it but the deprivation of love, the results i)f evii-doing would s^ill account for the historicaJ facis.— ll.J CHAPTER IX. 1-38. 313 the negation of the defect or of the sin to which tlie hated individual cleaves, but it is not the indi- vidual to which the defect or the sin cleaves. See aldd Tholuck, p. 49S, against Frilzshe, Meyer, De Wctte, and I'hilippi. It must be observed, further, that, in ver. 18, the de8cii))tion of f or c-ordi nation or prcdestinafion ac- cording to election, is introduced by ly zar' tx/.ay/jv n(j6f)Kin;. The idea of election refutes the follow- ing claims to a right in God's kingdom : 1. The claim by virtue of natural descent from Abraham, the father of the faithful, especially by virtue of birthriglit ; 2. The claim by virtue of de- scent from the legitimate marriage concluded under the promise ; 3. The claim by virtue of the merit of works. Election takes place freely : 1. Without regard to the advantage of birthright ; 2. to descent from a family that is blessed ; 3. to community even in a twin-birth ; 4. and to the fore- seeing of works. And all this is on the simple ground that election, a. voluntarily determines the indoles beforehand, thereby avoiding all appearance of natural necessity, the requirement of birthright, &c. ; b. and, aecordng to the indoles or economical endowment, it also makes a THioflKHi; in regard to the econt)mical call. [The sum of the whole matter, detaching from it all reference to the extent of the preference or the result of the choice of God in this instance, is, that God does exercise a prerogative of choice or election, independently of all these human considerations. That this is the point to which Paul would bring his readers, is evident from what im- mediately follows. A further proof that a general truth is also to be drawn from it, is afforded by the con.stant use made of special points in Old Testa- ment history and of Old Testament passages to es- tablish general propositions (see the case of Pharaoh, below, ver. 17, which, as far as the individual in question is concerned, has no connection with the discussion, and New Testament passiin). This me- thod of citation is based on the stability of the Divine character ; to deny its propriety, is to pre- sume an arbitrariness on the part of God, in far greater opposition to His character than is implied even in most fearfully fatalistic view of this chap- ter.— R.] Second Proof : TTie antithesis in fore-ordination {predeUination). God is not unrigh'eous in showing mercii and in hardening, and in His manner of uniting judgment and compass/on (vers. 14-18).* Meyer : The second part of the theodicy. Ver. 14. What shall we say then ? Is there unrighteousness with God? [Ti, ovv l()oT- (i f V ; fi ij uff !■ x i a n a q a. t w & f w ; Comp. ehap. iii. 5.] The Jew cannot refute the facts that .shmael was rejected in spite of his birthright, and that Esau was rejected in spite of his legitimacy and birthriglit. Just here was a special point of pride with tlie Jew. But the consistency of this f\ict had now appeared — the absolute freedom of Divine choice. Israel's call was itself the strongest witness •gainst the claims of the Israelites, because by it the * [Tit. Hodge considers this paragraph, the statement fend acyrer of the first objection arising agninst the doc- trine thtc God is sovereign in the distribution of Uis favors, »nd that the ground of His selecting one and rejecting another is not their works, but His ovm. good pleasure. A second objection, he thinks, is stated in ver. 19. So Meyer, BchaS, and most. — B. ' most weighty prejudices concerning their privilege! were overcome. But, finally, God's promise to Re. becca stood firm, and by this was decided, that th« works of the Israelites could no more impose con. ditions on God's free exercise of Ilis authority, than could be done formerly by the Works of Jacob, whec God assigned to him beforehand the domination ovei his brother — that is, the theocratic honor. It waa especially tliis declaration against the claims estab- lished on works which was calculated to excite the Judaizing Spirit, and lead it to the conclusion that, by so doing, God would be unrighteous. This is the interpietation of Augustine, Herva?us, the majority of Lutheran writers, and Bullinger and Tholuck. But even this conclusion he rejects with abhorrence (comp. chap. iii. 5). He adduces his proof imme^ diatcly afterwards. Meyer remarks : " This reason is demonstrative, in so far as by it the absolute divine worthiness of what God predicates of himself must be assumed." Yet this would be only an absolute proof of author- ity. Also, according to Calvin, the proof lies in the refuting effect of the biblical declaration : satis habet, s/ripturw ieKtimoniis impuros lotratus com' piscere* [In this choice and preference of tiie one before the other there is no unrighteousness. For he only is unrighteous who is under obligatioiis which he does not fulfil ; but God is under no obligations to His creature, hence can do with him what He will (vers. 14-29). God's will is the absolute and eternal norm of righteousness, and all that He does is necessarily right (Deut. xxxii. 4). There is no norm of righteousness above Him to which He is subject ; else were God not God. — P. S.] For other explanations, see Tholuck, pp. 507, 508. Tholuck : " Origen's regarding this as the ob- jection of an opponent, and ver. 15 as the Apostle's answer, and vers. 16-18 as another objection of the opponent, is a result of doctrinal perplexity." Theo- dore of Mopsvcstia, Storr [Jerome], and Flatt, re- garded ver.s. 15-18, and Heumann, vers. 15-21, as. the objection of an opponent. [Vers. 15 and 17 are quotations from the Scripture, and hence cannot be objections; while vers. 16 and 18 are not the incorrect deductions of an opponent from these pas. sages, as Chrysostom and Pelagius suppose, but the correct conclusions of the Apostle himself. — P. S.] Ver. 15. For he saith to Moses, I will have, mercy on whom I have mercy, and I ■will have compassion on whom I have compassion [ '£ IftjdM o V av i ?. f (7i , ■/. a I ol y. j f i (j tj a o) ov civ oixTfi()oi.\ See Textual A^o/e ", for the Hebrew]. An answer to the self-proposed objection in ver. 14, taken fiom Exod. xxxiii. 19, according to the LXX. The form of the original text is evi- dently this : I have (already) had mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I have had compassion on whom I will have compassion. The sense is there- fore not : To whom I am gracious, to him I am gracious ; that is, I act in the matter according to * [Hodge : " It will be remarked that these argnmetiti of the Apostle are founded on two assumptions. The first is, that the Scriptures are the "Word of God ; and the sec- ond, that what God actually does cannot be unrighteouB.'* -R.] t [On the distinction between eAeu and oncretpo), Mc-yet remarks : " The distinction between these two words is not to be thus defined, with Tittmtmn, Syuon., p. 69 f., that iK. describes the active mercy, and oIkt. the sympathetic com- passion ; but rather, that the same notion of misereri it expressed vwre sirimgly by o'ikt. The latter is originally the bewailing sympathy, coiitrasted with fiaxapi^ciK (XeiL Anab., 3, 1, 19).''— E.] 314 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. my owTi authority or freedom, unrestrainedness (the view of most commentators, also of Tholuck, p. 511. Yet the latter thus modifies his view, against Olsliau- Ben : The question is not concerning God's right, but God's grace; p. 114), but: I remain just, as Jeh.-vah, and continue the work of my grace where I have once revealed it, &c. — That is, Jehovah is the God of revelation in His consistency, and so are also His grace atd His compassion consistent. His freedom binds or unbinds itself. His freedom is rather to be regarded as decision also. According to the connection, indeed, the "'nsni could be re- garded as a future form ; but this is hardly admis- eible in connection with the simple future form inx , and with the name Jehovah ; therefore the Hebrew translations^for example, that of Philippson — are to no purpose : " And as I have mercy on whom I have mercy," &c. In sense, the inverted form of the LXX., from which Paul quotes, is therefore correct: y.al e).f- tjaiit ov av e/.f(T), x.t.A. [Alford objects, with- out sufBicent reason, to laying the stress on ov av, whomsoever ; but Paul, following the LXX., makes it the scriptural expression of general proposition. It is in the form of a Divine axiom (Meyer). — R.] The meaning of the name Jehovah is : Divine con- tistencji. But Jehovah's speaking to Moses has a special significance. The Jews regarded Moses as the founder of righteousness by works. Paul, on the contrary, brings out the fact that God said to this very Moses, that the consistency of the work of grace is grounded on the beginning of the work of grace in free grace. [This view is ingenious, and gives at least some warrant for a reference to works, which too often is " all supplied by the commenta- tor" (Hodge). But it can scarcely be accepted, as it seems to be rather an effort to avoid tiian to dis- cover the meaning of the passage. — As regards the thought of Divine consistency, which seems to rest on the present tense in the relative clauses, it is scarcely proper to limit the meaning thus. Certainly Meyer does not often let a grammatical point escape him ; yet he parapiirases : " ' I will have mercy upon him who (in whatever given case) is the object of my mercy,' so that I am thereby dependent on nothing without myself That is the sovereignty of the Divine will of mercy. Notice that the future is the mercy, proving itself in fact and act, wliich God accords in all those cases where He stands to the persons affected in the settled disposition (present eAfw) of mercy." — R.] Ver. 16. So then it is not of him who 'wiU- eth, &c. [«()« ovv Tov d-ilovroi;, x.r.?.. On the construction, see Winer, p. 556. — Meyer: "From the saying of God, Paul deduces the inference lying therein respecting the causality of the Divine sav- ing deliverance." — R.] That the entrance of human good conduct in faith is presupposed, follows not only from the analogy of Scripture, but also from the antithesis (ver. 17) ; though the Apostle here precludes the delusion that man, by his willing and running, can acquire that foundation of salvation ir :ich proceeds only from the freedom of the com- passionate God. Meyer : " Incorrect, according to Locke, and most commentators ; Reiche : S-U.ovt. is probably chosen with regard to Abraham's wish to constitute Ishmael, and Isaac's wish to constitute Esau, the heir ; but t(>«/. is chosen with regard to Esau's fruitless running home from hunting (The- ophylact thought that it refers to his running to the hunt).* For Paul, by his uoa ovv, draws his con. elusion only from God's declaration pronmlgated to Moses." I3ut, by this declaration to Moses, Paul proves that God was not unjust to Esau ; that is, that God, acting in harmony with the application of that declaration to Judaism, does not now do any in justice tS one who relies on righteousness by W(jrks. The willing and rtfuning are not rejected in them selves, l?iit arc elsewliere required according to th« bivine call (1 Cor. ix. 2-1. Meyer even derives tiie ?un)iing in this passage from the races, which ill suits the connection); it is only not recognized as the causality of the line of development. This causality is God's grace (the i/.fiovroi; must here be defined conformably to the preceding distinction between t/.ftbv and oi/'.Tft(Jn.v). [Paul obviously^ draws an inference from ver. 15, with «^a ovv. The question is, How gen- eral is that inference ? The verse is certainly gen- eral in form ; any limitation must be found in the preceding context, or in the scope of the Apostle's argument. To limit it to Esau, as an illustration of God's method, is, in fact, to extend it, since Esau was not of the chosen people ; and what God said to Moses, the head of the chosen peo- ple, could not be applicable to him, unless it was of general validity. To limit it to the Jewish peo- ple, because they are under discussion in this part of the Epistle, is forbidden by the fact that the in- stances or illustrations are outside that people (Esau, Pharaoh). The only safe view is, that the word to Moses is a Divine axiom, and this, an inference of universal application and validity. It will not inter- fere with human means in salvation ; for, if true, it applies to willing and running in general, and yet it stops no volition and ijts accompanying tnuscular ex ertion. That side of the matter is not under con sideration. Alford : " At present the Apostle is em ployed wholly in asserting the divine Sovereignty, the glorious vision of which it ill becomes us to distract by continual downward looks on this earth. It is most true that the im,mediate subject is t.e national rejection of the Jews ; but we must con- sent to hold our reason in abeyance, if we do not recognize the inference, that the sovereign powei and free election, here proved to belong to God, extend to everjj exercixe of His mercy — whether temporal or spiritual, whether in Providence or in grace, whether national or individual. It is in parts of Scripture like this that we must be especially care- ful not to fall short of what is written — not to allow of any compromise of the plain and awful words of God's Spirit, for the sake of a caution which He himself does not teach us." — R.] The antithesis of the consistency of free Divine grace, as experienced by Moses, is the consistency of Divine judgment as revealed in the case of Pha- raoh. Ver. 17. For the Scripture saith unto Pha- raoh. The yuQ announces the proof which arises from the uniformity of the same Divine dealing in its rejection. The Scripture saith, is a metonymy for God saifh according to the tesiimonj/ of Scrip- ture. But the metonymy brings out prominently the fact that this declaration of God is not merely temporary and isolated, but has the force of a per manent scriptural declaration, which is applii-able to ♦ [This is the interpretation of "Watson, and many Arminian commentators. But it is not necessary to i>ppos« a view so far-fetched, and forming such an anli-climax ' 1 — K.1 CHAPTER IX. 1-33. 81! til analogoua cases. The scriptural Btatement itself Is in Exod. ix. 16. [Even for this very purpose have I raised thee up, f t s' avr t o r t o f I tj y t (, () a i y n (t a. fjf, corre- sponds in sense to the original text, T^'^riTp3[n , iu3t as well as the (!ii,fTri()f'jf)iii; [LXX.] does, only it 13 more specific ; from whicli consideration Meyer again educes a difference between the original sense of the Hebrew text and Paul's meaning. After the judgment of murrain and boils and blains (the fifth and sixth plagues) on Egypt, we read, as before : " The Lord hardened tlie heart of Pharaoh," after it had already been said (Exod. viii. 15, 32) : " Pha- raoh hardened his heart;" and Moses must solemnly declare God's message to Pharaoh, which, accord- ing to the translation of Zunz, is as follows : " For I would already have stretcliod out my hand, and would have smitten thee and thy people with pesti- lence, so tliat thou wouldst be cat off from the eartli. Yet I have allowed thee to exist on purpose to show thee my strength, and tliat my name may be extolled throughout all the earth." Evidently the transla- tion allow to exist (also in Stier), is as much an ener- vation of the causal "'"^"il^n as that of the LXX. is, and probably the cause in this case is also the same hesitation in accepting the full strength of the thought. The expression is chiefly used of positive set- ting up (for example, of statues), and then also of arousiiiff, awaking ; and even the weaker meaning of allowinrj to exist has still the sense of a positive support. According to Meyer, Paul makes the Scrip- ture say: "'I have awakened thee;' that is, allowed thee to appear, to stand forth ; thy wiiole historical appearance has therefore been effected by me," &c. This interpretation introduces a harsh fatalistic sense into the text; and though Meyer presents a series of expositors as saying the same thing, this proves in- correct in the case of the very first one, Tlieophylact, who says: di; to /(iffov ijyayov. Bengel: T^73Sn ! omnibus locis omnino prcesupponit subjectum jam ante prodiictum. Philippi's explanation is : " I have awakened thee to beinp, let thee exist." Calvin's interpretation is strongest : Detis Pharaonem a se profedum elicit, cique hanc i?npo e A f t (T >iX tj Q vvf I']. This passage, if taken out of its connection, seems to declare an absolute predestina- tion in the supralapsarian sense. Meyer, with oth- ers, protests against any mitigation of the sense : " Paul's simple and clear meaning is, that it depends upon God's free authority either to bless by Hia saving mercy, or to remove to that spiritual ^tate in which one cannot be a subject of His saving grace, but only of His o^yi]." Of the two modes of view each of which, according to him, forbids the othe» — that Pharaoh in part produces his own hardness himself (Exod. viii. 15, 32 ; ix. 34), and that it in part seems to be wrought by God (Exod. iv. 21 ; viL 3, &c.) — he makes the Apostle expressly follow tha latter. [Meyer is perhaps unnecessarily harsh in hia view, but he intimates that it suits the purposf of 316 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. the Apostle better to choose tliis aspect of the hard- eniiig, as this Pharaoh, hardened bi/ God, is to him a type of tlie Jew resisting the gospel. — R.] Tlie usual mitigations of the passage are, at all events, insufficient, particularly the explanation : thnu^k God /lerini/s hardening (Origen, Grotius, and Other?), and also the interpretation of ax).ri()v- Vfi'V as diiriter tractare (Carpzov, Semler, Beck, ■nd others). Tholuck, without finally and positively adopting the latter of these, adduces many special grounds, in its favor. [Against this untenable view of (Tx}.rji>vvfi., see Alford in loco. "The word here refers to a hardeniuff, such a fortification in Bin, that the sinner is unsusceptible of all workings of grace and better influences, the removal into a state where conversion is either absolutely impossi- ble, or rendered difficult in the highest degree. This is an act of God, in so far as He has ordained the laws of the development of evil, ' that, propagating Btill, it brings fortii evil,' (Schiller). It is here viewed as a punishment for a previous self-harden- ing of the sinner " (Schaff ). So Hodge, who regards it as " the judicial abandonment of men ' to a rep- robate mind,' a punitive withdrawing of the influ- ences of His holy Spirit, and the giving them up to the uncounteracted operation of the hardening or perverting influences by which they are surrounded." So Wordsworth, but less strongly. If objection be made to such a judicial process as a work of God, then the same difficulty " lies in the daili/ course of His providence, in wliich we see this hardening pro- cess going on in the case of the prosperous ungodly man " (Alford). The facts remain, the solution is lacking, except so far as God plainly speaks in such passages as this. Meyer objects to the introduction of previous self-hardening here. See the clear and thoughtful note of Olshausen in loco. — R.] Evidently, the context in Exod. ix. indicates a postponement of the well-merited judgment, in which postponement God's long-suffering is concur- rent (comp. chap, xxiii.). The definite sense of the passage must be ascertained from the connection. We must here take into consideration the follow- ing: 1. Previously the question was, God's purposes preceding the birth of the children ; here, on the contrary, it is the free will with which God dealt with fixed characters — Moses, on the one hand, Pharaoh, on the other. If this free will be referred to a purpose of God, it is nevertheless not the pur- pose of elrctio7i, which first settles personality, but the purpose of ordination, which, in the establish- ment of its destiny, presupposes its conduct. Con- equently, because this purpose is conditional, God is Btill left free to have mercy on the real Moses, just as He is free to harden the still existing Pharaoh. 2. As the iXf(T) must here be taken emphati- cally, and expresses the free consistency of Jehovah in His mercy to Moses until He can reveal His glory to hira (see Exod. xxxiii. 19 ff.), so has also axi.tj- Qvvfi' the meaning of a continuation of the judg- ment of hardening to the extreme, in antithesis to the self-ripened judgment of retribution. The more Btrongly we here press the or &i).tt, the more will every notion of an abstract authority be ex- cluded, and the stronger becomes the emphasis on the pure divinity of the Oi).nv. [In other words, the more will the will of God, in its absolute free- dom, appear, not as blind arbitrariness, which is the very reverse of freedom, but as a will of infinite love md wisdom. It proves itself such in the spe- cial cases from which the general proposition of this verse is drawn. — If Oiinv (as is claimed by Pro- fessor Hitchcock, Lange's Cormti., Eph. i. 9) alvtajfa implies spontaneit)', then the " will " here, in each case, finds its justification in the character of God, which immediately prompts it. This may be wha* Dr. Lange means by the " pure divinity of th« Oihi.v."—R.] 3. The whole of the immediate result of- this fearfully significant expression is, that God, in Hia freedom, has mercy on Moses to the utmost, and has, to the utmost, led Phaiaoh to judgment; that Moses can thereby make no just claim on the ground of the righteousness of works, and that Pharaoh can protest against nothing that he might regard aa injustice done to him. In this way the justifiable use of the passage quoted by Paul is determined. [The freedom of God seems to be the main thought. The reference to the righteousness of works seema needless. Meyer concludes his exegesis of the pas sage thus : '' Undoubtedly the will of God is just and holy, but it is not conceived and presented here from this point of view, but in its indcpendmce of all human. Oihiv and T^it/ftr, consequently in ita simple self-origination {Aseiiut) ; which meaning is to be preserved in the clear sharpness of ov ikfk iXfii." The words certainly favor this view; we need but guard against inferences, which are drawn, not by the Apostle, but by imperfect human logic. -R.] Third Proof : God^s freedom in the actual call to salvation (vers. 19-29). A. The proof from the real relation (vers. 19-24). Tholuck regards this section as the collective carrying out of the thought, that the excluded one can bring no complaint against God, because he ia left free in his conduct, &c. ; but Meyer, on the con- trary, regards vers. 19-21 as the third part of the theodicy ; " Man is not entitled to reply against God by saying, ' Why doth He yet find f mlt ? ' For his relaticm to God is as that of the thing formed to him that formed it, or of the vessel to the potter, who has power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honor and another unto dis- honor." * Then he regards vers. 22-29 as the fourth part of the theodicy : " God has endured with much long-suffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruc- tion, in order to make known His glory on the ve* sels of mercy, even us Christians, whom He hatt called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gen tiles." We make the following distinction : In the first case, in vers. 6-13, the question was the free- dom of God's election in ai.tithesis to the human, and especially to the theocratic, right of inheritance. Then, in vers. 14-19, the questiim was, the freedom of God's ordination in antithesis to the claims of human righteousness by works (since even Mosea himself, the lawgiver, did not merit mercy by the works of the law, and Pharaoh was visited by the judgment of hardening, instead of by the judgment of destruction which he had merited). The Apostle now passes over to God's freedom in His call. [Whatever be the division adopted, or distino« ♦ [Olshausen : " The Apostle now Introdnces anew tt« nnwise inquirer of ver. 14, in order to find an npo'o^ foi himself in this o)>eration of God, even in the fonns of evil St. Paul abashes this arrogance with an appeal to tlif abso- lute character of God, with respect to whose ways the crea- ture must render an unconditioned submission, even when he is uot able to comprehend tbem." — U.] CHAPTER IX. 1-S8. sn tloDB made, there can be no doubt, that the objec- tion the Ajiostle heie raises and answers is one wiiich arises at once against the freedom of God's will, viz., that it d( stroys our responsibility. As this was more likely to arise as an inference {ow, ver. 19, wliich Bcems to have troubled the transcribers, however) from what precedes, there is tiie greater ground for holding that the preceding verses refer to God's sovereignty, considered in the light of an objection (ver 14), and tliat this paragraph presents it in op- position to another (ver. 19). At all events, what- ever limitations and special applications be made, the reader now deals with the passage (and subject) in this more general reference, and mo^t commenta- tors have 'elt obliged to treat it thus. — R.] Ver. 19. Thou wilt say then unto me [e^fTt; fioo oiirj. The conclusion which the Apostle allows the Jew to draw from the supposition that he has derived mercy and hardness from God's ■will, has been urged by thousands against Calvin's predestinarian system ; and, indeed, they have done it with nmch better ground than the Jew could ob- ject to Paul's doctrine ; yet they have also in many •wa3's mistaken the infinite importance of the exer- cise of Divine authority in human guidance. If the whole development of man is oidy an absolute Divine decree, the olyection in ver. 19 says : Why then doth he yet find fault ? [ t t o r r Mil, fAtftqxxai,; See Textual JVvte ^'.] How, then, can God find fault with man, or rebuke hhu for being a sinner? By doing so, He would even contradict himself. The expression /< t /< ^ f t a t seems to be purposely chosen to bring out the au- thoritative character in a finding fault, in which the question cannot be a really objective relation to guilt, Tholuck : " Neither the charge against Pha- raoh (Justin Martyr), nor that of the ungodly in the prophets (Zwingli, and others), is meant, but the re- buke of hardening brought against the Jews. Every penal declaration of revelation in general is meant, in so far as it would not be authorized by the doc- trine of fate. The Jew does not here have in mind God himself, but that presupposition of the idea of God wliich Paul seems to present. But he never- theless betrays the inclination of the one who relies upon the righteousnss of works to find fault with God, [In so far as one holds that notion of God, however derived, which in any way allows the pos- sibility of His being the author of evil in man, this objection will arise. It cannot be confined to the Jew and his legal righteousness. (Meyer, De Wetf.c, make the objection general, while Philippi finds in the sharp answer of ver. 20 a proof that the objector is a Jew.) — R.] [For -who resisteth his will? Tiji yaQ ^ov/.tjitati ai'Tod rli; urOifFrfjxfv; Mey- er renders fior^.i/Ka, which Paul uses only here, dns GeivoUfe — i. e., capium conxilium. It obviously implies deliberation, as /?oi'/o/(a«. does, when prop- erly distinguished from Qum. — R.] Though the av&ia T tj y.f has the present meaning, yet the form Been:3 to indicate also the thought that God has already anticipated every attempt of human oppo- eition. The Apostle does not hasten to refute the charge directly, by urging the truth of the relations of guilt, because this charge is based upon such a Vne-sided standpoint from the overrating of human action, that this human boasting must first of all be prostia'.ed. Chap. iii. 5 ff. proves that he can also reply to a similar charge by an answer which brings out the ethical relations in harmony with the con- nection. But the first task presented to him her« is, to go back with the quarrelsome Jew resting upon the righteousness of his works, to the absolute do pendence of man on God. Ver. 20. Nay but, O man [w a.vQ^()w7T i , /(frorryf]. We translate the fifvovvyf with Tholuck: Much more; Meyer construes it as irony; " Yes, indeed, man." Its most probable use is to strengthen the thought : " Junt the opposite,, ntan^ &c. Thou sayest that God disputes with thee, nid thou rather, in thy erroneous claims of right, diiest to dispute with God." [Still better, Alford : " Yea, 1-ather, taking the ground from under the previous a.- a - fifvq roT' 7Tt]/.ov. The order indicates the twr emphatic thoughts : 1. That the human subjects un der discussion are as " clay ; " " his cla,y," would bt a proper rendering. 2. That God has power ; the definition of that power is given in th<» next clause — R.] Tholuck : " The potter's clay j regarded by infralapsarianism as the massa jam perdHa. The vessels are not considered, as is observed by the GL ord. and Brenz, as naturally part silver and gold, and part dirt, but altogether dirt. Consequently, these expositors prefer the allusion to the Old Tes. tament, Jer. xviii., where a people already ruined, which God forms into vessels of honor or dishonor according to its own conduct, is spoken of; the su 818 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. pralapsarians, on the contrary, as Thomasius, Estius, Calvin, and Gomarus, decide in favor of an allusion to Isa. xxix. or xlv. Supralapsarianism, to wit, re- gards the n tj ?.6i; as the masxa absolute, quails erat massa aru/elorwn (Estius) and the n).a(jfia — which the meaning of the word is alleged to favor — as the product of the first creation." Tholuck finds in the Bimile only the sense expressed by Calvin : Nullam dei arb'drio causam snperiorem posse addiici, &c. Tor the harsh expressions of Calvin, the still harsher ones of Zwingli, and the equally mild ones of Bul- linger, sec Tholuck, p. 528. According to Ariniiiius, and others, together with Lutherans, ver. 21 contains only a preliminary re- joinder ; the real answer follows in vers. 22, 23. [It is indeed a preliminary, but one that " aims rather at striking dumb the objector by a statement of God's undoubted right, against which it does not become us men to murmur, than at unfolding to us the actual state of the case " (Alford). Comp. the emphatic order of the words. — R.] Besides, Ar- minians and Socinians have asserted that here Paul does not speak of " an election of individuals, but of classes — of believing Gentiles " (Tholuck).* According to Tholuck, further, the principal question here is. What must we understand by the ntjloi; ? If we regard the earthy clod as the rt-al clay from which man was made, then the work of Him that formed may be transferred to the creation itselJ". According to this idea, indeed, the individual man is only " a specimen of the species." But if we regard God's breath as the real substance of man's formation, according to the biblical idea of personality, Calvinistic supralapsarianism is obvi- ated. [Of the same lump to make, ex t o T avrov served this, and supplied a av t«s- ft from ver. 20 ; but the better supplement would be: //// adyy.ia na()n tm &k7)\ firj yf'rotTo ! in ver. 14; but the best of all would be chap. xi. 33. The second difficulty lies in the brief expression »at 'ira, which at once becomes clear by bringing over once more the tjvfyxi-v: has also endured in order to. For the different attempts at construction, see Tholuck (p. 535). 1. Ka i y V (I) (J i a a u , xal 'iv a yrro^tcrrj; the xai — /.cd just as well — as also (Nosselt, Bauln- garten-Crusius). Tholuck says, on the contrary, that in that case it must read &t/.iov t^v. 2. Our own construction. The xal 'iva is con- nected to ijvfyxi-v, so that the latter expresses a double purpose (thus Calvin, Grotius, Winer, Meyer, and others).f Tholuck does not regard the connec- tion by the mere xal as sufficieat, and thinks, with Baumgarten-Crusius, that this construction does not present any clear thought. But the previous for- mation of this clear thought is already contained in Exod. ix. 15, 16. 3. Beza, Riickert, and Fritzsche, have connected xal IV a to the participial xartj()Tua,aiva: *' those who are originally (!) appointed to destruc- tion, for t/ie purpose," &c. The xai would thus be epexegetical, which is Calvin's view of the thought ; but tlie xarrj()Ti-(T/i. is totally misconstrued. Tholuck proceeds, with Philippi, from the unwar- ranted su[)position, that the Apostle is expected to treat uniformly of God's dealings iu relation to the axbvt] tiq artiiiiav and to the fit; Tviti'jv; he re- quires, accordingly, the acceptation of a double ana- coluthon. " Mentally, the Apostle must have writ- ten," &c. Philippi interprets similarly. (See Meyer [p. 380, 4th ed.], on the contrary). On the con- structions of Hofmann, Bengel, Schottgen, and Beck, Bee Tholuck, p. 533 ff. With much long-suffering [tv nokXri fia- nQ o O^v ,11 ia]. On the obscurity of the itiea of fiixx^odiiftia in Calvin, Hofmann, ami others (as only meaning waiting for), see Tholuck, p. 536. * [The more general reference is to be preferred, and, in »ny case, it is implied ; for all ante-Christian history must te viewed as lontj-suffering forbearance in preparation for the great revelation of mercy. Comp. all the more modern •onceptions of ancient hitstory. — R.] t [Alt'ord agrees substantially with this view, but pre- fers to supply : " what if this took place," this ov fl e A e i , ikttl. So Ewald. Dr. Hodge joins the ol.iuse with ti\o>v, or rather supplies 6ek(ov, which is not only ob- jectionable on the grounds he states himself, but untenalile, if thj v t kt /» e v a fit; an(f'>/.fi,av. This is the end for which they are fitted ; the divine 6()yt'i is accomplished in the a;7ri)/fi,a. — R.] Meyer : '' But the subject who has fitted them for the aniiikua is God (see ver, 20 f.), and the insertion of any clause by which it should follow that they had fitted themselves for destruc- tion (see Chrysostom, Theodoret, QJcumenius, and Theophylaet) is contrary to both the word and the context (likewise Tholuck and De Wette)." But apart from the fact that, according to Ps. ii., God breaks the vessels of wrath, but does not 7nake them, the very decided change of the verb as well as of the tense {xar tjqr i,(j fi iva ; a n (j o ijt a i/) a- fffv) should guard the exegetical author, who usu- ally holds so tenaciously to the letter, against this con- clusion. It is a much bolder leap from the thought : God has the pnver to make vessels unto dishonor, to the thought that He has made the vessels of wrcih. In the Apostle's choice of verbs he presents three antitheses, whicli may well serve as a warning to the expositor. 1. The verbs themselves are different : in xa- Ta^TtiTftr, the idea of making read;/ predominates (to make fitting, to prepare fully) ; but in the ex- pression TTQotroiiici^nv, on the contrary, the idea of the previous preparation predominates. 2. The former word is put in the perfect, and (winch strengthens the matter) also in the participle; but the latter, being in the form of the aorist, is much less conclusive. 3. The former stands irrelatively in the passive ; but the latter, as activity, is referred definitely to God. Such antitheses as these cannot be dusted off by the brush of mere assurance. Therefore a third explanation takes its place beside the two foregoing ones. According to this last, the perfect passive participle must be read as a verbal adjective : pre- pared, ready, as in Luke vi. 40, &c. (Grotius, Calo- vius. Beck). The Apostle has probably chosen this form, because this beiiiff ready certainly arises from a continual reciprocal action between human sin and the Divine judgment of blindness and hardness. De Wette has an uncertain surmise of this relation : " The mixture of two different modes of view — the moral and the absolute — undoubtedly occurs here. It must also be granted that the Apostle avoids say- ing : a xaTtjfJTLfTf fi^ a7To')/.fi,av (Bengel)." The " two different modes of view " are reduced to one, according to which every development of sin is a network of human offences and Divine judgment^ CHAPTER IX. 1-38. 321 that are related to each other as chain and clasp.* The poet knew soToetliing more of the matter than many theologians, when he wrote: "This is the very curse of evil deed," &c. ; f provided the curse is not taken as a mere i)hrase. Ver. 23. And that he might make known the riches, &c. [ n « t «.' v a yv «> c » ff ij to v nkovrov, x.rJ.. As intimated above, this clause should be connected (Winer, p. 530) with endured. Kai, also. Tliis was a second purpose of God's endurance, undoubtedly the more important one. "Jvct is of course telic. — TTji; doirji; altov. The divine majesty in its beneficent glory. Bengel : JBonitatis, ffratice, miser icor dice, sap entice, omvipo- tentice. — R.] Tlie riches of glory form the antithe- sis to another miserable train of development which Christanity could conceivably have taken within the Jewish nationality. Tlie riches of glory are the train of development which God has actually taken, the course of the unlimited universality of evangeliza- tion, to the wonderful blessing of which, in the con version of the Gentiles, the Apostle ever reverts with rapt adoration (chap. x. 11 ; Eph. iii. 5-10 ; Col. i. G, 20 flf.). According to Calvin, the nXo'iroq rTjq Soiree should be so regarded that by the ifiteritiis inipro- borum eo luculenlius divince bonitaiis, erga electos amplitndo should be strengthened. According to the explanation of the Remonstrants, the Hberalitas of God should be made known on the vessels of mercy, by the comparison of this mercy with the patient endurance with tlie vessels of wrath. Ac- cording to Fritzsche, the purpose of sparing the Jews was, that many of them might be converted before the second coming of Christ. But this overlooks vcr. 24, according to which the vessels of mercy are only partly among the Jews.:}^ Meyer must also here mix up the second coming of Christ, which he every- where brings in, just as Dr. Baur does Clemens Ro- manus. " If, namely, God had not so patiently en- dured the (rxfi'tj ooj'^t-, but had already permitted His penal judgment to be inflicted upon them (which must, be regarded together with the second coming), He would have had no period to declare His glory to axivKTi. fV.601'?." That is, the final judgment, as the end of the period of mercy, would have been present with the complete penal judgment of Israel. The destruction of Jerusalem has certainly become a type of the end of the world, but not the end of the world itself. The Apostle presents us with an excellent exegesis of his own language, in chap. xi. 11, 25 ; Acts xiii. 46, and also in other passages. [On vessels of mercy, inl ay.ivt] e/.eoi'q. Not to (De Wette), but toward, with rer/ard to, de- pending on n'/.ovrov (Alford). The making known ia represen . )d by the preposition as stretching itself * [Stuart and Alford adop the stronger view as inherent "m. any consilient beUrf of an nmnipotrnt and omniscient O'ti;'' Dr. Hodge gives both, without definitely accepting Silher. Schaff deems the stronger view the more natural ore, but guards it, as must be done, apainst supra-lap- sarianism, &c. But the differences noted by I)r. Lange must be carefully kept in view, as themselves guarding against erroneous inferences. — R.] t [" Dai< EBEN isl dii- Fuch der hosen That Dis sie,forlZ'ugi-nd, imtner Boses muis gebdren.^' This quotation, almost a proverb in German literature, 1.5 from Schiller, Die Picrofomini. V. Aufi/., 1 Auftr. Cole- ridge, who has taken some liberties in arrangement, puts it in Act iii. Scene 1.— K.] t [The advantage of a general reference throughotit the passage is apparent here. The malcing known is something which occurs not once, but throuahout the whole gospel dispensation, as ver. 24 requires. — R.] 21 over the men who are its objects (Meyer). The lat> ter is preferable. We have no right to limit the " vessels of mercy " to any period. The preceding context would extend the reference to the times of Pharaoh ; ver. 24 extends it indefinitely into the Christian dispensation. — R.] Which he before prepared for glory [« n(jotjToi/ta(Fiv fit; doiav. The verb is aoriut, and refers to a definite past act. The two mean- ings suggested by Hodge: (1.) predestined; (2.) prepared by providence and grace (also that of Ola- hausen), are both objectionable (1.) Because it ii not the proper meaning of the word ; (2.) because this is a continued work, and would be indicated by the perfect, as was the " fitted " of ver. 22. It probably refers to the actual constitution of the in- dividual, as clay in the hands of the potter, the re- sult of election, yet distinct from it. — There is no necessity for limiting doicc to "the glory of the new covenant." Its antithesis, " destruction," shows that it means the full and eternal glory of the kingdom of heaven. — R,] Tholuck translates, "which he had prepared unto glory from eternity," and remarks thereon, that, from the circumstance that the xce- TijQTvrTfiiva. does not have the tt^^o before it, it fol- lows that Paul could have thought only of a dccreium eleetionis, but not reprobationis. [So ydiaff.] Tho- luck cites, in favor of this explanation, Eph. ii. 10 • Matt. xxiv. 34 ; Book of AVisdom viii. 9. We must remark, in relation to the middle pas- sage, that the expression : Buautia npotToifiaa' fiivrj ano y.arapo/.Tji; xoa/iov must not be con- founded with n^jo y.arafio/Jji; y.on/i. From the foundation of the world, through all time, God has labored for the preparation of the fiatjihlci. The thought, God has choten us before the foundation of the world, is also totally different from the infeasible thought, that He prepared us for glory before the foundation of the world. The two other passages are equally undemonstrative. Meyer explains, more correctly, thus: God formed the a/.tvij D.iovq there- for beforehand, before He declared His glory on them. But the general statement has also its his- torical relation on this side. As the true children of faith among the Jews came out from the peda- gogical exclusion under the law (Gal. iii. 23), they found themselves already prepared lor the glory of the new covenant, and the preparatory mercy had operated in this direction on even many of the Gen- tiles (chap. ii. 14, 15). The nXoTiro(; r/ji; rfoJiyf came over them like the rising of a spiritual sun— . ETTi ffy.fvt] a.souc;, the vessels which were sub- jects of mercy — and went far beyond them in the evangelization of the Gentile world (see Isa. ix. 2). [The paraphrase of Meyer (vers. 22, 23) is ap- pended, as a clear resume of the exegesis, for the most part supported in the notes above. " But if God, notwithstanding His holy will leads Him, not to allow His anger and His power to remain un proven, but to make it known in act, has yet, with great long-suffering, endured such as were objects of His wrath, and spared them the destruction, into which they are, however, fitted and prepared to fall, as a vessel from the potter — endured and spared not merely as a proof of such great long-suffering toward them, but also with the purpose of making known, during the continuance of this forbearance, the ful ness of His glorious perfection upon stick as are ob- jects of His mercy, whom He had before prepared, as a potter a Teasel, and enabled for eternal glory." R.] 832 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. Ver. 24. As such he also called us, &c. [o°e xat ixd/.KTtv fi/ioi/ v , z.t.A., in harmony with Hosea i. t), referred to Hosea ii. 23.-}- Ver. 26. And it shall come to pass, that in the place. [See Textual ^ote '^'K~\ In order to * The reference is undoubtedly to the symbolical names given by the prophet lo a son and daugbtcr (chap. i. 6, 9) : Lo-Ainiiii (not my people) and L't-Ruhamnh (not having ohtaned mercy). In order of birth the latter stands first, as well as in the passage cited. 'J'his is natural, as visible deprivation of mercy precedes visible rejection as a people. The Apostle inverts the order, however, perhaps because the prominent thought for his purpose was : nul my peo- ple, &c.— ll.l t [Dr. Hodge makes of vers. 25-33 a distinct section, in which the Apostle eonfinns the position of the preceding section (the freedom of God in selcctintt the objects of His mercy) l)y declarations of the Old Testament (1.) vers. 2'>, 26. Aliens were to be included in the kingdom of God ; (2.) Only a small portion of the Israelites should attain to the*' bltn-iiiss ; vers. 27-29 ; hence the Gentiles are called, and the Jews as Jews rejected; vers. 30, 31. The reason of their rejection was refusal to sul)mit to gospel terms of salvation ; ver. 32. As predicted, they were offended, at their MesBiah ; ver. 33. — K.] undeistand the whole argumentative force of thia citation, we must, like tlie Apostle, connect the seo ond citation, Hosea ii. 1 (LXX. i. 10), with the first (and this is simply an exegesis according to tin an- alogy of Scripture, as we frequently find in Paul). The Apostle, designing to emphasize the word cipsS , brings it out once more in his conclusion : ixfZ x/.TjOfjaovrai,, 'x.rJ.. Hitzig explains the expression : in the place, by instead of. According to Meyer, the prophet meant by tliis expression tKfi locality of the Gentiles, the Gentile lands ; but Paul understood by it, Palestine. Tliat the expression denotes the stay of the Jews in the Gentile world, is proved by Hosea i. 1 1 : " Then shall the children of Judah and the children of Israel be gathered to- gether, and appoint themselves one head, and they shall come up out of the land." It is just on this point that the weight of the proof rests. The call will be published to them among the Gentiles, there- fore among the ^'' no-iieople," among whom they them- selves are scattered as " no-peop'e." According to Meyer, Paul finds the demonstra- tive force of the two passages in the fact, that he perceives the mercy shown to the ten tribes as a type of the reception of the Gentiles to salvation. According to Tholuck, his proof rests upon the her- meneutics of the Jewish exposition. This " was ac- customed to refer biblical declarations, according to the law of ideal analogy, to such subjects also as are comprehended in the same category " (see p. 541).* It must be assumed that the decision : " not my people" has placed the Jews among the Gentiles, and that the decision : Ln-Ruhamah, has adjudged them to be a very intractable people even among the Gentiles themselves. If, now, tlie call to salva- tion is published to this no my people, in the midst of the Jews, then it has a creative, original mean- ing ; it is not published to Israel as God's people, but it creates for itself a people of God from the mixed ^^m -people" of the Jews and of the Gentiles. According to the typical construction, De Wette has referred the lonoi; to the ideal state or divine king- dom, and Fritzsche to the coetus Cristianorum. Yet, according to the coimection, this locality means the equalization of Jews and Gentiles in one coranion need of mercy. Ver. 27. And Isaiah cries also concerning Israel, Though the niunber of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, a remnant shall be saved. [Vers. 27 and 28 contain a quo- tation from Isa. x. 22, 23 ; the verses being divided differently, however. The original reference wa.s undoubtedly to the return from Babylon. Here, however, the emphasis is laid on rem^iant, mainly with reference to the call of the Gentiles, though perhaps not without a secondary reference to the future salvation of Israel — a preiuonition of chap, xi. — R.] That the question in the foregoing was the call of the Gentiles (the Jews, of course, in. eluded, in so far as they have sunk into heathen- dom), and not the call of the Jewish people, aa Hofmann holds, is proved by the verse which now follows — a quotation from Isa. x. 22, nearly accord. ing to the LXX. The Apostle here emphasizes the remnant, as he has emphasized the Gentile land in the foregoing passage. Only a remnant of Israel, ♦ [So Hodge, Stuart, substantially. For a discussioa of Paul'f analogical use of Old Testament events and dta* tions, the reader is referred to Lange's Comm. Oal. pjik 113 ff., 120 £f.— R.1 CHAPTER IX. 1-38. 323 to vnokfififia, will be saved. The LXX. trans- lated the original 110^ : ivill return, be converted, by a(f) f)-rj a tree i, in the sense of tdll be saved, though in a more restricted souse than Paul intends. The term remiiard is of all the more weight, as it Stands in contrast with the declaration, " though thy peo|)le Israel be as the sand of the sea." Similar pjussages : Isa. Ixv. 8, 9 ; Mai. iii. 2 ; iv. 1. — The ciying, x^jauft, describes the bold declaration of i truth very ott'ensive to tlie people;. Ver. 28. [For he is finishing the word, and cutting it short in righteousness ; because a short word will the Lord make upon the earth. Aoyov ycif) a vvt t XHiv xai awri- (tvo)v ev (i i,Aai.oa vvt\' oTt Xoyov awTfr- fitj fi iv ov 7T o (- f'j (T f If viv ^ lot; i n i r tji; y ^j 'i • See Textual Notes '^*' ''^' '•"'. Lange renders : j^'or He who consurmnates the reckoning, is also he who limits it in righteousness. Yea, a restrained work will the Lord carri/ out on the earth. Against this View, see below. — R.] Zunz translates the follow- ing words of the same quotation, ^""7 "|i''S3 , &c„, thus: "The ruin is decreed, righteousness overflows. For the Lord, the God of Hosts, executes a firndy determined desolation in the midst of all the land." The LXX. has translated: /.oyov avvrtMiv y.ai ai'v- Tt/ivinv iv (ii-xai-offi'vyi, oTt }.oyov avvTtXfitjfiivov xr^ioi,' noi,rj(Tiv iv ri] ol/.oifiivri o^.tj. Paul follows this in the main, with the exception of the last words. It may now be asked. Has the LXX. translated incorrectly, and has Paul incorrectly quoted from it, under the supposition that this translation corre- sponds better to his purpose ? (see Tlioluck, pp. 542 ff.) nb3 means, first of all, completion, consum- mation, and concurs with the ).6yoi; in the idea of aettleiiient (see the LXX., 1 Mace. x. 40, 42, 44). Accordingly, "(i"'^3 also means the judgment of destruction in the sense of settlement. Now the LXX. translates the first clause thus : " He who has determined the .settlement (the same as the final judg- ment) is the same who litints it, cuts it short in right- eousness ; so that a remnant can be left from the destruction." We read the xat avvrifivoiv as a conclusion with iarl, and understand by right- eousness, not penal righteousness, but righteous re- straint in punishing, according to the saving purpose of righteousness, wiiose highest glory does not con- sist in inexorable rigor. Tl)is translation is undoubtedly exegetical. First, it takes over Adonai, the subject of the following clause, in order to bring back the definition of the first clause to the defining clause. Then it does not explain the •^i^'^^ ^i^'^ ^s a higher degree of the first term V^''^ 'P^r^? but, antithetically, as a mitigation, which is even already hidicated in the Vnin . This exegesis will be perceived from the sense, also, to be altogether correct. Destruction is defined as settlement, but therewith also cut short ; overjtowing (restraining itself) with righteous mild- n;!ss, deliverance. The word nF;T2I frequently has the sense of mildness, of righteousness, as fairness in its saving effect. The verb riad is here transi- tive. See Gesenius, Lexicon. On avvriftvfiv, sec the Lexicon. This translation is further in harmony with the connection which gives prominence to j^re- eisely this thought, that a remnant shall be saved from the decreed judgment.* The " shortened • I STet the emphasis, as will appear from the notes on days," in Matt xxiv. 22, denote the same thing, Se« the Commentary on Matthew [Anier. ed., pp. 425, 426]. The second clause changes tht maxim of divin« government declared in the first clause, according to which, judgment always brings a deliverance, into a declaration ; here the word of the LXX. is explained of itself by the Ibregoing: for the Lord will efl'ect a shortened, that is, a moderated settle* ment in the whole world, or, as Paul says in a more general way, upo7i the earth. Now there seems to be no support for the avvTtrfiTjfdvov ir the original text. But the niphal participle n:i*in3, like the substantive ra"in3 , docs not by any meana denote in turn, like nbs , the penal judgment in it« self, but the definiteness and fixed limitation of the penal judgment. Thus the word n^t'^TiD'] after n?3, in Isa. xxviii. 22, evidently serves to express the limitation of the judgment, as is plain fiom the ex- planation in vers. 23-29. (Ver. 28 : He will not ever be threshing it.) Therefore the Vulgate prop- erly translates consmnmationem et abbreviationem audivi ; according to the Septuagint, avv-tfcthafiiva ■Acii avvttrnijfiiva n^) fferr wirA dissdbige Sleuren ihun nuf £2rden."~ll.\ m order to save the remnant. The former thought is the prominent one, as we infer both from the coi> text here, and from the original. The sense of tha whole verse then is : He (i. e., the Lord) is finish- i)ig and cutting short the word (making it a fact by rapid accomplishment) in righiiousness, for a cuU short word (one rapidly accomplisLfd) loill the Lord make (execute, render actual) upon the earth. This is, in the main, Meyer's rendering. While the oiig- inal reference was to the Jews in the times of Isaiah, the Apostle here makes the prophecy of more ge:- eral validity, referring it to the sad fact that most of the Jews were cut off (so Hodge), though including the other fact, that the remnant should be saved, both sides supporting the general thought of the chapter. Dr. Lange at last comes to nearly the same view. The question then arises, Is this at all in keeping with the words of the prophet himself? A comparison will show that it preserves the spirit of Isaiah's language most fully, and actually conveys to the reader's mind a clearer sense than a literal rendering of the Hebrew would do. Hence he used the LXX., and (as all authors do) inserted such un- important words as would make its language conforn to the use for which he designed it. — R.] The prophet has uttered a twofold truth in the quotation ; first, that only a remnant will be left from the great judgment of destruction, but then that this remnant shall be preserved in security. The Apostle, in vers. 27 and 28, has brought into prominence this first feature, but without altogether excluding the second. This latter is proved by the remaining part of his citation. Ver. 29. And, as Isaiah hath said, or proph' esied (Isa. i. 9), &c. [x a t , y.a& di q n (j o i i (> >i y. t v ' Huaiaq, y..r.L We give the pointing of Meyer (a comma after y.ai). The meaning then is : And, as Isaiah has already said (so I appropriate his words). Except, &c. See below, however. If it be objected, that this gives to the verb the unusual sense of prophesy, it will be seen that this is not the necessary meaning of has already said. The introduction of y. a w ? calls for some such para- phrase, and the n^o seems to I'efer to the time of the Apostle, rather than to the pilace of the last citation. Besides, the propriety of a direct adoption by the Apostle appears botli from the use of the first person, and the quasi-prophetic character of the ap- plication Paul mukes of the passage here. — R.] The explanation : he has already said, namely, in an earlier chapter (Erasmus, Calvin, Grotius, and oth- ers), is opposed by Tholuck, and others, with the remark, that such a reference to earlier passages in witliout an analogy in the Apostle's constant quo- tation memoriter. Against this explanation, at all events, is the Apostle's design of returning to the fact of the present condition of believing Israel ; so that he seems to construe the prophet's declaration chiefly as a typical prophecy. But that passage is immediately more than a description of an existing condition ; it is a vision of an immeasurable ruin extending to the future,* as the passage, Isa. vi. 9 ; • [Dr. Dreschler remarks on Isa. 1. 9 (Der Prnphet Jcxaja, L p. 84) : " The prophet with a few ground-.strokes gathers up the whole future of the people of Israel. He annouucea a period of judgment as an unavoidable pas.sage-w.ay ; then, again, a lime of salvation. But the period of judgment comprehends in itself all the judgments then standing \\ithout as yet : eveiy visitation, of which history fron« that time on knows aught, is a proof of this word of proph« ecy, a fulfilmciit of it. . . . Just so is the period of salva- tion conceived as the sum-total of all fulfilment in general, CHAPTER rX. 1-33. 325 eomp. Matt. xiii. 15; John xii. 39 ff. ; Acts xxviii. 26, 27 ; '-i Cor. iii., xiv. fl". It may be asked, whether we would read y.al inti, xctOioi; 'Ha. &e. : It stands thus, as Isaiah has prophesied, or : And — as Isaiah has prophesied — Exeept, &e. Meyer defends the latter construction ; but we prefer the former, because tlie Apostle designs to adduce this quoted tapression, like the former and the following one, as an expressive prophetical declaration. The term ffni(j/tcc means the /.aTakunfict, as well in its ex- ternal sniallness as in its inward importance for the future. The Septuagint has translated the T^iit) of the original text by aTTt^/ia,* Compare Isa. Ixv. 8. Fourth Proof : T7ie correspondence between God''s freedom in His goverinnent with the freedom of men in their faith or unbd ef. TJie stability of the fact that the Gentiles believe, and Israel, in its Sopu'.ar totality, does not believe (vers. 30-33). [eyer says, on this section : " The Jews them- selves bear the guilt of their own exclusion, because they obtained it not by faith, but by works of righteousness, for they were offended at Christ." [A new chapter should begin here. For, having already stated the objective, Divine ground of the rejection of the Jews, Paul now passes to the sub- jective or human cause, hinted at frequently before, viz., their unbehef. They were rejected by God, because, in spite of the many warnings of their own prophets, they sought their own righteousness, spring- ing from an external view of the law, and were of- fended at the promised Messiah, when He actually appeared, instead of seeking salvation through vital faith in the grace of God in Christ. This mode of view, which is carried out further in chap, x., solves in part the enigma of the preceding discussion ; yet it cannot be denied that, in the Divine predestina- tion, there ever remains an obscure background, which reason is not in a condition to fully compre- hend, and should humbly adore. — P. S.] Ver. 30. What shall we say then ? [Ti ovv iQOi'ufv; Precisely as in ver. 14, where it introduces an objection. — R.] We may ask, whether the Apostle again uses this expression here in order to avoid a false conclusion, or whether he merely " deduces the historical result from the foregoing prophecies" (Meyer).| Evidently, this passage is a turning-point of the greatest importance. The Apostle has heretofore described God's freedom, and finally His fieedom even in rejecting the greater part of Israel in contrast to His call of the Gentiles, and has strengthened his declaration by appealing to the prophecy of the Old Testament. This is now the place where this question arises : From all this, does there not follow fatalism, or a simple absolute au- thority of Divine freedom ? He does not absolutely express this false conclusion, in order to make short idnce the complete realization of all God's promises will brins what will still all the longing and the thirsting of the Vunian heart from thenceforth and forever." — P. S.j • [The rcsi-ued Israelites are called, Isa. vi. 13 (oomp. Ezra \x. 2), "a holy seed," because- out of them, as a small beginninor, at the s.ime time the nation shall rejuvenate . Itself, and the true spiritual Israel shall proceed. The Jew- ish Christians, who escaped the terrible judgment of God npon the mass of ihc unhappy nation at the de-truct'on of Jerusalem, formed the pith of the Christian Church. — P. S.] r [Alford answers thus : " This question, when followed by a question, implies, of course, a rejection ot the thought thus suggested ; but when, as here, by an asfertinn, intro- duces a turther unfolding of the argument from what has preceded." What follows is not a (lue^tion. See below. -K.1 work of it hj a. firj yivoiro, because ho has reallj anticipated it already. But he actually removes i); The Gentiles have not fir.'it attained to salvation from an exercise of absolute authority; they have attained to righteousness, the righteousness of faith, which can only oe obtained from the source of righteous ness. Some expositors (Pelagius, Cyril, Theodore of Mopsvestia, Flatt, Olshausen) have not understood the expression from oTt to s^OatTf as an answer, but as the real import and continuation of the pond- ing question, under different modifications (ort aa because, that, somehow that). This is opposed by the following: 1. The statement in vers. SO and 31 can by no means be regarded as a summary of the fore- going ; 2. It has not been at all present as yet in this definite deduction of the antithesis. It contains something new, which only arises as a conclusion from what has preceded. Chrysostom says that this passage is the aaqtaTcirri /i'o''/ifv, see Tholuck, p. 546. That the Gentiles. "ES^vtj ; not merely Gen- tiles. [Against Meyer, who says: "Not the Gentiles as a whole. On the Gentile side was righteousness," &c.— R.] Who -were not following after righteous- ness, attained. To. /ly duox. The Apostle uses the duir/.fiv with especial reference to the races (see Meyer on Phil. iii. 12, 14), and thus y.ara).aft p . means not merely the reaching, but also grasping ; in this case it is especially the grasp- ing of the prize (see 1 Cor. ix. 24). This consti- tutes a double antithetical oxymoron. The Gentiles did not run after righteousness, and yet even they grasped righteousness at the goal of the race-course.* But the Jews, who ran, or so far as ihey were run- ners after the law of righteousness, never reached the proper terminal point of the race — the well- understood law. The Apostle does not design to say that the Gentiles in general had known no high- er pursuit ; for he has already referred to the Gen- tiles in his expression concerning preparatory grace : « n(J0t]Toliiu(Tfv fti; (Jdiar.f But the Gentiles were not OTily not companions with the Jews in the course in which the latter ran after the law of righteous- ness ; righteousness, as an explicit moral law, was not the fundamental idea of their pursuit (although it constituted the unity of the platonic virtues). The Greek struggled for ideality, or wisdom, while the Roman struggled for an innocent legal order, or for power. Thus it came that they did not run astray by looking at an analytical phantom of right- eousness, like the majority of the Jews ; and hence that they could be subjected (that is, for a prelimi- nary condition of faith) to the curse of their ideals, to 1 profound despair in themselves and 'ji the glory • [It seems best (with Meyer) to conRider rightrousne^ as used, in this part nf our verse, without special referenc* to the Christian standpoint. Dr. Hodge really advocatei this view, but is hampered in reaching it by "the limited meaning he places upon the word as used by Paul. Stuait renders Sik., justifirntion in each case, which is altogether untenable. See p. 74 ff., &c. — R.] t [See ver. 23. It is doubtful whether ruch preparatios as is there referred to, includes, in any sense, the p.qpes^ diu'ic relation of the Gentile world to Chrifctia.ni(y, howi ever extensi~8 that relation was. — R.1 320 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. of the world (sec ?hap. iv. ; Acts xvi. 9 ; Rom. ix. Even the righteousness which is of faith [//mrciofTi'riyr di, x.t.X. That is, precisely the true righteousness. On the delicate meaning of di, see Alt'ord in loco ; Winer, p. 4r2. — R.] Vir. 31. But Israel, foUowing after the law of rirhteousness, attedned not to the law^ ['ycr^fCA//. ()i ii I (i) ■/. 01 V vofiov dixmoaiiv ijq, tiii vofiov ohn tqityaafv. On the reading, see Textual Not- ", and below. — R.] It is not : the righteousness of the law, but, more strongly : the law of righteousness. This would mean, in the fig- ure of tiie race, that Israel has by no means ad- vanced so far as to run after rigliteousness itself; the programme of the race became its goal ; in striving after an endless analysis of the law, it has run astray in statutes of external legality. There- fore it has come to pass that it has not readied vofiOi; in its truth — that Is, in its real inward character — and that, after all its running, it has never attained to the true beginning, the principle of the running. This antithesis is in harmony with the subject-matter (see Rom. vii. 1 ff.), and is much stronger than if the Apostle had said : It has not attained to the law of the righteousness of faith, which would be self- evident ; or even if he had said : It has not attained to the righteousness of the law according to the let- ter — which charge he could not bring against them. Therefore we prefer the reading of Codd. A. B. D., given in the text. [The briefer reading is quite well supported, and certainly, when rightly understood, adds to the force of tlie passage. They did not even attain to the law. Conip. Alford in loco. — R.] It hardly needs to be called to mind, that the ques- tion here is relatively concerning the Gentiles and Israel ; that is, concerning the antithesis between the believing Gentile world and unbelieving Israel. This limitation in reference to Israel lies in the diwy.<))v VOjUOV. 27ir, law of righteousness. The expression has been regarded by many as an exchange for f)t- xaLorrvvtjV vo/iov (Chrysostoni, Calvin, Bengel, and others). Undoubtedly this was the basis of the etfort of tlie Jews, but their real following extended, in Pharisaism, far beyond, to the amplification of the law into an endless series of ordinances. The view : The justifi/ing law (Meyer), obscures the strong emphasis of the vouoi; itself, when this voftot; is subsequently explained thus : " The law was an ideal, whose realization the Israelites strove to ex- perience by their legalness." Comp. chap. ii. 17-24. The theoretical, legal orthodoxy of the Jews was the perfect development of their righteousness of works, according, also, to the Epistle of James.f Most of the early expositors (Chrysostom, Theo- doret, and others) hold that Paul meant the Mosaic law in both cases in ver. 31. Others, on the con- trary (Theodore of Mopsvestia, Bengel, and De Wette [Hodge] ), have understood, by the second • [On tliis thought, see especially Orieckcvlhum iind Christenthum, by Dr. Or. C. Seibert, 1857, referred to in the Genoral Introd. JUitihiw, p. 6. The author is now a pastor fax Newark, N. .T.— R.] t [Dr. Ilodge seems to prefer the following view : "The word law may be redundant, and Paul may mean to say nothlnii more than that ' the Jews snught righteousness, or justification, Imi did not attain it.' This, no doubt, is the Biibstancf, though it may not be the precise form of the thought." This is but avoiding an interjiretation, and in a way which the learned commentator would deem unjustifl- Bb e if applied to less sacred forms than those written by xn Apostle. — it.] law, the Christian dixaioTvvtj. These two cor.struo tions are opposed not only by the (iuoxoiv (Meyer: it does not express the etfort to fulfl the law, but to possess the law), but also by the consideration that a true following after the Mosaic law — that is, after its fulfilment — must not only lead to it, buU even to Christianity (see chap. vii.). Tholuck (with Calovius, Philippi, and others) takes ro/d, because He produces the very good that is in them ; and He elects them, not on account of their faith and their holiness, but to faith and holiness. But it cannot be said, on the other hand, that He hatea the evil men because He produces the very evil that is in them ; for that would be absurd, and destroy His holiness ; but He hates them on account of the evil that they do or will do in opposition to His will. While human goodness is the effect of Divine love and grace, on the contrary, human wickedness is the cause of Divine hatred and abhorrence ; and on that account alone can it be the object of the punitive wrath and condemnatory decree of God. Were evil the effect of His own. agency, He would be obliged to condemn himself — which is irrational and blas- phemous. — P. S.] Second proof {from the time of the giving of the law) : The fact of ordination. The predetermi- nation of the historical train of development of per- sons is the free exercise of God's (Jehovah's) right- eousness on persons. It is not made conditional on a self-volitional human willing and running; but it conditions itself by its consequence in relation to a definite human course of conduct, by further show- ing mercy on him to whom mercy has once been shown, and allowing all his experiences to contribute to his salvation, and, by its influence and long-suft'er- ing, leading him who has once hardened himself to the judgment of hardening. In the infinitely vast antithesis between the one to whom mercy has been shown and the hardened one (Moses and Pharaoh), it constitutes the perspective of the antithesis of a final glorification and rejection, but not yet this an- tithesis — /. e., the final judgment itself (vers. 14-18). Third proof (from the time of the development of Israel of the Old Testament) : a. The fact of the call. The free exercise of Divine wisdom on the qi'^aua, or the spiritual, plas- tic material of the ancient world, and especially on Israel. This exercise is not made conditional on the historical Israel's claims to inheritance, and had the right to make of Israel, as it had become, vessels unto honor and unto dishonor, by a universal Chris- tianization. But the call makes itself conditional by the actual state, in which it still endures with much long-suffering the existing vessels of wrath, which are already fitted to destruction, that, by their exist- ence and opposition, the full display of God's glory, of His spiritual revelation in Christ, may be made known on the vessels of mercy. It thereby consti- tutes the economic antithesis of hardening in the New Testament, and of the historical judicial curst •n the great mass of Israel, and of an opposing im CHAPTER IX. 1-a 32S measurable display of tlie glory of its exercise of mercy in tlio Gentile world. But this antitliesis, as Wo shall I'uither perceive, does not preclude the pos- sibility of inerey on individual Jews, and of the re- jection of individual Gentiles (vers. 19-24). 6. 'J'/ie proof of this freedom of the Jjivine call from the Old Testament, First, the equalization of Je"»s and Gentiles in their rejection is prophesied by Ilosea (ver. 25). Second, the equaUzation of Gentiles and Jews in the mercy shown to the latter (ver. 20). Likewise, Isaiah h.as prophesied, first, tlie reduction of the great mass of Israel to a small rem- nant, who shall be saved from tlie judgment (ver. 27) ; but second, the certainty that such a remnant Bhail arise from a judgment cut short by righteous mildness (vers. 28, 29). Fourth proof : The correspondence of the exer- cise of Divine authority on Jews and Gentiles, with their ethical conduct, or with the antithesis of faith and unbelief. The conclusion from the whole chap- ter, as drawn by the spirit of the Apostle (vers. 30-3S). [4. This chapter cannot be fairly explained or properly honored without a recognition of the pro- found truth which lies at the foundation of the doc- trine of election, viz., the free, unconditioned grace of God. Those ex[)Ositors who would limit the sov- ereignty of the Divine will by human freedom, and deduce salvation more or less from the creature, must do great violence to the text if they make it accord with their systems. Yet we must guard against tlie opposite extreme of supralapsarianism, wliich, with fearful logical consistency, makes God the author of the fall of Adam, hence of sin ; thus really denying botli God's holiness and love and man's accountability, to the ultimate extinguishment of all morality. Many, indeed, have held this view, whose lives, by a happy inconsistency, were far bet- ter tlian their theories. They arrived at this ex- treme jiosilion through a one-sided explanation of this passage, and tlu-ough the logical consequence of their conception of the sovereignty of God's all- determining will. But if we would not have the Bible prove any thing man wishes, we must inter- pret single passages in their connection with the whole, and according to the analogy of faith. In the early part of this Epistle (chaj). i. 18; iii. 30), Paul une((uivocally declares that God is not the au- thor, but the enemy and judge of evil ; how, then, can he here affirm a specific Divine foreordination of sin and perdition ? In chap. v. 12 ff. he shows that redemption through Christ, as to its indwelling power and purpose, is fully as comprehensive as the fall of Adam. With this agree many passages, which epeak of God's sincere will to save all men, and of a general call, extended not at once, but gradually, to all (Ezek. xxxiii. 11 ; 1 Tim. ii. 4 ; Titus ii. 11 ; 2 Peter iii. 9). Accordingly, Paul must have in mind here such a general reprobation, as is either a Belf-incurred result of unbelief, or only a negative preparation for the extension of the plan of salva- tion, which it therefore ultimately furthers. Be- sides, in chap. x. the casting away of the Jews is ""ttributed to their own unbelief, hence to the personal guilt of the creature ; and in chap. xi. thf '•ejection is represented as temporary. In God's gTcK." ">us decree, the fall cf the Jews redounds to the blessing of the Gentiles, and the conversion of the Gentiles ultimately to the salvation of the Jews. So He has permitted the fall of Adam, in order to redeem humauity in Christ, the second Adam (ver. 12 ff.) ; He has included all under di» obedience, that He might have nierey upon all (chap, xi. 32 ; comp. Gal. iii. 22). But the salvation can become actual only gradually ; and the gradual re- demption of all (not all as individuals, but the mass in an organic, not a numerical sense) presuppose* the temporary rejection of some. The Scrij)tures teach, on the one hand, the ab solute causality and unconditioned grace of God; and, on the other, the moral nature of man, include ing also his relative freedom and his responsibility {i. e., human personality). They ascribe redemption and sanctification, as well as the creation and main- tenance of all things, to God alone. He works both to will and to do of His good pleasure (Phil. ii. 13) ; no man cometh to the Son, except the Father draw him (John vi. 37, 44) ; without the Son, believers, can do nothing (John xv. 5). Not only the begin, ning, but also the progress and completion of conr version, are attributed to God (Jer. xxxi. 18 ; Heb. xii. 2 ; Luke xxii. 32 ; Eph. ii. 10 ; 1 Cor. iv. 7 ;• 2 Thess. iii. 2 ; 1 John v. 4). Hence all believers confess, with Paul : " By the grace of God I am what I am " (1 Cor. xv. 10), and ascribe all the honor and glory to the Lord alone (2 Cor. x. 17), Indeed, even evil, as a phenomenon, and according to its material forces, cannot be excluded from the absolute activity of God. He hardens Pharaoh and raises up Nebuchadnezzar ; He creates the light and the darkness ; He gives peace and effects evil (Isa, xlv. 7) ; and there is no evil (misfortune) in the city, that the Lord has not done (Amos iii. 6). — On the other hand, however, the Scriptures never treat of man as a mere machine, but as a moral being. They hold up before him, in the Old Testament, laws, with the promise of blessing if he obeys, and the threat, ening of a curse if he transgresses ; they offer him, in the New Testament, the gospel, baptism, finth ;• bid him, with fear and trembling, work out his own salvation (Phil. ii. 12); present to him the highest moral duties as commands : Be ye holy, be ye per- feet ; and account sin and the rejection of salvation as his own personal fault. " How often would 1 have gathered you, as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not " (Matt, xxiii. 27 ;. Luke xiii. 34).* * [Forbos ttus lays down the fundamental truths on thi^ difficult subject : "All pood oriprinates froni God. All evil ori^nates from the creature. Election originates in the fiee gr.ice of God. Eeprobation originates in the free-will of man. To God belongs the whole glory of the salvation of the Elect. To man belongs the whole responsibility of the ruin of th« Reprobate.'' See his Dissertation, pp. 380-475. That these positions are not reconcilable by human lofic, is evident from the discussions on the subject ; but this cannot, of itself, disprove their truth. It is the old and ever-recurring mystery of the oriein of evil. Forbea seeks to prove that these positions are compatible with th« doctrin.il statements of the Westminster Assembly. Those who wish the sharpet^t predcstinarian views, may find them in Haldane's notes on this chapter. The Synod of Dorl, which is considered by many the representative of hyper. Calvinism, only goes thus far in speaking of the reprobates " Whom God, out of H s sovereign, most just, ineprehe/isi ble and uncbangcable good pleasure, hath decreed to have in the common misery into which they have wilfully plunged themselves, and not to bestow upon ihem saving faith and the grace of conversion ; but permitting them, in His juffi judgment, to follow their own way, at last for the declara- tion of His justice, to condemn and punish them forever, not only on ac ouut of their unbelief, but also loi theii 330 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. If the first truth respecting the absolute, creative causality of God in the works of creation, redemp- tion, and aanctification be denied, we fall into the Pelagian error, which destroys the very marrow of Christianity, and attributes salvation to the creature ; but if tlie second class of Scripture texts be denied or wrested, we are brought to the brink of the abyss of fatalisir. or Pantheism ; man is degraded into a mere instrument without a will, and his re- pponsibility, guilt, and punishment abrogated. The task of theology consists, not in the establishment of one of these postulates at the expense of the other, but in reconciling both, and bringing into right relations with each other the infinite and finite causality ; in loosing, not in cutting the gordian knot. This is, indeed, one of the greatest and most difficult problems, which can never be fully solved from the standpoint of earthly knowledge. Only after the accomplished victory over evil can the deep, dark enigma of evil, which forms the main difficulty in the problem, be fully solved.* For practical and popular use, the following re- marks will suffice : (1.) There is an eternal predestination of believ- ers unto holiness and blessedness, and hence they must ascribe all the glory of their redemption, from beginning to end, to the unmerited grace of God alone. (2.) They do not, however, on this account cease to be free agents, responsible for all their doings ; but, as God works in nature not magically and im- mediately, but through natural laws, so He works in men, through their wills, hence through the media- tion of finite causes ; and the more that grace is de- veloped within them, so much the more is their true freedom developed ; so that perfect holiness and per- fect freedom coincide with each other. According- ly, the highest freedom is the complete triumph over the evil, and is consequently identical with the moral necessity of the good. In this sense, God is free just because He is absolutely holy. (3.) There is no Divine foreordination of sin as sin, although He has foreseen it from all eternity, and. other sins. And this is the decree of reprobation which by no means makes God the autlior of sin (the very thuu^bt of which is blasphemy), but declares Him to bo an awful, iireprehonsible, and righteous judge and avenger" (Canon i.. Art. XT.). This is as far as any ought to gi i, but it is by no means a reconciliation of the two sides of revealed truth, or an attempt at it.— E.l * [A few xcholia may be added here : 1. The relation of scientific theology to revealed truth, is that of science in general to the truth it seeks to systematize. Hence ths- ology has unsolved problems, and these furnish the stimu- lus to further investigation. 2. Theology is not to be con- eidered untrustworthy in its settlement of great questions, because some remain unsolved, nor can the failure of its attempts at solution invalidate either the positions already won, or the separate truths which it has not yet reduced to a system. 3. The modesty of true science lias a place in tbeological discussion. If theologians claim that their attempt at the solution of such a problem as that presented Id this chapter is the only one th it should be madf, the objector may feel that, in successfully opposing that view, he has overthrown the truth itself. 4. This problem is one that is ontological as well as theological, and hence cannot be escaped by rejecting revelation. Atheism avoids it solely by negation, pantlieism by opposing the testimony of our own consciousness. Whoever believes in a personal God and his own personality, is confronted with it. The «afer position for a child of God to tike is that which leaves the difficulty where the irreatest glory is ascribed to God. History shows that those who thus once were not the least roiicemed to live under the fullest sense of their accou'it- jbility. The Christian life is thus far the only solution of this great problem ; a mystery which is pruitically recon- siled only by one yet greater, the mystery of godliness, God manifest in the flesh — E.] with respect to redemption, permitted it, while con stantly overruling it to His purposes. Hence, those who are lost are lost through their own fault, and must blame their own unbelief, which rejects the means of salvation proffered them by God. (4.) In the time of the calling of nations and ic- dividuals to salvation, God proceeds according to a plan ol eternal wisdom and love, which we cannot fathom here, but should adore in silent reverence. (6.) The right use of the doctrine of election is the humbling of sinners and the comforting of be- lievers, as well as the increase of their gratitude ar.d happiness. Only a culpable misunderstanding and misuse of it can lead to carnal security and to de- spair. (6.) Instead of meditating much upon the pro- found depths of the Divine decrees, it is better for eacli to make his own calling and election sure, and, with fear and trembling, to work out his own salva- tion.— P. S.] 5. The lorbearance and confidence with which the Apostle pronounces his oiuiiion on the fill of Israel, his patriotic and truly human pain (2 Cor. xii. 7-9), and his prophetic elevation above it, reaching to sublimity, are characteristics of this wonderful man of God. 6. Israel's glory is revealed in the correspond ence of its great actual blessings with its chosen in- dividuals. The line of actual saving blessings enters into reciprocal operation with the personal line of the fathers down to Christ according to tlie flesh, the climax in which divinity and humanity unite. Its foundation is Israel's adoption, in Abraham, to son- ship. On this there is founded, first, the patriarchal antithesis of the ()6ia or of the revealing angel of Jehovah, and of the covenants, in whicli the evan gelical element is properly placed in advance of the legal element, confoiinably to the character of the patriarchal revealed religion ; then comes the an- tithesis of the Mosaic period, of the gift of th£ law, and of the services ; and here, in conformity with the character of the legal economy, the legal ele- ment precedes the evangelical. Both the patriarchal and Mosaic economies then comprise each other, just as the evangelical and legal elements are comprised in the promises of the prophetic period. It has already been remarked that, notwithstanding this articulation, each particular of the attributes men- tioned is peculiar in a more general sense to the en- tire theocracy. v. Careful attention must be paid to the fact that, in the election in vers. 6-13, the commimication of the Divine decree precedes the birth of the chil- dren. But, on the other iiand, in the ordination in vers. 14-18, it applies to characters already existing — Moses and Pharaoh — in accordance with the direc- tion which they have taken themselves. In tlie call in vers. 19-24, this communication finally follows the state of the case already existing : Vessels of wrath, vessels of mercy. From the whole of thia section, chaps, ix-xi., it follows that the decrees underlying these communications belong also to eternity. But they belong to eternity as decrees which are conditioned upon individual conduct, a3 God universally conditions himself in tiie measures wiiich He adopts in reference to persons to be deter- mined or already determined, and their personal re- lations. The decree of election (or of love) takes cognizance of no other condition than that the sin. gle individual must be defined according to the organ, ism «f the members of God's kingdom in Christ CHAPTER IX. 1-38. 331 The decree of ordination (or of righteousness) is conditioned by the fact that individuals, in their free Belf-determination, need, both for themselves and for their relation to the whole body, their historical des- tination and special guidance. The decree of the call (or of wisdom) is conditioned by the fact tiiat it makes the judgments pronounced on unbelief itself means for subserving the promotion of faith. The distinction of the elder theology, decretum ircedes- tinaiionin, decretum gratia; decretum justijicationis, has confused election and ordination — which has generally been the case from Augustine's time down to the present. This distinction has likewise over- looked the fact that the decretum gratiw constitutes the very centre of the decretum proedextinationis (Christ 6 oioi&nivot:, Acts x. 42 ; Rom. i. 4). The decretum justijicationis is most intimately connected with the decree respecting the vocatio. 8. We have elsewhere brought out the truth, that the wonderful tlowcr of the biblical doctrine of election, like the aloe, has been long concealed, yet with its character determined, in the sharp thistle of the ecclesiastical doctrine of predestination ; and that it is a duty of our day to acquire, with its full idea, the whole depth and glory of the biblical doc- trine of personality ; but not to seek to weaken and render indifferent, by the old Lutheran or Arminian- Reformed definitions, the solution of an enigma to whose real solution every living distinction of indi- viduals contributes, more than a scholastic hatching of confessional antitheses can do. In this respect, Lavater's Physiognomy may be regarded as an ex- planatory enlargement upon Calvin and Zwingli. The mystery of predestination, like that of the atonement, and every other Christian mystery, is re- flected in the. midst of life. 9. Ver. 1. The intimate proximity of salvation and sorrow (chap. viii. 39 ; ix. 1) in the Apostle's state of mind, as in our Lord's states of mind. 10. Ver. 3. For more particular information on the ban, see Tholuck, p. 472. [See also Excursus on Anathema, p. 302. — R.] 11. The AposUe's patriotism is a tragical feeling, pubject to the dominion and kingdom of Christ, and thereby glorified to the intercessory feeling. — On the Shekinah {doxa), see the note in Tiioluck, p. 477. 12. On the divinity of Christ, and the relevant passages of the New Testament in which He is in part called really God, and in part appears to be so called (Joini i. 1 ; xvi. 28 ; 1 John v. 20 ; Acts xx. 28 ; the present passage, ver. 5 ; Rom. xvi. 27 ; Eph. V. 5 ; 1 Tim. iii. 16 ; 2 Tim. iv. 18 ; Titus ii. 13; 1 Peter iv. 11 ; 2 Peter iii. 18; Rev. v. 13), comp Tholuck, p. 482. My Positiv Doffm., p. 160 fl. 13. Biblical doxologies : Rom. i. 25 ; ix. 6 ; xi. 86 ; xvi. 27, &c. ; 2 Tim. iv. 18 ; 1 Peter iv. 11 ; 2 Peter iii. 18, and others. 14. Ver. 6. Not all are Israel which are of Israel. This applies also to every nation, to every confession, to every Christian community, just as it Uppligs in general to the branches of the mystical tine, Christ (John xv. 2). 15. Tiie children of the flesh and the children of promise. See the Commentari/ 07i John, i. 13. [Comp. Galatians, pp. 119, 123. — R.] 16. On the theological discussions with reference to the doctrine of predestination in the present sec- tioQ, see Tholuck, pp. 490-506, and below. 17. Ver. 15. On the idea of consistency in tha name of Jehovah, as well in His having compa* .sion as in judging, see the Exeg. Notes. It is in har- mony with the righteousness of Jehovah's exercis* of authority, that even the judgment of death r&. dounds to the life of the sincere and compassionated one ; while the gospel, on the other hand, -s a savor of death unto death to the perverse and jnbel)"iV ing. But the consistency of Jehovah does not lie in His carrying out the abstract decrees of His own will, inflexiljly and in an exact direction, but in His remaining like himself, and therefore in His eren assuming a different position in relation to the changed positions of man ; yet this is, of course, ia harmony with the consistency of the principles es- tablished and realised by Him. Therefore, there is propriety in speaking of a Divine repentance — for example, in the history of the Flood. The position of mankind toward God has become so thoroughly perverted, that the Creator must become the De- stroyer. Comp. Ps. xviii. 24-27. 18. On the Egyptians' remembrance of the Pha- raoh under whom Israel went forth, see the article JE^iypten, by Lepsius, in Herzog's Theol. Encyc^ and Tholuck, p. 616. On the hardenings of Pharaoh especially, see Exod. iv. 21. Since the judgment of hardness is here declared collectively, the passage does not decide on the succession of the particular ones. The same applies to chap. vii. 3. Then the particular historical ones follow. First, Pharaoli m hardened by the counteraction of the magicians (chap. vii. 13, 22). A significant illustration of the free volition of Pharaoh in the latter case ; see chap. vii. 23. In chap. viii. 15 we read : " Pharaoh hardened his heart, and hearkened not unto them." And now his heart becomes hardened, even in spite of the warning of the terrified magicians ; chap. viii. 19. Again, in chap. viii. 82 : " And Pharaoh hardened his heart." We read the same thing in chap. ix. 7. But in chap. ix. 12 we read: "And the Lord hardened the heart of Pharaoh." In chap, ix. 34, on the other hand, we again meet with self- hardening, which is then designated as a judgment; ver. 35. In chap. x. 27, the Lord again hardens him. The same occurs in chap. xi. 10 ; xiv. 8. As regards this whole series of particulars, the atomistic exegesis of earlier times led to its being re- garded as fatalistic. But we must, in the first place, distinguish the prophetical declarations of the judg- ment of hardening as general views of the whole course of events, from the historical particulars. As for the historical particulars, v/e must always be very careful to notice that the hardening is not a single act, but a long succession of acts, which succeed momen- tary shocks and apparent awakenings. But the periods of hardening themselves are divided into three partic- ular acts: 1. Pharaoh is hardened by the magicians; 2. He hardens himself ; 3. The Lord hardens him. We must further consider, that he always hardens himself just as soon as he has recovered a little from the penal judgments. But the series of his expressions of penitence must be regarded as aris- ing particularly from fear {attritio, not contritio). Pharaoh's starting-point is the defiant question ; Who is the Lord ? chap. v. 2. Then he requires a miraculous proof; chap. vii. 7-10. He does not take the first plague to heart, because the magicians do likewise ; chap. vii. 22, 23. The first shock and its characteristic expression ; chap. viii. 8. Simila? emotion ; ver. 28. The first confession of sin ; chap. ix. 27, 28. The second, chap. x. 16. It ia characteristic that Pharaoh pays least attention t« 832 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. the plagues that least affect him and his house. This may be seen in the first and tiiird plagues ; but lie observes with more attention, on the otlier hand, tlie second and fourth, wiiich rest heavily upon him- self. He does not trouble himself about the mur- rain ; the boils and blains seem to snare him person- ally. The thunder and hail, on the contrary, terrify him ; the locusts also, but tlie darkness less. Final- ly, the death of the first-born at the decisive moment bioaks tlie tyrant's defiance, yet without being able to convert him. And it is out of this wonderful net^ work of human offences and Divine judgments that a ponderous fatalistic decree has been contrived. Meyer quite gratuitously opposes Olshausen's expla- nation, that the hardening assumes at the outset the already existing beginnings of eviL The ov Oihi, does not oppose it, for God can let man die before his hardening. Meyei, also, does not favor Calovius' definitions of hardening, that God does not harden man £Vf^'J'//T^xwc,•, but 1. avy/M^jtiti,/.!))^, propler per- misttioiiKm ; 2. aifo^firiTi^/Mq, propter occasionem ; 3. iyAara}.n,mi/.mi; ; 4. nai)a()oriy.Mi;. 19. Just as Pharaoh hardened himself more and more at Moses' deeds of faith, so was Moses always advanced and strengthened in faith by the trials of faith which were prepared for him by Pharaoh's hard- enings — that is, by the apparent failure of his miraculous deeds. This is a fundamental law of God's kingdom. The kingdom of darkness displays itself in its reciprocal action with the kingdom of light, but the latter is also displayed in its reciprocal action with the former. 20. Tholuck's explanation on having compassion and hardening, p. 523, harmonizes with the old Lu- theran dogmatics. Meyer's resume, p. 310. [Pages 390 ff., 4th edition. Justice to this an- thor, whose clear and acute exegetical notes have been so freely used by Dr. Lange, as well as in the additions, requires the insertion of a larger portion of his theological resutne than is given in the origi- nal. " The contents of chap. ix. 9-23, as they have presented themselves purely exegetically, and taken in and of themselves, of course exclude the idea of a decree of God conditioned by human, moral spon- taneity ; for indeed God's absolute activity, consid- ered in itself as such, cannot depend on that of the individual ; but a fatalistic determinixm, which robs man of his self-determination and free self-positing for salvation, making him the passive object of Di- vine arbitrariness, must not be deduced from our passage as a Pauline doctrine. For this reason, that this passage is not to be considered separately from what follows (vers. 30 ff. ; x. 11), and also because the countless exhortations of the Apostle to believ- Jng obedience, to steadfastness and Christian virtue, as well as all his warnings against falling from grace, are so many witnesses against that dreary view which annuls the nature of human morality and responsi- bility. Should we, with Reiclie, Kcillner, Fritzsche, and Krehl, suppose that Paul, in his dialectic zeal, had permitted himself to be hurried into self-contra- diction * we would have a self-contradiction so mani- fest, yet so extremely important and dangerous in a religious and ethical aspect, so harshly opposed to the (Christian moral ideas of Divine holiness and hu- «ian freedom, that it were least of all to be expect- ed of this Apostle, whose acuteness and dialectic • [Fritzsche, ii. p. 550 : " M'hus sihi Paulus coisensissel, li Aiistolelit, non Oamalielis alumnus /uisseL " { ) — R.] skill could guard him against it on the one band, while especially, on the other, his apostolic illumina- tion and the depth and clearness of his moral expe- rience 7tiu-st guard him against it." " But this bj no means justifies the interlining of the clear and definite expressions of the Apostle in our passage, on the part of anti-predestinarianism from Origen and Ghrysostom until now, to the effect that the moral self-determination and spontaneity of man ia the correlative factor to the Divine decree. The correct judgment of the deterministic propositions (vers. 15-23) lies rather between the psychologically and morally impossible admission of a self-contradic- tion, and the exegetically impossible interpolation in this way, of thoughts the d.rect opposite of the Apos- tle's expression. Hoic there can be the concurrence, so necessary in the moral world, of the individual freedom and spontaneity of man and the absolute self-determination and all-efficiency of God, is in- comprehensible to human reflection, at least so long as it does not desert the sphere of Christian view, and pass into the unscriptural, pantheistic sphere of Identity, in which, inileed, there is no place for free- dom in general.* Whenever, of the two truths: ' God is absolutely free and all-efficient,' and ' man has individual freedom, and is also on his side, in his own self-determination as free agent, the causer of his salvation or misery,' we handle but one, and that one consistently, and hence, one-sidedly, we are com- pelled to speak as if the other seems to be invalidated by our reasoning. But only seems ; for, in fact, there is in this case only a temporary and conscious abstraction with respect to the other." " Paul, then, found himself in this case. For he wished to pre- sent, in opposition to tlie fancy of the Jews respect- ing descent and works, the free and absolute al- mightiness of the Divine will and work, and all the more decidedly and exclusively the less he would leave any ground for the presumptuous error of the Jews, that God must be gracious to them. The Apostle has here placed himself entirely on the abso- lute standpoint of the theory of God's pure indepen- dence, and that, too, with all the boldtiess of clear consistency ; but only until he has done justice to that polemic purpose. Then he returns (vers. 30 ff.) from that abstraction to the humano-moral stand- point of practice, so that he grants to both modes of view, side by side, that right which they have within the limits of human thought. The view which lies beyond these limits, the metapliysical re- lation of the essential connection of the two points, viz., objectively Divine and subjectively human free- dom and voluntary activity, was necessarily without and beyond his present circuit of view. He would have had no occasion either to enter upon this prob- lem, since it was incumbent upon him to defeat the Jewish presumption with but one side of this — with the absoluteness of God. That, or how far the Di- vine election is no delectus militaris, but finds ita norm immanently in God himself through His holi- ness, and thus may be conditioned by moral condi- tions on the human side, remains for the present entirely out of tlie account. It enters, however, with ver. 30, in which the one-sided method of con- sideration, followed for a time, is again compensated for, and the ground afforded for a time for apolo. * [Still less in modem materialism, where what is (prob- ably from habit) called free civilization is attributed mainlj to climate and food, especially fish. Compare cuneiu literature ad nauseam. — R.] CHAPTER IX. 1-88. 333 getic purposes, to the doctrine of absolute decrees, is again witlidrawn." — R.j He 0|)p()seti those who have charged the Apostle with a HL'li'-contradictioii — deterniiiiation and free- dom (Reiclie, KiJllner, Fritzsohe, &c.) ; but he hiin- Biilf thinks that the nietaph_»ical relation of unity betv/een the ail-prevailing efficiency of God and man's freedom is ineompieliensible by Christian re- flection, and that, therefore, we can only s[)eak of tlie one, eonsidered in itself alone, in such a way that the other seems to be removed by our reason- ing. But this is not the case if we speak either of haiiian fieedom or of God's free grace in a proper way. Tlie t'ormcr a.ssumes dependence on God ; the latter retiuires faith. Though God's all-efficiency is not conditional on man, yet it conditions itself as the jjersonal exercise of authority in relation to man, so soon as he is determined by election, according to the stage of development in which nian is. It may also be said that the one decree of God is explained, according to chap. viii. 29, 30, in five decrees, and these are reciprocally conditional. If the decree of election were an absolute de- termination bf salvation and condemnation, there would be no peculiar decree of ordination or his- torical predetermination ; God would no more be free to say to Moses, *' I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy." But if the decree of ordination were absolute, then we could no more speak serious- ly of a new decree of the call, and still less of a free idea of justification ^ as well as of glorification. The Divine decree in relation to the final judgment has conditioned itself by the nature of all the pre- ceding decrees. And only in this way does God remain a free God, while, on the other hand, we would make of an unconditional decree of predes- tination itself a real divinity, which would have bound the personal God. But, it is quite in harmo- ny with the nature of religion, the real relation be- tween God and man, that the truth asserts the majesty of the Divine right against every human arrogation, every irreligious claim against God. The free power of election stands in opposition to the claim of a natural heirship in God's kingdom ; the free power of grace, in its historical exercise of au- thority, opposes the claim to the merit of works ; and the free power of the Divine call in the eco- nomic relations of God's kingdom opposes the claim to both. If the point is reached where man will make God conformable to himself, before whom he would present himself independently, yea, one whom he thinks that lie can bind by " replying against " him, then God himself opposes him in His truth as the God who stands in absolute free power above him, and before whora he is as nothing, or as the tlay \\\ the potter's hand. Up to this point the A.postle miist havs recourse to the Jewish assump- tions against God's majesty. The pioneers of the Reformation, but particularly the Reformers them- selves, were in a similar situation ; ecclesiastical tra- dition had, in the latter case, taken the place of de- scent from Abraham ; ecclesiastical righteousness of works had taken the place of Levitical righteous- ness of works ; the self-righteous creature began to prescribe laws for his Creator. The Reformers, ad- I Bring to the truth, thus reversed the relation : God's Bovereignty and grace are every thing, while the irrogated right and merit of man are nothing. But their arriving in theory — which was really only one chapter in their system — to the negition of human freedom of election (Melanchthon, in his later life, excepted), and their being led into contradiction with their ethical principles, were in part a tribute of weakness which they had to pay to their indepen dence from the Catholic Augustine (strong expres- sions of Calvin and Zwingli, see Tholuck, p. 628), and in part the false conclusion from a profoundly justified religious feeling. They taught, with good ground, that God's government of the world is a government controlling and pervading all moral events, and that even sin is not merely permitted, but accepted and determined as a fact in God's plan ; only they had not yet found — as Sebastian Frank, at their time, and, subsequently, such orthodox teachers in the Church as Breitinger, Voetius, and others — the distinction between sin as a wicked counsel of the heart, that merely appertains to man, and sin as a fact in which inward sin itself is already treated with irony, captured, and judged (sec Prov. xvi. 1 ff.). The Apostle himself, on the contrary, has united the doctrine of the absolute judicial power of God with the doctrine of the importance of faith, yet particularly with the declaration that God has delayed His historical judgment in long- suffering, and has made the already existing judg- ment of hardness a medium of compassion.* — "The people, clay in the potter's hand," is a frequently recurring biblical expression. See Tholuck, p. 530; also the Note on p. 532 ; likewise p. 636. 21. The concatenation of judgment and compas- sion which appears throughout in the facts of Holy Scripture, as well as in its doctrines, has not been sufficiently comprehende 1 and made use of by the popular ecclesiastical conception ; and this is a prin- cipal source of its hindrances and imperfections, Righteousness and mercy are regarded as collateral modes of God's revelation. Judgment and compas- sion absolutely preclude each other. But the Scrip- tures unite both facts in various ways. First, the reconciliation of men themselves, both collectively and individually, inwardly as well as out- wardly, is made conditional on a judgment which separates the old from the new life. Second, the display of redemption and its institutions, of the theocracy and of the Church, is conditioned by judi- cial acts that separate the old from the new states. Third, judgment, even from the flood downward, separates an old from a new race, and brings to pass the redemption of the latter by the still conditional rejection of the former. Even in the final judgment, the consummation of heaven is made conditional on the separation of the wicked ; Matt. xiii. 43. 22. With the confusion mentioned above, there is also connected the fact that righteousness has ever been too much regarded as the extreme consequence of rigor, but not also in the light of forbearance and mildness. This latter idea of righteousness is fre- quently taught in the Scriptures (see Matt. i. 19 ; 1 John i. 9), and so also in the present chapter, ver. 28. Comp. also chap. iii. 26, p. 135. 23. The full and direct force of the passage in ver. 31 is only reached by accepting the reading pr^ ferred by us. The Jew's righteousness of works, a^ such, was never faithful righteousness of works, but a righteousness of boasting of the practice of stat- utes, and therefore it was a failure to obey the true • [A reference to the Exrg. Knifs will show bow Dr. Lanjre frnds this mitiiTtintr idea of lonfr-sufferi' pr through- out the chnjiter. Admittinp the correctness of his exegesii (which many will not be prepared to do), it is siiH doulnighls, &c., W(jrks, vol. iii. 418; Reconsidered Texts, No. I., J. C. Knight, Kitto's Journal, 1st series ; Nos. 10-12. Two Letters, by A. David- Bon and J. C. Knight, on the above interpretation, Jbid. —J. F. H.l The Apostle's sorrow for his brethren : 1. A great sorrow, so that he wished to be accursed from Christ for them ; 2. A natural sorrow, because they («.) are his kinsmen according to the flesh ; (h.) are Israelites to whom pertaineth the adoption, &c. (vers. 1-5). An apostolical asseveration (ver. 1). — Words only have strength when our conscience bears us witness in the Holy Ghost that we say the truth in Christ (ver. 1). — The witness of our conscience in the Holy Ghost is a witness for us that we say the truth in Christ (ver. 1). — Magnanimous heaviness and mag- nanhnous pain (ver. 2). — The Apostle's readiness to stake the dearest possession for his brethren (ver. 3). — The difference between Israelites and Jews (ver. 4). — What do Israelites possess ? 1. The whole of the Old Testament, with all its covenant blessings ; 2. The fathers ; 3. Tlirough the fathers, Christ, so far as His human descent is concerned, belongs chiefly to them (John iv. 22) (vers. 3-5). Si'ARKE, Cramkii : In important matters for God's honor and the advancement of our neighbors' salva- tion, we may swear (Isa. xix. 18 ; Jer. xii. 6) ; but io wantonly affirm a thing before God, is an abuse of God's name (Exod. xx. 7) (ver. 1). — The saints are not stoical blocks of wood (!) ; therefore we should also weep with those that weep, and rejoice with those that rejoice (ver. 2). — Love has certain de- grees, and one may witii a good conscience prefer in love his natural friends and blood relations to others (ver, 3). — IVovn Bibl. Tub. : Nothing grieves pious j>eople more than the ruin of the ungodly. Particu- larly a true shepherd can do nothing else than speak 01 them with sorrow and tears (ver. 2). — Hedinger This is love ! Oh, that we had even a less degree of it I Exod. xxxii. 32. Geri.ach: Calvin beautifully says: "It ia not contradictory to this wish of the Apostle, that he knew of a surety that his salvation by God's election could not prove a delusion. For as such a glowing love always burns out more violently, so does it see nothing and care for nothing except its object'* (vers. 1-5). Lisco : The Apostle's sorrow at Israel's unbelief (vers. 1-5). — In Christ every thing was glorified and fulfilled which Israel already had ; how important, therefore, it was to believe in Him wiiom the anti- types had announced, and who brought grace and truth ! John i. 16, 17. Hedbner : Asseveration of the Apostle's love for his people (vers. 1-5). — It 'm only a spirit sancti- fied by God's grace that can be grieved at the spirit- ual fall of others. The unconveited man is indiffer- ent to the moral misery of his neigHbor. The holi- est sorrow is for others (ver. 2). Besser : Throughout the Holy Scriptures there is not another passage where, as in the present in- stance, the most profound darkness of sorrow is in juxtaposition with the brightest sun of joy. Paul has ascended on the wings of faith to the height where he sees the whole kingdom of the world and the devil lying at his feet; and, sheltered in the rock-strong love of God in Jesus Christ, he has sung a triumphal song in the upper choir. There he pauses, and as one who is still dwelling in the land of pains and tears, just at this point he discloses to his brethren, first, the profound and concealed sor- row of his life by a solemn assurance of that of wiiich he would have God also conscious (ver. 1). — The sainted Bkngel says : " Souls which have made no progress, do not comprehend Paul's wish We should not lightly pronounce judgment upon the measure of love in Moses and Paul. The modicum of our thoughts of love is too small for us to do so ; just as a boy does not appreciate the heroic spirit of a general " (ver. 3). — Not Jacobites, but hraeliles, wrestlers with God, are called the descendants of the patriarch, who obtained of the Lord a blessing upon his seed, that they might be called alter his name, and the names of his fathers Abraham and Isaac (ver. 4). — Eight blessings of God's house united in four pairs (vers. 4, 5). [BuRKiTT : -God has placed a conscience in every man, whose office it is to bear witness of all hia words and actions ; yea, of all his thoughts and in- ward affections. Conscience is God's register, to re- cord whatever we think, speak, or act ; and happy is he whose conscience bears witness for him, and doth not testify against him. — Ver. 2. Note : 1. What are the dismal effects and dreadful consequences of obstinate unbelief, under the offers of Christ ten- dered to persons in and by the dispensation of the gospel, without timely repentance ? 2. The true spirit of Christianity is to make men mourn for the sins and calamities of others in a very sensible and affectionate manner. Good men ever have been and are men of tender and compassionate disposition ; a stoical apathy, an indolence of heart, a want of ' natural affection, is so far from being a virtue, or matter of just commendation unto any man, that the deepest sorrow and heaviness of soul in some cases well becomes persons of the greatest piety and wisdom ; 3. Great sori-ow and continual heaviness of heart for the miseries of others, whether immi- nent or incumbent, but especially for the sins of otlk ers, is an undoubted argument, S'gn, and evidenc* of a strong and vehement loT t^oward them.—* CHAPTER IX. 1-88. 3SS Henry: We ought to be in a special manner con- cerned for the s|>u-itual good of our relations, our brethren and kiusnien. To them we lie under spe- cial obligations ; and we have more opportunity of doing good to them ; and we must, in a speeial man- ner, give account concerning ;hem, and our useful- ness to them. — HonoK : Fidility does not require that we should make the truth as oHensive as possi- ble. On the contrary, we are bound to endeavor, as Paul did, to allay all opposing or inimical feelings in the minds of those whom we address, and to allow the truth, unimpeded by the exhibition of any thing offensive on our part, to do its work upon the heart and conscience. — J. F. H.] [ScHAFF : Vers. 4, 5. These advantages of Is- rael, sketched by the Apostle, are at once types and prophecies of the higher blessings, which continue uninterruptedly in ihe Christian Church, and are en- joyed daily and hourly by all believers. In their lap is the adoption and heirship of eternal life, the continued presence of the Lord in the means of grace, the eternal covenant of grace instead of the Buccessive covenants, the free, lifo-giving spirit, in- stead of the killing letter of the law, the worship in spirit and in truth in all places instead of the ser- vice confined to Jerusalem, the far more plain and precious promises of the heavenly Canaan and ama- ranthine inheritance, the incomputable cloud of wit- nesses, patriarchs, prophets, apostles, martyrs, and confessors, from all climes and tongues, and, as the sum of all blessings, Jesus Christ, the God-man and Saviour, who is fiesh of our tlesh, aye, our Brother and Friend, and yet exalted above all, the eternally adored Head of the CImreh, which He calls " His bodv, the fulness of Him who filleth all in all." -R.] Veeb. 6-23. a. Vers. 6-13. Who are the true Israelites? 1. By no means all who are of Israel, or are the seed of Abraham, are children according to the flesh ; but rather, 2. The children of promise, whom He has freely chosen according to His purpose (vers. 6-1 o). — The question of Divine adoption does not depend upon natural descent, but upon the mercy of the call, without the merit of works (vers. 6-13). — God's word (promise) has not failed because many are not Israelites — that is, are not participators in the promise (vers. 6-8). — Neither has God's word failed to us because many who are called evangelical are not evangelical (vers. 6-8). — How Paul, the Apostle of the righteousness of fiith, reminds us of John the Baptist, the preacher of repentance ! Conip. vers. 6-8 with Matt. iii. 9. — The cliildren of the promise : 1. Isaac, the son of Abraham ; 2. Jacob-Israel, the son of Rebecca (vers. 9, 10). — The mystery of election and reprobation (vers. 10- 14). — Not by the merit of works, but by the mercy of Him who calleth ! A passage : 1. For our hu- miliation ; but also, 2. For our consolation (ver. 12). Stahke : God does not look at carnal service ano external advantages and privileges in the distri- bution of His mercy and spiritual blessings ; 1 Cor. XV. 10 (ver. 12). — Hedinger: God's word always has its i'ulfilnient in either one way or the other ; Jcr. xxxii. 42 (ver. 6). — Beware of founding your hope of salvation on birth, or the visible Church, or merely seeming work. One must inwardly be a Chiistian and Abraham's heir (ver. 7). Spjener : Bj this instance (vers. 8, 9) Paul has sufficiently shown that salvation does not depend on natural birth, and that, therefore, not all the de- .scendants of Israel were necessarily the people of the covenant. But because it might have been Siiid that Ishmael was born of the bondwoman, and lost such an honor in consequence of his wicked life, foi he was a scoffer, Paul proceeds to show, by the ex« ample of Esau and Jacob, that it depended upoo (jod's free choice as to whom He would show cer- tain spiritual or temporal advantages and benetits, in which cii.'^e He does not look at works (vers. lU-13), Roos : The children of the promise are such aa have become the cliildren and true seed of Abraham by belief in God's promise (vers. 8-11). — An elec- tion does not preclude the foreknowledge of faith and works, but, on the contrary, it always goes in advance, while faith and good works follow after- ward. Thus, a soldier is chosen before he has fur- nished a proof of his bravery ; a child is chosen for adoption before he has given evidence of filial grati- tude. The exhibition of bravery and gratitude is hoped for. But what is man's hope, is God's fore- knowledge. Yet it must not be said that, in mak- ing an election, the one who chooses has been influ- enced by works that have already occurred. It was not from works already performed by Jacob that God's pronii.'^es resulted, but from the loving will of God, who stands in need of nothing, whom no crea- ture can place under obligation, and who does not inwardly pass from hatred to love (vers. 11-13). Geelach : As the preference of Jacob to Esau, and of the Israelites to the Edomites, was declared by God before the birth of the two ancestors, and thus what Jacob had in advance could by no means depend upon any privilege or merit of birth, so is free grace the bestowal of justification through Christ ; it does not depend upon anticijjated virtues or services of him who receives them ; it admits valid claims of any kind (vers. 11-13). Lisco : The Apostle's purpose is to prove that God, far from all arbitrary authority, and with the most exalted love, holiness, and wisdom, though without binding himself to natural laws (primogeni- ture, posterity of Abraham), or to the narrow limits of a certain descent, proceeds in His guidance of nations, and now calls this one and now that one to the gospel, just as He formerly called to a share in the privileges of the old covenant people. The Is- raelite, as such, had legal claims to salvation in Christ, yet not on account of his natural descent, aa is shown from both the examples adduced. Even Esau's descendants, and, indeed, all heathen, have been called to salvation in Christ ; therefore evi- dently Esau's rejection is by no means regarded as eternal, and the object of Jacob's preference is the temporary salvation of the nations descended from both Esau and Jacob (vers. 11-13). Heubner : We nmst maintain : 1. Paul's speech is altogether individual or national, and applies sole ly to Israel, in order to prostrate Israel's perverse pride ; 2. The question is not concerning an eternal election and reprobation, but the calling of a people by the external call, by revelation, and concerning the subsequent rejection of such a call (vers. 6-13), 5. Vers. 14-18. Is God unrighteous ? This ob- jection is refuted by Paul : 1. By reference to God's declaration to Moses ; 2. By reference to such a declaration to Pharaoh (vers. 14-18). — Moses and Pharaoh : 1. Moses, an example of God's mercy and compassion ; 2. Pharaoh, an example of lardening ; 3. Both together are examples of God's i'ree «.ec- 336 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. tion (vers. 14-18). — On what does our salvation de- pend ? 1. Not upon our willing or running ; 2. But upon God's mere)' (ver. 10). Staukk : God is and ever remains righteous, however He dispo.ses tilings according to His sov- ereign will and good pleasure (ver. 14). — Oh, the great and exceeding riches of divine mercy and com- passion, by which God perforins ail the good which He bestows on man, witliout regard to any service, greatness, honor, or appearance ! (ver. 15.) — Hkd- ISGER : One's own running, working, exerting hira- eelf, devising services, doing penitence, and inflict- ing scourging, crawling into caves and putting on Backclotii, accomplish nothing; God must open the heart, and, when He knocks, open to Him ! He has the key himself, and you have from Him the hands and the power to throw wide open for His entrance (ver. 16). — Hardening is a great judgment. Many are involved in it, and yet they do not know it (ver. 17). — SpKNER : Thus God's will is perfectly free and unconfiued in its own work, and He lias the power to show mercy or not, just as He will, without our ability to find sufficient cause for the difference, although He himself, as the wise and holy God, does nothing without a holy cause, so that even His freest power wills and does in such a way as His wisdom perceives conducive to His glory. For as men of understanding do not foolishly and thoughtlessly use their freedom, but do every thing considerately and with a rational choice, even when they are in the enjoyment of the most unfettered freedom, how should we suppose that the all-wise God can have mercy and harden without holy causes, or in any other way than is in harmony with His goodness, righteousness, and majesty, though above our under- standing? This should be enough for us: The holy and righteous God, who never can wish to do any thing evil, wills it to be thus. Koos : Ver. 16 : Moses desired to see God's glory ; but his desire would not have obtained this view by force. More than once Moses ascended to the top of Sinai, and came down again ; but his run- ning did not earn as a reward that which he prayed for. God met his willing by compassion : out of compassion He crowned Moses' ascent of Mount Sinai by an extraordinary blessing. — Gerlach : Ver. 16 : Pa;U elsewhere exhorts (1 Cor. ix. 24-27 ; Phil. iii. 12-14) in the most decided way to will and to run ; but it is a wilhng whose soul is God's mercy toward sinners, and it is a running whose power is God's renewing grace. Iiisco : The last and only ground of participa- tion in God's kingdom is and ever remains God's mercy (ver. 16). — All of Pharaoli's efforts did not prev(!nt the execution of the Divine purposes, but he himself became, contrary to his will, an instru- ment for their execution ; accordingly, God was glo- rified in the perverse king, who did not escape His righteous punishment (ver. 17). — Thus, then, God shows His mercy on whomsoever Ho will with mi- Umited freedom ; and He hardens whomsoever He will — that is. He allows His mercy to redound to the ruin of those who, like Pliaraoh, are impervious to all of His instructions and guidance; and tlius it can also come to pass to the unbelieving Jews, that God will withdraw His mercy from tliem if they scorn His gospel, just as Pharaoh once despised God's will (ver. 18). Hedbnku: No people can prove that it will be God's people (ver. 16). — The humiliation of pre- sumptuous tyrants is a glorification of God (ver. 17). — Hardening is therefore never a blindly absc ute, but always a righteous decree of God on those who have long withstood all of His calls. Pharaoh would not have been hardened, if his many cruelties had not already hardened his heart (ver. 18). Hesser : To sum up, says Luther ( Works, vol, xxii. p. 745): "Every thing is spoken against the proud. ' He to whom I give shall have it, and you shall not take it from me by your holiness.' What more shall he do ? He nevertheless says, ' You shall have it, but if you seek and wi?h to have it for tha sake of your righteousness and your piety, I cannot and will not allow you to have it ; I will sooner tear to pieces and destroy every Uing, both priesthood and kingdom, and even my ev^i law. But show m* mercy, and you shall have it'" (ver. 16). — He who can still take upon himself to say, " God has had compassion on me because I .\m not as Pharaoh was," has not yet read the Epistle to the Romans aright. The reverse is the case : Becanse Gcd has had com- passion on me, I am not as Pharaoh, but as Mosea (ver. 18). c. Vers. 19-29. Nay, but, man, who art thou that repliest against God ? 1. Remember that thou art only the work, but He is the Maker ; 2. There- fore submit unconditionally to His sovereign will (vers. 19-21). — What does God design by His un- conditional and free election ? 1. On one hand, to show His wrath and make known His power ; 2. But, on the otlier, to make known all the more, by this means, the riches of His glory (vers. 22-29). — The vessels of wrath and the vessels of mercy (vers. 22-24). — Who are the vessels of mercy? All who are called ; not alone, 1. of the Jews, but, 2. also of the Gentiles (ver. 24). — Hosea and Isaiah as wit- nesses of God's grace, showing mercy on and calling Jews and Gentiles : 1. Hosea ; 2. Isaiah (vers. 25 -29). Luther : Although the greater part fall away and remain unbelieving, He will nevertheless not let all fall, but will support the rest, and by them all the more abundantly disseminate His word and grace, in order that they may be righteous and glo- rious (ver. 28). Starke: God, in leading man to salvation, does not deal with him according to the unconditional purpose of His will and with unlimited powwr, but in a certain order, in "which they who are ennobled by the rational soul have obtained the freedom to obey or to opposa (ver. 29). — Also teacliers and preachers must exhibit an appropriate gentleness when censuring the ungodly, and must not always select the rarest words of abuse and reproach, to pour them out upon them like a heavy shower (ver. 26). — Do not despair, though you be miserable ; the morciful and gracious Lord can cause a light to arisa within you; P.*. cxii. 4 (ver. 25). — Hedinger : God be praised for His long-suffering ! How many thou- saTxd brands of hell dost thou bear with ! Thou art, and ever remainest, my righteous God ! F*. ciii. 8 (v.!r. 22).-~-Lange : If you would be a true vessel of mercy, jou must draw grace for grace from the fulness of Jesus (John i. 16). — Let the love of God be poured out in your heart by the Holy Spirit (chap. V. 5) ; and in order that you may be useful in tha Lord's house, and a vessel sanctified to His honor, seek to be purified from contact with all impure vea. sels (ver. 23). Spener : The Apostle says of the vessels of mer- cy, that God has prepared them for glory. He M not only their Creator, but their being the vessels oj CHAPTER IX. 1-33. 337 ffig mercji is His own preparation. But he does not eay of the vessels of wrath, that God jircpared them for destruction, but that they are Jitted to destruc- tion who have fitted and corrujited themselves to it, so that ihcir condemnation does not come from God, but only that He has long borne with them patient- ly, just as lie did to Pharaoh, and that lie finally destroys them with all the more violence. By this are declared His glory, power, compassion, and right(!ousiiess, without one coming in conflict with the otlier (vers. 22, 2!^). — Koos : The great long- Buffering of which Paul speaks, proves that God takes no pleasure in the destruction of the vessels of wrath ; Air if He had wished, lie could at any time have given them up to destruction sooner than He really did ; but the efBcacicus <'all, which applies to the vessels of mercy both of the Jews and Gen- tiles, proves that God does not indulge a precon- ceived hatred either of the Jewish people or of the Gentile nations, and it is only His call that makes a difference between the vessels of wratii and of mercy (vers. 22-24). — Gerlacii : We must always bear in oiiiid, that when God has compassion, and when He hardens, He acts in different ways ; in the former case, lie produces good in the human heart by His compassion ; and in the second, He withdraws from man lILs divine light and life, yet does not awaken evil in him, but only allows the evil already existing to assume the form and take the course which, to Him, is evidently necessary for the salvation of the world. Man's seeing, in mercy as well as in harden- ing, a perfectly similar operation of God — namely, His own arbitrary authority — is bis own fault, since he closes himself against God's compassionate love by his own claims (ver. 21). Lisco : All humanity, and not merely Israel (which fancied itself thus), is like the clay from whicli God, of His own free choice, chooses unto par- ticipation in the kingdom of heaven ; and He is not bound to Israel in such a way that He cannot also appoint the Gentiles to the same privilege (vers. 20, 21). HErnsKR : Before God rejects a people. He pa- tiently gives it time for repentance (vers. 19-23). — Especially on ver. 19: The universal objection of all determinists, fatalists, and absolutists, is: "How can man be free, since in his existence, and in the forma- tion and change of his mind, he is totally dependent on God ? " This is here represented in a special direction, thus : " How can sin be imputed to man ? Why does God's punishment of him enrage him ? He is only what Go» Israel [on their behalf]* is, that they might be saved [for their saltation] • 2 For I bear them record [witness] that they have a zeal of God, but not accoid- 3 ing to knowledge. For they, being ignorant of God's righteousness [not knowing (j. c, mistaking) the riglitcousness of God], and going about [striving] to establish their own righteovisness,* have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness 4 of God. For Christ is the end of the law for [unto] righteousness to every 6 one that believeth.^ For Moses describeth [Avriteth concerning] the righteous- ness which is of the law. That the [saying. The] " man which doeth those things 6 [who hath done them] shall live by them [or, in it].' But the righteousness which is of faith speaketh on this wise [thus]," Say not in thine heart, Who shall ascend into heaven ? (that is, to bring Christ down from above ["mii from 1 above] :) Or, Who shall descend into the deep ? (that is, to bring up Christ 8 again [omu again] from the dead.) But what saith it ? The word is nigh thee, even ["»u< even] in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which 9 we preach ; That [Because] if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus [or, Jesus as Lord],* and shalt believe in ihine heart that God hath [omii hath] 10 raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. For with the heart man believ- eth [faith is exercised] '° unto righteousness ; and with the mouth confession is 11 made unto salvation. For the Scripture saith, W^hosoever believe th on him shall not be ashamed [put to shame]. B. The equal claim of Jews and GentDes to faith. Hfince the nece.ssity of universal preaching. The unequal result* of preaching (vers. 12-18). 12 For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek [distinction be- tween Jew and Greek] : " for the same Lord over .all is [is Lord of all,] '° rich 13 unto all that [who] call upon him. For whosoever [every one who] " shall call 14 upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. How then shall [can] they call '* on him in whom they have not believed ? and how shall [can] they believe '* in him of whom they have not heard ? and how shall [can] they hear '° without a 16 preacher ? And how shall [can] they preach," except they be sent ? as it is written,'" How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel [those who 16 bring glad tidings] of peace," and bring glad tidings of good things ! But they have not all obeyed the gospel [did not all hearken to the glad tidings]."" For IV Esaias [Isaiah] saith. Lord, who hath [ovnt hath] believed our report ? °' So then faith cometh by [of] hearing, and hearing by [through] the word of God.°' 18 But I say, Have they not heard [Did they not hear] ? Yes [Nay] verily, their sound went [out] into all the earth, and their words unto the ends of the world. C The unbelief of Israel and the feith of the Gentiles already prophesied in the Old Testament (vers. 19-21). 19 But I say. Did not Israel [Israel not] " know ? First Moses saith, I will 20 21 manif^t imto them that [those who] asked not al'ter me. But to [of] Israel h€ saith," All day long I have [omit have] stretched forth my hands unto a disob-e- diet-t and gainsaying people. 340 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. TEXTUAL. » Ver. I.— [After 8^t)(ri«, K. Ii. Rer. insert ij, defended by Philippi ; omitted in 5C. A. B. B F. G., by txiclunsni^ Tischendorf, Meytr, Tholuck, Alford, Trefrelles. Probably insfrted to limit irpot rhv 6e6v to £«r/(7it, since .1 seemed improper to connect it with tiSoxCa. On the meaning of the last-named rfoid, as involvei iu the erit'aa. question, see Exeff. NnUs. '^ Ver. 1. — 1\-. A. B. D. F. O., all modern editors, read avriav, instead of toC 'lo-paijA (K. L. /?•<;.). The l&ttet ffns substituted as an exp aniitory gloss, which was tlie more necessary, as this verse began a church .ic'.zcs Ende , wrr an den gluubl, dcr ist gerechl. ° Ver. 5. — [The E. V. has translated on, which is here merely a quotation-mark (ort recttavtis). The abovo emendation is from the Keviaion liy Five Anglican Clergymen. The on is found before rijy Sik. in x'. A. D'. — an nltcratioi , on account of the accusative alter ypa.ei. — The quotation is from Levit. xviii. 5. If the reading of the Sec. be adopted, the only variation ia 6, instead of o ; a change necessary to adapt the citation to its position here. See next Note. ' Ver. 5. — [The coiTect reading is dlfiicult to determine. Most editors now retain aura {Rnc, N'. B. F. G., most versions and fathers). Instead of ev aurois (Rcc, N^. D. F. L., some versions and fathers, Meyer, AVordsworth, L:iiigo), the reading iv avrfi is found in N'. A. B., many versions, and is accepted by Laohmann, De Wette, Alford Trcgelles. The singular would be a variation from both the LXX. and the Hebrew; yet this but renders an alteration to tiie plural (for the sake of conformity) the more probable. On the other hand, Meyer urges stroncly that the plural stunds or falls with airra, which is now generally accipted. The change to the singular may have been made to guard against the validity of the righteousness of works, as indeed A. substitntes »ri'j9 Kal Aa/3^ Vt^*-^ auT^j', Kal aKovar'tiv TTOtijirji avTrfV, koX iroirjtxopL^v } 14. eyyvs <70V earl to prj^a. a(liO&pa ev Tu> UTOp-ari cov, Kal ^v Tjj KapBia o-ou, Kai cy Tat? X^P^^ *^o^ IT0let^ ouTo. The Xew Testament text is renjarkably well established throughout. The variations from the LXlX. are noticed in the Exrg. Xnli s. ' Ver. y. — [Ii. has oti /cuptos 'Ir)' Ver. 12.— [Literally : there is no distinction of J w and Greek ; but this sounds too abstract, as if the distinctions ■were obliterated, as in Gal. iii. 28. Here it is better, then, to preserve the concrete idea, by using between. S^' Eev. Five Ang. C ergymen. '2 Ver. 12. — [Lange renders : Drnn Einer and derseihe ist Herr von Allen. So Noyes : For one and the same is Lord overall. Five Ang. Clergymen : The same is Lord over all. The Amer. Bible Uninn as above. This is most literal. Alford, indeed, objects, "on account of the strangeness of 6 aiirds thus standing alone ; but this is met by Dr. Lange in the Exeg. iVoles, where he expands the phrase into : One and the same Lord is L'ird over all. Stuart : There is the same Lord ; which is harsh. On the whole, it is best to find the predicate here, and not supply is with rich, as is done in the K.V. 1* Ver. 13. — [This is almost word for word from the LXX., Joel ii. SI (Hel^ii. 5): Kal ccrroi irSj, &s, k.t.A. The yap is inserted t'l introduce the i^roof. In Acts ii. 21, the citation is made even more exactly. The strong form of the Greek is retained by rendering, every one whosoever (Alford, Five Ang. Clergymen) ; Amer. Bible Union, Noyes : every one who. '* Ver. 14. — [In each of the four interrogative sentences of vers. 14, 15, the exact form of tha leading verb is doubt- ful. The Rec. in every case gives the fntiu-e indicative, but the uncial authority supports the aorist subjunctive, the deliberative or conjunctive aorist. The MS. authority is given in the separate notes. Here the Rec, with K. L., and some fathers, reads : eiriKaAeaoyTai ; N. A. B. D. F. G. : eiriKaAe'cru vrai. The future is supported by Meyer, and apparently accepted by Dr. Lvinge. The aorist is adopted throughout by most critical editors. (So Trcgelles.) As the variat on here involves only the change of ui into o, it is readily accoimted for. The E. V. gives a correct rendering ol the future, which, iniieed, in these cases differs little in meaning from the conjunctive. Can is substituted to expre.ss the force of the correct reading, although it is perhaps a shade too strong. The Amer. Bible Union omits have in the relative clauses throughout ; but, although this is a literal renderine of the aorist, it here obscures the meaning by destroy ng the litotes. All other later versions properly retain the English perfect. ■^" Ver. 14.— [/ifc, A. K. L. : Trio-Teucr o u crtr. N. B. D. F. G. wiorTeiicrwcri >> . The last two prefix the argument. " Ver. 14.— [.fliO., L. : aKouaovaiv; X'. D. F. G. : aKoiio-oi'Tai ; '. A^. B. :aKoi;a-) ^r]Tov)>'. Tlie Hebrew is luhowed with exactness.— X>' is inserted aftel tip49r}v, in li. D'. F. ; brackctted l)y Alford and Ticgelles. »* Vtr. 21.— [Tlie order nf the LXX. is : eftireraaa t. x- P- ^^V '^^^ rifiepav ; otherwase the citation is exact. Th» ■ •I dvT: Aeyoi'Ta is an addition of the LXX. The Hebrew gives but one adjective, 1*110, rehcllious, — I'o Israel, It not correct ; wilh respect lo, concerning, is the meaning, ■which, however, is sufficiently indicated by o/; so Five Angf Olergymti), Anier. liible Union.— E.] EXEGETICAL A^B CRITICAL. Summary. — TTie fart of the partial rejection of Israel, &c. The fact is not a fatalistic decree, for the Apostle prays for Israel, and bears record to their zeal ; vers. 1,2. It rests rather on the an- tithesis between sclf-righteousncss as the presumed righteousness which is of the law, and the righteous- Boss which is of faith ; vers. 3, 4. The righteous- ness of faith, although arising from Israel, is proved by the prophecy of the Old Testament to be, accord- ing to its nature, accessible to all men, and not con- fined to the Jewish nation. It is universal ; that is, accessible to all in its internal character, because it is allied to the inward nature of man ; vers. 5, 9. Its universality is confirmed t)y experience ; vers. 10, 11. It is proclaimed by the Old Testament Scriptures, which promise, in Christ, salvation to every nitin. There arises therefrom the universality of faith — the freedom of faith to Jews and Gentiles ; vers. 12, 13. This freedom of faith is made actual by the universality of the preaching of the gospel and of the apostolic mission ; vers. 14, 15. Unbe- lief is voluntary, like faith. The gospel is con- ditioned by faith; vers. 16-18. But the faith of the Gentiles is prophesied in the Old Testament, as well as the imbelief of the Jews; vers. 19-21. [There is little difference of opinion among com- mentators respecting the meaning of this chapter as a whole. Dr. Hodge coincides most nearly with Dr. Lango in his divisions, Tholuck, Philippi, Meyer, Alford, make two sections. (1.) The further exposi- tion of the fact that the exclusion of Israel is found- ed on their own unbelief; vers. 1-13. Alford: " The Jews, though zealous for God, are yet ignorant of God's righteousness (vers. 1-3), as revealed to them in their own Scriptures (vers. 4-13)." (2.) Proof from Scripture of the same fact; vers. 14-21. Tholuck : " They could not excuse themselves by this, that God had not done His part to make hu- manity know the gospel, or that it had not reached them, or that they could not have seen what their conduct with regard to it and God^s dealings with the Gentiles would be." The connection with chap. ix. 83 is very close ; and as the Apostle is accus- tomed to repeat, at the close of an argument, the ^'opoaition from which he started, the repetition of tiie quotation of chap. ix. 33, in ver, 11, favors the iivision of Dr. Lange, — R.] A. Faith, vers. I, 2. The fact described is no ] fatalistic decree. Ver. 1. Brethren [l^tTf A gp o t, Bengel : * Jl^iirie quasi superata prcer.edentis iractatioiiia se- vrritate comiter appellat fra'res.^^ Comp. 1 Cor Xiv. 20; Gal. iii. 15.— R.] Though this is an ad- diess to all readers, yet it is directed with special feeling to the Jewish Christians. Repetition and carrying out of the personal reference in chap, ix. 1 ff. My heart's desire, or, good-will [?/ ft it fii<)oxia r'/i; i/itji; y.a(j()lai:^. A real antithe- sis to the /liv is contained in the judgment passed in ver. 3. [See Winer, p. 535 ; who thinks the an. tithesis was too ptiinful to be expressed. All ad- mit that the thought is found in ver. 3. — R.] Mey- er, contrary to Chrysostom, Theodoret, and most of the early writers, as well as De Wette and Olshau- sen, holds that fv<)oy.ia cannot mean wish, dcside- rium, but only benevolence (Vulgate, voluiiias ; Au- gustine, bona voluntas ; Calvin, bcnevolenikC). Tho- luck : "There is, indeed, no example as yet in which fi'doxla is exactly equal to ' wish.' But how could the Apostle have said, ' My good pleasure and my prayer for them to God are directed to their salva- tion.' " Yet he regards it advisable to adhere to the translation : My good-will for them. [The lexica' objection to rendering tvHoxia, dtsire, is weighty On the other hand, the rendering good-will severa it from the context. The insertion of rj after dhjtnq Was probably an attempt to avoid this difficulty. Alford suggests a " a mixture of constructions : the Apostle's fvfioxia would be their salvation itself — his ()i'//m?, x.T.).., was fi'c,- itwt." We hold to the more usual meaning of the word. Wordsworth pushes it as far as this : " Probably he uses this word because he wishes to represent the salvation of the Jews as a thing so consonant to God's wishes and counsel, that, as far as He is concerned, it is as good as done ; and the Apostle delights in looking back, in imagination, upon that blessed result aa already accomplished." There is little warrant in the word or context for such an interpretation. — R.] And prayer to God [y.al y ditjm-q n^'Ot; Tov x)f6v. The latter phrase can be limited to <)irjGi,ii without adopting the poorly supported //. The " prayer" was undoubtedly " of his heart," but. there are no grammatical reasons for connecting that phrase with these words. Jirjaii; is, strictly, peti- tion, request. — R.] We refer xai !] titr^ai,^ back to >!«^()<'n(,-, and then exclusively to n(>oi; Toi' Q lov. My heart is not only full of good-will toward the Jews, but it can also venttne to inter- cede for them before God — a proof that they falsely regard me as their adversary — and I have not yet given up the hope of their salvation. This also com- prises a pledge of Divine compassion. [So Bengel ■ " Non orasset Paulus, si absolute reprobati ejsent,'" -R.] [On their behalf is for their salvation, V n i () a I' Toil' tli; ff o) t 7} ^ i a v . The correct reading shows how close the connection with chap ix. is. Meyer: "«fwT//(j/a is the eiid which my fiiioxla would have for them, and my prayer asks for then." The E. V. gives the correct sensq though in a paraphrase. — R.] 342 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. Ver. 2. For I bear them witness [/tap- Ti'pw ;'«() aliTolq. Fci-Q introduces the rea- son lor the preceding declaration. — R.] He still seeti, even in their error, something good : they have a zeal of God [C'^Aoi' Otov t/ovtri-v. Zejl for God, not grcdt zeai, or godly zeal'^. (Acts xxi. 20 ; xxii. 3 ; Gal. i. 14 ; John ii. 17.) This will, indeed, not be tlie only ground of his fWoztct, bit is the ground of the cheerfulness of his inter- ce-isioii tor them. But not according to know^ledge [ciA/' oi' /. «?•' sniyvMavv. Comj). chap. iii. 20, p. 123; Col. i. 9 (Lange's Comm., p. 17). — R.] The iTiiyvtomi; is the knowledge which, being the living principle of discernment, impels far beyond the mere historical yvoxTi'i;. Meyer's definition: inconsequence of the iniyr., is incorrect. The antithesis : ymto. fiyvoi-av, Acts iii. 17. The Apostle's statement may, at all events, be designed to alleviate his charge. The bright as well as the dark side of tiie religious zeal of the Jews was and is a peculiar phenomenon in the history of the world. [The objective advan- tages of the Jews were given in chap. ix. 1-5 ; here we have the subjective religiousness, whicli corre- sponds, although degenerating into blind fanaticism. Yet religious fanaticism, we infer from this passage, is preferable to religious indifferentism. Tliere is something to hope for, a ground for good-will, where there is earnestness. — R.] Vers. 3, 4. Sclf-riffhteousncss, and the right- eousncss of fa th. Ver. 3. "For they, not kno-wing (mistaking) the righteousness of God \^ayvovvri-i; yaij T^v to"; &10 1I () i,x aio (J I' V tj v^. AVe take ground, with De Wette, and others, against Meyer, who does not see in the idea of ayvooTn'Tfq the ele- ment of mistake, but merely the declaration of igno- rance. [Meyer justifies his position, l)y saying that Paul was only proving the " not according to knowl- edge." — R.] But simple ignorance, without guilt, could have no meaning whatever in the present in- stance ; and still less could it be the cause of wicked results. The same holds good of chap. ii. 4 ; 1 Cor. xiv, 38 ; see also Tlioluek, in toco. Their ayvoftv is the cause of their seeking to establish their own righteousness, and consequently they did not submit themselves to the Divine righteousness revealed in the gospel for faith.* And striving to establish their ototi right- eousneijS [y. at rijv Id lav i1i,y.avo(Tvvtjv c/;- TorvTfi; (TTrjaai,. See Textual Note *'\. Essen- tially, it is the same as the righteousness of the law, according to Phil. iii. 9. Formally, this expression is stronger, because it not only signifies acquired righteousness in distinction from that which is be- stowed, but as the real principle of this acquired righteousness, it denotes one's own choice, power, and will, as well as man's own will in opposition to God's choice, grace, and order. [The point of this distinction is lost, if the phrase be construed as = their own j mtification. — R.] Therefore this eftort remains a nugatory tt]Tih< axTinai, (chap. iii. 31; Heb. X. 9). The atfjaai, expresses the element of pride in their effort. • [Stuart, and others, take the phrase righteousness of God here as ^ God's miHwd of junliflratinn. How iiicor- f ct this is, will appo&r from a reference to p. 74 ff. Dr. HoJgesays, very properly: "It is that on which the sen- Unce of justification is founded." Alford : "th.at rtgh'e- aimnes.^, which av.ails before Ood, which becomoa ours in nBtification."— B.] [Have not submitted themselves, &c , tjI ()tx ato (T iM'-rj . . . OCX vn fr dytjOav .^ Meyct regards the vntrdytja av as passive, as in chap, viii. 20 ; 1 Cor. xv. 28. Tholuck, on the other hand, correctly regards it as reflexive.* Ver. 4. For Christ is the end of the law [tt^. OS ya() votion A'^KTTOi,-]. First, tiXo^ must be left in its full signification, and not be con- sidered merely as the negative end by which the voiioq is made void ; second, A'^tfTToi; is = Christ iiimself, not simply the foundation, tiie fundamental law of His theocracy (Meyer), or the doctrina Chrintx (Socinians, and others). In both cases, Meyer's ex- planation \ would destroy the full meaning of the text. The same thing is declared in reality by the passages. Matt. v. 17 ; Rom. xiii. 10 ; Gal. iii. 24 ; Eph. ii. 15 ; Col. ii. 14. The end of the law waa Christ, because Christ was, in a positive form, the fulfilment of the spiritual, essential iirport of the law, and therefore He was, at the same time, the making void of the imperfect Old Testament form of the law. Comp. 1 Tim. i. 5 ; 1 Peter i. 9 ; Rev. xxi. 6 ; xxii. 13. The centre of the idea is there- fore final aim, purpose, and end (Chrysostom, Me- lanchthon, Calvin, and others). There is no good ground for dividing this explanation into two differ- ent ones. On one hand, Erasmus, Wolf, and others, have brought out the positive view : Fulfilment of the law. The alternative here : obedientia ac iva, or obed. activa and passiva (see Meyer), must be re- moved. As for the negative view of the idea, Mey- er cites a large number of authorities who harmo- nize with him in limiting it to this ; yet lie can hardly prove this by Augustine, Olshausen, and many oth- ers.:): Even ver. 4 plainly says that Christ is in so far Tfc/ot; vofcov as He is unto righteousness to * [Alford defends the passive sense, as expressing th« resull only, it might be themselves, or some other that sub- jected them — tlie historical fact was, they ivfrc ixit sutj-dcd. But as this veree presents an aiitithi sis to ixiv (ver. 1) ; and .TS the whole current of thought implies their personal guilt, the middle sense is preferable, and is adopted by tha majority of commentators. — R.) t [Meyer thus paraphrases : " For in Christ the validity of the l;iw has come to an end, that riprliteousness eh juld become the portion of every believiiiR one." — R.] t [Dr. Lanp;e's view is, on the whole, to be preferred; but he does not charly state tho-e of other commentators. We append, therefore, the three opinions most in fnveR (1.) Christ is the aim (EnrlzifJ) of the law. (So Chrysostom, Calvin, Beza, Bongel, Alford, Webster and Wilkinson, and others.) This view means either (a.) the end of the law was to m:\ke men righteous, and thi.-i end is accomplished in Christ (Chrysostom, Stuart, and o:hers) ; or, (6.) tlie law led to Him, as schoolmaster (Calvin, and others, Tholuck reaches this from another point of view). (2 ) Christ is tha fiilfi'mcnt of ihe law (tuAos = irK-qpuiiia). This is, indeed, true, but scircely meets the requirements of this passage, especially if law be limited to the ceremonial law. (3.) Christ is the IcrminaUon of the law (Augustine, Luther, Tlioluok, Meyer, Hodge). This is the clironological view, which Dr. Lmge calls the negative one. In what sense he is the termination of the law, is also a matter of dispute (ceremonial, or moral !). Some confusion exists in most commentaries in the citing of authorities. In fact, these meanings largely rim into each other. In favor of the last, it may he urged that tlie Apostle is drawing such a contrast here between the righteousness of the law and the righte- ousness of fiith (vers. 5, 6), as requires a strong antithesia between the law and Christ ; but unle-s we interpret : "When Christ came, the old legal system was abolished, .and a new era commenced" (Hodge), this antithesis will not be correct. Yet the fact that Paul quot(>s from the law itself to 6U]'port the claims of the righteousness of faith, seems inconsistent with Ibis view. (See below.) Nor will it be evident how this verse introduces a proof of the non- submission of the Jews to the righteousness of God (ver. 3), unless it asserts that the law led to Christ, ratlier than thai Christ abolished the law. All three views may bo iiicludedi but the first Is the more prominent one. — R.] CHAPTER X. 1-21. 349 every one that believeth, tli; Sixatoavvtiv ntcvri Ttji TTtffTfi'OVTt, and the yn(j intro- duoes just the proof that the Jews did not suhniit themselves to the rir/hteongness of God, which, however, was manifested in Clirist's fuliihnent of the law (comp. ehap. ix. 31). The question of the extent of prominence here given to the negative Bids of the Tt/.oq, is connected with the expla- nation of vers. 5 and 6. [Stuart, following Flatt, renders flc;, with respect to. It is better to take ic ■s indicating reault or purpose. The former will be preferred, if ri'/.os be rendered aim ; the latter, if it be rendered termination. The sense will then be, either : Christ is the aim of the law, so that right- eousness may come to every one, &e. ; or : Christ abolisiied (or fulfilled) the law, in order that, itc. The word righteousness has here the full sense, *' righteousness of God ; " but the emphasis rests on believeth. — R.] Vers. 5-9. Hie universnlit;/ of the righteousness of faith is proved by the Old Testament also. On the citatwns. It is evident that vers. 5 and 6 present an antithesis between the idea of the right- eousness which is of works and the inward essence of righteousness. But it is clear from the place of the citations, that this antithesis means no con- tradiction between the Old and New Testament. The quotation in ver. 5 is taken from Lev. xviii. 5 ; the quotation in ver. 6 from Deut. xxx. 11-14. It is evident, therefore, that the Apostle places the two Bides of the law in contrast, one of which is an ex- ternal Jewish law of works, and the other is an in- ward law of the righteousness which is of faith, or a law designed for the inward life ; the one is tran- sient, the other permanent. Therefore, he takes his first statement from Leviticus, and from that part of it where the laying down of the Mosaic obstacles to marriage is introduced ; tlie second, on the other hand, is taken from Deuteronomy, which early im- parts a profoundly prophetical meaning to the law. Therefore we read, tirat: Moses describeth, or rvriteth (and what he writes is a command) ; but then, The ric/hteou.^ne/^s which is of faith spea eth (and what it says is a proclamation). Though the Apostle holds Deuteronomy to be as fully Mosaic as Leviticus, yet, in the former, Moses administers his office as the Old Testament lawgiver of the Jews; while, in the lat- ter, tiie propiiotic spirit of the righteousness of faith speaks as decidedly through him as if it altogether took his place. Ver. 5.* For Moses writeth respecting the righteousness, &c. [MMvari<; ya.Q y(m- flpft r'rjv iivr.ciioax'vrjv, x.t.A. Tiie accusative After •/(jdq'fLV is either governed by the verb in the transitive sense : to write of, to describe, or is the remote object, that concerning which it is written. The rendering ; describeth is perhaps too strong, though lexically admissible. — R.] Viidiffi, John i. 46. The citation is from Leviticus, according to the LXX., but of the same purport as the original text. We further read : Moses writeth down, or com- mands : Tha man who hath done them [6T^ ;roi/»J(Ta? avta a v Q- q o) n o f;^ The noiti- • (The translator found it necessary to make some diarg<58 in the ordpr of the original. In making the addi- Mons, it was found to lie impossihle to avoid confusion, Vithout further transpnsitioi s. Nothing lias been omitted, but it has been an unusually dilBcult task to prese it Dr. Lange's notes in a shape that would correspond to the oi ler »f the Apostle's wordi.— It.] (Ta? is emphatic, yet it is significantly connected with tivOtioinot;. yiiToi, that which is written, the commandments ; the law, in the analytical form of commandments. The emphasis here rests on iht doing. " But the rigliteousness which is ol' faith says : ' The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in tiiy heart; only confess with thy mouth, aud believe in thy heart.' " Shall live by them [trjnttai, iv ai'toi? See Tcj-lnal J\'ote \ If avr^i be adopted as the correct reading, it refers to the righteou.sness accru- ing from the doing of the commandnients (Ailord). Dr. Lange renders iv, durchf but this is too strong; in the strength of, is better. — R.] The different readings apjjear to have arisen from an apprehension that the Apostle's expression might cause a misun- derstanding, perhaps an acceptation of the possibil- ity of righteousness by works. Hence the omission of aiiTci, and the reading iv avrji ("He shall live by righteousness itselt"). Cod. A. even reads : Ttjv di,x. ix niarmti;. A proof how decidedly the early Church rejected the righteousness of works. The assurance of life has been referred to the life in Palestine. But the historical standpoint of the Mosaic economy indicates sonietliing further than the vit Ti a f r (XI- ilt; r ij v a [S v a a vv ; LXX. : T«< diantitoiad, Tjfilv ft's- to nii/av rJjt; d^aAaffffc/i;]. An explanation of the Mosaic passage : Beyond the tea 1 According to Scliulz, {DetUeronomium), Be- jrW the sea refers only to the vast extent of the sea. This would be tautology in relation to the fore- going. To bring from beyond the sea, can also not mean (according to Vitringa), to bring over from the Greeks. That the sea may be considered as cinn , iifiraaoq, is proved by the harmony of the Septua- gint. But oinri is not 0^ , and over the sea is alto- gether a different idea from into the deep. The probable solution of the difference is, that the ideas over the ocean and beneath the earth coincide as designations of the realm of the dead. The Greek Tartarus is, indeed, under tlie earth, but not a real cavern under the earth, ''^he Greek Elysium lies far out in the ocean, on the Isles of the Blessed. Also, in the present passage, Paul has evidently found the realm of the dead to be indicated by the words be- yond the sea. Similar notions existed among the Celts and Germans. Meyer dismisses the question in a very untenable manner, when he says : The view of Reiche, Bolten, and Ammon — that the place of the blessed (over the sea) is also meant in the Hebrew — confounds a heathen representation with the Jewish one of Sheol (see Job xxvi. 5, 6). [Dr. Lange (following Chrysostom, De Wette, Mey- er, and others) assumes throughout that these ques- tions are questions of imbelief, altliough finding in the passage something more tlian Meyer's brief statement: " Be not unbelieving, but believing." Alford gives a full discussion of the three views: questions of ?t i' (> t o v 'J tj a ovr. The mass of commentators are disposed to take xv^vov as a predicate placed first for emphasis, and render as above. So Tholuck, Stuart, Hodge, De Wette, Me3'er, Sehaff, Webster and Wilkinson, Noyes, Lange. Alford doubts this interpretation ; comp. his note in loco. See Textual Note °. Hodge : " To confess Christ as Lord, is to acknowledge Him as the Mes- siah, recognized as such of God, and invested with all the power .and prerogatives of the mediatorial throne." Used in such close connection with a cita- tion from the LXX., which translates Jehovah by the same word xr^jtot;, it certainly means more than an acknowledgment of power and moral excellence; especially as this part of our verse corresponds with the coming down from heaven alluded to in ver. 6. — R.] Just as the words "Lord Jesus" correspond with to bring down from heaven, so raised hins * [Either Iht word reupccUvg faith, or, which forms Xtt substratum and object of fiiilh (Alford). The latter U Ut be preforred, since word, just before, nnist be taken in • very wide sense, as includins; the whole subject-matter oi the sos'^el. The prrsnttdl object of fnith is near, is certainlj implied n ver. 7 ; but this is not directly expres*«d here -E.) CHAPTER IX. 1-33. 34') from the dead coixesponds with to bring up from the dead. — [Thou shalt be saved, iar^v ()t«- Tokij 7 or (Vat 01' ri xal"E).XpjvoQ. This ren- dering is more literal than that of the E. V. Sea Textual Note ". Greek stands here for Gentile, Comp. chap. i. 18 ; also in chap. iii. 22. — R.] No difference in reference to the freedom of faith ; in reference to the possibility and necessity of attain- ing to salvation by faith. The right of faith is the same to Jews and Gentiles. Proof: For the same is Lord of all [6 yag a I'l t o s xv(ji,oq nnvro)v. See Textual Note '^.j Strict- ly speaking, we must suppose a breviloquence also here : One and the same Lord is Lord over all. The one Lord is Christ, according to Origen, Chrysostom, Bengel, Tholuck, and most other expositors (see ver. 9). Others refer the expression to God (Grotiua, Ammon, Kollner, &c.) ; Meyer, on the other hand, has good ground for observing that it was first neces- sary to introduce the Christian character,! as Olshau. sen has done (" God in Christ ") ; see Acts x. 36 ; Phil. ii. 11. Rich. [Lange : erweisend sich reich."] TIlov- rmv (see chap. viii. 32 ; xi, 33 ; Eph. L 7 ; ii. 7 ; iii. 8). Unto all \_flq ndvrai;. Alford : toward all ; Lange: Oher Alle ; Meyer: fiir Alle, zum Besten Aller ; Olshausen : "By fic,- is signified the direc- tion in wihch the stream of grace ru.shes forth." — R.] This is both the enlargement and restriction of Christ's rich proofs of salvation. Only tho^e who call upon him [toi'/c; in i,xa).ov i^iivovi; av- Tor], but also all who call upon him, share id His salvation. The calling upon Him is the bpjcific proof of faith, by which they accept Him ai their Lord and Saviour. Ver. 13. [For every one whosoeve/-, &c., TTaq yctg o^, x.t.A. See Textual Note '^ Scrif>- tural proof: Joel iii. 5. [LXX. and E. V., ii. 32.] Tholuck : " The omission of the exact form of the quotation occurs either in universally known decla- rations, as in Eph. v. 31, or where the Apostle makes an Old Testament statement the substratuir of his own thought, as in chap. xi. 34, 35." Paul has specified the name xi'^tot; in Joel as the name of the God of revelation, in harmony with the mes- sianic passage. [If we accept a reference to Christ in ver. 12, we must do the same here, as, indeed, the next verse also requires. Alford well says : " There is hardly a stronger proof, or one more irrefragable by those who deny the Godhead of our Blessed Lord, of the unhesitating application to Hixn ♦ [Alford : " The Apostle seems to use it here as taking up iravTi T

(T i,v ov nil A t]xov(Ta,v. On the construc- tion of the genitive o*, see Meyer; comp. Eurip., Ifedea, p. 752. Meyer seems scarcely justified in insisting upon the correctness of the Vulgate : quo- modo credent ei, quern non audierunt. The E. V. gives the proper meaning. — ^Without a preacher, yM^l<; xijQuffffovToq. Tittmann, Sgn. N. T., p. 93 : -/iiitiii; ad suhjectum, quod ad objecto sejunctam est, refertur, otjifii autem ad objectum, quod a sub- jcclo abrsse cogitafur. Dr. Lange may be correct in claiming that the preachers are as yet indefinite, but the beautiful precision of the Greek requires us to find an intimation of the certainty of the univer- sal gospel proclamation. In the first two questions, there is an absolute negative ; in the third, /oioiq occurs, implying the probability that one will preach; in the last, we have iav turj, which indicates that, however men may fail to call and hear, those who will preach will certainly be sent forth. This turn of expression seems to have escaped the notice of commentators, but it points directly toward the po- sition the Apostle is establishing: the universality of the means provided by God for the salvation of men, whether they hear or forbear. — R.] • [T>T. Hodge : " It is an argument founded on the principle, thit if God wills the end, He wills also the means." He propirly opposes Calvin's view, that the Apostle is proving the desian of sending the gospel to the Gentiles from the fact that they have received "it. Still, Dr. LangL-'s view (which is that of De Wette and Meyer) seems yet mere exact, since the providing of the means is moic marked in this nassa^e thaa their success. — R.J Ver. 15. [And how shall they preach, ex cept they be sent? not<; ()k y.rj(ti'iui(Tiv tat fi rj a TT (XT A w(T 1. r ;1 The definite preacher! spring first from the divine mission. But the Apos. \le proves, by Isa. Hi. 7, that there must be such seni (apostolic) preachers. As it is w^ritten, How beautiful, &c. The Apostle here repeats the prophet's announcement in an abridged and free manner, but yet in strict con- formity with the sense ; fullowing the original text more closely than the LXX, According to Meyer, the prophetic passage in question speaks of the happy deliverance from exile, while the Apostle has very properly interpreted it in its messianic character as a prophecy of the gospel preachers of the messianic kingdom. But the full, mysterious messianic import of the prophetic passage extends beyond the meaning of a ty|)ical prophecy as verbal prophecy. The beauty of the feet of the messen- gers of peace is hardly spoken of, because the feet of the one who approaches become visible (Tholuck), but because they, in their running and hastening, in their scaling obstructing mountains, and in their ap- pearance and descent from mountains, are the sym- bolical phenomena of the earnestly desired winged movement and appearance of the gospel itself. Paul has left out the mountains, and has given the col- lective singular a plural form, according to the sense; peace has to him the full idea of the gos- pel salvation ; the good things are the rich, dis- played, saving blessings which proceed from the one salvation. Vers. 16-18 : But as the gospel is, on the one hand, naturally free and -universal in relation to the antithesis of Jeivs and Gentiles, so, on the other, it is, according to its inward nature, conditioned by the antithesis of faith and unbelief. Ver. 16. But they did not all hearken to the glad tidings [LY /.A' ov ndmi; 1< tt r] /. o v • a av r to i li a y y i Xim . The aorist is historic ; during the preaching (Alford). Hence the general reference is to be admitted, especially as the a/.Aa contrasts with the preaching to " all," the limited result. — R.] Theodore of Mopsvestia and Reiche do violence to the connection in reading these words as a question. Fritzsche holds that they refer to the Gentiles ; and Meyer, to the Jews. But they refer chiefly to the difference between believers and unbelievers in general, for there were also unbeliev- ers among the Gentiles; and, above all, the ques- tion was the general establishment of the antithesis : believers and unbelievers, and then its application to Jews and Gentiles. Lord, who believed our report ? [Kvqk, riq Inlatfvaiv rfj ot/.o'i r'lfitov; An exact quotation from the LXX.] This citation from the prophet Isaiah, chap. liii. 1, is mainly a strong proof of this: that the preaching of -salvation does not meet with faith on the part of all to whom it is preached, although in this citation the reference to the Jews comes out more definitely. The hj-per- bolical expression of the prophet means : " Only a few believe." The entire contents of Isa. liii. prove that here we have not only to deal with a typical prophecy, but also with a verbal one. On the different interpretations of axoc/, see Tho- luck, p. 577 : " TTiaf which is preachel," " to preach what is heard from God." Meyer : " The preaching which is apprehended;" or, in which the stress re8*a upon the right apprehension (the words of obedi. ence). — Not all. Tliat is, not all within the reach of CHAPTER IX. 1-38. 349 preacliing {axot'j, nSnni::). [The word axoiy has occasioned much difficulty. For, if rendered report, prcachinfj, here, then it would seem natural to give it the same sense in ver. 17. But if this be done, tlien " word of (iod " must receive an unusual meaning (see below). Generally the conimentatois have admitted his meaning here w-thout question, and tiicn in various ways met the subsequent dillieulty. Forbes, however, strikes at the root of the matter, and claims that there is no ground for rendering 5J1^^ , report — i. e., what we cause others to hear. His view has been adopted by Uengstenberg, and is the most sat- isfactory solution yet offered, '.^xorj, like the He- brew equivalent, he claims with reason,* refers to the me:;sage viewed from the side of the hearer, not from that of the preacher. The prophet is speaking in the name of his countrymen, as he does through- out the chapter : Who (of us) hath believed that which we heard? (See Forbes, pp. 362 ft") This view is more literal ; it does not disturb in the least the general drift of the argument, while it relieves ver. 17 of a great difficulty. In fact, Meyer, Alford, and others, approach this sense, but too indirectly ; this is as simple as it is satisfactory. — R.] Ver. 17. t So then faith cometh of hearing [a()a fj niarii; t'i cixo//?]. From the a/.otj. Explanations : The message preached (Tholuck, Meyer [Hodge, and most] ) ; the act of hearing (Calixtus, Philippi, and others) ; hearing with faith (Weller, and other Lutheran expositors). As this preaching does not meet with universal faith, only the announcement itself can be meant. [Accepting Forbes' explanation of a/.m] in ver. 16, we apply it here : Faith comes from what is heard, not the act of hearing — which gives a different sense from ver. 16 ; nor what is preached — which confuses this word and ^Jjiia. — R.] And hearing through the word of God [// Sk ay.oij (ha ^t'jfiaroi; 0-foii. See Textual Note '^ on the reading A't^to-Tor.] Different ex- planations of the ^Tjfta Ofov: 1. God's revealed word (Tholuck, and others) ; 2. God's order, com- mission (Beza, Meyer [Hodge], and others). The ground : Because otherwise ^rjua flfori would not be different from a/.otj. But strictly speaking, both definitions are indissolubly united in the revealed word with which prophets and apostles were en- trusted. The Divine message, as such, is a formal Bending, or a commission and a material sending ; or, with these, also a preaching. Therefore Tholuck does not appear to be correct, when he says that to ptjfia f)fo~i tni Ttra denotes not God's order, but His oracles ; Jer. i. 1, &c. Nevertheless, there does exist a difference between this y^/^a and the axotj ; a/.o/} is every message of salvation to the end of the world ; but the ^/y,«a Sfoii denotes the Divine Bourees of revelation, on whose effluence the au- thority and effect of every message depend : The word, and the fact, and the effect in life taken to- gether. Therefore (ha. ^rj/iaroi;. [The thing heard ia through or by means of the revelation of God. * [This is the classical usage, and all the New Testament passiiijcs can be quite as readily explained thus. The Hebrew wurd is not lliphil, yet the common interpretation brces a Hiphil sense upon it. — B.] \ [Stuart Las a sinaiilar view respectinp: this verse. lie finds iM it the sucpestion of the Jewish objector, whom he has already discovered in vers. i4, 15, to the effect th.at "many of the .Tews are not culpable for unbelief, inasmuch as they have not heard the gospel, and hearing it i» neces- •ary to the believing of it." — B..] This is the sense, if we adopt the usual meaning of ay.orj ; and, indeed, it gives ^Tj^a a simpler sense, De Wette suggests that ^^/la prepares for rdt ^/; ^ara in the next verse. — -11,] Ver. 18. But I say, Did they not hear? [a). '/.a kiyd), /i tj o li x /;' xo ccrct v ;] The iO' definite it [which Dr. Lange supplies] is regarded by Meyer as denoting the a/.o>'j ; and, according to Tholuck, as that which has heretofore been the sub- ject undei- consideration ; which is sufficient. [All the difficulty about the verb here disappears, if Forbes' view be accepted. There is no necessity foi going back to ver. 14, or making the matter indefi. nite. The Apostle has been speaking of the neces- sity of hearing, of the thing heard ; now he says ; did they not hear ? The universality of the privi- lege is affirmed. — R.] Although reference is con- stantly made to the Jews, the question is neverthe- less, principally and formally, concerning unbelievera in general. If unbelievers, as unbelieving people, can excuse themselves by saying that they have not heard God's message, the most direct answer would be : " Then they would not be unbelievers in the specific sense." But the Apostle rather brings out the fact of the incipient universal propagation of the gos- pel, by clothing it in the language of Ps. xix. 4, from the LXX. [Nay, verily, fifvovvyt. Comp. chap. ix. 20. So far from this being the case, their sound went out into all the earth, &c., fiq ttu (ray rijv yrjv, y..r.).. An exact quotation from the LXX. (Ps. xviii. 5 ; Heb. xix. 5 ; Eng., xix. 4. — R.] In the Psalm, the question is undoubtedly the uni- versal revelation of God in nature ; therefore we cannot regard it as a real prophecy, and as an argu- ment in the usual sense. However, the Apostle seems to clothe his view of the incipient universality of the gospel in those words of the Psalms, because he perceived in the universal revelation of nature ths type and gunraidee of the future revelation of sal- vation. Then, his having given to the q:S6yyo<; avToiv * another reference, also corresponds to thia freer application of the passage (there, the sound of God's works ; here, the preacher). [Dr. Lange here follows the mass of commentators (including Stuart, Hodge). But Calvin, Stier, Hengslenberg, Alford, Forbes, regard these words " as possessing a real argu- mentative force, when interpreted according to their genuine meaning as designed at first by the Psalm ist." Alford urges the fact : " that Ps. xix. is a com parison of the sun, and the glory of the heavens with the vor I of God." Calvin : " As He spoke to the Gentiles by the voice of the heavens. He showed by this prelude that He designed to make himself known at length to them also." Dr. Lange, it is true, approaches this view, yet does not find it in the Psalm, but in the Apostle's use of it. Was the Apostle likely to convince his countrymen by put- ting a new meaning on their Scriptures ? — R.] On the gross misconstruction of this passage, that the gospel should extend everywhere, even at Paul's time, see Meyer [p. 408, 4th ed.] ; Tholuck, p. 580. As for the ecstatic salutation of the uni- versality of God's kingdom, then first appearing, which often occurs in Paul (see Col. i. 2£), compara the two statements of Justin Martyr and TertuUian ; Tholuck, p. 380. That which appears surprising in * [The LXX. thus renders D^lp, which means, first their livf ; then, Irom the string of an instrument, theit sound. — E.] 350 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANa Ihe hyperbolical form of the Apostle's statement of the uni /ersal propagation of the gospel, disappears just in proportion a3 that propagation is regardeJ not quarUitalhely, but qualitativdy. Jerusalem and Rome were the centres of the ancient world. But, in addition to them, there were many other general centres. The error of expounding the passage in the sense of a quantitative universality could not hoi i good, even if we admit that the gospel had at that time reached America ; the whole of the fifth grand division of the world, as well as all Africa, would also have to come into consideration. C. Tlie faith of the Gentiles and the unbelief of Israel. Vera. 19-21 : Prophesied already in the Old Testament. Ver. 19. But I say, Did Israel not know? [fi^ 'JiT(jat]k ovx iyvi));] The Apostle now passes over to the long-prepared antithesis of un- believing Israel and of the believing Gentiles. But yet, in his representation of tliis fearful inversion (which stirred up unbelieving Judaism) of the old theocratic relation — according to which the Jews were God's people, and the Gentiles were given up to themselves — he has recourse to the witnesses of the Old Testament respecting the beginning and prospect of this inversion. After the first question : " Have unbelievers not heard the gospel ? " there follows the second: "Did not Israel know it V We may now ask : What is referred to ? Explanations : 1. That the gospel should pass from the Gentiles to the Jews (Thomas Aquinas, Calovius, Tholuck [Stuart, Hodge, Jowett], and others). But that threat was only conditionally uttered, and is not contained in the foregoing. 2. The gospel (Chrysostom, and others). [Here must be classed Calvin and Beza, who supply : the truth of God ; Philippi and Forbes : the word or message of God (from ver. 17). The last named defend tlieir view, from the emphasis which seems to rest on Israel (in the correct reading), and from the parallelism with ver. 18. Meyer opposes, with rea- son, the //ly-oi'x, which anticipates an affirmative answer; nor is this objection met, by saying that an affirmative might be expected, that Israel ought to have known the gospel. Paul knew too sadly that the reverse was tlie fact. — R.] 3. That the gospel should become universal, ac- cording to the preceding language of the Psalm (Fritzsche, De Wette [Alford], Meyer).* Meyer places Tholuck also in this category. Tholuck, how- ever, now declares for (1.), as follows: "But yet the following prophetic declarations do not contain BO much the universality of preaching, as explana- tions of the inverted relation which God will assume toward Gentiles and Jews." At all events, the citation immediately following is not simply a proof of the universality of the gos- pel. But it only follows therefrom, that a new state- ment is made with the proof. This also holds good of the last quotation. The progress is as follows : a. Universality ; Ps. xix. b. The faith of the Gen- tiles for the awakening of the faith of the Jews ; Pe»:t. xxxii. 21. c. The faith of the Gentiles ; Isa. /it. 1. d. The unbelief of the Jews; Isa. Ixv. 2. Therefor»> we regard the explanation of Fritzsche, • [Bretschneiiler and Rciche take Israel as the object of Cho verb, and supply Omi as subject. Did not God know iBrael! But this is arbitrary, aad not in accordance with the context.— K.] &c., as correct, and all the more striking, as the fbl filment of this very ancient prospect just now becaOM an offence to Israel. — Proof: First Moses saith [ ;r ^ w t o ? M iDva^t ).iyfi,. First, " in the order of tiie prophetic roll" (Altord), with reference to Isaiah, as one among the many who spoke afterward to the same eflecU Wetstein, Storr, FL.tt, join tt^wto? with alt 'iyvo), but on insufficient grounds. — R.] The futuM universality of the Abrahamie blessing had been de« clared earlier, but it was Moses who first declared that there should be no difference between Jews and Gentiles before God's righteousness ; indeed, that possibly the Gentiles, in their good conduct, might be preferred to the Jews in their bad conduct, Thus the same Moses who communicated to Israel its economic advantages over the Gentiles, was he who had set up the rule of faith by which this re- lation could possibly be inverted in the future. I ■wiU provoke you to jealousy ['Eya na(> aL.7j}.Maii) vfiaii. The only variation from the LXX. (which closely follows the Hebrew) is the substitution of vfiaq, in each clause, for avrovi;, — R.] Thus Moses speaks to Israel in the name of the Lord ; Dent, xxxii. 21. With those who are no people [«;r' oi'ic id-vfu. The precise force of the preposition ia with difficulty conveyed by any English word. It ia not =: aycmist, although that is implied ; nor = by means of but rather, on account of. With expresses the weaker shade of instrumental force sufficiently well, but the real sense is : aroused on account of and directed toward a no-people. — R.] CS X:i2 . The Gentile nations were not recognized as true na- tions in the idea of the people, because they were devoid of that religious and moral principle which transforms nature into a moral nationality ; see chap. ix. 25; 1 Peter ii. 10. "^iri , from ^"5^ de- notes, strictly speaking, the increasing mass of nat- ural human beings; cy, from C?:s', a connection, assembly, community. [The words people, nation, are used in the E. V. to preserve the distinction be- tween the Hebrew words. Despite the fact that the LXX. has used the same word to render both, it haa not been overlooked in the E. V. in tiiis passage. — R.] The explanation of the " no-people " (the om denies the idea contained in a nomen connected with it), is found in the following parallel : By a foolish nation [tTrt t {yvd aaxata, napopylia, by the para* phrase : J will move you lo jealousy, I will excile you to i» dignation. — B.l CHAPTER X. 1-21. 85. Ver ?^ But Isaiah is very bold, and saith l'Haa.''oii i)i anotoXfi^t xal /.iytt,. Lange: But Jna\ak even ventures to sai/ ; wliich is the spirit of the Greek. Beiigel : Quod Moses innucrai, Esaias audacter et plane eloquitur. — R.]. The Apostle re- garded it as great boldness in Isaiah to say the words of cliap. Ixv. 1 and 2 in the hearing of the Jews, as the first verse, according to his explanation, ex- pressed mercy to the Gentiles, and the second the hardness and apostasy of the Jews. [I was found by those who sought me not, E V (J i & tj V T o r «,• i fi E n if tfjrovaiv, x.t.X. See 'Textual Note ", for tlie text of the Hebrew original and the LXX., to the former of whicii Dr. Lange refers so frequently. The Apostle has trans- posed the clauses. — R.] The question is now raised first of .all by the later exegesis, whether Paul's explanation of Isaiah's passage is correct? Meyer says : " In its strict sense, Isa. Ixv. 1 (freely from the Septuagint, and with an inversion of both the parallel members) treats of the Jewx ; but in a typical sense, which Paul clearly perceives in it, they are tj'pes of the Genti/e.s," &c. But in this case, Paul would have made an exegesis without any evidence, and would have exposed himself to the legitimate contradiction a?id censure of the Jews. Tholuck also remarks, that if the Apostle, in ver. 1, referred directly to the Gentiles, his application would have to be regarded as having missed its ob- ject. In the first place, namely, Tholuck says that rabbinical expositors (Jarciii, &c.) have "simply and satisfactorily " explained vers. 1 and 2 as relating to the same subjects. He further says : " Independ- ently of these rabbinical predecessors, the same ex- planation has been adopted by Gesenius, Ewald, Hit- zig, and Umbreit, which last writer translates: I was to be inquired of." There is just ground for disap- proving of Luther's confidence in inserting in ver. 20; to the Gentiles, and in beginning ver. 21 with a for — -for I speak; &c. Yet the exegetical author- ities cited are utterly refuted, not only by Paul's authority — although we cannot even admit that in one of his last sword-thrusts he has made not merely a random stroke, but even wounded himself — but also by the connection of the whole of Isaiah's pas- sage, chap. Ixiii. Y-lxvi. The antitheses in general between the strongly Old Testament Jewish prayer in chap. Ixiii. 1 flf., and the prophetical New Testa- ment answer of God in chaps. Ixv. and Ixvi., are first to be considered. It is said that the prayer is undoubtedly designed to express Israel's state of mind ; that it contains angry and passionate ele- ments ; and that the Lord must so reveal himself that the Geiitiles will tremble at His name (ver. 17 ; chap. Ixvi. 1). Tiie prayer is a conflict between the profoundest contrition and the most painful dejec- tion, and it dies away in a question which sounds like a reproach. The Lord now answers, it is said, in the cold reproach : " I was to be sought." And this is claimed to be the simplest rendering of TlCn'^J . But what does the Lord answer in rela- tion to the people of Israel, and in relation to the Gentiles ? In chap. Ixiv. 8 ff, we read : " Thou art our Father ; we are the clay, and thou our potter," &c. Finally : " Lord, wilt thou hold thy peace, and afflict us very sore ? " Compare here the an- swer in chap. Ixv. 2, and further. In ver. 8 the femiliar thought again recurs to the prophet: A rem- nant of the people will be saved ; from ver. 18 on- trard he explains by a grand antithesis. From tliis antithesis there then arises the descripti'.n of the new Israel, wliich was to be called by another name (ver. 15). On the Gentiles, see chap. Ixvi. 12, 18, 19, 21. But the antitheses between chap. Ixv., vers. 1 and 2, come still more into consideration. In ver 1 we read, "^la-bs ; in ver. 2, C?~'N. The "'ia, in ver. 1, is '^'ilL'a X"p~S9oT'VTa, the negative. If so, both were necessary to convey the full meaning of the Hebrew word used by tlie propliet. " Tiiey say to God, offer- ing them salvation : we mil not" — R.] DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. 1. The intercession of the believer a sign of hope and salvation to those for whom it is made. 2. Tiie bright and dark sides of religious zeal. If it be not purified by progressive, living knowl- edge, it becomes peverted into the carnal zeal of fanaticism. On tlie first appearance of Jewish fanat- icism, see the Commentary on Genesis [p. 664, Amer. ed.]. 3. Self-righteousness has many forms. The start- ing-point is the effort for the righteousness of tlie law, not as it is attained inwardly by simplicity and humility, but as it, by self-complacency and impurity, falls into externality. In this direction the right- eousness of the law becomes the righteousness of works ; and from this there results self-righteous- ness, wliich branches out into many forms — into the ecclesiastical and political form of confessional and partisan righteousness ; into the ecclesiastical and scholastic form of doctrinal righteousness (orthodox- ism) ; into the worldly form of moral righteousness ; into the pietistic form of righteousness of feeling ; and into the piiilosophical and brutal forms of the denial of all personal guilt. In all forms it inverts the relation between God and man — between the Cre- ator and the creature — between God's sovereignty and man's own will — between God's law and the self- made service and law — between grace and works — and between the ground of life and the most out- ward false show. Its real want is the ivanf of the heart's upward look at the tlirone of God's eternal majesty ; and this want is also the first guilt ; tlie positive ruin connected therewith is the baseness of the mind's look at tilings below ; the lost state of the mind's look in tlie abject beholding of self. But as this self-righteousness is so tiiorouglily selfish that it misunderstands and scorns the proffer of God's freelj'-given righteousness, the gospel of grace, so is it likewise selfish in connecting itself insepa- rably with fanaticism. 4. Christ is the end of the law, because He is the fulfilment of the law ; therefore He is, on one 6id6, the end where the law is changed into the col- lective principle of the new birth; and, on the oth- er. He is tlie end in whicli it lays off its eternal Old Testament form and meaning; just as ripe fruit be- comes freed from its bondage in the husk. See Exec). Notes, 5. Ver. 5. The doctrine of eternal Wii has de- Teloped itself embryonically by stages : In this life, God's blessing, God's glorious deli'-^rance from the manifold danger of death, and, in the future, th« peaceful slumber of those delivered from beds oi eartlily suffering, their celebration of the marriage supper of the Lamb, and their safety in Aijraham'a bosom, &c. This development, just as every biblical doctrine, has taken place in organic conformity to the law. According to Tlioluck, p. 557, the escli»« tology of tlie Jews of Palestine at the time of Cbiist had already attained to tiie idea oi eternal life. Yet they hardly attained to the idea of eternal life in tu0 Christian sense. [It must ever be remembered that the ideas, immortality and eternal liff, are not iden- tical. ZiDtj has a new meaning in the New Testae ment. Comp. the thouglitful remarks of Trench, Syn. N. T., § xxvii.— R.] 6. Tlie righteousness of faith speaks even in Moses, if Moses be properly understood and ex- plained. [Comp. Exey. Notes on vers. 7-9. — R.] 7. The truth of the inward essence of the law, like that of the gospel, and therefore the truth of the whole saving revelation of God, is based on its inward character — on its inward union with the most inward nature of man. Its impregnability and in- corruptibility also rest upon the same basis. Just as man must return from all by-ways (for his salva- tion or for his judgment) to the idea of God, so also must he ri'turn to tiie idea of the God-man, of guilt, the atonement, deliverance, the new birtli, and the new and eternal life. The objection urged against revelation, and especially against Cliristianity, that this religion beclouds the earthly life by an exclusive representation of heaven, and the present by an exclusive assertion of the future, tlie realm of the dead, and duration after death, is removed by a pas- sage which the Apostle cites and elaborates from Deuteronomy. Christ is on the earth in so far aa He has become inseparably incorporated witli it by His historical presence and union with humanity ; and He is just as much in this life, and present in His judgments and bestowals of salvation, as He is in the eternal world, as the future Finisher of all things. 8. Faith and confession ; see Exey. Notes. Thtf delivering power of confcnsion. Because it : 1. makes inward faith irrevocable ; 2. Breaks loose from unbelief; 3. Unites with believers, becomea flesh and blood, and, in a good sense, acquires world- ly form, worldly power, and the power of manifes- tation ; 4. Pledges itself to full consistency in word and deed, life and death. Christians have had good ground for holding martyrdom in such high honor. But if martyrdom can be exaggerated and overvalued, how much more can a confessional righteousness be overvalued, which seeks its protection and peace un- der the shadow of formulas ! 9. The centre of faith and the centre of con- fession ; see ver. 9. The centre of faith is Christ'a resurrection, with all that it comprises ; the centre of confession is Jesus as the Lord, and therefore not "the Christianity of Christ," but the Christ of Chris- tianity. [Hence the Apostle does not say : If thou shalt confess with thy mouth my doctrine, and be- lieve in thine heart in justification by faith, thou shalt be saved ; yet how often he is represented aa saying this, and no more. The living Christ is not in such a gospel. — R.] 10. With the complete freedom of revelation and of God's people there has also come the full protection of faith against unbelief. IL The riches of the Lord to a praying hunuA world. CHAPTER X. 1-21. 353 12. Th« order of the gospel message. Its ne- cessity, its promise, its authority, its condition (the Divine mission ; direct or indirect). See tlie inter- esting statements wliich Tlioluek makes, p. 680 ff., on the assertion of the Lutlieran theologians of tiie seventeenth century, as well as of their latest com- panions ill adherence to the letter, that this text (and the article of the general call) forces us to ac- cept the position that the gosjiel had been preached in all the world at Paul's time. 13. We must be careful to distinguish, that the question here is the necessity of the official bearers or messengers of God's word, but not of them ex- clusively. Or, more strictly si)eaking, the sending has two sides, and does not consist simply in official arrangements and forms. [This is even more ap- parent, if we understand ver. 17 to refer to vliat is heard, rather than what is preached, and then con- eider how the Apostle proves from an Old Testament description of tlie voice of God in nature (ver. 18), the universality of this privilege. — R.] 14. The feet of the messengers on the moun- tains, or the beauty of the progressive course of the gospel. IC. Unbelief in the gospel is disobedience, spe- cific disobedience and rage; Ps. ii. The more grossly and rougldy human nature is apprehended, the more external become the ideas of obedience and disobe- dience ; the more profoundly, purely, and inwardly they nre viewed, the more profoundly, purely, and inwardly is this antithesis defined ; and, finally and fundamentally, faith in God's word is specific obe- dience, wliile unbelief is specific disobedience, spe- cific rebellion. [The LXX. form of Isa. Ixv. 2 (ver. 21), by dividing the idea of rebelUon into disobedi- ence and gainsaying, only recognizes the connection between refusing God's commands and contradicting His words : disobedience and unbelief, acting and reacting upon each other coiitiinially. — R.] 16. The prudent advance of the Apostle in his judgment, that Israel has changed its part with the Gentiles by its unbelief, and has become an apostate people, is here a characteristic of his masterly apos- tolic wisdom of instruction, as well as of his apos- tolic heart, as, witii a shudder of inmost sorrow, he gradually draws aside the curtain from the ghastly picture of Israel. The argument from the Old Tes- tament is in conformity witb the law that every apology must be discussed from the acknowledged eources, statements, or principles of the opponent, and that its possibility ceases where there cease to be positions in common. HOMTLETICAL AND PKACTICAX. a. Vers. 1, 2. The benevolent disposition of the Apostle toward Israel. It is clear: 1. From his wish and prayer that they might be saved ; 2. From his record that they have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge. — A zeal for God is good, but it should not exist without knowledge (ver. 2). —How often ignorant zeal occurs : 1. In domestic ; 2. In civil ; and 3. In ecclesiastical afifiiirs ; and, unfortunately, it occurs most frequently in the last (ver. 2). — The folly of ignorant zeal. It is foolish : 1. In regard to its starting-point; 2. Its end; 3. The choice of means (ver 2). — Wise and ignorant real. Starke : Oh, how can men so transgress as to be led by a blind religious zeal to oppose the dear- 23 est truths of the gospel by an imaginary defence of orthodoxy ; and thus hate, calumniate, and reproach Christ in Ills niembens, and always tliink, witii those ancient enemies, that, by so doing, they do God ser- vice (John xvi. 2). — Hedingek: The zeal of the Jews crucified Christ. Spknkh : All the persecutions which have been, and still will be inflicted on pious Clirislians, are committed by those who do not know the truth and doctrine of godliness ; who regard otliers who are attached to it as false and wicked people ; and who think that they render God a service when they persecute them (John xvi. 2) ; but yet, by tliis very means, tiiey thrust themselves into G(jd's judgment, and are not at all excused for their error (ver. 2). Hkcbnek : What is blind zeal in religious mat- ters^? Whence does it come V If it be wholly un. clean, it is self-love, selfishness ; if it be merely joined with perverse measures, then it arises from a weakness of understanding, and, in that case, haa also a mixture of egotism I True zeal is pure and clear. — Compare Paul's early Jewish and later Chris- tian zeal. Besser : When Paul cherishes, and expresses in praying to GoJ, the hearty wish that they who have stumbled against the stone of offence may yet be saved, he certainly has no knowledge of any abso- lute decree of condemnation on any man, not even on the most stiff-necked Jews (ver. 1). — One of out older teachers laments : " The Jews had, and still have, a zeal without knowledge ; but we, alas, have an understanding without zeal " (ver. 2). b. Ver. 3. Our own righteousness, and right. eousness which is of God (Luke xviii. 9-14). 1. The former is proud, and leads to humiliation ; 2. The latter, on the contrary, is humble, and leads to exaltation. Starke, Lange : No persons are farther from God's kingdom, and more difficult to be converted, than those who, when they hear of the method of salvation, have so much of their own righteousnesa as to think that they have long conformed to it. Heubser : They are therefore devoid of an hum- ble recognition of their unworthiness before God ; they would themselves be somelhing, and carry weight. Where this pride and fancy exist, there ia always blindness. c. Vers. 4-11. The righteousnesss which is of faith is : 1. A righteousness in Christ, who is the end of the law ; 2. And therefore can be obtained only by faith in Him (vers. 4-11). — The unbeliever asserts that Christ is far from and unapproachable by man ; but the believer, on the contrary, knowi that He is near us by the word of faith (vers. 5-9). — Id order to avoid believing, men make use of empty evasions (vers. 5-9). — As the law was near to Israel, so is the gospel near to us; 1. In the mouth; 2. In the heart (ver. 8). — What do we preach ? 1. Not a remote, and therefore incomprehensible word ; but, 2. A near, and therefore a very easily under- stood word (ver. 8). — The conditions of salvation : 1. The confession of the mouth that Jesus is the Lord ; 2. The belief in the heart that God haa raised Him from the dead (vers. 9-11). — The inward interdependence of confession and faith : 1. There is no true confession of the mouth without faith in the heart ; 2. But there is also no living faith of the heart without the confession of the mouth (vera. 9-11). — Faith in the heart must ever precede the confession of the mouth ; which, unfortunately, ia not always the case, and therefore so much is said 354 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. of confession, and so little is inwardly believed (vers. 9-1 1). — The great confession of the Clnistian Cliurch, as expressed: 1. Li the apostolic confession of faitli; 2. In the hymns of the churcli ; 3. In its prayers ; i. In its celebration of tlie Lord's Supper (ver. 10). .— Tlie confessors of the Cin'istian Church : 1. In the Deginning (the time of tlie first i)ersecutions); 2. In the period of the Reformation ; 3. At the present tirao (tlie martyrs in Madagascar, on tlie South Sea Islands, in Borneo, Syria, &c. ; ver. 10). LuTHKR : Ue who does not believe that Christ has died, and risen, in order to malte us righteous from our sins, says : " Wlio shall ascend into heav- en, and who shall descend into the deep ? " But this is done by those who would be justified l)y works, and not by faitli, when they speak thus with the mouth, but not in the heart. J^mphasis est in verbo : in the heart. Starke : Christ is the essence of the Old Tes- tament Scriptures also ; he little understands them who does not find Christ in them. The entire life of the saints of the Old Testament is a prophecy of Christ ; John v. 4G (ver. 5). — Say not, " Who has been among the dead, and has returned again, and has told us of the condition of the dead ? " Stand by the gospel truth, and you will be righteous and saved; Luke xvi. 31 (ver. 7). — Be comforted, troubled soul ; though you do not have the joy of faith just ill the hour of temptation, you will never- theless be saved, so long as you depend on Christ ; for God, who does not lie, has often given you the assurance that you shall be saved (ver. 11). — Cra- mer : The mouth and the heart cannot be separated ; Ps. cxvi. 10 (ver. 9). — Faith must not grow on the tongue, but in the heart ; Acts xv. 9 (ver. 10). — Hkdinger : The heart witliout the mouth is timid- itv; the mouth without the heart is hvpocrisy (ver. 10).^ Spkner : We read that the word is nigh us, Bamely, that it is declared to us ; that we liave it in the heart — where the Holy Spirit has impressed it ; and in the mouth, by which we declare it. Tliere- fore, it is not something concealed in heaven, or in the deep, but we have it with us, and in us. Verily, we may say that the v)ord means not only the word itself, but also the blessings which that word pre- sents — Christ, with all His gospel treasures. Christ's merit, grace, Spirit, and life are not far from us, and cannot first be brought down from heaven, or brought up from the deep ; they are not first to be acquired, but are nigh us, and, if we will accept them, in the mouth and in the heart. Thus, though the language of the Old Testament was not on this wine, since the knowledge of grace was of a less degree, Tnore ob- scure, and more difficult to be obtained, yet it is now very near to us, for it is imparted by the great- er and stronger measure of grace which is now de- clared to us (ver. 8). Gerlacii : Chri.st is in so far the end of the law as He, 1. Is its final object, the one to whom it leads (Gal. iii. 24) ; 2. Is its fulfilment (Matt. v. 17) ; 8. Puts an end to the dominion of the law (Luke xvi. 16) (ver. 4). — To become acquainted with God's gracious counsel, to deprive death of its power by the manifestation of a divine and holy life in the flesh — which the carnal man was incapable of, since he knew nothing except the righteousness which is of the law — can be effected by the righteousness which is of faith, which establishes him in Christ's right, and freely gives him as his own what the Son of God is and has. The heart need only believe, and the moulh only confess, in order to be rigiiteou* and saved (vers. 8-11). Lisco : The Divine order of salvation is, there, fore : Justificatiou succeeds faith, God's a.ss jtance is obtained, and lie who courageously and persover- ingly confesses his faith, obtains salvation (ver. 10). — Hkub.ver : Rigliteousness is introduced as speak< inp, and is regarded as proft'ering itself. No super human knowledge, or profound learning, or ascend, ing to heaven to see Christ, is necessary to tonvmec us of Christ's resurrection and His sitting at God'.r right hand ; neither is it necessary to descend int cour.ses be delivered in simplicity and Diviue power CHAPTER X. 1-21. 855 and hearer, see that your attention is of the right kind (ver. 17). Spknkr : 1. They must call upon Christ if they would bo saved ; '2. But if they would call upon Hitii, they must believe on Ilim ; 3. If they would believe on Him, they must hear His word ; 4. But if they would hear His word, it must be preached to them ; 5. But if they would have preachers, people must be sent to them for that purpose. These are the successive links in the chain of Divine benefi- cence (ver. 14). — Roos : Here, as was always the case with the Apostle in liis charges against the Jews, he cites passages from the Old Testament Scriptures; the fi^st of which is Isa. xxviii. Ifi, where the " making waste " has the same force as " being ashamed." . , . The second passage is in Joel ii. 32, and comes down lowest to the weakness of men. Our advice to the greatest sinner who stands on the brink of hell is : " Call upon the name of the Lord, and thou shalt be saved." . . . The third passage is in Isa. lii. 7, and is a prophecy of the friendly and beautiful heralds whom the Lord, having previously spoken himself, would send out at the time of the New Testament, in order to preach peace and good-wiJl to men. But why ? Undoubt- edly in order that men might lay hold of the peace declared to them, and appropriate and enjoy God's good-will toward them. But because tliis should take place by faith, these herald.^ lament, in the fourth passnge, Isa. liii. 1 : " Lord, who hath be- lieved our report?" (vers. 11-16.) — Bengel : Any man is worth more than the whole world. Gerlach : God wills the salvation of all, but all do not wish the salvation of God ; unbelief is the cause of the ruin of all who are lost (ver. 16). — It is God's will that all should believe ; and for this reason He has sent preaching, whose import is His OWE word (ver. 17). Lisco : It is Christian duty to send teachers to the heathen world ; missions are necessary, and ac- cording to the Lord's will (Mark xvi. 15) ; and it is » glorious calling, to declare the message of Jesus, deliverance of the captives, and the new kingdom of God. — Preaching takes place by God's word ; that is, by virtue of the Divine call and a doctrine revealed by God (ver. 17). Heubner : Living preaching is God's chosen means of instruction (ver. 14). — God must send preachers; they cannot go of themselves (ver. 15). — All tiie eft'ects of grace are connected with the word ; this applies to fanatics, enthusiasts, and those who despise the word and preaching (ver. 17). Besser : The Divine order of salvation admits of no personal or national distinction (ver. 12). — The help of the rich Lord, as He passes by, is in- vited by calling iipon Him, though it be not with strong faith, yet with a hearty desire to believe ; by calling iip07i Him, though we do not pray as we ought, yet are supported by the unutterable groans of the Spirit (chap. viii. 26) ; by calling upon Him, if not with advanced knowledge, yet with the loud confession of Bartimeus: "Jesus, thou Son of David, ba'S mercy on me !" (Mark x. 47) (ver. 12.) — Be.n- iiE.. says: " He who desires the end, will also con- Iribute the means. God desires that all men call upon Him for salvation. ; therefore He wishes them to believe ; therefore, to hear ; and, therefore, to have preachers. Hence He has sent preachers. He haa done every thing necessary for our salvation. His antecedent gracious will is universal, and is 3lolhed with energetic power " (ver. 14). — It is not only necessary for the real preacher in God's namt that the word preached be real, but also that the preacher say : " Here is the staff in my hand ; the Lord has sent me " (ver. 16). e. Vers. 18-21. The relation of the Jews and Gentiles to the preaching of the gospel : 1. The former did not wish to understand the gospel, al- though they co-uld understand it ; 2. But the latter although they were ignorant, have understood if, because they wished to do so. — 77ie cotivlusiov of the whole chapter : The Jews are themselves guilty of their wretched fate, which took such a lively hol(j upon the Apostle's sympathy. For, A. The gospel was : 1. Not far from them ; 2. It was preached to them ; 3. They could lay hold of it ; but, B. I'/iey — the Jews — souglit it ; 1. Far off ; 2. Did not like to hear it ; 3. Would not understand it. Starke : Who will blame God that so many peo- pie remain children of Satan, and are condemned ? Behold, tliey are themselves the cause (ver. 21). — Roos, with reference to chaps, ix. and x. : Fiom all this it is plain that the word grace is the most com- forting and most severe, the clearest and the darkest word in the Bible. It is the most comforting word, because it assures salvation to the creature (to whom his Creator is in nowise indebted), the sinner who deserves punishment. It is also the most severe word, because it utterly prostrates pride, slays de- fiance, and completely destroys the notion of self- righteousness, wliich is so natural to man. It is the clearest word, because it needs no description ; but it is also the darkest word, because its sin]j)le mean ing is understood by only a few humble souls. Many men, who think that tliey understand this word, conceive God's grace very much as a prince's favor, which always lias regard to service, and is never disconnected from utility. But God needs no serv- ice. His will alone is free. No one can recompense Him. And yet He is righteous, and acts according to knowledge. Whoso is wise, and he shall understand these things? Prudent, and he shall know them ? Heubner, on Ps. xix. : The gospel and creation are God's two voices that reeclio about us. Besser ; Quotation of an expression of Luther, who compares preaching to a stone thrown into the water. The circles ever enlarge, but the water in the middle is still, Lange : The intercession of Paul, who was per secuted by the Jews, for Israel. — His witness for Israel: 1. High praise; 2. Great censure — The different forms of self-righteousness. — Self-right- eousness is always opposed to God's righteousness, which is : 1. Legislative ; 2. Penal ; 3. Merciful, justifying ; 4. Awakening to new life. — The self- testimony of the law and the gospel to the inward nature of man : 1. The law, the ideal of his life ; 2. The gospel, the life of his ideal. — The twin form, faith, and confession : 1. Is positively different ; yet, 2. Inseparable. — The riches of the Lord to praying hearts — to the praying, sinful world. — The univer sality of the gospel. — The freedom and limitat'ou of the message of salvation : 1. It is free to u'^ m the world who call upon the Lord ; 2. It is confined to faith, because unbelief contradicts it, [BuRKiTT (condensed) : Christ is the end of the law : 1. As He is the scope of it ; 2. As He is the accomplishment of it ; 3. As He is to the believer what the law would have been to him if he could have perfectly kept it — namely, righteousness and life, justification and salvation. — The natural man ii a proud man ; he likes to live upon his own stock o56 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. he cannot stoop to a sincere and universal renuncia- tion of his own righteousness, and to depend wholly upon the lighteousiicss of anotiier. It is natural to a man to choose rather to eat a brown crust, or wear a coarse garment, which he can call his own, than to feeil upon the riciiest dainties, or wear the costliest roliL'S, wiiich he must receive as an alms from an- other. — DoiiDiiiDGE : Let us rejoice in the spread which the gospel has already had, and let us earnest- ly and daily pray that the voices of those Divine messengers that proclaim it may go forth unto all the eartli, and tlielr words reach, in a literal sense, to the remotest ends of the globe. — Lord, give us any plague rather than the plague of the heart ! — Scott : Ministers who are faithful bear the most aft'ectionate good-will to those from whom they re- ceive tiie greatest injuries ; and they offer fervent and persevering prayers for the salvation of the very persons against whom they denounce the wrath of God if they per>jiMt in unbelief. — Clarke: Salva- tion only by righteousness : 1. The righteousnesa, or justification which is by faith, receives Christ aa an atoning sacrifice, by which all sin is pardoned ; 2. It receives continual supplies of grace from Christ by the eternal Spirit, tiirough which man is enabled to love God with all his heart, soul, mind, and strength, and his neighbor as himself; 3. This grace is afforded in sufficient degrees, suited to all place% times, and circumstances, so that no trial can hap» pen too great to be borne, as the grace of Christ ia ever at hand to support and save to the uttermost. — Hodge : It is the first and most presfir.g duty of the Church to cause all men to hear the gospel. The solemn question, " How can they believe without a preacher ? " should sound day and night in the ears of the churches. The gospel's want of success, or the fact that few believe our report, is only a reason for its wider extension. The more who hear, the more will be saved, even should it be but a small proportion of the whole. — J. F. H.] IniRD Section. — The final gracious solution of the enigma, or the overruling of judgment for the salva. lion of Israel. iJoiVs judgment on Israel is not one of reprobation. Ood''s saving economy in His Providence over Jews and Gentiles, over the election and the great majority of Israel, and over the concatenation of judgment and salvation, by virtue of which all Israel shall filially attain to faith and salvation through the fulness of the Gentiles. 2Tie universality of judgment and mercy, DoT.ology. Chap. XL 1-36. A. 1 I say then, Hath [Did] God cast away his people ? God forbid. [Let it not be !] For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of 2 Benjamin. God hath [did] not cast away his people which he foreknew. Wot [Or know] ye not what the Scripture saith of Elias [iv 'Hh'a, in the story of Elijah] ? how he maketh intercession to [])leadeth with] God against Israel, 3 saying [omit saying],' Lord,^ they have killed thy prophets, and [omit and ; insert they havc] ^ digged down thine altars ; and I am left alone [the only one],* 4 and they seek my life. But what saith the answer of God [the divine re- sponse] unto him? I have reserved* to mj^self seven thousand men, who have not [who never] bowed the knee to the image of {omit the image o/"] Baal. 5 Even so then at [fV, in] this present time also there is a remnant according to 6 the election of grace. And [Now] if by grace, then is it no more [no longer] of works : otherwise * grace is no more [no longer becomes] grace. But ' ii it he of works, then is * it no more [longer] grace : otherwise work is no more [longer] work.* B. 7 What then ? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for [That which Israel seeketh for, he obtained not] ; but the election hath \omit hath] obtained 8 it, and the rest were blinded [hardened], [[omit parenthesis'^ According as it is written, God" hath given [gave] them the [a] spirit of slumber [or, stupor], eyes " that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear ;) uc to [not hear, unto] this day. And David saith, Let '^ their table be made [become] a snare, and a trap, And a stumbling-block, and a recompense unto them : 10 Let their eyes be darkened, that they may not see, And bow down their back alway.'* CHAPTER XI. 1-86. S57 0. 11 I say then, Have they stumbled that [Did they stumble in order that] they should fall ? God forbid : [Let it not be !] but rather through [but by] their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke [in order to excite] 12 them to jealousy [«/•, emulation]. Now if the fall of them [their fall] he the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them [their diminishing] the riches 1 3 of the Gentiles ; how mufb more their fulness ? For '* I speak [1 am speak ing] to you Gentiles [:], inasmuch [then] ^^ as I am the apostle of the Gentiles, 14 I magnify [glorify] mine office : If by any means I may provoke [excite] to emulation tlienx which are [omu them icJiich are^ my [own] flesh, and might save 15 some of them. For if the casting away of them be the reconciling [reconcilia« tion] of the world, what shall the receiving [reception] of them be, but life 16 from the dead. For [Moreover] if the first- fruit be holy, the lump is also holy [so also is the lump] : and if the root be holy, so are the branches [also]. 17 And [But] if some of the branches be [were] broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wert graffed [grafted] in among them, and with them par- takest [and made felloAV-partaker] of the root and '° fatness of the olive tree ; 18 Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, 19 but the root thee. Thou wilt say then. The " branches were broken off, that I 20 might be graffed [grafted] in. Well ; because of unbelief they were broken 21 otl', and thou standest by faith. Be not high-minded,'" but fear: For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed \_fear'\ lest " he also spare not thee. 22 Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God : on them which [those who] fell, severity;"" but toward thee, goodness [God's goodness]/' if thou 23 continue in his goodness : otherwise thou also shalt be cut off. And they also [moreover], if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be graffed [grafted] in : for 24 God is able to graff [graft] them in again. For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert graffed [grafted] contrary to nature into a good olive tree ; how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be graffed [grafted] into their own olive tree ? 25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant ol tnis mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits," that blindness [hardening] in part is 26 happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be \omii be] come in. And so all Israel shall be saved : as it is written," There shall come out of Sion the 27 Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob : For this is my cove- nant [the covenant from me, tiuq iiiov^ unto them, when I shall take away their 28 sins. As concerning [touching] ^* the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes : 29 but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers' sakes. For the 30 gifts and calling of God are without repentance. For as" ye in times past have not believed [were disobedient to] ''^ God, yet have now obtained mercy 81 through their unbelief [the disobedience of these] : Even so have these also now not believed, that through your mercy \i. e., mercy shmm to ymi~\ they also may 32 obtain mercy. For God hath concluded them all [shut iip " all] in unbelief [disobedience], that [in order that] he might [may] have mercy upon all, 33 O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom [riches and wisdom] and knowl- edge of God ! how unsearchable'* are his judgments, and his ways past finding 84 out! For who hath" known the mind of the Lord? or who hath been hia 85 counsellor? Or'" who hath first given to him, and it shall be recompensed untc 36 him again ? For of him, and through him, and to [unto] him. are all things to whom [him] be glory for ever. Amen. S58 THE EriSTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. TEXTUAL. • Ver. 2. — [The Rec. inserts K^yaiv; supported by x'. Ij. It is omitted in N'. A. B. C. D. F., versions and fathcra The probability of an interpolation is so great, that modern editors unhesitatingly reject it. — Some MBS. insert 6* wpoeyvM (from the first clause of ver. :') in the first clause of ver. 2. The sitiiiiarity of the clauses readily explains this. ■■' Ver. 3.— [A free citation fiom the LXX., 3 (1.) Kings xix. 10 (ver. 14 is almost a repetition of ver. 10) ri h(rtaaia, koI vn'oAcAei/ifxcu iyit liovutTaToi, Koi ^ijToDat Tiji' i/fux"?" /'*'"' Ka^dv avrriv. The Apostle has omitted a few unimportant words, trans; 'osec tha clau.ses, hubstituted /idyo? lor /u-ovwraTOj, and the aorist i7re\tC is sufiiciently correct, although Inei, literally, means: since in that case. — VCverai, which has been altered in one MS., and taken as = eari, in most versions, is to be rendered exactly. On the meaning, see Exeg. NoUis. The simplest view is : ceastih to be ; but Dr. Lange finds more in the expression. ' Ver. 6.— [The whole clause: ei Se ef ipyutv. . . . iarXv ipyov, is omitted in N''. A. C. D. F., versions and fathers; it is rejected by Erasmus, Grotius, Wetstein, Gricsbach, Scholz, Lachmann, Meyer, Tregelles; bracketted by Alfoid, and in version of Amor. Bible Union (rejected by Five Ang. Clergymen). On the other hand, it is found (with some variations noticed in the following notes) in X". B. L., the older veisions, in Chrysostom and Theodoret (text, not commentary). It is retained by Beza, Bcngcl, Rinck, Fritzsche, Reiche, 'J'holuck, by Tischendorf in later editions, Wordsworth, Hodge, Lange. It is difficult to decide, but the critical ground for retaining it is very strong. See Exeg. Notes. " Ver. &.— [Rec. : ia-rC, on very slight authority. * Ver. 6. — [B. has X"P'S ^°^ epyov; either a mistake of the transcriber, or an attempt at explanation. See Exeg. Notes. '" Ver. 8. — [The first clause is a free citation from Isa. xxix. 10. LXX : on TrcTroTKcev vfias Kuptos nvev/xaTi itocacvfews. Hebrew : nr^inn H^-l Plin^ D3"'bs'_ "DJ-^S . " Ver. 8. — [It is much dispuied whether these words are borrowed from Deut. xxix. 4, or from Isn. vi. 9. The former passage reads thus (LXX.) : koI ovk eficuice . . . koX b(f>0akp.ovi; /SAeVeiv, koI una aKOveiv eu? t^9 rj^epas Taiinjs. The latter contains the same idea, but still further removed in form from Paul's language. Dr. Lange thinks both were in mind. In that case, as well as if Deuteronomy is cited, the parentheses must be omitted, so as to join " unto this day " with the rest of the verse. Noyes tones down the telic force thus : " eyes that were not to see, and ears that were not to hear." •2 Ver. St.— [From Ps. Ixlx. 23 (E. V., 2'.'). The LXX. is followed more closely than the Hebrew text. The latter is literally : "Let their table before them be for a snare, and to those secure (cii'ibC?), a trap." (The E. V. in loco, gives an unnecot^sarily forced and circuitous rendering.) The LXX. renders : yev-qOriTui ri rpan-e^a avTiav et'wn-iov avTuiv eis Trayi'oa, Kol fi? avTairoSocnv. Kai eis . B. C, but found in N'. A. L. Still another reading in D>. F. Alford rejects, Tregelles brackets, but most editors retain it. If retained, the note of Dr. Lange in loco is correct. — The E. V. has paraphrased trvvKoivuvo^ : ivith Ihrm partake si. The above emendation is more literal. " Ver. 19.— [The article ot before xAafoi is omitted in x. A. C. D^. L. ; rejected by Scholz, Lachmann, Meyer, "Wordsworth (who i correctly cites B. as omitting it), Tregelles ; bracketted by Alford. It is found in B. D'. ; retained by Tischendorf, De Wette, Tholuck. Lange. Jleyer thinks it is a meclianical repetition from vers. 17, 18 ; while De Witte thinks it was omitted on account of the euphony : i(eK\di7drip6vei (Rec, C. D. F. G.), Lachmann and Tregelles adopt in^ijAa (^pdvci, on the author ty of m. A. B. The first word is so unusual that it was likely to be changed. Most editors follow the Ric. •• Ver. 21.— [The uncial authority is against ^^wcos. It is omitted in N. A. B. C, hut found in D. F. L. It if rejected by Laohmaiin and Tregelles, bracketted by Alford. But the probability of an omission, because of the frture (^eCa-eTai) v.-hich follows, is so great, that most critical editors retain it. To obviate the same difliculty, the rabj. ^«i(r»)Tai is substituted in Ric, but with no uncial support. '° Ver. 22.— [Instead of the accusative anoToiJ.Cav (Rec, D. F. L.) most editors adopt tbe nominative, on th« iiulhority of N". A. B. C. The punctuation favors the latter, as the former would be governed by ISe , which is sepa- rated from it hy a colon. The absence of a predicate for the norainatives led to the change. So Lachmann, Tischen- dorf, Meyer, Alford, De Wette, Tregelles, Lange. The same remarks apply to ypria-Torri^. ai Ver. 22.— [Instead of xPlo'TorriTa (Rec, D'. F. L.), j^pjjirTOTrii on the authority of A. B. C. D'. V. l&« XPIffToniTO!.— /?ec., D' 3. F. L. omit 0eov, which is found m N. A. B. C. D'. The critical editors generally ad pt it, on the ground that it was likely to have been omitted as unnecessary. The later revisions retain and render as above, except Amer. Bible Union, which follows the E. V. "2 Ver. 25. — \R''r., with N. C. D, L., reads Trap' eavToU. A. B. have iv. The preposition is omitted in F. and some cursives. Lachmann, Tischendorf, Alford, Hodge, Tregelles, adopt c y ; but the sense is much the same, whichevel CHAPTER XI. 1-36. 35a firep iisU.cn be adopted The phrase wop' iavroU is found in chap. xii. 16, and Prov. iii. 7 (LXX.) ; hence the prob.ilnl- ty of an alteration to correspond. -3 Vcr. 2G.— [According to the view of moBt of the best expositors, the citation is from Isa. lix. 20, 21 (from Hf* to StaOiiKq, ver. 27) ; the last clause of vor. 27 is horn Isa. xxvii. 9. The text of the LXX., and the more importani variations from the Hebrew, will be found in the Exeg. Antes. •* Vcr. 28.— [Kara, uciording In, as respects; &c. The version of Five (LXig. Clergymen adopts as toucliing, in bott clauses; Amer. liible Union: as' concerning. If a choice must be made between the two, the former is preferable. Although neither is altogether exact '* Vcr. 30.— [Tlie Kcc. inserts (tat, on the authority of SC'. L., and some versions. It is omitted in N corr.' A. B. 0. D'., versions and fathers ; rejected by modem editors generally. Scholz retains it. *» Ver. 30.— [The E. V. confounds hero the nearly related ideas of unhilit^ and disobedience. Later revision* correct the rcnderiig of both verb and noun. Dr. Ilodge claims that the E. V. is correct ; but it is only infcrenlially to. These reiuai ks aiiply also to avtiOtiav (ver. 32). 2' Ver. ;>•:.— [(v"»),/! ovv']. The ovv may appear to be merely an inference from what was said last : All day long God stretched forth Hia hand. But as, in ver. 11, he makes a further asser- tion, designed to forestall a false conclusion, it baa here the same meaning, in antithesis to the strong judgment pronounced on Israel at the conclusion of the previous chapter. Meyer maintains a more defi- nite reference to the Xiyio in vers. 10, 18, 19. [Did God cast avray his people ? ft ij andxjnro 6 Sfoq Tor kaov ctiiTor; When Reiche remarlvs the absence of an ixnarra from A a d r , and Semler an omnino from a tt (■< (t a t o , they both fail to appreciate the emphasis of the ex- pressions. The people and his people are different ones, just as an economic giviny over to judgment and an eonic casting away (Ps. xciv. 14 ; xcv, 7). Bengel : Ipsa populi ejus appeUatio raiionem, Tie- gandi continet. The Apostle repels such a thought with religious horror : firi yiroiro. For I also [xai ya^ t y"']- According to the usual acceptation, he adduces his own call as an example ; but Meyer, with De Wette and Baum- garten-Crusius, on the contrary, hold that Paul, on account of his patriotic sense as a true Israelite, could not concede that casting away.* But it was just this inference from a feeling of national patriot- ism that was the standpoint of his opponents. A single example, it is said, can prove nothing. But by Paul's using the y.ai, he refers to the other ex- amples which were numerously represented by the Jewish Christians among his renders. Am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraheun, of the tribe of Benjamin [ 7 ff (< a // /. i t »; <,- f i // 1 , In (T7Ti(;ftaToq ^4 [] q a. ct n , q v ITj t; B t v lU' fiflv. The spelling Bfvuafiiv (LXX., iJec.) is poor- ly supported here and in Phil. iii. 5.] As a true scion of Abraham and Benjamin — the tribe which, together with Judah, constituted the real substance * [Wardsworth supposes that he is speakinGr as an Apostle : "Do not imagine (he says to the Jew.') that Ood cast off His ^^ncient people when Ho .ndraittcd the Gentiles to the Churoti. Ko ; I, who am His chosen instrument foi admitting them, am a Jew." But this is an infereno* rather than im interpretation. He also explains " of the tribe of licnjaniin :" "the son of Israel by his beloved wife Rii'he', hot by Leah, or by one of their handmaid* I * SCO THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. of the people which retunicd from the captivity — he is conscious tliat he does not belong to tlie elec- tion 03 a mere proselyte ; if he would speak of a casting away of God's people, he must therefore deny himself and his faitli (Phil, iii. 6). [Alford distinguishes between the popular view, and another which implies, " that if such a hypothesis were to be conceded, it would exclude from Go'd's kingdom the writer It m.self, as an Israelite." This agrees, apparently, with Lange's view, but implies also that " his people " is used in the nationnl sense, not of the xpiritual Israel. See below. — R.] Ver. 2. God did not cast away [ o i' y. xTTd'iaaTO 6 .9fot,]. He follows with a solemn declaration founded upon the testimony of his own conscientiousness and of examples. His people [tov Xaov aiirov^. He is as definite in characterizing i/i.sjt)eo/)/e, ov n(>otyv(o, /as he is grand in his declaration of tlie not casting /; t ca; a ov aTiixt fivav, x.T.A. See Textual Note ^] The Apostle has quoted freely the real meaning of the words of the text. It makes no difference in the thing itself that, in the complaint which Elijah makes, he understands by the /lovoi;* the only remaining prophet, while the present passage understands the only worshipper ol God. For the prophet, in hia state of mind, was not inclined to acknowledge dumb or absconding worshippers of God as God's true worshippers. But Paul, in conformity with his view, has transposed the words meaning altars and proph- ets. Meyer pays attention to the plural, the altars, " as the temple at Jerusalem was the only place ex- clusively designed for service." But even in the temple at Jerusalem there were two altars. Yet the question here is concerning the kingdom of Israel^ and therefore the remark of Estius is almost supei*' * [See Textual Note * : "I am left the only -me." -B.1 CHAPTER XI. 1-36. 36 fluous, that it was even blasphemy to throw down God's altars on the high places.* Ver. 4. But what saith the Divine re- sponse unto him? aXka ri '/.iyn. alrm 6 j/f (j,M «TKT/(0(,- ,• Oil /(J tjfiaTi-a/i oi;, see tlie Lexicons. [The substantive occurs only here in the New Testament. Tiie cognate verb is used in Matt. ii 12, 22; Acts x. 22; Heb. viii. 5; xi. 7, in tlie Ecnse : to be warned of God, as the E. V. expresses it. Tlie obvious meaning here : Divine response, Bcems to have been tlius derived : the word lirst meant bii!)»',' &c., is more than doubtful. Its oldest au- thorities are Cod. B., Pesliito, Chrysostom, Tlieo- ddret (in the text). On the contrary, it is wanting in A. C. D. F. G., Origen (according to Rutinus), Vulgate, the Coptic Translation, and others. Yet Fritzsche has undertaken to defend this reading, «ind lately Reiche also, in the Coinm. CriL, p. 67 ; Tischendorf has preserved it in the text," &c. Ac- cording to Tholuck, the addition has the character of a glossarial reflection. This appearance of such a self-evident amplification could, however, have also occasioned the omission.* The ylvfrai, in the first sentence means, ac- cording to Tholuck : to result, to come out as. This explanation is just as doubtful as that of Meyer: "in its concrete appearance it ceases to be what it is by nature." [So De Wette, Alford, Philippi. The dis- tinction between ylvirau and tariv is ignored by many commentators. — R.l The /a^tt;, in the second sentence, must be understood, according to the current explanation, as the effect of the ydfjn; in the first sentence. In addition to this, we have the question : What is the meaning of " work is no more work ? " Does the Apostle regard only merce- nary work as a true work? We attempt the following explanation : If it is of grace, then it is no more of works ; for grace does not first exist, or is not first in process of existence by works. Grace, according to its very nature, must be complete before works. But if of works, then no further grace exists,f be- cause the work is not yet complete, and never will be complete as meritorious work. Works, consid- ered as meritorious, are always an incomplete infini- tude. But if grace should first be the result of works, H would not be present until the boundless future. If we accept this view, the literal expres- Kon is saved; and to the first declaration, that grace and the merit of works preclude each other, there is gained a second : Grace is naturally a prepared ground before the ezistinp work, &c. (see also the continuation in ver. V). The reading of Cod. B. : n 6k ii i()yo)v, oi'xt'rt /d(ji,t;, infl xb tfjyov ov/.iri, ItTTi /a,()i,(;, seems also to be a special attempt at an explanation. The real purpose of the antithesis is, that the Apostle proves that the election of the people could only consist of those who establish them- telves on ffrace, but not in the party wh ch establishes itself on works. If the matter were as those who rely on the righteousness of works desire, there would not be any grace ; and grace would never be accomplished, because the righteousness of works is never accomplished, just as little as the tower of Babel was ever finished.;): • [Afford well remarlis : " The object beinfr predxinn, it is much more probable that the Apostle should have written both clauses in their present I'ormal pariillelism, and th;it the second should have bfen early omitted from Its seeminff superfluity, than that it should have been Inserted from the marfnn." The want of exact correspond- »nce is also a^iiinst the probability of an interpolation, as Fritzsche has remarked : x^P'ti— ef ipyiav ; yivfrai x^C's —iariv epyov ; epyov at the close, where epya might have been expected. — R.) t [So Wordsworth, who accepts the very weakly-anp- ported eoTi of the Rec, and accenting it thus: e vious verse. — That Tvhich Israel seeketh for he obtained not [ o i n^t r] t 1 1 ^1 a i> a ij k , t o T - TO orx initv/fv. The latter verb is usually followed b^ the genitive ; rarely, in the classics, by the accusative, as here. Hence we find, in Rec. (no MSS.), Toi'Toi'. See Meyer for the authorities for this use of the accusative. The meaning is not : to find, but to attain to, to obtain. — R.] Israel did not obtain that which it sought to obtain by works — grace, as the end of the finished work. Like a phantom beyond the ever unfinished work, grace had to recede ever further in the distance. The eTTtLfjTfiv can, at all events, also mean zealous striving [Fritzsche, Philippi, Hodge] ; fjut it is clear that this idea would not be in place here. [Meyer says it indicates the direction. — R.] The present properly denotes " the permanence of the effort " — the permanence of the effort to find the city of grace at the end of the long road of self-rig!iteousness. But the election obtained it [;; tVe i/.).o- yi] tTiirv/tv. The election for the elect, as the circumcision for those circumcised. Vivacious ex- pression. — R.] Meyer says : " For they were sub- jects of Divine grace." Paul has already said, iu other words : For the elect are distinguished by having received God's grace in faith. And the rest were hardened [ o i di ).oi-7ioi i 71(0 Q (il f> tj (J ct V . The verb is rendered blinded in the E. V., here, and 2 Cor. iii. 14; iu . other places, hardened, which is decidedly prefer- able. — R.] Israel is divided into two parts. One part is the i/.loyt], although it is the minority ; the other is the ).oi,noi, the nvii;, although they are the majority. Meyer says, they were hardened by God. [So Hodge, Stuart, Philippi (with a reser vation), and Tholuck, in later editions ; comp. chap ix. 18. The passive certainly includes this thought. — R.] Paul says, they have been hardened l)y a reciprocal process between their unbelief and God's judgments. The sense undouljtedly is, that those who remain for the incalculable periods of judgment have become, " in understanding and will, insus- ceptible of the appropriation of salvation in Christ " (Meyei^, and insusceptible, above all, in their heart and spirit ; because the last sparks of the spiritual life in them, which alone can understand the gospel of the Spirit, have expired ; just as a sapless plant is no more supported by the sunshine, but is reduced to a dried-up stalk. Ver. 8. According as it is written. [Stuart is disposed to find in xaQ-(0(; (^. B., Tregelles : y.ot.ddn(i>) yey^antaif a declaration of analogy, its sonrce) ; for (in that case) grace no longer becomes (loses its efficacy as) grace (the ireedom of tho act is lost, it having been prompted frum without) : but if of works (as the cause and source of the sclecticin), no longer is it (the act of selection) grace ; for (in that case) work is no longer work (work being 'that which eamg reward,' its character is contradicted)." The same author remarks, thai this point is stated so fully just here, because the Apostle was to enter upon such an exposition of the Divine deal- ings as rendered it necessary to show that their severity did not contradict their general character of grace and loot -K.] CHAPTER XI. 1-36. 363 rather than a citation of prophecy. So Tholuck ; but Fritzsche, Meyer, and otliers, hold the latter view. " Tlie pers[)L'Ctive of prophecy, in stating such eases, embraces all the analogous ones, espe- cially that great oho., in which the words are most pron ineiitly fulfilled " (Alford). See below, note on vor. 10. On the free citation, see Textual Notes •• '".— R.] The c-itation is freely collated from I^a. xxix. 10 ; Isa. vi. 9 ; Deut. xxix. 4. Meyer denies tliat Isa. vi. 9 is taken into consideration ; but if we compare the two other passages, they do not suffice for Paul's citation, since the assertion iu Deut xxix. 4 contains merely negations. God gave them. By no means a mere per- mission (Ciirysostom), but likewise not simply ac- tii'iti/y without something further. The ground of the judgment of a spirit of slumber [nvivua xara crlf njt;], or of deep sleep ( m:^"in n^" ), on Israel, is definitely declared, in Isa. xxix. 10, to be the guilt of the people ; ver. 13 ff. — But the pas- sage in Isa. vi. 9 If., which constitutes the principal part of the present quotation, is explained imme- diately afterward in the conduct of Ahaz, in chap. viL The third passage from Deuteronomy brings out more definitely the negative element in this hardening process : " Yet the Lord hath not given you a heart to perceive,'' «fcc. On the meaning and interpretations of xaraiTi'tc, see Meyer, p. 4'JO ; Tholuck, p. 596.'- — [Unto this day | to be joined with what immediately precedes, since they are sub- stantially from Deut. xxix. 4. So modern editors and commentators generally. — R.] Ver. 9. And David saith. The second pas- sage is taken freely from Ps. Ixix. 22 (LXX.). Meyer says : " David is not the author of this Psalm (against Hens;stenbeig), which must be judged anal- ogously to the expression in Matt. xxii. 43." Comp. on that passage the Commcntari/ on Mat hetr, p. 404. First of iill, it is quite easy to prove that the suffer- ings of the people in exile could not have been in mind in writing either the lamentations of Psalm Ixix., or the " imprecations " on enemies. First, the theocratic exiles did not say that they had to suffer for the Lord's sake (ver. 7), and for zeal for His house (ver. 9). But they said just the contrary (see Ps. cvi.; Isa. Ixiv. ; Dan. ix.). And though the exile could also invoke God's wrath on the heathen, and wish them evil (Ps. Ixxix. 6 ; cxxxvii. 9), the prophetic imprecations are very different, for they portray the judgments of blindness that are invoked on the spiritual adversaries of the theocratic faith, and of the house and name of the Lord, who proved their enmity by persecuting God's servant. Comp., in this respect, Ps. lix. ; Ixiv. ; Ixix. 22-28 ; cix. In such Psalms, either the personal, collective, or ideal f David chiefly speaks, because David has be- come the type of God's suffering servant. We there- f(.)re hold, with Luther, Rosenmiiller, and others, that the concluding words (from ver. 32) are a later addition.^ • [Fritesche has an Excursus on this word, pp. 588 ff. He makes it = stupor, numbnrss, as fiom stupefying wine. Only here, and not in the classics. Incorrect, according to thi- view ; Cah-in : spiritus compunetionis ; Luther : einen trbiUerten Geixt. -R.] t [Phi'J.ppi (following Keil) says that the subject in this Psalm is "not the ideal, but the concrete person of the righteous." Hongstenberg (so J. A. Alexander) adopts the ot;;er view. — E.] t (The Psri m purports to be written by David. Dr. LangeV remarks are in supjort of tbis \iew of the author- «hip, though he finds it necessary, in order to sustain it by The imprecations themselves are a propheticc ethical view, clad in the sombre drapery of the Old Testament. [Dr. J. Add. Alexander remarks, on thia verse of Ps. Ixix : " The imprecations in this verse, and those following it, are revolting only when con- sidered as the expression of malignant selfishness. If uttered by God, they shock no reader's sensi- bilities ; nor should they, when considered as the language of an ideal person, representing the vhole class of righteous sufferers, and particularly Him who, though He prayed for His murderers while dying (Luke xxiii. 34), had before apphed the words of this very passage to the unbelieving Jews (Matt, xxiii. 38), as Paul did afterwards."— R.] Let their table become a snare [Ffvri- & r'jTm jy T ^ d 7Z 1 1^ a avrwv fl(; n ay id a]. Phili{)pi, with Origen, Tholuck, and other.s, has re- ferred the table to the law and its works. But when Melanchthon says: doctrina ipsorum, the latter must be very carefully distinguisiied from the law itself. Chrjsostom : the r evjoyments ; Michaelis, and oth- ers : the Jewish passover meal, at which the Jewa were besieged, and which was followed by the de- struction of Jerusalem ; Grotius : the altar in the temple itself. The point of the figure becomes blunted, if we hold, with Tholuck, that table is men- tioned, because it is at the table that surprise by an enemy is most dangerous. Rather, the table, or the enjoyment of life by the ungodly, becomes itself their snare, &c. Now this table can be something different at different times ; generally, it is the sym- bol of comfortable banqueting in wicked security over the ungodly enjoyment of life (see Matt. xxiv. 38). With the Jews of the Apostle's day, this table was their statutes, and, above all, their illusion that the earthly glory of the kingdom of Israel would be manifested by triumph over the Romans. It is a fact that the table, the ungodly enjoyment of life, becomes a snare for the ruin of the adversaries of the Holy One ; just as the pious man's table be- comes a sign of blessing and victory (Ps. xxiii.). While they think they are consuming the spoils of their earthly sense, they become themselves a spoil to every form of retribution ; just as the bird is led into the snare, and the deer is hunted, or perishes by a stumbling-block — that is, a trap. [And a trap, and a stumbling-block, and a recompense tinto them, y.ai tli; -d-i^oav y.ai (ii; cf y.dvda/.ov xal dvTanodof.a ai'ToTq, See Textual Note ".— R.] Paul has freely elabo- rated the original forms still further, by inserting Ka.i fit; &tj^av. Likewise (Txdvda/.ov fol- lows dvTanodoffiQ in the LXX. The Vulgate inter- prets dr'i^a by captw; Fritzsche and Meyer adopt the same, while Tholuck and Philippi prefer tha instnanent [Ewald, Alford : rut] of hunting, which applies to both the other means of capture, and no< merely as a " hunting-spear." Meyer is incorrect in saying that this ruin is explained" in what follows. For the following words describe the intcard relations of the judgment of the ungodly, in antithesis to the judgment in the outboard relations of life, which have been described by the foregoing words. Ver. 10. Let their eyes be darkened, that they may not see [ffxoT<.«T^^TW(ra* o* internal evidence, to admit the later addition of the con« eludine verses. The question of authorship does not, in- deed, affect the question of the propriety of the phrase: David saith ; but when it is so likely that David did write the Psalm, inventing theories to prove that he did not^ seems to be useless ingenuity.— K.] 364 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 6(f>&ixX^i,ol avrSiV toT' ^^ /9A£7rfiv]. Spirit- Uiil blindness is one form of the inward judgment, and total despondency of spirit is the otlier. And bow down their back alway [x«t tov t:')TOV avTu)v Jta ^rai'TOi; ai'yy.a/i- xpov. See Textual Note ".— E.] The LXX. has translated tlie words of the original text, " and make their loins continually to shake," by : " make their back i crooked always ; " a change to which the Apostle adlieres, probably because it gives the ex- pression of permanent dejection a somewhat more general character. — By bowed-down backs, Meyer un- derstands spiritual slavery, while the early expositors understood Roman slavery. Yet this would be an important deviation from the original text. But, in reality, the bowed-down backs should mean the same thing as shaking or tottering loins. Tholuck and Philippi have correctly observed, against Fritzsche, and others, that in ver. 8 (and the (tame thing applies also to ver. 9) the question is not the citation of a prophecy, according to which the unbelief of the Jews at the time of Christ must be a necessary result. Yet this remark does not suffice to show that the quotation takes place as in the cita- tions in Matt. xiii. 14 ; John xii. 40 ; Acts xxviii. 26 ; which " refer, vi analogice, to the classical pas- sage for the unbelieving conduct of Israel toward God, in Isa. vi." The most direct practical purpose of these citations in the New Testament is to prove to the Jews, from their own Holy Scriptures and his- tory, that there w;is always in Israel an inclination to apostasy ; and Uiat it is therefore not contrary to faith in prophecy to charge the present Israel with apostasy (see the defence of Stephen). But then a really typical prophecy also underlies this purpose ; yet it is not a fatalistic prophecy, but the idea of the consequence of ruin even to its historical consumma- tion (see Matt, xxiii. 32 ff.). Ver. 11. I say then, Did they stumble in order that they should fall ? [ A £ y w o r v , /t /} tnTai,(Tav t'r« n i a.nt. the meaning of falling, but only the delirium (Vulgate) [so Alford], for they h£V8 really fallen, yet that was not the object (see also Tholuck, p. (5()0). Tholuck properly opposes, also, the view that here the principal thought is, that Israel should be restored, although an intimation of the restitution of Israel is included in the words. It is evident that the conversion of the Gentiles is pri- marily designated as the final object of Israel's hill ; with this final object there is, indeed, again asso- ciated the final object of the preliminarily isolated and of the finally total conversion of Israel. The na{ta.nx. here can as little mean a mere " passing away," as a mere infortunium, which Reiclie and Riickert, with others, would render it.* Salvation is come. 'H acir tjQia. Fiyovtv must be supplied, according to the connection. The Apostle cannot have regarded this tragical condition as an absolute necessity ; but he may very well have considered it an historical one. Israel, having been placed in its existing condition by its own guilt, did not desire the Gentiles, under the most favorable circumstances, to participate in the messianic salviv tion, except as proselytes of the Jews ; and still more did it indulge the thought of vengeance on, and dominion over, the Gentiles ; but it was impos- sible for Christianity, as Jewish Christianity, to be- come universal in the Gentile world. In addition to this came the experience of the Apostle, that he waa always driven more decidedly to missionary labors among the Gentiles by the unbelief of the Jews ; Matt. xxi. 43 ; Acts xiii. 46 ; xxviii. 28. The nega- tive condition of this transition was apostolic preach- ing, and especially that of Paul. In order to excite them to jealousy [ft? TO 7ta(j att]).tii(T ai, avrovi;. Instead of jcal- ousy, we may substitute emulation, as the word is not used in a bad sense (Hodge). The clause is telle ; the purpose was not the total fall, b'lt that their moral fall might be used to further tht salva- tion of the Gentiles, and this, in turn, bring about their own salvation as a nation. — R.] This purpose was associated from the outset, and the mention of it is here in place for the removal of the fatalistic thought, that their fall was decreed for their ruin. Vers. 12-16. As the unbelief of the Jews ha» been the means of effecting the conversion of the Gentiles, so shall the conversion of the Gentiles be still more not only the means of effecting the belief of the Jews, hut, with this return of Israel, still greater things shall occur. Now if their fall . . . and their dimin- ishing the riches of the Gentiles [il (H to 7T a Q a, n rii) fi a, avroiv . . . to r/TTrj/ia av- TiTtv n).ovTO which precedes, if the view be adopted that denies the fact of a final fail. We must, then, hold that the national fall into utter ruin is denied throufrhout, while the stumblinjr and the moral fall of the individual! are admitted. So Alford.- -R.] CHAPTER XL 1-86. 36S here as diminution in captivity, according to the original text, for menial servitude. Likewise, in I Cor. vi. 7, the word means a moral loss, a dimiiui- tioii of the power of believers in opposition to the World. We therefore hold that tiie expression riTTtiiia places the two other ideas in a more defi- nite liglit, and that tlie whole expression alludes to the scene of a routed arm\'. Even in military ati'airs, tlie dynauiical antithesis of broken power and of the full sense of power is connected with the id&is of numerical diminution and numerical fulness; as, in the present instance, the weakening is connected with the loss of men, and full power with the com- plete number. Tholuck bases his explanation on the meaning of n'/.tji^iiifta in ver. 25. Explanations of the i'lrrrjua: dimiiiut'o (Vul- gate) ; minority, defectus (Chrysostom, and most commentators) ; injury, loss, fall (De Wette, and others). De Wette brings this explanation in exclu- Bive antithesis to the first, with reference to 2 Cor. xii. 13. Fritzsche : Diminution of messianic salva- tion. Philippi : The damage to God's kingdom by their falling away. But Meyer remarks, with good reason, that the thrice-repented avn'tv is in the same relation, the subjective genitive. Tlioluck : Reduced Btate.* According to Tholuck, Meyer's explanation is : the minority ; but Meyer himself pronounces against this explanation, and understands the word to mean, sinking and ruin. Ulfilas has interpreted the word, which means at the same time the loss of men and the weakening, by the deficiency. There is a real difference made by the reference to the be- lieving Jews as the minority of believers (paucitas Judccorum credentium ; Grotius), and the antitheti- cal body of unbelievers, the moral field of the dead, or the captcn-ed, those subjected to slavery. But here, too, both parts cannot be separated. The aiVot are the whole people ; the believers are the Bound remainder of the army ; while tlie unbeliev- ers, the same as the fallen, or captives, are its Kow much more their fulness [;rd(Tw l.in./.).ov TO nkrjQm^ia, cti'iTwr]. The 7i).r\- p(i)/( ft. Explanations : The whole body (Tholuck) ; the full number (Meyer) ; the restoration of Israel to its proper position (Riickert, Kollner) ; [Hodge : their full restoration or blessedness ; Alford : their replenishment. — R.] Philippi : the filling up of the gap caused in God's kingdom by their unbelief. The latter view, which was first set forth by Origen, is discussed at length by Tholuck, p. fiOG ff. But this view confounds in a twofold way : 1. The idea of the full number of God's eternal community in gen- eral, and the idea of material fulness {nh'j(io>/ia), the whole number of the Jewish people ; 2. The idea of the economic completeness in the present passage, and that of conic completeness.! Tholuck very properly calls attention to the ap- • [So Hoda:e, Alford : tlieir impoveriphment. The nu- mer.oal idea is quite objectionable, although Dr. Lange Bc«ms to think it is included also. The whole verse, ac- oordin'^r to this view, means : " If their unbelief {i. e., of one part of them) is the world's wealth, and their small BUTibor ((. e., of bolievere, the other part of them) the w^nlth of the Gentiles, how much more their full (restored) number''' This arbitraiily changes the rcfere;ice nf avric, puts a forced meaning on iJTrTijiia, and really weakens the force of the argument, which is : if their sin has done so much, how mucli more their cnnversimif — E.] t [The numerical idea is lexically admissible in TrKr)pu>- uo, whence it hdS been transferred to ^TTrj/xa, but even here it is not the prominent one. It is, however, to be Understood, that the spiritual fulness will necessarily include the coLveruion of the nation as a whole. — R.] parent tautology in nXovto^; xoaftov, nXoTiTO(; e&' wTiv, which has been very much neglected by ex^osi* tors. In xodfioq, he says, there seems to be con> prised the idea of the whole extent of humanity and in tt'/mTt. if)i: there appears the more conci-et* designation : " The reduction of the chosen people turned to an enrichment of the profane nations." The former definition regards the qualitative, inten* sive, and teleological relation in an altogether univer- sal sense : The fall of the historical Israel redounded to the advantage of the world, even including the ideal Israel. The latter definition describes the quantitative and extensive character of the histori- cal course. Jewish tribes, or Jewish communities, drop out of the people, while, on the other hand, whole heathen nations are gained. But if their fall has thus been a gain to the world, how much more their fulness — that is, a believing Israel ! Ver. 13. For I am speaking to you Gen- tiles Ivfttv de Atj'oj Totc; t&vfGvv. The sense is the same whether we read yuQ or de. A colon should follow this clause ; the pointing of the E. V. obscures the proper connection. — R.] The declared prospect of the full conversion of Israel leads him to the furttier explanation, that he regards even the conversion of the Gentiles, though an ob- ject in itself, as a means for accomplishing the object of Israel's conversion. [According to Alford, tliis verse answers the question : " Why make it appear as if the treatment of God's chosen people were regulated not by a consideration of them, but of the less favored Gentiles?" — R.] — Fbi* Gentiles; that is. Gentile Christians. — [Inasmuch then etp' 6a ov i.tev ovv. See Textual Note ". The cor- responding ()e is wanting, as often in the Apostle's writings. — R.] 'E

*" '^'^ honor to mine office, but purpose therewith to excite mykintrmen," &c This htingi out the force of jneV, and the connection of thought. — 11.1 366 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. IS perhaps to express this shade of thought that the E. V. renders : reconcilinii ; but reconciliation is more hteral, and shows how important Paul deemed the fact in question, which could thus be character- ized. — R.J In this free use of language Paul also Bays ffr.iffw, in ver. 14, because he is the herald of What shall the reception of them be [t/c; ^ 7r()6<,-A///tT/'n,]. Reception to salvation, and to paiticipatiou in salvation by their conversion. But life from the dead? [ft /^ »/ Co;^ ex vt/.ui')v ■,^^ T*^ -S clear that the Apostle awaits a boundless eifeci of blessing on the world from the future conversion of the Jews. We ask, What is it? We must first look at the antithesis: Their casting away became the reconciling of tlie world ; that is, only conditionally, therefore as if, and indi- rectly. Thus, we continue, the conversion of the whole people of Israel will also be conditionally, as if, and indirectly, a life from the dead. With the appropriated xarnlXayij, there now begins, first, the spiritual resurrection, which is succeeded, second, by the future bodily resurrection. Hence different explanations : 1. Figurative expression of the new spiritual life (Augustine, Calvin, and others) of the Gentile world, or of the world in general, but not of the Jews (as Cocceius, Bengel, and others, explain), since the new life of the latter is regarded as an antecedent means. But this new life is also regarded in differ- ant senses : The further extension of God's king- dom, and the new subjective vivification (Philippi, and others), increase, and advance of piety (Bucer, Bengel). '' A new life in the higher charismatic ful- ness of the Spirit shall extend from God's people to the nations of the world, compared with which the previous life of the nations must be considered dead ; " Auberlen (calculated to mislead, and over- drawn, so far as the Christian life of the previous world is meant). Other modifications : Highest joy EGrotius, Hodge apparently], highest blessedness. Stuart : something great, wonderful, surprising, like to what a general resurrection of the dead would be. He thinks it probable Paul had in mind Ezekiel's vision of the dry bones. — R.] 2. The literal view : The resurrection of the dead is meant — the oldest ecclesiastical explanation (Origeu, Chrysostom, Riickert, Tholuck, Meyer, De Wette, &c.). Tholuck says that the meaning of this view is, that the conversion of Israel is regarded as the final act in the world's drama ; but then he makes the objection, that t"<>/ ex vfuQ. nowhere stands in the New Testament for the araaTaffte, and thus the expositor finds himself compelled to prefer the metaphorical exposition. But it has not been sufficiently considered how very conditional the first proposition in the compari- fion is : for if the casting away of them be the reconciliation of the world. As this is a fact which is realized first up to and in the conversion of the Plermna of the Gentiles, and then of the Jews, so is the consequence of their reacceptance a fact which is ccmtinued from the higher spiritual new life cf the world to its consummation, particularly in the first resurrection. To the Apostle, the ideas of spiritual resurrection and bodily resurrection do not lie so far apart (see chap. viii. 11) as to our exposi- tors ; therefore Olshausen is right in applying the word to a spiritual resurrection, which takes place in the bodi!> .-esurrection. [Alford also combines the two riews " Standing as it does, it must be quali- tative, implying some further blessed slufe of tht reconciled world, over and above the mere recon- ciliation. This might well be designated ' life from the dead,'' and in it may be implied the glories of the first resurrection, and deliverance from tiie boLd- age of corruption, without supposing the words tc be = the resurrection from the dead." — R.] Ver. 16. Moreover, if the first-fruit be holy, so also is the lump [tl di ij anaoyri ay La, )t a t to ((i v (> a u a . Lange : das Ei st- lingsbrod, the bread of the fr.stfruit.s — i. e., the portion of the dough taken as a heave-offering. — R.] After the Apostle has disclosed his prospect of the glorious results of Israel's conversion, he returns to the grounds for the hope of this conversion itself. He uses two similes. The first is taken from the significance of the bread of the first-fruit (Num. xv. 19-21). \4na^-/'l ^^i^) indeed, denote the first-fruit, as well as the bread of the first-fruit ; but it receives this meaning from the corresponding idea of the harvest; while, on the other hand, the baking of the first-fruit must correspond to the qvija/ia, the kneaded dough. Therefore the expression here can neither mean first-fruit (Estius, Olshausen, and oth- ers), nor the grain for the bread of the first-fruit (Grotius). But the ana^iyij in general denotes the representative offering by which the whole mass, to which aTiaQxtj belongs, is consecrated to God. Thus is the consecration of the first-born to the priesthood (with which Levi was charged), the con- secration of the people ; the consecration of the first-fruit is riie consecration of the harvest ; and the consecration of the bread of the first-fruit is the consecration of the whole lump, which was after, wards prepared. [So Stuart, Hodge, Alford, De Wette, Tholuck, Meyer. ^^na(j/rj is necessarily defined by its correlative term nintana, the mass of dough for baking. — R.] And if the root " be holy, so are the branches also [xat ft ii (> i Ca ayla, xai ot >t).d()oi]. This second simile is clear in itself : The branches correspond to the root (anomalous ex- ceptions to this agreement, which may be found in nature, do not here come into consideration). The general fundamental thought of both figures is, un- doubtedly, as Reiche holds, that the whole people ia designated as good by its first-fruits as well as by its root. Interpretation of the particular parts : 1. Both figures mean the same thing. The anaQ'/t] are the patriarchs (Abraham, &c.) ; to qivQUfia, is the whole body of the people. The same relation applies to root and branches (the Greek fathers, Erasmus, Calvin, Tholuck, Meyer [Stuart, Hodge, Alford], &c.). 2. The figures are different. The second figure undoubtedly applies to the patriarchs and their pos- terity ; but the first, by aTra^///, describes the be- lieving Jews, and, by qvQafia, the rest (Toletus, Cramer, and others. [So Wordsworth, who under- stands, by (/ii'^a/(«, tlie whole mass of the world which is to be converted. — R.] Also, in referenco to the first figure, Ambrosius, and others). Modi- fications : According to Origen and Theodnr»^t. a 71 a (J /Tj means Christ himself, and yiWia/irt, Christians. Meyer has two objections to the differ- ent rendering of the figures. First, it is contrary tc the parallelism of the two passages. But apart from the fact that Paul's prose is not subject to the ruloi of the poetical parallelism of the Old Testament, this reasoning betrays a defective idea of the Old Testament parallelism itself. His second reasoa CHAPTER XI. 1-86. seff that the Apostle elaborates the second figure only, is of just as little force ; for, with the further re- sumption of the second figure, there is presented a perfectly new thought. The most untenable expla- nation is, that jji'Ca means the original Ciiristian Church, and xXadot, are the individual believing Jews. We hold that the antithesis is very decided. From what follows, it is clear that the ideal theocra- cy, though represented by the patriarchs, yet not identical with them (see Isa. xi. 1, 10 ; Kev. v. 5 ; xxii. 16), must be regarded as the root of Israel, In fact, from the foregoing citations, the same Christ is certainly the root of the old theocracy, as He is the a(>/tj in the a.na{)-/ii of the new Jewish believ- ing Church, and the causa efficiens of the sanctifica- tion of both. But according to the antithesis here presented, y/^a is the patriarchal foundation of the theocracy as the natural disposition consecrated to God ; while the aTTa^/i], on the contrary, is the first Jewish body of believers prepared by God as the bread of the first-fruit for the first harvest festival of the time of fulfilment, the Christian Pentecost. The present passage is related to Rom ix. 5, the fathers being regarded as the root, and Christ as the miraculous fruit of the branches. [It is evident, from Dr. Lange's note, how diffi- cult it is to support the twofold sense of tiie verse. As Tholuck remarks, the dyioTtji; is the point of comparison. J^o/y here means not only as conse- crated to God, but as actually pure. If a distinction must be made between the two figures, it seems natural to find these two ideas of holiness given prominence in each respectively. Those certainly miss the point of both figures, and the argument of the Apostle as well, who do not find here, in " lump " and " branckes," a reference to Israel, considered as the people of God. Alford : " As Abraham himself had an outer and an inner life, so have the branch- es. Tiiey have an oiiter life, derived from Abraham by physical descent. Of this no cutting off can de- prive them. But they have, while they remain in the tree, an inner l at'Toit;. [Meyer : the Jews in general. He rightly adds, that not all Jews, who were not con- verts as yet, were to be regarded as broken off; only tliose who had rejected Christ. — R.] But if thou boast [ft de xaraxav/d- ffai. The verb, occurring twice in this verse, is unusual. — R.] Meyer : 2Viumphest against them. According to the assumed figure of the wild olive tree, they could be tempted to boast that the mem- bers of the Jewish believing Church had received new life through heathenism, just as the boast has been made tiiat Germanism, and especially Lutheran- ism, has reformed Christianity itself; while Chris- tianity, operating from its very foundation, has re- formed, and still reforms, its phenomenal forms. l^Jfufatis mutandis, of special application every- where. — R.] Thou bearest not the root [ o i' a ii r »/ v qiuccv panrdtfK; . Supply: know that, or, let th'wi humble thee, that. See Winer, p. 575. — R.] Thou, as a grafted branch, standest in no more favorable relation to the root than those which are broken otf and remain standing. Thou remaincst thoroughly conditioned by an inward fellowship with the root, which must be confirmed in the humble knowledge of this dependence, and in inward union with tlie natural branches. The brief explanation is strengthened by the fact that it forms an imme- diate conclusion. Tholuck remarks : Such a pre- sumption toward the branches could not be without presumption toward the root. Ver. 19. Thou wilt say then, The branch- es were broken off, &c. [c^fti,' ovv 'Eit- TiXdfrO-rjffav [ot] xAoidoi, x.t.X. See 7'ext- uil Note ".] The genuineness of the article o i is rendered very probable by the intention of the Gentile speaking. After this religious warning, he will appeal to a religious decree, to a fait accompli of predestination. He accordingly abuses the truth which the Apostle himself has taught, by saying, negatively : the fate of the branches is irrevocably settled- -there is no more salvation for the Jewish people ; but he also abuses it, positively, by believ- ing that he himself stands firm through the privi- lege which he presumes he has acquired. Here, then, we clearly see how the Apostle dismisses ich t pr\;destinarian presumption. Ver. 20. Well l^xakmt;']. Ironical, as if ne would say : a fine application of the do(;trine of Divine predestination, by overleaping the ethical elements brought into the account by it ! [With Stuart, Hodge, Meyer, Alford, and others, it must be held that the Apostle here admits the purpose in the l)rcaking off, as stated in vtv. 19 ; but he admits it only to protest against the wrong use made of it. -R.J Because of unbelief they were broken oil [ttj an tafia ii f x?.d(j fjff av . On thr. da- tive, see Tho uck and Alford in loco. The latter suggests their iMbelief, thy fa th (so Amer. Bible Union), but it seenjs better to take the nouns a.s ab« stract. — R.] The earnest declaration. That is, be- cause of uubdief, expressed in strengthened form by the dative. That, therefore, is t e decisive cause of their 1) Irt, the real hindrance to -.heir salvation. [And thou standest by faith, iri tk rr^ Tiiatfi, t'err ly xai,-.] And thus thou also standes* and endurest only bi/* faith. The standing uicana here the being grafted in, and not, standing iu the absolute sense, as Meyer correctly observes, against Tholuck, and others. For the opposite of it is not falling, but the being cut oft'. Es.sentially, the idea certainly coincides with stnudinr/ and /ailing. [Be not high-minded, /< /) i' v; /. 09 ()6vf * See lextual Note ". — R.] Be not therefore proud of an imaginary privilege, but fear [d/./.d q>0' /SoT ] ; that is, be all the more afraid of falling, be- cause thou art inclined to boast. Bengel : timor opponitur non fiducice, sed supercilio et .iccur/iati. Ver. 21. For if G-od spared not the natu- ral branches [ft y aQ 6 (z) t 6 (; r iTiv x ar a (firatv x/.d(hi)v ovx £(/' f / tt oi i; 1'() e aov ^ f / • (jfTai. See Textual Note ". Supply fear, or, it is to be feared. See Winer, pp. 442, 470, 556. On the future, Buttmann, N. T. Gram., p. 303.— R.] Tiiou at least hast no claim to this genealogi- cal nobility of Israel. Meyer : " The future is more definite and certain than the conjunctive." Ver. 22. Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God [m)6 ovv -/(ir^arortirc* xai aTZorofiiav Of 01*]. The usual predesti- narian system would say : The grace and justice of God. Paul says something quite difterent. The period [E. V., colon] gives grammatical support to the reading dTzoTOfiia, &c., accepted by Lachmann. On those. 'En I fiiv roix;. The goodness, as well as the severity or sharpness of God in con- tinual movement, corresponds to human conduct.— [Severity, dnorofiia. See Textual Note '*. -R.] [But tow^ard thee, God's goodness, ini (ie ae /^ rj arortji; &ioT>. See Textual Note ^, The nominatives give an elliptical construction : there is severity, there is the goodness of God. — R.] — If thou continue in Ids goodness [«av i ntfi f iv'ri(; ri] /(JijfTxortjri,. That goodnesx. Alford : //" tliou abide by. — R.] On the living ground of God's free grace and mercy. Meyer: Wilt have continued. Should the goodness have first begun then ? — Otherw^ise thou also sh Jt be [eTTft xai ah ixxo Tifj arj. Comp. ver, 6, The E. V. conveys the correct 'meaning of tnii, — R.] Meyer very appropriately calls attention to the stronger expression : exxontjari. Ver. 23. [And ttey moreover, xdxfl%-o» Si. This is the reading adopted by Griesbach, * [Both datives are rendered : durch, 'by Dr. XianKe. The E. v., however, varies from because of to by. Alford has the foUowiug discriminating note : '^'IVirough^ indicat«l better the prompting cdut-e of a definite act — 'iy' the «mi- taining conditiun of a continued state. Tims we should always say that we are justified through, not by, fiiith ; hal that we stand by, not Ihrnugli, faith." Hence the pioprietj of the rendering of this verse in the E, V. — E.] CHAPTER XI. l-3ft. 3G9 Scholz, Laclimann, Tischendorf, and critical editors lijeaeraJly, on the authority of j^. A. B. C. D. F. The rendering is that of Alford, who is unusually happy in expressing the exact force of di. — K.] — For God is able to graft them in again [dvvaroi; yd() iarvv, x.t./..]. lie will not apply Ills power to compel unbelievers to believe ; but if they only do not continue in unbelief, He will graft them in again. He is not wanting in power, and certainly He will not be wanting in tlie applica- tion of it. The becoming strong for faith, and in faith, as well as the being planted in again, is exer- cised by the power of Divine grace.* Ver. 24. For if thou wert cut out. The yci(j serves to establish the rfcrarbs- ■ya.ij (Meyer). Likewise the stronger expression here : iify.6n?j<;. — Of the olive tree which is vrild by nature. This is the idea of the oleaster, or wild olive. — And wert grafted contrary to nature [xat 7in()i(TO t'jaoviav (ver. 23). But this changes the matter very little ; the Apostle's supposition is, that the economy of God's government will accomplish the dissolution of the Jewish obduratio. [Alford clearly defines the meaning : In the case of the Gentile, the Apostle sets the fact of natural growth over against that of engrafted growth ; here, the fact of congrulty of nature (tt] idia, ilaia) is set against incongruiti/, as making the reingraft- ing more probable. Hodge : " The simple meaning of this verse is, that the future restoration of the Jews is, in itself, a more probable event than the in- troduction of the Gentiles into the Church of God." -R.] Vers. 25-36. The last word, or the mystery of the Divine government. Ver. 25. For I would not, brethren. The yoiQ confirms the previous tt6(Tu) nd'/lov \ accord- ing to Tholuck, the address, '' brethren," is directed this time to the Gentile Christians. But why not to * [As Stuart well remarks, this verse speaks of what can be done ; the next, of what ivill hi.- done. It is trreatly to be doubted whether the verse has any bearing on the questions o'i ptrsevm-anci', cmvi'rxio resislihClia, &c., which ilever, and others, find involved here. — R.] } (There seems no good ground for departing from the common rendering. Dr. Lange's idea about real fresh life In the branches is not admissible. For, although frish phj'sical and intidlectual life lias again ai d again come into the Church from new races, it has always been, for a time, at tLr expense of spiritual vigor. Kot until the new Bpuitual life, contrary to nature, had been felt, was there Bny gain by such grafting.— E.] 24 all? Oil . . . dyvoitv, Rom. i. 13 [p. 70], &ic. An announcement of an important couimunication. Of this mystery. 'Jo /u i'gt t](Jiov TorTe [See Tholuck and Alford in loco on the word mya- tcry. — 11.] On the ba.sis of the general mystery of the Christian tvntfitia, 1 Tim. iii. 16, revealed tc Christians by their becoming believers, there are dis- played tiie individual mysteries which concern the development of Chiistian life in the world, particue larly the universal development ol Christianity. In regard to these, the Apostles are illuminated in ad- vance by revelation, in order to connnunicate them to the Church. Thus Paul communicates, in many ways, to believers, tiie mystery that the Gentiles shall be joint-heirs of life, without legal conditions, Eph. iii. 6 ; also the mystery that, in the last times, the transformation of persons still living will take place, 1 Cor. xv. 51 ; and so here he communicates the mystery of the Divine economy in relation to the results of the conversion of Jews and Gentiles, and especially of the final, universal conversion of Israel. Lest ye should be wise in your own con- ceits [tret fi ^ tjTf tv eai'Toli; qi(j ovi/uoi. See Textual Note ■". — R.] Meyer: According to your own judgment. The Apostle foresees that, ia the Gentile Christian Church, there will arise respect ing Israel's future contemptuous decisions of the un- illuminated and self-sufficient judgment. [Calvin, Beza, Stuart, refer it to pride in their own position ; but Meyer, De Wette, Hodge, and most, agree, with Dr. Lange, in applying it to a wrong view of the exclusion of the Jews. — R.] That hardening in part is happened to Israel [ 6 t i. n o'l (j o) a t. <; a. no ft i (j o v i; t » '](T(jatj/. yiyovfv. On tt o'l (j (o a i^ i; , see ver. 7. — R.] '^4 no /( t(j(Jiov has engaged much attention. Tho- luck, following in the wake of others, properly calls attention to the fact that the Apostle's quotations from the prophets were given by him as a warrant of his hope, but not as its ground ; p. 625 ff. Paul, as an Apostle, was also a prophet, apart from the consideration that he could already find the germs of this prophecy in the gospel tradition (see Matt, xxiii. 39 ; John xii. 32). However, we take for granted that he could have drawn his warrants from the Old Testament as freely as he desired, though Tholuck raises the question why he did not do this, but contented himself with citing two passages not belonging to that class, and of doubtful relevancy (the declarations cited by Auberlen, p. 625). We must here refer to biblical theology, as well as to the writings which have treated especially on this eseho- tological part of the theology of the Old Testament.'^ There shall come out of Zion, &c. ["HJf» ix ^ii)')v, x.T.X. See Textual Note ^'', and below. Forbes makes the four lines of the quotations corre- spond alternately : covenant-promise — removal of sin. — R.] The two connected quotations are from Isa. lix. 20 and xxvii. 9 ; not (according to Cal vin [Stuart], and others) from Jer. xxxi. 33, al- though there is a kindred sense. :j: They are freelj * [The view now generally adopted, and supported oy Beza, Estius, Koppe, Iteicho, Kiillner, Meyer, Thoiuck, D« Wette, Hodjre, Stuart, Alford, and a host of others, is : that the ancient people of God (so marvellously preserved in their distinctive life, as if in earnest of tliis) shall ba restored, a a nation, fo God's favor. With all the modifi- cations of this view from, other passages, we have not fo do. Thus much ought to be admitted by all fair rules of exe- gesis.— II.] t [The Literature on this subject is very extensive. The passages bearing on this particular point are grouped by Demarest and Gordon, Chrislncracy, pp. 231 ff. Coir p. Meyer, pp. 442 f.— R.] i [So Tholuck, De Wette, Meyer, Alford. Dr. Hodg« thinks it probable "that here, as elsewhere, he does not intend to refer exclusively to any one prediction, but to give the general sense of many specific declarations ol the ancient prophets." The obicctioiis urtred throughout against such a view nf the Apostle's citations are applicabls here. — Philippi remarks that these citations support th* affii-mation • "so all Israel shall be saved," not the con- tinuance of the hardening " until the fulness of the Qen* tiles come in." — E..] CHAPTER XL 1-86. 37> treated, and joined together (from the LXX.). Yet, jn reality, they perfectly answer to their application. We must not forget that the armor of tielivcranee which the Lord puts on, according to chap. lix. 17 fl'., is a further enlargement of the armor of the Messiah in Isa. xi. 5 tt'. Now, if we adhere to the position that prophecy makes no retrograde move- ment — that therefore Jt/iovah, instead of the 3Ies- 8-ii/i, must denote a progress — the passage cannot be understood merely to denote the tiist appearance of the Messiah, as Isa, xi., but, in any case, the escha- tological appearance of Jehovah is also conjoined in ..he Messiah. This is favored by the grand expres- RJon in ver. 19. The Apostle, with his usual mas- terly slvill, therefore makes use of the proper pas- sage here, similarly to the exegesis of Christ, which has also been a subject of surprise to many exposi- tors. 7'/ie original text (Isa, lix. 20, 21) reads : " And the God (Redeemer) shall come to Zion, and unto them that turn from transgression (3.'tB ) in Jacob, saith the Lord. As for me (on my side), this is my covenant with them, saith the Lord : My Spirit," &c. The Septuagint : y.al r/ift tvmtv Ztwv 6 ^ro/ifvoi;, xai a7Z0(TT(jiwfii adffitlaq ano Jay.mp, timv y.v- (>to<;. Kai wi'tj^ avToli; tj Tin() i/ioT< diaOrjxtj, HTitv xi'^ioc, TO nvtT'fia to ifiov, x.r.X. Ciiap. xxvii. also treats of the restoration of Israel. Ver. 6 gives the more definite starting-])oint. The sense of ver. 8 is : God punishes Israel with moderation. The form of this punishment is hardening, and being carried off as by an east-wind storm. Then we read: " Therefore (by this means) shall the iniquity of Ja- cob be purged ; and this is all the fruit (tlie use) to take away his sin." The LXX, : Aia toT'To aqau- ^fOf'jairai !j dvoftia Jay.iof!, y.al toTto itniv tj fvloyia avToT', orav a(fi).(i)/iau auToT' t/jv afiafj- riav. Paul took into consideration three modifica- tions : (1.) Fro)n Zion, instead of for Zion, in which we must not forget that also in Isaiah Jehovah must come from Zion for Zion ; (2.) The original text assumes conversion at the announced redemption ; with the Apostle it was self-evident that the redemp- tion precedes the conversion ; (3.) The Apostle de- scribes the new covenant with Israel, by inserting the passage from Isa, xxix. ; that is, he here de- scribes the purging and taking away of Jacob's sin as the essential part of the covenant, instead of the promise of the impartation of the Spirit, in Isa. lix., because he knows that both are indissolubly connect- ed. Yet these modifications of form do not prevent the citation from being a proof, as Tholuck sup- poses. See, on the further exposition of this pas- sage, Tholuck, p. 631. [Tholuck : " How came the Apostle, if he wished only to express the general thought that the Mes- siah was come for Israel, to choose just this citation, consisting of two combined passages, when the same is expressed more directly in other passages of the Old Testament ? I believe that the i-in, gave occa- sion for the quotation : if he did not refer this directly to the second coming of the Messiah, yet it admitted of being indirectly applied to it." — R.] Yer. 28. As touching the gospel, they are enemies [>taTa ft ev to ivayyi). i,ov i/- ^ (> o ( ], As enemies, they are said, by Meyer and Tholuck, to be hostilely treated by God [Alford, Hodge] (Tholuck : invisi deo). But it is difficult to sstablish the antithesis, that they can be simultane- ously odious to, and beloved by, God, except in dif- ferent lelations. See the £xeg. Notes on chap, v, 10 [p. 165]. Other explanations : regarded by Paul u. enemies (Grotius, Luther) ; enemies of God (Thoniaa Aquinas, Bengel). According to the gospel — tnai u^ according to the relation of the gospel to believori and unbelievers — they are enemies ; this means not merely that they are adversaries ol the gospel (Chry. sostom, and others), but that, as adversaries of the gospel, they are regarded by God as adversaries, and then l)y His messengers also — for yoiir sakes [()(.' I'/f"',] : from the ground of the saving ecoiv omy already set Ibrth. But as touching the election, they ar* beloved [ >>. « r « d k r i^v t x k o y i] v a ya ntj Tot]. We would here also protest against the favorite division : beloved of God, or of the Apos- tle, or of Christians. They are enemies in their falling out with the gospel, yet they are favoritea according to the election, but simply lor the salie of their connection with the fathers. — For the fath« ers' sakes [dud to in,- 7raTt(*«i,]. Meyer says : in favor of the patriarchs ; the sense is, because they are included in general in the election of the fathers ; according to ver. 28, are made partakers in the gifts of the fathers, in the call of Isi'ael.* Ver. 29. Without repentance [dfifrafti- A»/Ta, The reference here is evidently national, not individual, though tlie proposition is general in its form and force. — R.]. Unrepented. Irrevocable in the sense of a Divine, ethical, and self-conditional result (see 2 Cor. vii. 10). Ver, 30, For as ye, &c. [ lo a tt fQ yd^ {ififti;. See I'lxlual Notts -*, ^^.'l The Gentiles. — Formerly disobedient. The a7TKJT/a is dnhidfio. toward God's word, which was promulgated to the Gentiles by tiic creati(m (Rom. i. 21). [Forbes finds, in vers. 30-32, a six-lined stanza, two lines in each verse, with the alternating thoughts: Disobedience- mercy, recurring three times. — R.] Ver. 31. That through the mercy shown to you they also may obtain mercy [tw {i ft trip 10 t?.in- (I'a y.al an to I t }.f tj S iTxT tv. We accept (with E, V., Hodge, Meyer, De Wette, Alford, and most) a trajection of the i'ra. — R,] Meyer would join nji v/i(rii>o) D.iii, to what foUcfws : " In order that, by the mercy manifested to you (which mercy provokes them to jealousy of your faith ; ver, 11), mercy might be shown to you." This construction must be rejected outright, because by it the Apostle would say to the Gentiles w^hat is both ill-bred and untruthful, namely, that their con version was merely a means for the purpose of the further conversion of the Jews.-)- The opposite con- struction : noil credvierunt in vesU-am miKerivordiam (Vulgate), emphasizes the conversion of the Gentiles as an end in itself, and then makes the fuither pur- pose of the conversion of the Jews, thereby brought about, to follow. * [The obvious meaning is, that the election of Israai as the people of God involves such a hope of l)le6siiiK to the children of Abraham, that the mercy will at last come, even after '■^t'h.o\xsnx\.i\s of generatinvs." If the Abrahamie covenant is abrogated, the Apostle's words have little force -K.] t [Notwithstandintr this very strong assertion of Dr. Lanse, on the ground of the parallelism, as well as en aO" coimt of the general thought of the -whole passnge, tha construction of Meyer is to be preferred. The tra;eciion gives emphasis to rep vfi. i\. The other views are : The% an: disnhedienl Ihroug/i the mercy, &c. (Calvin, .ind otliers) ; they have not bcHeved nn the. meixy .'hmvii to you, &c. (Lu- ther, Estius, Lange). But to these there is the same gram« matioal objcotion. Tholuck says : with the same, mercy ; which obviates Dr, Lange's difficulty, but is against th< parallelism. — R. ] 372 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. Ver. 32. For God hath shut up all under disobedience \_o?i, ayid Spirit.* Meyer opposes this, by urging that neither Chrysostom, (Ecunienius, Theophylact, Calvin, nor Beza, liave re- ferred to the Trinity in their e.Npositions. The con- text speaks simply of God the Father. Yet it can- not be doubted, if we take into consideration other passages of the Apostle (for example, 1 Cor. xv. ; Col. i.), that Paul here had in mind at least the dif- ference of the revelationn of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. It is certain tliat the view of God's absolute unity predominates here, but not therefore in the exclusive, doctrinal definiteness of God the Father. The Trinitarian relation lies be- yond subordinationism. * [Alford, who is unusually happy in his comments on this chapter, remarks : " If this be ritchtly understood — not of a fiirmal allusion to the three Persons in the Holy Trinity, but of an implicit refercnc (as Tholuck) to the ■\tkree attnhuies of Jehnvah, respectively manifested to us by Itie three coequiil and coitemal Persons— there can hardly be a doubt of its correctness." " Only those who are doir- matically preindiced can miss seeing "that, though St. Paul has never d>\iini'ive!y expressed the doctrine of the lioly Trinity in a definite fonnuln toere arbitrariness." The St. Paul of Ren.in has just ap- peared, lie accepts our Epistle as genuine, but denies the correctness of its title, and also its intecrity. The follow- ing is a resume: "The edited of the Unal and accepted text of Paul's letters had, for a general principle, to reject nothing and add nothing-hut above all, to reject nothing. The common hmty, then, of the so-called Epistle to the Romans was a circular letter, an encyclical letter addressed to the churches of Ephesus aud Thcssalonica principally. Chap. XV., ver. 1. Now "we that are strong ought [u(piikQniv dk tjftfiq ol dvvaroi. The cVt does not stand for ovv, as the E. V. indi- cates (so Ilodge), although it connects with whal precedes (Meyer, Philippi, &c.). — K.] Tholuck find* in di continuative a proof that the division of the chapter ha.s been improperly made at this verse. As far as conviction is concerned, the Apostle stands on the side of the strong ; see chap. xiv. 14, 20 ; 1 Cor. viii, 4. [To bear, /9affTatf tr]. After the Apostle has shown what the strong have to avoid, he shows what is now their duty toward the weak. In natu> ral life, weakness is often oppressed and made to suffer violence by power ; in the kingdom of the Spirit, on the contrary, " strong " expresses both the appointment to, and the duty of bearing, the infirm- ities of the weaker. Infirmities of the weak [ra aaO fvrjfia' T« roiv adiivdTo>v. Meyer, Lange : GlaubenS' schwachheiten ; but, with Philippi, Alford, &c., it seems best to regard the term as general, including, of course, the scruples above referred to. — R,] These are undoubtedly a burden, and thus an im- pediment to the progress of the strong ; but in order to take the weak ones along with them, their weaknesses must be taken up — which is the rule in a caravan. But the bearing does not consist merely in suffering, but rather in forbearance. [Comp. Gal. vi. 2, Lange's Cowm., p. 149, where the same verb is used. — R.] And not to please ourselves. \4()iayin,v see Gal. i. 10 [1 Cor. x. 33]. C. Reciprocal edification, in self-denial, accord* ing to the example of Christ, chap. xv. 2-4. Ver. 2. Let every one of us [txaffTos 7JHWV. See Textual Notes -° and '"]. Thus the Apostle here comprehends both parties. — [For his good (with a view) to edification, tl^ ro aya- Obv Ti^oi; o t xof)o/( j^r.] Ben gel : Bonuni (aya- Oov) genus, cedificaVo species. There is, first, fi\-, then, 71 o 6^. In order that one may aid the other in what is good, he should promote his edification, his sense for the fellowship of what is good. The good chiefly meant here is self-denying love, the constant exercise of humility. Ver. 3. For even Christ pleased not him- self [zai y«c 6 X(Jt.ar6i; oi a )! A ?/ (T f (1) <; alone ; yet many commentators, who adopt this reading, claim (and with reason) that Buch a constructiott would be uugrammatical. Still, Dr. Lange seems to favor it. We paraphrase : " the patience and comfort produced by a study of the Scriptures." — R.] Two things should support the believer, particularly in looking at the retarding, ob- Ptructing prejudice of the weak : First, the patience immanent in the Christian spirit (patience evidently suits better here tlian constancy, which Meyer pre- fers). [So Philippi, De Wette, &c.] Second, the comfort of the Holy Scriptures, which, in the pres- ent connection, consisted in the fact that, in spite of all the impediments to spiritual life in the Old Testament, the development to the New Testament nevertheless proceeded uninterruptedly. Might have our hope [rz/r tknlSa ?/(»)- fifv. Dr. Lange: might hold fait hope. Others: might have more and more of the Christian hope. — R.] And then, this comfort was an encourage- ment to hold fast hope as the hope of better times ; that is, of the ever newer and more glorious devel- opments of God's kingdom, in Spener's sense. Beza, and others, properly explain ; tenenmus, which is opposed by Meyer. We can, indeed, preserve hope by patience, but not acquire it. According to Meyer, indeed, patience should also be referred to T(7o are truly strong are often classed with the old-fashioned. — The cau- tion about judging is prophetic of what is so mani- fest in the history of Christ's Church in her impei- fection : that more divisions and discords have arisen from the questions, about which the Apostle himself gives no definite decision, than from the discussioc of the weightier matters of the earlier chapters -R.] CHAPTER XIV. 1-XV. 4. 42^ 8. It is almost impossible to emphasize sufficient- Ij the two distinctions to which the present secticm leads us. The Apostle shows, first, that we should not deny our free conviction, but should deny our- selves in reference to the inconsiderate conduct ac- cording to conviction in practical things, that do not belong to the testimony of fiiith. How often is tliis nil 3 exactly reversed, by one's asserting a narrow view in order to please the weak (for example, in tlie condemning art, concerts, innocent relaxations, &c.), while he himsc'if willingly enjoys occasionally the forbidden fruit.* The second distinction is brought just as closely home — namely, between do- ing and leaving undone. Wliat one cannot do with the inward assurance of his conscience, must not be done at ail. 4. Tlie opposite tendencies that are presented to us as a germ in the Church at Rome, extend in con- tinual gradations through tiie boolcs of the New Tes- tament, and confront each other in the second cen- tury as the matured opposites of Ebionitism and of Gnostic antinomianism. — On the relation between Gentile Ciiristians and Jewish Christians at the time of Justin M:.rtyr, see Tholuck, p. 704. 5. On the idea of weakness in faith, and conduct ■which is not of faitii, see the Exeg. Notes on vers, 1 and 23 ; eomp. Tholuck, p. 706 ff. 6. " For (iod is able to make him stand ; " ver. 4. How gloriously this has been fulfilled 1 see the Exeg. NotcR. 7. On the duty of striving after a certain convic- tion, and the means for attaining it (self-knowledge and gratitude), see the Exeg. Notes on ver. 5. 8. On ver. 6. Thanksgiving makes every pure Christian enjoyment a real peace-offering ( cbtU ). 9. On ver. 8. On the Lordship of Christ, see Tholuck, p. 715 ft". Discussions on the divinity of Christ, on ver. 10, see Phili[>pi, p. 572. 10. Every thing is pure. According to Olshau- sen (in respect to the laws on food), creation has again become pure and holy through Christ and His sanctifying influence. The proposition cannot be opposed, but how far must it be more specifically defined ? As the creature of God, it h;is again been recognized as pure and holif. As a means of enjoy- ment, it has again been freely given in a religious sense. But as a real enjoyment, it is only pure and lioly to the one enjoying, when he has the full assur- ance of his conscience, and therefore eats with thanks'jiving. But in this the natural repulsion, practice, law, and a regard to love, limiting the circle of the means of enjoyment, as well as of the enjoy- ment itself, come into consideration, because they also limit that assurance. 11. The understanding of the present section has been rendered much more difficult by not regarding the manner in which the offence is divided into the ♦ [The emphatic deliverances of ecclesiastical hodies as matters of minor morals (even making dnuVitful matters terms of cominunion) must often he rccardod hy the care- ful reader of this chapler as ovcrpacsing the limits here set to hearins the infirmities of the weak. When that about which the "Word of God makes no distinct utterance, is nade a term of communion, those who are thus wise atove what is written are not acting to " edification." It is but nn attempt to make holy by an ecclesiastical law. If Gcd's law could not do this "in that it was weak throuch the flesh," man's law is not likely to accomplish the result arrived at. "Strange as it m:iy appear, it is nevertheless true, th.it scruples about lesser matters almost always in- volve soire dereliction of duty in greater and more obvious ones" (Joweft). Comp. the very valuable dissertation of thi3 autho' on "Casuistry," Comm. ii. pp. 322-357. — K.] two fundamental forms of irritation and presump tion. See the h'xeg. Notes on vers. 13 and 21. 12. Luther's expression, "the Christian is a ma* ter of all masters, a servant of all servants," coniei into consideration here. Gregory tlie Great had ex pressed the same sentiment, but in a reverse ordei and application : " Free in faith, serving in love." The parable beginning with Matt, xviii. 23 tells us that the consistent and conscious offence against lova weakens faith. 13. Bearing with the weak has: (1.) Its founda- tion in the fact that the Almighty God bears in love the world, which in itself is hclpkss ; (2.) Its power and obligation consist in the fact that Christ haa borne the guilt of the helpless world ; (3.) And its dignity lies in the fact that the strengtli of the strong first finds in this function its whole truth, proof, and satisfaction. 14. On the idea of edification, see the Eixg. Notts on chap. xiv. 19. 15. The word of the Old Testament Scriptures ig still of application ; how much more, therefore, is this the case with that of the New Testament ! Yet, in this relation, we dare not overlook the truth, that Christian life may have but 07ie rule of faith, but yet two fountains : the Holy Scriptures, and the imme- diate fellowship of the heart with Christ, from which the patience of Christ flows. HOMILETICAIi AND PRACTICAI.. Vees. 1-12. On the proper reciprocal conduct of the strong and weak in faith. 1. What form should it take ? a. The strong should receive the weak, and not de- spise them ; b, Tiie weak should not judge the strong. 2. On wkat should it be established ? a. On every body's remembering that God has re- ceived the other as well as himself ; b. Therefore he should consider that, in whatever the other one does or leaves undone, he does it or leaves it undone to the Lord ; c. Do not forget that the decision on our course of action belongs to the Lord alone, to whom we all belong, and before whose judgment-seat we must all appear (vers. 1-12). — Who art thou that judgest another man's servant ? Two things are im- plied in this question of the Apostle : 1. Directly, a warning to guard against any judgment of faith on our brethren ; 2. Indirectly, an admonition rather to judge ourselves, and to perceive the weakness of our own faith (ver. 4). — In matters of conscience, each one standeth or falleth to his Lord (ver. 4). — The great value of a strong religious conviction. 1. To ourselves, a. We act according to fixed prin- ciples ; b. We do not vacillate ; c. We preserve oup inward peace. 2. To others, a. They know where they are with us ; b. They therefore entertain confi- dence in us ; c. Their own life is improved by our example (ver. 5). — The possibility of thanksgiving to God as a test of enjoying that which is allowed (ver. 6). — As Christians, we are the Lord's posses- sion. 1. What is this ? a. No one liveth to him. self, and no one dieth to liimself ; that is, whether in life or in death no one belongs to himself; but, b. Whether we live, let us live to the Lord, or whether we die, let us die to the Lord ; that is, w« belong, in life and death, to Him ; we are His. 2, By what means have we become the Lord's proper, ty ? a. By Christ's death ; b. By His resurrectiof <28 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANa and glorification (vers. 7-9). — We shall all appear before the judgment-seat of Christ ! This is said : 1. To the weali in faith, that he may not judge his brother ; 2. To the strong, that he may not despise his brother ; 3. To both, that they may examine themselves (vers. 10-12). — The great account which every one of us shall have to give in future. 1. Of whom ? Of himself, on all that he has done and left undone. 2. Before whom ? Before God, who kncweth the heart, and seeth what is secret (ver. Luther : There are two kinds of Christians : the strong in faith, and the weak. The former arrogant- ly despise the weak, and the latter easily get offend- ed at the strong. Both should conduct themselves in love, that neither offend or judge the other, but that each do and allow the other to do what is use- ful and necessary (ver. 1). Starke : If one should be certain of his opinion in the use of things indifferent, how much more ne- cessary is it in matters of faith ! (ver, 5.) — Hed- iNGER : Stones in an arch support each other ; so should you support your neighbor. You may know much, but your neighbor may be very useful ; you should at least bear him witness that he has a tender conscience (ver. 1). — Bkngel : Gratitude sanctifies all acts, however different, that are not inconsistent with gratitude (ver. 6). — The art of dying well is nothing else than the art of living well (ver. 7). Gerlach : An article of food is only unclean when eaten without thanksgiving; but everything is holy to him who thankfully acknowledges that the earth is the Lord's, and the fulness thereof (1 Cor. X. 25-31). Let him, on the other hand, who, through fear of breaking a Divine commandment, eats but one kind of meat, be thankful even for that which he does enjoy. Every thing depends on our acting in full obedience to the Lord, and in doing nothing wilfully and independently. Hkubnkr: The less scrupulous one must show tender forbearance ; the more scrupulous one must guard against decrying the more liberal (ver. 3). — It is not becoming in us to pronounce any definitive opinion on the inward worth of a man. — We should not condemn even the fallen (ver. 4). — Christianity, as a free institution for the training of mankind, allows freedom in regard to services and in the choice of holy-days (ver. 5). — Every believer re- nounces his own will, lives to the Lord, who has purchased and redeemed him, and accordingly dies in harmony with the Lord. — This dependence on the Lord is something quite natural to the Christian. He, therefore, who will not be led by love to place a restraint upon himself on account of his weaker brother, but is obstinate, acts against that fundamen- tal principle (vers. 7, 8). — He who judges, arrogates to himself Christ's office ; he who bears in mind that Christ will judge ug all, will no more condemn. Bksser: To despise and to judge — each is as bad as the other, for in both man encroaches upon God's right, and arrogates to himself a judgment on another's state of faith and heart, which becomes an injury to his own life of faith (ver. 3). Schleiermacher : New-Year's Sermon on vers. 1 and 8. The language of the text is placed before u? as a motto on entering this new year of life : 1. In relation to what shall happen to us ; 2. In rela- tion to what we shall be required to do. [Charnock : Christ, by His death, acquired over as a right of lordship, and hath laid upon us the itrongest obligatioa to serve Him. Ho made him self a sacrifice, that we might perform a service tc Him. By His reviving to a new state and conditioc of life. His right to our obedience is strengthened There is no creature exempt from obedience to Hiiu, Who would not be loyal to Him, who hath already received : 1. A power to protect ; 2. A glory to re* ward? [John Howe : Receive the poor weakling, for God is able to make him stand. Every new-born child is weak, and we must remember that this is the case with every regenerate soul. [Bishop Hopkins : On ver. 12. All the wicked- ness that men have brooded on and hatched in the darkest vaults of their own hearts, or acted in the obscurest secrecy, shall be then made as manifest as if they were every one of them written on their foreheads with the point of a sunbeam. Here, on earth, none know so much of us, neither would we that they should, as our own consciences ; and yet those great secretaries, our own consciences, through ignorance or searedness, overlook many sins which we commit. But our own consciences shall not know more of us than all the world shall, for all that has been done shall be brought into pubUo notice. [Henry : Though some Christians are weak and others strong, though of different sizes, capacities, apprehensions, and practices, in lesser things, yet they are all the Lord's. They serve Christ, and ap- prove themselves to Him, and accordingly are owned and accepted of Him. Is it for us, then, to judge or despise them, as if we were their masters, aiid they were to make it their business to please us, and to stand or fall by our sentence ? [Wesley, Sonnon on the Great A.isize, Rom. xiv. 10 : Consider : 1. The chief circumstances which will precede our standing before the judg- ment-seat of Christ; 2. The judgment it.«clf; 3. Circumstances which will follow it ; 4, Application to the hearer. [RoBKRT Hall : The proper remedy for a diver- sity of sentiment is not the exercise of compulsory power, much less a separation of communion, but the ardent pursuit of Christian piety, accompanied with an humble dependence on Divine teaching, which, it may reasonably be expected, will in due time correct the errors and imperfections of sincere believers. The proper conduct to be maintained is a cordial cooperation in every branch of worship and of practice with respect to which we agree, with- out attempting to effect a unanimity by force. [RiCHARn Watson, on vers. 7, 8 : The exten- sion of the work of Christ in every age goes upon the same principle. The principle of selfishness and that of usefulness are distinct and contrary. One is a point, but the centre is nothing ; the other is a progressive radius, which runs out to the circumfer- ence. The one is a vortex, which swallows up all within its gorge ; the other is the current-stream, which gushes with an incessant activity, and spreads into distant fields, refreshing the thirsty earth, and producing richness and verdure. The principle of one is contraction ; of the other, expansion. Nor is this a sluggish or inactive principle. Lively desires for the acknowledgment of Christ by men, strong and restless jealousies for His honor, tender sympa- thies with the moral wretchedness of our kind, deep and solemn impressions of eternal realities, and of the danger of souls ; these are the elements which feed it ; and they carry Christian love beyond evji the philanthropy of the natural law. CHAPTER XrV. 1-XV. 4. 42« [HoDOK : (»wing to ignorance, early prejudice, weakness of faith, and other causes, there may and must t\ist a diversity of opinion and practice on tninor points of duty. Kut this diversity is no suffi- cient reason for rejecting from Christian fcllowsliip any nienil)er ol the family of Christ. It is, iiow- ever, one thing to recognize a man as a Ciiristian, and another to recognize him as a suitable minister of a church, organized on a particular form of gov- ernmeiit and system of doctrines. [F. W. liouKin-soN : It is always dangerous to multijily restrictions and requirements beyond what is essentia] ; because men, feeling themselves hemmed in, break the artificial barrier, but, breaking it with a sense of guilt, tiiereby become hardened in con- science, and {)reparcd for transgressions against com- mandments which are divine and of eternal obliga- tion. Hence it is tiiat the criminal has so often, in bis confessions, traced his deterioration in crime to the first step of breaking the 8abbatii-day ; and, no doubt, with accurate truth. — If God has judgments in store for England, it is because we are selfish men —because we prefer pleasure to duty, party to our church, and ourselves to every thing else. — J. F. H.] Vers. 13-16. On avoiding offence. 1. Offence cannot be avoid- ed at the expense of personal freedom ; 2. Just as little can it be avoided at the expense of love toward a brother (vers. 13-16). — If you would avoid stum- bling or offence, then preserve : 1. Your personal freedom ; 2. But do not injure love toward a brother, for whose sake Christ died (vers. 13-16). — Nothing is unclean in itself; much is unclean if one 60 regard it (ver. 14). — Take care that your treasure be not evil spoken of ! 1. What is this treasure ? Spiritual freedom. Comp. ver. 6 ; 1 Cor. x. 30 ; 1 Tim. iv. 4. 2. How can it be protected against slander? When the strong man in faith rejoices in its possession, but at the same time walks charitably (ver. 16). Ldtmer: The gospel is our treasure, and it is evil spoken of when Christian freedom is so boldly made use of as to give offence to the weak. Starke, Hkdinger: Take heed, soul, lest you give offence ! No stumbling-stone, no sin, however small you think it may be, is really small if it can make a weak one fall. Use the right which you have, but use it aright; Matt. xvii. 24 (ver. 13). Gerlach : It is not our office to judge our brother, and to decide on his relation to God ; but it is every Christian's office to pronounce decidedly against uncharitableness, which can condemn another to his fall. Hecbner : The treasure is Christian freedom, deliverance from outward ordinances. It is evil spo- ken of either by the enemies of the Church, when they see the dissension of Christians, or by the weaker brethren, when they condemn tlie stronger, and use their freedom presumptuously, or by the stronger, when they give offence to the weaker, and injure their conscience (ver. 16). Besser : It is a true proverb : " Though two do the same thing, it is not really the same thing," for not the form of the deed, but the sense of the doer, decides as to whether any thing is unclean or holy, 01 contrary to faith and love (ver, 14). [Jeremy Taylor : In a ripe conscience, the practical judgment — that is, the last determination of an action —ought to be sure and evident. Thi« is plain in all the great lines of duty, in actions de terminable by the prime principles of natural rea« son, or Divine revelation ; but it is true also iu all actions conducted by a right and perfect conscience. There is always a reflex act of judgment, which, upon consideration that it is certain tliat a public action may lawfully be done, or else that tiiat which is but probable in tlie nature of the thing (so far ai we perceive it) niay yet, by the superadding of som« circumstances and confidential considerations, or by equity or necessity, become more than public in the particular. Although, I say, the conscience be un- certain in the direct act, yet it may be certain, right, and determined, in the rejlix and necond act of judg- meiit ; and if it be, it is innocent and safe — it is that which we call the right and sure conscience (llit Rule of Conacience, Works [Bishop Heber's edt' tion], vol. xi. pp. 369-522). Clarke: It is dangerous to trifle with conscience^ even when erroneous ; ic should be borne with and instructed; it must be won over, not taken by storm. Its feelings should be respected, because they ever refer to God, and have their foundation in His fear. He who sins against his conscience in things which every one else knows to be indifferent, will soon do it in those things in which his salvation is most inti- mately concerned. It is a great blessing to have a wtll-informed conscience ; it is a blessing to have a tender conscience, and even a sore conscience is bet- ter than none. [Barnes : Christ laid down His precious life for the weak brother as well as for the strong. He loved them ; and shall we, to gratify our appetites, pursue a course which will tend to defeat the work of Christ, and ruin the souls redeemed by His blood ? — Do not so use your Christian liberty as to give occasion for railing and unkind remarks from your brother, so as to produce contention and strife, and thus to give rise to evil reports among the wicked about the tendency of the Christian religion, as if it were adapted only to promote controversy. — J. F. H.] Vers. 17-23. The glory of God's kingdom as a kingdom : 1, Of righteousness ; 2. Of peace ; 3. And of joy in the Holy Ghost (ver. 17). — God's kingdom is: 1. Not a kingdom of dead ordinances, by which the conscience is oppressed ; but, 2. A kingdom of liv- ing, evangelical truth, by which righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost are planted and promoted (ver. 17). — God's kingdom is a kingdom which: 1. Rests on righteousness; 2. In whose borders peace reigns ; 3. To belong to which brings joy to the hearts of all its citizens (ver. 17). — Tlie blissful service of Christ. 1. The service is in righteous- ness, &c. ; 2. The blessing : a. That we are accept- able to God ; b. That we are approved of men (vera. 17, 18). For what should members of the Christian Church strive, if in most important matters they are one, but in un(>sscntial matters they have differ- ent views? 1. For what makes for peace ; 2. For what contributes to edification (ver. 19). — Even the weaker brother's Christian life is God's work ; there, fore be indulgent toward his conscience ! (ver. 20.) — Rather deny self than offend a brother (ver. 2\), — The happiness of Ciiristian freedom (ver. 22).-« The condemnation of the doubting conscience (vei 430 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 23). — What is not of faitli is sin. 1. How often is this expression misunderstood ! a. When it is sup- posed that all the virtues of the heathen are glaring Bins ; b. When all the civic rigiiteousness of uncon- verted people is condemned in like manner ; c. When the whole civilized life of the present day re- ceives the same judgment. Therefore, 2. There arises the serious question, How should it be under- stood ? a. As a declaration which has no applica- tion whatever to the heathen, or to unconverted people in Christendom, but strictly to awakened pro- fessors of religion ; and, in consequence thereof, b. Contains an appeal to them to do nothing which cannot be done witii the full joy of faith (ver. 23). LuTHKR, on ver. 23 : Observe, that all this is a general declaration against all works done without fiiith ; and guard against the false interpretations here devised by many teachers. Starkk : A reconciled and quiet conscience is the workshop of spiritual joy (ver. 17). — Osiander : The most certain rule of conduct for using Christian freedom, is to contribute to our neighbor's edifica- tion and improvement, but not to his downfall and ruin (ver. 19). Spener : The Apostle would say (ver. 17), that you should be careful of nothing but God's king- dom. Where this is promoted, it should make you rejoice, and it should grieve you when it suffers. That, on the other hand, which does not concern God's kingdom, should be regarded by you as a small matter. Gerlacii : The righteousness which avails in God's kingdom is not an outward observance of the law, but inward holiness ; tiie peace with God wiiich we have in it overflows to our brethren, and holy joy destroys both all anxiety and every thing which can offend and grieve our neighbor (ver. 17). Lisco : To attach importance to eating and drinking, to hold that there sliould henceforth be no i-cruple at certain kinds of food, or that, on the ether hand, this or that should be renounced, is no sign of true Chiistianity (ver. 17). Heubner : The mistaking of what is essential in Christianity, makes us petty ; while laying stress on merely secondary matters unfits us for accomplish- ing the principal object (ver. 17). — That which is allowed may be sin : 1. When we do it against our conscience ; 2. When we thereby offend others (ver. 21). Besser : Every Christian and all Christendom are God's work and building (1 Cor. iii. 9). It is blasphemy against God's sanctuary to drstroi/ this work by ruining a brother sanctified by Christ's blood (ver. 15), and by sundering the bond of peace, which keeps the block-s of the divine building in place (ver. 20). — Every thing which is of Christian faith is truly good, because the doer is good by faith, and his deed is love, the fulness of all good deeds (ver. 23). [Lkigiiton : There is no truly comfortable life in the world but that of religion. Religion is joy. Would you think it a pleasant life, tliough you had fine clothes and good diet, never to see the sun, but Btill to keep in a dungeon with them ? Thus are they who live in worldly honor and plenty, who are Btill without God ; they are in continual darkness, with all their enjoyments. — The public ministry will profit little any way, where a people, or some part of them, are not one, and do not live together as of one mind, and use diligently all due means of edify- ing one another in their holy faith. — Borkitt : Ob- serve : 1. That the love and practice of religio)i# duties, such as righteousness and peace, is a clear and strong argument of a person's acceptance witt God ; 2. That such as are for those things acce()ted by God, ought by no means, for differing from us in lesser things, to be disowned of us, and cast out of communion by us. [Henry : Ways by which we may edify one an. other : 1 By good counsel ; 2. Reproof ; 3. In. struction ; 4. Example ; 6. Building up not only ourselves, but one another, in the most holy faith. None are so strong but they may be edified ; none so weak but they may edify ; and while we edify others, we benefit ourselves. — Clarke : If a man's passions or appetite allow or instigate him to a par. ticular thing, let him take good heed that his con- science approve what his passions allow, and that he live not the subject of continual self-condemnation and reproach. Even the man who has a too scrupu- lous conscience had better, in such matters as are in question, obey its erroneous dictates, than violate this moral feeling, and live only to condemn the actions he is constantly performing. [Hodge : Conscience, or a sense of duty, is not the only, and perhaps not the most important, princi- ple to b(j appealed to in support of benevolent en- terprises. It comes in aid of and gives its sanction to all other right motives ; but we find the sacred writers appealing most frequently to the benevolent and pious feelings — to the example of Christ — to a sense of our obligations to Him — to the mutual re- laticms of Christians, and their common connection with the Redeemer, &c., as motives to self-denial and devotedness. — As the religion of the gospel con- sists in the inward graces of the Holy Spirit, all who have these graces sliould be recognized as genu- ine Christians ; being acceptable to God, they should be loved and cherished by His people, notwithstand- ing their weakness or errors. — The peace and edifi- cation of the Church are to be sought at al> sacri- fices, except those of truth and duty ; and the work of God is not to be destroyed or injured for the sake of any personal or party interests. — An enlightened conscience is a great blessing ; it secures the liberty of the soul from bondage to the opinions of men, and from the self-inflicted pains of a scrupulous and morbid state of moral feeling ; it promotes the right exercise of all the virtuous affections, and the right discharge of all our duties. — H. B. RinoEWAY, on vers. 22, 23 : The reason that the Church is so cold in her devotions, and so little comparative success attends her evangelizing efforts, is, that her con- fidence in God's promises and methods is pai'alyzed by a self-ncc using conxa'oiixness of delinqnenci/. There cannot be an overcoming faith in the people of God, except the Spirit of Him who fulfilleth all righteousness breathes and works in their hearts and lives. [Homiletical Literature on ver. 17. — A. Bur- Gi'SS, Spirit lal Revivingi^, part i. 123; J. Aber. NETHY, Of the King lorn of God, Ser?n., vol. iv. 1.5.5 ; S. Clarke, In vhat the Kinridoni of Hod Con- sists, Serin., vol. vii. 233 ; H. Whistiaw, 77ie True Nature of the Kinqdom of God, Serin., vol. ii. 91 ; S. Bourn, On the Natnre of the Christian Religion^ Di>ic., vol. ii. 2.59 ; L. Holden, Righteouanexx EKsen- tial to True Religion, Senn., 314 ; J. Dodson, ./op in the Holg Ghost, Due, 152 ; James Foster, ITie Kingdom of God, nndi'r the Dispensation of tht Gospel, Serm., vol. ii. 313 ; Bishop Shipley, Serm.^ Works^ vol. L 265 ; John Venn, The Nature oj CHAPTER XIV. 1-XV. 4. 431 True Religion, Serm., vol. iii. 132 ; I. B. S. Car- WlTiiiN, y/te Brakminicul Hi/stem in its Operations CWt the Intellectual Faculties, Hampton Lectures, 213 ; T. DwioiiT, Joy in the Holy Ghost, Theology, vol, iii. 208 ; John Gaunons, True Religion, ISertn., vol. ii. 15 ; R. I'. BuDDicOiM, The Inward and ISpiritual Character of the Kingdom, of God, Serm., vol. ii, 234 ; Bishop Jebu, iSerm., 11 ; H. Woodwaiid, Jisfays, &c., 407 ; K. Montgomkry, j'he Church, Viewed as the Kinudom of the Spirit, God and Man, 118.— J. F. IJ.'j Chap, xv. 1^. Let ua bear the infirmity of the weak without pleasing oui'hclvcs ; for iti this : 1. We seek to please our iU'ij;;libor for his good, to edification ; 2. We herein clioose Christ as our [)attern, who did not please liimself (vers. 1-4). — For what purpose should the strong use the infirmity of the weali V 1. To humble himself; 2. To please his neighbor; 3. To imitate Christ (vers. 1-4). — On pleasing our- selves. 1. In what is its ground ? a. In a man's regarding liis views as the most correct ; 6. His eflbrts as the best ; c. His words as the wisest ; d. His deeds as the most godly ; e. And, consequently, himself as insurjjassable. 2. How is it shown ? a. In tiie seveie condemnation of the weak ; 6. In im- moderate self-prnise ; c. In pretentious manners in Bociety. 3. How is it to be overcome ? «. By dis- cipline in bearing the infirmities of the weak breth- ren ; b. By an iionest effort to please our neighbor for his good, to edification (eomp. 1 Cor. x. 33) ; c. By a believing look at Christ, who did not please himself, but bore the reproaches of His enemies (vers. 1-4). — The blessing of the Holy Scriptures for our inward man (ver. 4). — The Holy Scriptures a fountain of hope (ver. 4). — Examples of patience and comfort, wliich tlie Scriptures present to us for awakening joyous hope : 1. From the Old Testa- ment ; 2. From the New Testament (ver. 4). Roos : Bearing the infirmity of the weak is an exercise of meek love, which neither liglitly esteems him who is weak, nor would seek to change him in a rough, vehement manner. To please ourselves, means to act according to our own views, whether another can be offended at them or not ; or to so conduct ourselves as if we were in the world for our own sake alone, and not also for our weak brother's sake (vers. 2 and 3). Gerlacii : The Apostle here sets up Christ not merely as a pattern, but as a motive, and the living Author and Finisher of our life of faitli (ver. 3). Heubxer : The reason why a man does not place himself under restraint, is pleasure with himself; and this hinders all peace, destroys the germ of love in the heart, and is a proof of spiritual weakness, prejudice, and a corrupt heart. He is not strong who cannot bear with others near him, nor tolerate their opinions (ver. 21). — The Bible is the only real and inexliaustible book of comfort ; Paul said this even when there was nothing more than the Old Testament. — The Bible is not merely a honk to be read, but to be lived \iiicht Lese-, sondern Lebebuch.'^, Lutlier, vol. v., pp, 1707 (ver. 4). [Jere.my Taylor : There is comfort scattered up and down throughout tlie holy book, and not cast all in a lump together. By searching it diligently, we may draw our consolation out of: 1, Faith ; 2. Hope ; 3, The indwelling of the Spirit ; 4, Prayer ; 5. Tlie Sacranients, — Buukitt : The great end foi which the Holy Scriptures were written, was the informing of our judgments, aid the directing ol our practice, that, by the examples which we find there of the patience of holy men under sufferings and of God's relieving and comforting them in theii distresses, we might have hope, confidence, and assur- ance, that God will also comfort and relieve us under tlie like pressures and burdens, [Henry : Ciirist bore the guilt of sin, and the curse for it ; we are only called to bear a little of the trout)le of it. He bore the presumptuous sina of the wicked ; we are called only to bear the in^ firmities of the weak. — There are many things to be learned out of Scripture ; tlie best learning is that which is drawn from that fountain. Those are most learned that are most mighty in the Scriptures, As ministers, we need help, not only to roll away the stone, but to draw out the water; for in many plaeea the well is deep. Practical observations are more necessary than critical expositions. [Scott : Many venture into places and upon ac- tions against which thek own con.science revolts ; because they are induced by inclmation, or embold- ened by the exam))le ot those who, on some account, have obtained the reputation of pious men. But they are condemned for indulging themselves in a doul)tful case. In order to enjoy freedom from self- condemnation, we must have : 1. A sound judg. ment ; 2. Asimple heart ; 3. A tender conscience ; 4. Habitual self-denial. [Robert Hall: Paul enjoins the practice of for- bearance, on the ground of the conscierdiousness of the parties concerned, on tlie assumption not only of their general sincerity, but of their being equally ' actuated, in the very particulars in wliich they dif- fered, by an unfeigned respect to the authority of Christ ; and as he urges the same consideration on which the toleration of both parties rested, it must ; have included a something which was binding on the i conscience, whatever was his private judgment on the points in debate. The Jew was as much bound to tolerate the Gentile, as the Gentile to tolerate the Jew. [Hodge : The desire to please others should be wisely directed, and spring from right motives. We should not please them to their own injury, nor from the wish to secure their favor ; but for their good, that they may be edified. — Barnes : Christ willingly threw himself between the sinner and God, to intercept, as it were, our sins, and to bear the effects of them in His own person. He stood be- tween us and God ; and both the reproaches and the Divine displeasure due to them met on His sacred person, and produced the sorrows of the atonement, — His bitter agony in the garden and on the cross. Jesus thus showed His love of God in being willing to bear the reproaches aimed at Him, and His love of men in being willing to endure the sufferings necessary to atone for these very ones. [HoMiLETicAL LITERATURE on ver. 4 : Bishop Latimer, Sernu-ns of the Plovgh, Works, vol. i. 69 ; Seven Sermons, Ibid., vol. i. 85 ; Bishop Patrick, The Use of the Holy Scriptures (London, 1678); W. Wotton, Serm. (1722); John Gutse, Serm. (1724) ; Dispositions for Reading the Scriptures ; Pitman from Osterwald, 1st Course, vol. i. 15 ; J. Brailsford, Revelation of a Future State in thi Scripturex, an Argument for Comfort and Patience^ Serm.. 247; Thomas Adam, Works, vol, iii. 334 { H, Draper, 7%e Authority, Excellence, and Use oj 432 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. the Holy Scrijit-res. On the Collects, vol. i. 24; John Hkwlett, 7" i Thhigs Written Aforetime for our Learning, Serm., vol. iv. 209 ; T/ie Duty of Studying the Holy Scriptures with Patience, Ibid., vol. iv. 2?.7 ; The Patience, the Comfort, and Hope to be Derived from the Holy Scriptures, Ibid., vol. iv. 246 ; R. L. Cotton, Study of the Scnpiures, Serm., 3?t); VV. Macdonald, The Seriplures. Plain Sermons, 24; C. Girdlestone, Holy Scripture. Fare- vxll Sermons, 165 ; G. R. Gleig, Sermons for Ad- vent, &c., 39 ; T. BoWDLER, 2%e Scriptures Given for Comfort. Sermons on Privileges, &c., vol. J. 48 ; F. E. TusoN, The Blessings and Importance of the Written Word of Cod, Serm., 110; Arthcb Roberts, llie Uses of Godh Word. Plain Sermons^ vol. i. 12; J. W. Donaldson, The Patience and Corif fort of the Holy Scriptures, A. Watson, 2.d Series^ vol. i. 26 ; J. Garbeit, Christ Speaking in Hol^ Scripture. Christ on Earth, &c., vol. i. 30 ; Bishof Medley, The Old Testament in its Relation to the New, Serm., 121 ; Isaac Williams, The Scripture* Bearing Witiiess, Serm., vol. i. 12. — J. F. H.] Sixth Section. — Exhortation to unanimity on the part of all the members of the Church, to the praim of God and on the ground of God^s grace, in which Christ has accepted both Jews and Gentiles. Pe fen nee to the destination of all nations to glorify God, even according to the Old I'esiammt, and encouragement of the Roman Christians to an immeasurable hope in regard to this, according to their calling. Chap. XV. 6-13. 6 Now the God of patience and consolation [comfort] grant you to be like- minded [of the same mind] one toward another accoi'ding to Christ Jesus : 6 That ye may with one mind and one mouth [with one accord ye may with one mouth] glorify God, even the Father [or, the God and Father] ' of our Lord 7 Jesus Christ. Wherefore receive ye one another, as Christ also received us 8 [you]/ to the glory of God.' Now [For] * I say that Jesus [omii Jesus] ' Christ was [hath been made] ° a minister of the circumcision for the truth [for the sake of God's truth] of God, to [in order to] confirm the promises made unto the fathers : And that the Gentiles might glorify God for his mercy ; as it is written. For this cause I will confess [give thanks] to thee among the Gentiles, And sing unto thy name. 11 And again he saith,' Rejoice, ye Gentiles, with his people. And again,* Praise the Lord, all ye Gentiles ; And laud " him, all ye people. 12 And again, Esaias [Isaiah] saith,'" There shall be a root of Jesse, And he that shall rise [riseth] to reign over the Gentiles ; In him shall the Gentiles trust [hope]. 13 Now [And may] the God of hope fill you Avith all joy and peace " in believing, that ye may abound in hope, through [fV, in] the power of the Holy Ghost. 9 10, * Ver. 6. — [On the two renderings given above, see the Extg. Notes. * Ver. 7.— [The Rfc, with B. t)'. • 17/iias ; \'. A. 0. D^ ^. F. L., most versions and many fathers: vjua«. All modern editors adopt the latter. Tiesides the overwhelming; MS, pupport, there is the additional reason, that ^/*a» might so readily enter as a coiTect gloss, since the reference is undoubtedly to both Jewish and Gentile Christians. Sea the Exg. Notes. ' Ver. 7.— [The iZ''c., on very insufBfient authority, omits toO before ©eov; inserted in N. ,A. B. C. D. F. G. * ViT. 8.— (Instead of yip, which is found in N. A. B. C. D. F., versions and fathers, the Ri'c. (with L., a'd Pcsbito) reads : Si. The latter readinp; probably arose from a misunderstandine of the connection (Alford), or because Xtyia Bi is so common with Paul (Meyer). The former is now generally adopted (from Griesbach to TregellcB). Philippi thinks a decision impossible ! * Ver. 8.-.-[D. F., Syriac versions, Rrc, insert '\ri omitted in ^^ A. C. L., fathers. It was easily inserted from ver. 10. Lacl>inann adopts it, but it is generally rejected. — The orderof the lUc: tov Kvpiov ndvra ra iBvi) is prolably a Corrcclion tooonforiii with the LXX. N. A. B. D., Vulgate, Syriac, &c. : n. t. iO. rbf xvpiov. So Lachmanii, Tischeiidorf Alford, Tregelles. " Ver. 11.— [N. A. B.C.: iiraivea-aroxrav. So Laclimann, Tischendorf, Meyer, De "Wetto, Alford, Trcgellesi Lango. Jtec, F. L., versions : iiran/ii/i(T)v Jtiaov A'^KTroT'.] He is not only the Father, but also the God, of Christ, in the high- est specific sense (thus Grotius [Bengel, Reiche, Fritzsche, Jowett], and others, in opposition to Mey- er). Comp. Eph. i. 17. • [With this accords the view of Dr. Hodge : " The ex- pression, t^ bf like-minded, does not here refer to unanimity of opinion, but to hnrmony of feeling ; see chaps, viii. 5 ; xii. 3." The context favors this very decidedly.— Meyer thinks "the example of Christ (ver. 3) is still the ruling thought;" but It is certainly not the exclusive one. The Teib Sifi) is the latter Hellenistic form for &>«i|. — li.] 28 [God, even the Father, &c. The E. V. thus renders, disconnecting " of our Lord Jesus Christ " from "God." So De Wette, PhiHpi)i, Meyer, Stuart, Webster and Wilkinson. Hodge, Thoiuck, and Al- ford, leave the question undecided. It woidd seem that either view is admissible grammatically ; y.ai is often used epexegeticaliy, even, and the article (standing before 5for only) nmy merely bind the two terms, "God" and "Father of Christ" (Meyer). At the same time, the article tnifJtt be looked for before nariiia, were xat explicative. Nor is there any doctrinal difficulty occasioned by either view. The only reason in my own mind for pre- ferring the interpretation of the E. V. is, that those exegetes, who are most delicate in their perceptions of grammatical questions, adopt it. See Meyer in loco. — R.] Ver. 7. Wherefore receive ye one another [fit 6 TiQoalaiipavta&f a).).t'i).oi'(;\ In th* intensive sense. An exhortation to both parties. As Christ also received you [ x « .9 lo t; xai 6 A' ^ trr T 6 <; 7i(JO(Tt).a.pfro v fi at;. See Text' ual Note ^] This is more definitely explained in vers. 8 and 9. To the glory of God [ft? Sotav rov Qfo'i. See Textual Note '.] This must be referred to Christ's reception of them, and not to the exhor. tation : receive ye one another, according to Chrysos- tom, and others.* That God might be (jlorijied. Not immediately, in order that we may share the Divine glory with Christ (Grotius, Beza, and others), although the glorification of God shall consist in that. As the self-humiliation of Christ, which was proved by His receiving men into His fellowship, led to the glorification of God (see John xvii.), so also, according to the previous verse, shall tlie same conduct of self-humiliation on the part of Christians have the same effect. But how has Christ received us into His fellowship ? Answer : Ver. 8. For I say [/.iyo) yuQ. See TexU ual Note *.] The Apostle now explains how Christ received the Jewish Christians and Gentile Chris- tians into fellowship with himself. — That Christ * [Dr. Hodge seems to prefer t.he other reference, while Dr. lange really adapts both in his further remarks. De. Hodge does not decide which re:iding he adopts, i/ttot Dt r|/xa? ; but snys that, if the former be the true reaiimg, Paul is "exhorting the Gentile converts to forbearanoa toward their Jewish brethren." This view is rejected by most of the later commentators, for both parties" are ad- dresped, as the context shows. Beciuse Paul often meaaa Gentiles when he says ^/leiy, we need not hold that ht always uses it in this sense. — ^B.l 434 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. [Xqkttov. See Textual Note '.] The reading Christ, as a designation of God's Son, in view of the incarnation. In this view He hath been made a minister of the circumcision [di.d/.ovov yfytvT^csOat, tt f^i tro/i //(,-. See Textual No'.e ''. Dr. Laiigc, in his Gurinan text of this verse, thus explains tliis i)hrase: ''from a higher, Diviiie-liuinan, ideal point of view, receiving the Jews into His fel- lowship, by submitting himself to circumcision." — K.] His concrete incarnation as a Jew, in which He became subject to tlie Jewish law (see Phil. ii. 7 ; Gal. iv. 4), must be distinguished from His in- carnation in the more general sense. By this means. He, as the heavenly Strong One, through voluntary love entered into the fellowship of the infinitely weak in both a human and legal sense, and accord- ingly received them into His fellowsiiip. It seems far-fetciied to regard th"; circumcision here (wicli Meyer [Phiiippi, Hodge], and others) as an abstract idea for t/ie circumcised.* Tlie circumcision de- notes the law ; and as He freely became a minister of the law, He also became a ministering companion of the Jews ; Matt. xx. 28. Therefore it is not the theocratic " honor of the Jews " which is empha- sized here (Meyer) [Phiiippi], but the condescen- sion to serve them. [So Hodge. /Iidy.nvov is in em|ihatic position. The view of the emphasis taken by Meyer seems confirmed by what follows, which sets forth an advantage of the Jews. — R.] For the sake of God's truth \^vntQ d).t]- ■&f iai; (-J env. Fur the sake of the truthfulness of God, in order to justify and to prove it by means of tiie fulfilment of the promises of the Old Testa- ment. — R.] This undoubtedly seems to express the advantage of the Jews ; but it also indicates their perilous condition. His condescension had a two- fold cause ; God's mercy, and His promises resting upon it. Principially, His mercy took the prece- dence ; but historically, the promise preceded. The truthfulness of (iod had to be sealed ; He must con- firm the promises given to the fathers by fulfilling them, however unfortunate the condition of the pos- terity ; must confirm them in a way finally valid, for, as such sealed promises, tliey still continue in force, according to chap, xi., especially to believers (see 2 Cor. i. 2() ; Rev. iii. 14). Ver. 9. And that the Gentiles, &c. [ra ^ lO-vrj VTTEQ II to I' c; d o t n (T a i, rbv (■) i- 6 v .^ Ciirist had to receive the Jews, acting as a minister to them through His whole life ; and He had to con- fine himself to historical labors among them, not so much because they were worthy of it, as to fulfil the promises given to the fathers. But the Gentiles were now the object of utterly unmerited mercy. The thought that Christ has redeemed the Gentiles through pure mercy, which was not yet historically pledged to them (for the promises in the Old Tes- tament in relation to the Gentiles were not pledges to the Gentiles themselves), now passes immediately over into the representation of the fact that the Gentiles have already come to glorify God as believ- ers, in which they have an advantage on their side also. The meaning of I'l Tie (> s^. to re; is, that mer- cy could not help satisfying itself for its own sake, by redemption. The tiolciaav has been trans- lated by Riickert [De Wette, Hodge, Alford], and • [This view can scarcely be deemed " far-fetchod," when it is so readily .su^crested by the antithesis, fdv-q (vcr. 9), and when Paul so frequently uses the term in this sense (c imp. chap. iii. 20 : Gal. ii. 7 ff. ; Eph. ii. 11 ; Col. iii 11).-R.] Others : have glorified ; by KiiUner [Calvin, ThO" luck], and Phiiippi: should glorify. See Meyer on tins |)oint, p. 517.* The aorist says, at all events, that they have dicidcdly begun to glorify God. For this cause I will give thanks to thee, &C. \^Ji,cc ToT'TO i io /I o /.oy r'j )i,d Torro = vn't{i i/.iovi;). But this is the plastic description of glorifying on the part of the Gentiles themselves, which takes place in the name of the Lord Jesus, and through Him (Col. iii. 17)." Ver. 10. Rejoice, ye Gentiles, with his people [ f."i'i(/ (J ar 5 //Tf i O r r/ fi frd roT' ).aoTi ctrTori. See Txtual JSfote ', for the Hebrew text. — R.] Deut. xxxii. 43. From the LXX., which reads //fT« roTi }.ao7' ai'Tor for "is? , "probably following another reading : 1^""rX ; " Meyer. On the impo.'isibility of understanding, by Goim, the single tribes of Israel, which De Wette does, comp. Tholuck, p. 730. [Also Phiiippi, whose remarks on this citation are unusually full and valuable. — R.] According to the theocratic idea, the definitions : rejoice to his people, or rather, iiiake his people rejoice ( I3^3"in ), ye Gentiles, and rejoice with hi* peofile, amount to llie same thing. Ver. 11. Praise the Lord; Ps. cxvii. 1. [An exact citation from the LXX. See Textual Notes " and ", however. — R.] A prophecy of the univer- sal spread of salvation. Ver. 12. And again, Isaiah saith. [See Textual Note '".] In chaj). xi. 10 : According to the LXX., which, however, has translated the original text so freely that the twofold dominion of the Messiah is indicated, on the one hand, over the Jews (as the root of Jesse), and, on the other, over the Gentiles. A root of Jesse [a} yt^a rov '/fccrat]. See Isa. xi. 1. The tree of the royal house of David being cut down, the Messiah arose from the root of the house, which is symbolized by Jesse. In a high, er sense, Christ was indeed the holy root of Jesse, and of the house of David itself. • [The aorist infinitive Sofia- a i has occasioned soma trouble amonfi; the grammarians. 1. It has been taken ns dependent on Xe'yoj (ver. 8). So "Winei, p. 3U, Eodge, Alford, Be Wette, Phiiippi; but in different senses : (" ) I sn y that the Gentiles /cav praised God (at their conversion). So Alford, Hod'.;e, Be "Wette. But tliis is both contrary to tlie usajre with the aorist infini- tive, and iiitroiuces a thought that does not seem to belong here naturally, (l.) I say tt.at the Gentiles ought to praise God (Calvin, Phiiippi, Tholuck). But there is no idea ol oblieation introduced in ver. 8 which is parallel to this. ('■.) I say that the Gentiles praise (indefii.ite y). So Winer, Fritzsche. But to this there are fnammatical objections. Besides this, all the^e involve au incorrei t view of tb« dependence of the infinitive. 2. The simplest, most natural view, is that of the E. V., McyiT, &<•. The infinitive stands next to a clause wljere there is also an aorist infinitive OePatcucrat) ; it is therefore ciirirdinatc with this, depinding also on eis rv, though express' ng the more remote purpose : Christ was made a minister, &c., in order to confirm the promises, and as a result of this, that the Gentiles might praise God for Hif mercy. — K.J CHAPTER XV. 5-13. 4SS Ver. 13. And may the God of hope. A l^nd description of God here, whore the object is to remind the Ilonian Cliristiiins to lead a life in per- fect accordance witii their universal calling. To this ulso belongs the duty of looking conlidently and prayerfu'ly to the God of hope, the God of that future of salvation which is so infinitely rich, both extensively and intensively. With all joy and peace. From that hope, the highest possible evangelical, saving joy, shall spring; the result of this shall be the richest meas- ure of peace, and the harmony and unanimity of faith. This sliall take place in believing {ni,(T- rtvuVy it is not by unbelief, or by abridging our faith, that the Unity of Christianity siiould be sought), and accordingly these two S{)iritual bless- ings shall ever produce a richer hope, not in human power and according to a human measure, Init in the inward measure and divine power of the Holy Ghost.* Therefore the realization of hope should not be striven for by the aid of earthly and even infernal powers : one shepherd and one fold ! According to Grotius, the end of tliis hope is harmony ; according to Tholuck, the immediate end is the gracious gifts of God's kingdom ; while the ultimate end is the regnuin glurice. However, there lies just between these the end which the Apostle here has in view — that by the aid of the Church at Rome, in their fel- lowship with Paul, all nations shall be brought, by the spread of faith, to glorify God ; Eph. i. IS if. DOCTRINAL XKD ETHXCAL. 1. The great grounds of the profound and per- fect harmony and unanimity of Christians, a. God as the God of patience and comfort ; that is, as the God of the infinite power of passive and active love ; h. The pattern, the spirit, the power, and the work of Christ ; e. The design that Christians, by being like-minded, and by aiming at subxtant'al fellowship in God and in Christ (as created and redeemed), should find also the ethical fellowship of harmony and unanimity. 2. The universal fellowship into which Christ has entered with humanity, and the special fellow- ship in which He has pledged himself to the Jews, constitute the basis for the most special and real fellowship into which He, through His grace, has entered with believers. But it is a grievous offence to refuse conununion with him whom Christ, by the witness of faith and of confession, has communion, or to abridge and prejudice hearty intercourse with those whom God, in Christ, deems worthy of His fellowship. [Ver. 7 seems to be a dictum pvobans for what is termed "open communion." — R.J 3. On the antithesis : Christ Jesus and Jesus Christ, see the Exeg. Notes. 4. It is also clear here (see ver. 8) that we must • fM'yer remlers : in virtue of Vie (inworkiBp) power of •!• TInly Ghost. Our E. V., usually so apt, is peculiarly untbrtunute i:i its treatment of the preposition iv, ■nhioh It rcndci-8 through in this case. The later revisinns have by. But it is to he doul'tcd whether iv over has a strictly InsiTuinnntal force. The peculiar meaninp, in, always re- mains 'u it. So here, in bi'lirvivg, in the power of tlir Holy Ghost; ti^e former expressing the subpctive, and the latter, she ohjeetivi' means, yet the ibmirr sets forth the status, in which {gtduhfgsein) they arc, and the latter an anworkiiig pcver. ''otnj). PhilippC— E.] distinguish between the iJad incarnation of Chiisl in itself, and His concrete incarnation in Judaism, and, generally, in the form of a servant. 5. God is free in His grace, ar.d yet also bound in His truth, for He has bound liinisell to His prom, ises. But tins obligation is the higiiest glory of Uis freedom. His truthfulness had to satisly His word, but His mercy had to satisfy itself. G. Tlie riches of the Old Testament in promises for the Jews, and the high aim of these promises • a woild of nations praising the Loid. 7. The God of patience, cirnfort, hope. All such terms define God to be infinite, and infinite as a fountain, as .^elf-communicating life, and archetype of life. So also is the Holy ."spirit defined as tlie Spirit of truth, &e. See the beautifid remark of Geilach, below. But the highest thing for which we can praise God, according to ver. 6, is His being the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Clirist. Isot only is He His Father in the specific sense, but also Hia God ; the glorious (iod of His consciousness and life is the true God in perfect revelation, and conse- quently shall become our God tlirough Him. 8. On the development of hope, within the sphere of faith, into joy and peace, and, by means of peace, mto an ever richer hojjc, see tlie Exeg. Notes. It is only in tliis way that irenics can be conducted in the power of the Holy Ghost, and not wiih the modern artifice of attempting tiiem outside the sphere of faith, beyond all creeds, and with the theory of unconscious Christianity, or even with the violent mcMsin-es of tlie Middle Ages. The Apostle says : In the power of the Holy Ghost. nOMILETlCAL AND PRACTICAIi. Jewish and Gentile Christians should agree for Christ's sake, who has received them both. — Chris- tian harmony. 1. It comes from the God of pa- tience and comfort ; 2. It is shaped according to the pattern and will of Jesus Christ ; 3. It express- es itself in harmonious praise of God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ (vers. 5, 6). — A harmonious and fraternal tiisposition is a source of the joyous praise of God, which is not disturbed by a discord- ant note (vers. 5, 6). — Jesus Christ a minister of the circumcision. 1. Why? For the truth of God, to confirm the promise. 2. How ? In obedience to the Divine law, for freedom from the law (ver. 8). — Receive one another, as Christ also received us, to the glory of God. Every thing to God's glory, and not to our own (ver. 7). — The praise of God out of the mouth of Gentiles : 1. Established in God's mercy ; 2. Resounding in many tongues ; 8. As- cending to heaven (ver. 9). — God's mercy toward the Gentiles : 1. Present from the beginning ; 2. Declared by the prophets ; 3. Manifested in Christ (vers. 9-13). Ver. 13 is an appropriate te.xt and theme for addresses on occasions of confirmation or marriage. Starke : In Christ, souls arc worth so much tha God receives them, just as men hoard gold and sil- ver, pearls and gems; Isa. xliii. 4 (ver. 7). — 51 il- LKR : Patience does not increase in the girden of nature, but it is God's gift and grace ; God is tha real Master who creates it (ver. 5).— Because Christ is a root. He must vegetate, bloom, and bring forth fruit in us (ver. 12). Gerlach : God is the source of all good thing% 436 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. and since He not merely hsis them, but they are His real essence ; since He does not have love and om- nii)otence, but is actually love and oninipotence themselves, so can He be denominated according to every glorious attribute and gitt which He possesses. Tlie advantage which the Gentiles tiiouglit that they po!4essed in their polytheism, when they, for exam- ple, worshipped a deity of truth, of hope, &c., is possessed in a much more certain and effective way by the believing Christian, when he perceives, in a vital manner, that the true God is himself personal faitiifuluess, hope, and love, and thus has all these attributes just as if He had nothing else but them (ver. 5). Hkubner : The harmony of hearts is the real Boul and power of worship (ver. 6). — Christ is the cetitre of the Holy Scriptures (ver. 8). — Christ is the bond of all nations (ver. 12). — God alone is the source of all life and blessing in the Church. The means is faith, as the ever new appropriation of sav- ing blessings ; from this arises the enjoyment of peace and of all blessed joys — an overflow of hope. But every thing is brought to pass by the Holy Spirit (ver. 13). Bksskr : The Scriptures are a book of patience and comfort (ver. 5.) — Every thing which is true jni/ in tills life, is a foretaste of the joy of eternal life — joy in the Lord and His word, joy in all His blessings, which make body and soul happy, &c. . . . All true peace in tiiis world of contention and anxiety, is a preliminary enjoyment of the peace in the kingdom of glory. ScHLKiKRMACHER : The limitation in the labors of our Saviour himself, when we look at His person, and tlie greater freedom and expansion in tl'.e labors of His disciples. 1. Treatment; 2. Application (vers. 8, 9). Vers. 4-13. The Pericope for the Second Sun- djii in Adnent. — Sciiultz: On the likeness of Christ and His redeemed ones. 1. In what respect has Christ become like us ? 2. In what respect should we become like Christ? a. In patience and humil- ity ; b. In the respect and love with which He treated all men ; c. In the joyful faith and peaceful hope with which He overcame the world. — Rikmer: What must there be among Ciu-istians, in order that the Church of Christ may stand ? 1. One founda- tion ; 2. A harmonious mouth ; 3. A common bond.— Brandt : To what does the season of Ad- vent exiiort us ? 1. To the industrious examination of wliat has been written ; 2. To the unanimous praise of God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, for all that has been already fulfilled ; 3. To an attentive waiting for the future coming of God's kingdom. — Heubner : The unity of the Christian Church. 1. In what does it consist? 2. What binds us to it? — The Bible the bond of the Chris- tian Church. 1. Proof: It is the bond, a. In faith, or in doctrine ; b. In the holy sense, or in love ; c. In worship ; d. In daily life. 2. Application, a. A warning against despising the Bible, and an admo- nition to maintain its authority ; b. A dissemination of its use ; c. Our own proper use of it. — The Bible the treasure of the evangelical Church. — The in- ward unity of true Christians amid outward diversity. [BoRKiTT : The Christian's hope : 1. God is its ol)ject, and therefore the sin of despair ia most un- rciisonable ; for why should any despair of His mer- cy wlie is the God of hope, who commands us to hope ic His mercy, and takes pleasure in them that 60 ? 2. The grace of hope, together with joy and peace in believing, are rooted in the Christian'! heart, through the power of the Holy Ghost — that is, through the sanctifying influences of the Holy Ghost — enlightening the understanding, inc!i;iing the will, rectifying the affections, and reducing all the rebellious powers and faculties of the soul in con. currence with our endeavors under the gOTernment and dominion of reason a.ni. religion. [Henry: The method of faith is: 1. To seek Christ as one proposed to us for a Saviour ; 2. And, finding Him able and willing to save, then to trust in Him. They that know Him will trust in Him. Or, this seeking Him is the effect of a trust in Him, seeking Him by prayer and pursuant endeavors. Trust, is the mother ; diligence in the use of means, the daughter. — What is laid out upon Christians ia but little compared with what is laid up for them.— Doddridge : Nothing can furnish so calm a peace and so sublime a joy as Christian hope. — That is the most happy and glorious circumstance in the station which Providence may have assigned us, which gives us the greatest opportunity of spreading the honor of so dear a name, and of presenting praises and services to God through Him. KoLLOCK, Sermon on the patience of God: I. The nature of tiiis patience, or slowness to anger: (1.) It is a modification of the Divine goodness; (2.) It is not the result of ignorance ; (3.) It is not the result of impotence ; (4.) It is not the result of a connivance at sin, or a resolution to suffer it with impunity ; (5.) But it is grounded on the everlast- ing covenant, and the blood of Jesus. II. Some of the most illustrious manifestations of it. III. The reasons why God exercises it : (1.) He is patient because of His benignity ; (2.) In order that this perfection may be glorified ; (3). In consequence of the prayers of pious ancestors ; (4.) Because the wicked are often mixed with the pious, and nearly related to them ; (5.) The number of His elect ia not yet completed ; (6.) The measure of the sins of the wicked is not yet filled up ; (V.) That sinners may be brought to repentance ; (8.) That .sinners who continue impenitent may at last be without ex- cuse ; (9.) Tiiat His power may be displayed ; (10.) That He may exercise the trust of His servants in Him. IV, The effects that the belief and knowl- edge of it should produce upon our hearts and lives: (1.) Because of God's patience we should love Him; (2.) We should repent ; (3,) We should imitate Hiiri ; (4.) His patience should be our comfort ; (5.) We should grieve at the reproaches and insults cast upon God, [HoMiLETiCAL LITERATURE on vcr. 13 : Hdgh Binning, Worht, vol. iii. 249; R. Lucas, ./oy, Peaccy and Hope, the Christiaii's Portion Here, Serm. (1709), vol, ii. 119; Bishop Moore, Ezcelipncy of the Christian Religion, Serm., vol. ii. 291 ; James Craig, Serm., vol. ii. 355 ; J, Dodson, -Toy in Be- lievinv-?l of Christ. [;] Yea, so have I strived [Y.et on this wise making it my ambition] * to preach the gospel, not where Christ was [already] named, lest I 21 should [that I might not] build upon another man's foundation : But as it is written,' To whom he was not spoken of, they [They to whom no tidings of him came] shall see : And they that have not heard shall understand. 22 For which cause also I have been much [for the most part] '" hindered from 23 coming to you. But now having no more [no more having] place in these parts, and having a great desire these many years [having these many years a longing] 24 to come unto you ; Whensoever I take my journey into Spain, I will come to you [omit I will come to you] : " for '* I trust to see you in my journey [as I pass through], and to be brought on my way thitherward [to be sent forward thither] by'* you, if first I be somewhat [in some measure] tilled with your company. 25 But now I go unto Jerusalem to minister [ministering] unto the saints. 26 For it hath pleased them of Macedonia and Achaia [Macedonia and Achaia thought it good] to make a certain contribution for the poor [among the] saints »27 which are at Jerusalem. It hath pleased them verily [For they thought it good] ; and their debtors they are. For if the Gentiles have been made par- takers of [have shared in] their spiritual things, their duty is [they owe it] also 28 to minister unto them in carnal things. When therefore I have performed this, and have sealed [v. e., secured] to them this fruit, I will come [retuj-n] '* by you 29 [through your city] mto Spain. Aud I am sur^, that, when I come unto you, I shall 438 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS, come in the fulness of the blessing of the gospel [omit of the gospel] " of 30 Clirist. Now I beseech you, brethren,'" for the Lord Jesus Christ's sake [by our Lord Jesus Christ], and for [by] the love of the Spirit, that ye [to] strivfl 31 tot^ether with me in your'' prayers to God for me; That I may be delivered from them that do not believe [the disobedient] in Judea; and that my service [nunistration] " which I have [is] for Jerusalem may be accepted of [prove 32 acceptable to] the saints ; That I may come unto you with [in] joy by the will 33 of God," and may with you be refreshed." Now the God of peace be with you all. Amen. " TEXTUAL. » Ver. 14.— [Instead of aAA^Aovs (x- A. B. C. D. F.), adopted by modern editors generally, a^\ouj is found in L., many cursives, versions, and fiitliers. As an alteratioa to stiengthen the sense, or an error of tQe transcriber, it i« readily accounted for. The list of cursives given by Dr. HodL'e adds little to the support of this reading.— The (cai il ilso omitted, and aAA^Aovs put before Swdfifvoi, in some authorities. These are evidently corrections, to avoid repeati' g xaC for the third time. 2 Ver 15. — [A. B. : ToAnTjpoTe'p u s . Evidently a gloss, since the adjective is used adverbially. ' Ver. 15 —[X'. A. B. C, umit oScAcfiot ; rejected by Lachniann, Tischendorf, Tregelles. It is found in N'. D. F. L., Vulgate, &c. ; adopted by Philippi, De Wette, Meyer, Lange ; bracketted by Alford. The omission can be accounted for by the interruption the word made in the connection, while there is no good reason for its insertion, save its genuineness. * Ver. 16. — [Rec, D. L., some versions and fathers: 'Itjo-oO XpioroO. N. A. B. C. F. : Xpi<. B. D'. F. (Lachmann, Tre^'cllcs) : iAoTi;aoO|a a i . There are other variations, all of which indicate that the original reading was one occasioning grammatical difficulty. Hence the first rcadini; is generally adopted, and the other considered a grammatical correction.— The E. V. requires emendation, biith on account of the particip al foi-m, connecting this verse with the preceding one, an' vftiov; B. (aTrb) D. F. : ai^' vp.iov. The former is adopted by Philippi, Tregelles ; the latter by Lachmajm, Tischendorf, Meyer, De Wette, AJford, Lanse. '* Ver. 2a.— ['ATTcAeu'cr o/x,a I, TwiH prnreeil, with a, primary reference to the point of departure (an-o), but followed by et9, it points to the terminus a^i qtiem. Neither come (Ya. V.) nor ^0 (Amer. Bible Union) exactly meets the case. Return, in this case, is peculiarly appropriate ; return from Jerusalem and go to Spain. So Five Ang. Clergymen. — The labors of the learned authors have been fn-ely used in this section. 15 Ver. 29. —[The words toO euayyeAi'ov tou (inserted before XpicrTou, in N'. L. Rec, versions and fathers) are now consideri'd a gloss. They are not found in N'. A. B. C. D. F., are rejected by the Latin fathers, and by all modern critical editors, also Philippi and Hodge, who are least disposed to vary from the ReopCa. But N. A. C. D' '. L., most versions favor StaKovCa, which is adopted by most later editors. So Tischendorf, Meyer, Philippi, Tregelles. Lnchmann prefers the former, whi'h, however, seemi to have been substituted as an explanation. — On the same authority, i) «is 'Icp. is to be preferred to ^ iv 'I (Lachmann). '* Vir. 32.— [Instead of the well-sustained and generally received ©eoO (Rec. N'. A. C. D'. L., most versions and fathers), we find xvplov 'Irjo-oD (H.), XpiixTou "Irjo-ou (D'. F.), 'ItjctoD Xpto-Tou (x*.). The uncial authority is decisive Besides, Paul always siys: OdKriixa ©eoO, never XpiffjoD (so Meyer, and others). CHAPTER XV. 14-33. 4Si; ■' Ver. 82.— [Lachmann ami Tiscliondoif omit Kai a-vvavairavaoiiJLai. vulv, on tho authority of B. The fords aie fniiinl (wiih variations) in (N.) A.. C. (L>. F.) L., and are Mdoptcd by Meyer, l)e Wette, Wnlijipi, Trcgelles Alford biackets. NotwitUblaudaig the variations, thero is no motive lor insertion which would jutitily us iu njectina ' »» Vcr. 33.— [A. F. G. omit 'An^v; found in N. B. C. D. !>., versions and fathers. Brnckctfcd by Tregellie, but generally received. 'I'he word is always open to some suspicioii, as a liturgical addition, at the close of a benodiction. -B.J EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. The following section is termed an Ephcjuc by Tholuck and Meyer. But this view does not corre- spond with the purpose and construction of the Epistle. Tiie Apostle now comes to tiie last design of iiis Epistle, which is, to make Rome the princi- pal station for his missionary labors in the West. See Schott, Dcr Jiomerbne/\ p. 314, and elsewhere. Suinr/Kin/. — A. The Apostle explains, almost apologetically, that his addressing the Romans was the result of his call to make the Gentiles, in priestly labor, an acceptable offering to God ; and he gives jnformation respecting the general completion of his work in the East (to Illyricum), and the results of the same ; vers. 14-19. B. Bis prinrip/e, not to invade the sphere of the labor of others (conduct the very opposite of that of all sectaries). The consequent impediments to his coming to Rome, where Christian congrega- tions already exist. The desire, that nevertheless arose in harmony with his calling, to take this step. His hesitation not being fully removed, he describes his intended visit to Rome as a sojourn to gain strength for his further journey to Spain — that is, to the limits of the West ; doubtless in the expec- tation that the Church will welcome him, and com- mit itself to his direction ; vers. 20-24. C. The last hindrance from his journey to Rome. The mention of f;ho collections a proof of his love for believing Israelites, an expression of the proper conduct of Gentile Christians toward Jewish Chris- tians. A further announcement of his journey through Rome, and of his visit, in the spirit of p.postolical refinement. A f<^rcboding reference to the obstructing hostility of the unbelievers in Judea, and a request that the Roman Christians should yr&y for the fulfilment of his purpose of coming to ihem ; vera. 26-33. A. Vers. 14-19. — Vcr. 14. Even I myself; vi'to? ey"'? chap. vii. 25. He himself, tha same, 'vho has admonished them, has also this conviction. Thus he is not in antithesis to vthcrs (Tholuck),* Ifjt he, ns the one persuaded, is in antithesis to his fidmovHion. This is fiivorcd by the following verse. V'ritzsche, De Wette, Philippi [Stuart, Alford], ex- plain similarly. [Ye edso yourselves, xal avroL "With- out any exhortation of mine " (Alford). — R.] — Are full of goodness [ftfaroi tar f a ;- « .9 (» - / <; ]. In the foregoing section the ayaOov was to be understood particularly of humility and eelf-denying love, as the key-note of Christ's feel- ing ; accordingly, it must also here be construed as • substantive. (Meyer : " That ye are also of your- • [Meyer (followed by Hodge in last edition) under- #^nds it to mean : " I of myself, without the testimony of others." He urees the em )>hasi:s which he thinks rests on - (Ti'vt] ill its wider sense, full of virtue, or excellence." This last is adopted, apparently, from Meyer ; it i« 80 wide as to seem almost too eomplimentary. — R.] With all knowledge [ /'roifff ox;. We re- ject the article, wliicli is found only in j^. B. — R.] The Apostle very willingly refers the yrrTiffn,- par- ticularly to the universal destination of Christianity ; comp. Eph. i. — Admonish, vnnOmlv. Strictly, to direct with brotherly feeling. To set the heart right is not a human aft'air ; but when the heart ia properly disposed, the ror*,- (or even the head) can be placed right. Vcr. 15. [Howbeit I have ■written more boldly unto you, toI/i ti^ior t(jov i)k iy(>a\i'a t'/fir]. The adjective is used adverbially. Meyer insists upon the comparative sense. [The verb t'y((c«V'a is the epistolary aorist, / have written; hence the Amer. Bible Union, / wrote, is a slavish following of the rule which makes the Greek aorist equivalent to the English past tense. The authors of that version unfortunately ignore all exceptions. — Brethren, adflifioi. See Tcxtval Note '. — In some measure, aTi'o fiioovi;. This qualifies eyijari'a : I have written boldly in pUiees (so De Wette, Meyer, Lange) ; not the adverb : 7 have written someiohot too boldly (Pesliito, Grotiu.s, Hodge). Hence the E. V. does not convey tlie meaning cor- rectly. — R.] The boldness consists in his having spoken to them as to his own church, although lie is not, strictly speaking, its founder, and refers, fot the most part, to chap. xiv. if. Meyer enumerates^ in preference, a number of other passages : chap, vi. 12 fif., &c. [viii. 9 ; xi. 17 ff. ; xii. 3 ; xiii. 3 ff. ; xiv. 3 f. 10, 13, 16, 20; xv. 1.— R.] As putting you in mind. He can say this in a general sense of the Christian state of develop- ment, which he presupposes in them, and, in a special sense, with reference to his many friends in Rome, who were not only his disciples, but also his helpers. Because of the grace, &c. [rfta rijv /«- ^u', z.T./..] The following verse explains the sense in which he means this. Because his great and gracious call impels him to go far beyond Kome, he must first of all arrange matters perfectly with thorn. [The common interpretation : " My apostolic office was the ground and reason of my boldness," does not exclude the special reference suggested by Dr. Lange. — R.] Ver. 16. That I should be a minister [fit, TO flval /If }.fi,rov(jynr. The purpose of the grace given to him. — R.] The /f^TOl■^;'0(,• denotes, not only according to the immediate coimection, but also according to the character of tiie whole Efiistle, the minister in public worship ; Meyer ; the sacri ficinci priest ; Heb. viii. 2; Phil. ii. 17. Christ Jesus [ A' p kt t o r 'J tjtf ov . This reading seems most accordant with the context, since the priestly service under Christ, the Kivg, is referred to. — R.] Reiche : Christ is the offering brought ; Riickert, very properly, says : Clirist ii the High-Priest ; against which Meyer strangejj 440 TDF EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. urges, that thi.i 'm not an idea of Paul, but of the Epistle to tho Hebrews. | Dc Wette, Meyer, Fritzsche, and I'liilippi, tliink that Christ is lepre- Bented liere as Head and King of the Church, whicti is perhaps preferable. — R.] Ministering (as a priest in) the gospel of Ood \_if(Jov(>yoTivTa to tvayyiXiov roT' &fnv. Performing a priestly office with reference to the gospel. — K.] Explanations: 1. The gospel Ls the offering (Luther). 2. The office of the gos- pel is his priestly office (Erasmus, Tholuck, &c.). As tlie law was the basis of the Old Testament cul- ius, 80 the gospel is the basis of the New Testament cuUvi. Hence the meaning is : Explaining, as min- istrant to the High-Priest, Christ, the gospel in its liturgical character, and transforming the knowledge of God contained in the gospel into evangelical praise of God (thank-offering) ; see chap. i. 21. [A slight modification is necessary, if Christ be represented here as King. Estius: '■'■ Administrans ev itiffellum a Deo misxam. koininibux, eoque ministerio velut sacerdotio fun'/ens." — R.] The offering of the Gentiles [tj ngoa- (po(ta n')v tOvoiv. Genitive of apposition.] Not the ottering which the Gentiles bring, but which the Gentiles themselves are (burnt-offerings). Being sanctified in the Holy Ghost [i^yt- aanivrj iv nv f V n ax I, ayim. Ev seems to be instrumental, and yet may well indicate the ele- ment in which they were sanctified, purified. — R.] In the real New Testament mode, not in the merely typical sense of the consecration in the temple.* Ver. 17. I have therefore my boasting in Christ Jesus [i'/w oi'V rtjv ■/.av/tjfji.v tv X(j(.(TT(Ti 'Jtjdoi'. See Textual J^ote ^.] We take «/(.) as emphatic, and in connection with the words C/irist JsHiiK. His glorying (tiie act itself) in his great calling, he, as the minister of Christ, holds within the bounds of the fellowship and Spirit of Christ. [He incidentally opposes any suspicion of his glorying himself, but the main emphasis does not rest on this. De Wette, Alford : " I venture to boast." i?i, not ihvoiuih Christ (E. V., Stuart). — R.] In those things vrhich pertain to God [t« TTQOi; r'ov (-Jfov^ According to the context, the restoration of the real worship of God in the world is meant. [Philippi, De Wette, Alford : " My above-named sacerdotal office and ministry." — R.] Meyer says, however : " My boasting is something which belongs to me in virtue of my connection with Christ, in relation to God's cause." Reiche : My glorying consij^ts in my glorying of Christ. [Dr. Hodge mentions another: "I have offerings for God — i. e., Gentile converts." Too far-fetched. — R.] Ver. 18. For I will not dare, &c. [ov ya^ T o ?. II r'l (T , x.T. )..']. The yctQ explains how he meant the foregoing expression in ver. 17. But ver. 17 refers to ver. 16, in proof that he knows that he is placed, as a minister, completely under the direction and operation of the Spirit of Chiist, the High-Priest. Thus Paul speaks, and thus John Bpeaks ; but modern criticism, on the other hand, boldly maintains the contrary — that Paul corrected • [This verse, instead of sunportine the idea that the Ohristia'i ministry is a priesthood, virtually opposes it. Had tlie A))ostle l:iid claim to actual and special sacerdotal ftint'ioTis, it irt very unlikely that tie would have kept the olaii.; BO const.intly out of sipfht In his Epistles. In this passage, the otloiinp is a fig^urative one , the priestly func- tion i^ also figurative. The !-ilence of the rest of his writ- indfs of itself proves that this must be regarded in another th;in a literal sense. See Doctr. Note ♦.— R.] the Ebionitic form of Christ, and that then (" pseu do ") John again corrected Pauliinsm. — The constant purpose was to call the Gentiles to the obedience of faith. Tholuck, and others, here accept a reterenca to the experiences which Paul had suffered in Cor- inth from the Judaists. But his purpose is, to show to the Romans that he comes to them .simply as an instrument of Christ. [The emphasis rests on oi' xat fiqydaato, did not work. Hodge, following Theodoret, and others, places it on Christ, so that the antithesis ia what he did, or could do, of liimself. But the view taken of the verse by most commentators will ap. pear from Alford's paraphrase : " I have real ground for glorying (in a legitimate and Christian manner) ; for I will not (as some false apostles do) allow mt/- self to speak of any of those things which {i,>v for inflvotv, a) Christ did NOT work by me (but by some other) in order to the obedience (subjection to the gospel) of the Gentiles (then, as if the sentence were in the affirmative form, ' I will only boast of what Christ has veritably done by me toward the obedience of the Gentiles,' he proceeds) by word and deed.** This last phrase is to be joined with ver. 19. — R.] Ver. 19. In the pow^er of signs and w^on- ders [ ev dvvdfift a rj ft i imv xal t f ^ « t «> v ]. Thus the si>yov of Paul is explained. Comp. the Acts of the Apostles. — But he refers every thing, word and work, signs and wonders, in a more spe- cial sense (in signs the miracle refers to the coming renewed world, and in re'^ai,- to the astonishment of the old world) to the power of the Spirit, the spirit, ual life in which the Holy Spirit has become one with his spirit.* These " wonders" are incidentally a confirmation of the accounts of similar import in the Acts of the Apostles, and are therefore very un- comfortable to Baur, and others ; comp. 2 Cor. xii. 12. From Jerusalem. After the intensiveness of his labors, he comes to their extensiveness. Three points must be here observed : (1.) From Jerusa- lem ; (2.) y.i'ixko) ; (3.) To Illyricum. As for (1.), the Apostle has reckoned his stay in Aral)ia and Damascus among his years of instruction, and not among his years as teacher. Likewise Jerusalem, where he first entered upon his apostolical labors, was not only the starting-point of the mission of all the apostles, but especially of his (see Acts ix. 28, 29; xxii. 18.) Round about [xnl xiixXiy']. This does not mean in an arc (from Jerusalem by way' of Asia Minor, Macedonia, and Greece, to Illyricum ; Theo- doret, Flacius, and others), but round about ; •{• in which, indeed, points forming a circle come into consideration, thougli the expression must not be pressed geographically. As ifar as lUyricum [/(t/()t rnv '/AAi'^»- xov^. The later expositors generally regard Illyri- cum as the terminus (see Tholuck) ; but Meyer, on the contrary, is of the opinion that this view sub- jects the Apostle to the suspicion of boasting ; and • [Should TTvev/noTos be accepted as the correct read- ing, then, of course, wveOfia may be taken in the sGcond sense (see p. 23.5) ; yet this is not absolutely necessary since Meyer rejects the longer reading, and at the same time refers nvevfj-aTOi to the Holy Spirit. But the reading TT^eufiaTos ayiov is more probably correct ; see Texluai Note '.-R.l t [T)o "Wittc, Philippi. Alford, and others, join this with "Jerusalem," taking it as — and tlie iieighhorhood. It doei seem to be connected with the startiuL'-point, and yet Dr Lancre rightly includes the intermediate joumeyings, &0i -R.] CHAPTER XV. 14-33. 441 probably, therefore, that he made an excursion into Illyiicuin, " possibly to the journey narrated iu Acts XX. 1-3." But /(t/('t Oai.daaiji; means to the sea, not into the sea. In Acts xx. 1-3 there is no trace of a journey by way of Macedonia and Greece to the West. I have fully preached, n tn ).»}(> iDxivaif. [Literally: have fulfilled ; but the E. V. conveys the iiiciining (juite accurately. — R.] Not complete- ly discharged the oflice of the gospel (Bcza, Bengol, and others), but completely tpread the gospel. The expression, therefore, does not mean : accomplished every thing with the gospel (Luther), or, perfectly declared the gospel (Olshausen). See Meyer [p. 527] for other explanations. The dilBculty disap- pears if we appreciate the circumstances and method of the apostles. They had neither time nor calling to perform missionary labor in every village ; they understood their calling in a universally historic and dynamic sense, and, consequently, when they had once conquered the fortresses, they had also con- quered the surrounding country. B. Vers. 20-24. — Ver. 20. Yet on this wise making it my ambition [oi'to) dk qi,).ori,- u o V fi fvov. See Textual Note '. The verb means : to make it a point of honor. Alford thinks, how- ever, that it loses its primary meaning here, which is doubtful. — R.] See the Lexicons. The ipi,}.o- Tt/f oi'/( f roi', as an accusative dependent on fii, Bee 2 Cor. x. 15. Was already named [onov wvofidaO-tj]. Has been named according to His name. — This prin- ciple [which must not be deemed an attempt to avoid opposition (Reiche, and others). — R.] was in harmony with the labors of the apostles everywhere, because they had to lay the foundation. But it had a special meaning for Paul — that he had to establish the gospel in its full and most universal diffusion, and therein would not collide with the often nation- ally qualified, though evangelically free, missionary methods of the other apostles (see Gal. ii.). The subsequent settlement of John in Epliesus was the result of a call to lay an ideal and unifying founda- tion, by means of which even the work of Paul could be carried further forward ; besides, the labors of John embraced many churches which had arisen after Paul's labors in that region. Ver. 21. But as it is written. [See Textual Note', \4kkd, introduces the positive explanation of ol'Tw, on this wise ; not where others had preached, but according to this rule of Scripture. — R.] Isa. lii, 15, according to the LXX. Meyer says that the subject is the (there mentioned) kinr/s, not the nations. Not at all, even if the subject be violently rent asunder into two parts. The univer- sal impulse of the gospel to go farther and farther into every land, was already expressed in prophecy. Ver. 22. For Tvhich cause also I have been for the most part hindered [Jto xat tn- xonrofttjv t« tt o).).a.\ Because he had to carry on his missionary labors now here and now there in the East. According to Meyer, Paul would Bay : By this means I have baen hindered in most cases (t« nokkd\ besides other instances. Un- doubtedly the Apostle knows also other instances of Rindrance ; see 1 Thess. ii. 18.* • [PhiUppi, Hodare, and others, adopt this view of to moWa. as = plerumque, for the most part — i. e., this was the principal rea'on. Alford follows Schott and De Wette, vhc understand it to mean : these many timei—i. e., so often. Ver. 23, No more having place [/t tjy.it xonov 'i'/iitvY Meyer, following Luther: upace^ scope. [Philippi, De Wette, Alford : opportunity^ occasion. — R.] But the Apostle's scope was condi. tioned by a standing place, a central point ; and here it is most natural to think of such a place. Tho« luck : " The apostles were accustomed to cany on missionary labor in the metropolitan cities, leaving the further extension of the gospel to the churchw" established there, and therefore, after all, to let the pagani remain heathen." Ver. 24. Whensoever. The Jit; dv [instead ofidv{Rec.). — R.]: qnandocunque. — Spain \_2^7Ta,- I't'cti']. Usually called Iberia by the Greeks. The Roman Hispania. According to Meyer, this plan for his journey was not fulfilled ; according to The- luck, the question depends on whether we accept a second Roman captivity, and this again on the evi- dence of Clemens Romanius. See the Introduction to this Epistle [especially Dr. Schafif's note on p. ]I], as well as the Introduction to the Pastoral Epis« ties. Neander, i., p. 525 ; Wieseler, Chron. de» apost. Zeitaliers, 1. Excursus. As a church already, exists in Rome, although not established by an apos. tie, the Apostle cannot designate Rome as his prin» cipal object before Rome had met him in this re- spect ; but as ancient Spain embraced the whole Pyrenean peninsula, it undoubtedly has for the Apostle the still further significance of a symbol of the whole West extending beyond Rome. To him,. Spain meant the Western world. But Spain itself was a proper object, because there the two prelimi? nary conditions of missionary labor already existed.:, Jews and Jewish synagogues, and Grecian and Ro- man civilization. It does not follow, as Meyer sup. poses, that Paul gave up his plan of going to Spain after receiving the news, in his first ^aptivity, on the state of things in the East, and thought chiefly of a return ; Phil. ii. 24. [I w^ill come to you. This clause is retained; by Dr. Lange, See Textual Notes " and '". Reject-, ing it, we paraphrase : But now I have no longer a central point for labor in these parts, and (as I am seeking to begin labor in the extreme West) I have had a desire to see you for many years while on my way to Spain. For (now that there is some hope of my starting for Spain, and as you are the Christiau church nearest that region) I trust, &c. — R.] An'd to be sent forward (on my journey), thither by you [xai d(p' l fiwv TT()on(f((p- &Tl vai. The dno denotes not merely by them^ but from theyn, as a new point of departure.— R.] The expression 7iQon(u.q>. not only expresses a real attendance, such as Paul generally received from the churches for his further journey, but also the friendly furtherance of his journey, or even the friendly dismission ; Acts xxi. 8. — In some meas- ure [aTTo fttQovq. Grotius : " Non quantum, TELLEM, sed quantum licebit. — R.] An expression of the high regard in which he held their fellowship. — Filled, ifin).t]a&ij), by spiritual satiation. C. Vers. 25-33.— Ver. 25. But now 1 go. He regards this new official hindrance as the last.— [Ministering, fi i,a,y.ovMV. Present participle, not the future ; the journey is part of the ministry, the whole action is already begun. This is lost sight of in the E. V. ; Amer. Bible Union : " I am going Stuart calls attention to nl as indicating the impossiblIit| of his coming hitherto.— R.] 442 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMAVS. to Jerusalem to minister," is even more objection- able. — R.] On the collection mentioned, see 2 Cor. ix. 1, 2 ; Acts xxiv. 17. Origen is o*" tlie opinion that he wished to bring this collection home to the hearts of the Romans too.* He had time enough etill for this. Ver. 26. For Macedonia and Achaia thought it good [^f vd 6 ■/. rj a av yao M a xk)o v ia xai Ay.aia. Dr. Laiige : were jo if fully willing. The above rendering is perhaps scarcely strong enough, but is taken from later revisions. It seems best to preserve the personiticatiou of the orgiual. — R.] The translation : they have wished, does not at all do justice to the frd'oy.. A certain contribution [xotrwv/ar ri,vn. Literally, a certain communion or participation. As used here of a contribution, '■^honesta et cequHatis plena a pellatio" (Beiigel). — R.] As the symbol and expression of the xotvcovla, it is itself xoivinvia. The later giving of almr, and particularly that of the Middle Ages, has not kept this meaning in view. Ti'vd softens the force. Meyer says : " There is no further trace in the Epistles of Paul of the commu- nity of goods." We might add : Tkere is no trace from the outset of a legall" carried out community of goods ! Ver. 27. [For they thought it good, (166- xTjffav yciQ. The ydij introduces an explana- tion of ilSo/.tjaav (ver. 26). The clause is ■=^ for they thought it good beitig their debtors. — R.] — In spiritual things. A statement of the cause of the propriety of this relief in temporal matters. — [To minister, Xfi.rovQytjcyai,. The figurative priestly service is still in mind, and to it belongs the privilege and duty of providing for the poor saints. Who, then, cannot be Christ's priest, so long as we have Christ's poor with us ? — R.] — In carnal things. The cra'ottjta denote, in a general idea, external things ; (jdiii is the external, material, and finite side of human life, of life in general. Con- clusion a majori ad minus. Ver. 28. And have secured to them. SifQayit^iadai'. Luther [marginal reading]: " Truly and faithfully preserved to deliver up." To this belongs also here the full spiritual meaning and effect. Strange view : Wheri I have brought over to them the money, sealed (Erasmus, and others). Still more strange : When I have safely effected, with let- ter and seal, the proper delivery of their collection. It may be that, by sealing, the Apostle alludes to the usual method of the world in the management of money affairs, as, for example, in Phil. iv. 15. Meyer : Vouched for ; that is, corroborated as the fruit ripened for them. — [This fruit, rov xciq- nbv ToriTor; i. c, the amoutit of the collection. There seems to be no reference to the fruit of love or faith, still less of Paul's activity. — R.] Ver. 29. And I know, &c. {olSa Si, x.r.L See Textual Note ".] A text applicable in many ways for installation sermons. Ver. 30. Now I beseech you. The Apos- tie's wonderful presentiment of what he has to ex- perience in Jerusalem ; see Acts xx. 22 ; xxi. 10 if. By our Lord Jesus Christ, /lid, see chap. xil. 1. — By the love of the Spirit. Meyer: The love effected by the Holy Spirit. As this is lelf-evident, Paul means a love extending itself with ♦ [A most fn^atuitous assumption is that of Schott, that Ihese coHectionB were to win favor, and prntoct him during his absence in the extreme West. Decidedly uiipauline I the Chri-stian spirit, so as to embrace in iu univer sality the entire kingdom of God, which can praj for all affairs of the kingdom and its administrators, and overflows the whole earth. In yoiu: prayers. Codd. D. E. [F. G.] add the proper gloss i^imv; Col. iv. 12. [See Textual Note ". It is not genuine, though correct. — R.] Ver. 31. [The disobedient, dntvOovvrMV. Either unbelieving (E. V., Hodge, De Wette, and others) or disobedient (Philippi, and others). The two ideas are intimately related in the New Testa- ment, but tiie latter seems the prominent one here. — R.] The Apostle describes tlie unbelieving Jews as disobedient. Those were, in a special sense, rebels against the Messiah, who refused the obe- dience of faith. — My ministration [-^ dtaxo- via, nov~\. Meyer: My rendering of service de- signed for Jerusalem. — [May prove acceptable. Of tliis he had doubts, and with good reason.* Yet he adds : to the saints. — R.] Ver. 32. That I may come unto you in joy [tra e.v /a(>a t'/.Q-m n (j in; li/uai;. In the element of joy ; the emphasis rests on this phrase. — R.] As if he had, to a certain extent, forebodings that he might come to them in sad cir- cumstances, as a captive. And may with you be refreshed. By spiritual interchange. [Alford : " That we may mu- tually refresh ourselves ; I after my dangers and de- liverances, vou after your anxieties for me." See Textual Note =«.— R.] Ver. 33. Now the God of peace. It is very natural for him here to call God the God of peace, in consequence of his conflicts and their differences. Grotius accepts the latter alone ; Meyer, the for- mer alone ; Philippi, the peace of reconciliation ; Fritzsche, salvatixjn in a general sense ; Tholuck, " different occasions ; " see chap. xvi. 20 ; Phil. iv. 9 ; 1 Thess. v. 23 ; Heb. xiii. 20. DOCTRINAIi AND ETHICAL. 1. On the great importance of this section, see the Introduction, the Arrangement, and the Sum' mary. 2. On ver. 14. The chiu-ch of that day at Rome, compared with that of the present day. 3. On ver. 15. The sense of the calling and the duty of the calling embolden. The Apostle's sense of his great calling. 4. Grand view of the conversion of the whole world. An offering in which the nations are offered to God. Christ, as the High-Priest, has brought a propitiatory sacrifice ; now the ministers, as subor- dinate priests, must present the thank-offering and burnt-offering. But what a source of worship, and of the elevation and purification of worship, has proceeded from the ministerial service of Paul in both an extensive and intensive respect : churches, church-towers, hymns, prayers, festivals without number, and praising Gentiles (vers. 10, 11). The antiphony of praising Gentiles (ver. 11) resptmds to the extolling intonation of the Apostle (ver. IC). * [The existence of a coolness between Paul and the Christians at Jerusalem, perhaps the gicat body of them, is evident from the Epistle to the Galatiuns and the Acta of the Apostles. But this by no means implies either a want of unity among the apostles personally, or difTcrent gospels. See Langc's Comm. Galalians, pn. 40, 63 ; Light, foot, Gdhtians, Dissertation iii. pp. 283 ff., St. Paul and th( Three.-R.] CHAPTER XV. 14-83. 443 [^Hodge : " In this beautiful passage we see the na- ture of the only priesthood which belongs to the Christian ministry. It is not their office to make atonement for sin, or to offer a propitiatory sacrifice to God, but, by the preaching ot tiie go.-^pel, to bring men, by the influence of the Holy Spirit, to ofl'er theniseives as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to Ciou." Comp. Calvin. — K.l 5 Paul's missionary sphere. See his Life in the Inlr'jduclion. 6. Paul's principle in ver. 20 ; a principle of genuine churchliness in contrast with hierarchical and sectarian piopagandism. [The term used by the Apostle belongs to the sphere of minor morals, to " a point of honor," indeed. Yet the principle is not unimportant. Men may be Christians, and dis- regard it, but not Christian genilemnt, not men pos- sessed of that delicate sense of propriety which no rules can impart. Besides, such eftbrts at proselyt- ing generally ignore the essential graces of Chris- tianity : humility, self-abnegation, charity. He who insists on missionary eftbrts among Christian people, is necessarily uncharitable. Sects whose main efforts are in this channel, will not be celebrated for the graces of Christianity. Moreover, Christian ethics have so far informed the world, that ungodly men recognize the necessity of " honorable " conduct in Cliristial workers, and can sneer at the unseemly " competitions " of much that is called pious zeal. This does not prove that the world's sense of honor is higher than that of the Church, but that the standard of sectarian proselytists is far too low. That a man can be a zealous missionary and not be a meddlesome propagandist, is evident from the case of this Apostle. — R.] 7. On ver. 23. The thoroughly dynamical view which the apostles had of the world, is reflected even in their thoroughly dynamical missionary method, according to which they conquered the capital and central points of the ancient world. 8. Vers. 26 ff. The idea ot fellowship in its full universality. The sacred method in the matter of collections: (1.) An assignment of reasons (debt- ors); (2.) Voluntariness; (2.) Authentication; (4.) Connection with the purposes of God's kingdom. 9. Spain, as the representative of France, Britain, Germany, and Scandinavia. [And of America, too ! For from the neighborhood of the pillars of Hercu- les, toward which Paul's missionary zeal led him, the voyager sailed who discovered the new world. — R.] How does the matter stand now ? Paul through Rome to Spain — this has again become a prospect of the present day, or a pium dedderium. [From Spain to Rome seems the likelier course ; yet, where Spain has long held her hand, how strong is the rule of Rome !— R.] 10. On the Apostle's great anticipation, see the Exeg. Notes. 11. Prayer a wrestling and striving. See the history of Jacob at Jabbok. The Israelites = God's warriors. Christians at Rome must now help the Apostle to fight against the schemes of degenerate warriors of God. 12. The God of peace. As an infinite source )f peace, as if peace itself constituted His divinity. 6o the love of the Spirit ; the whole Spirit which in Christianity is poured out over the earth, must be regarded as a breath of Love and of Spring exhaling over the earth. 13. Avxen. See the Lexicons, the Concordance, fend the Catechisms. Also the conclusion of chap. xvi. HOMILETICAL AND PEACTICAIj Chap. xv. 14-33. The good testimony which Paul gives to tb* Christians at Rome (ver. 14). — The Apostle's call an the Apostle to the Gentiles. 1. From whom did he receive it ? From God, who gave him this grace (comp. chap. i. 5 ; xii. 3 ; Gal. i. 1). 2. How Jid he regard it ? As a priestly employment in the sanctuary of the Kew Testament. 3. ^VlIat bless- ing did he derive from it? He brought the Gentiles to obedience to the gospel. 4. By what rule did he administer it ? To preach the go'spel only where it was not yet known (vers. 14-21). — The proclama- tion of the gospel regarded as a priestly service (ver. 16). — The task of the missionary to the hea- then. 1. What is it ? To administer the gospel among the heathen ; that is, to declare it with priestly consecration, devotion, and patience. 2, What should be its constant end ? To labor that the heathen may be an offering, a. acceptable to God ; h. sanctified by the Holy Ghost (vers. 15, 16). — The most beautiful and best glory is, when we can glory of serving God (ver. 17). — The right means for conversion (vers. 18, 19). — Paul's great field of labor (ver. 19). — The first missionary sphere among the Gentiles (ver. 19). — From East to West ! That was the course of the gospel in the first period of the Christian Church. But it has subsequently come to be from West to East ! (ver. 19.) — To build on another man's foundation, a mark of secta- rianism (ver. 20). Common nowadays. The Apostle Paul's plans for his last journeys. 1. They bear witness to his enterprising spirit, which continued fresh in Christian joy even to his old age ; 2. But they are accompanied by anxious foiebod ings, that lead him to request the intercession of others (vers. 22-33). — Christian collections. 1. How must we regard them ? As a service rendered to the saints ; either, because, a. spiritual gifts have been received from a certain quarter, for which ser- vice in temporal goods is wilUngly shown ; or, h. because brotherly love always requii-es us to do good to every man, but especially to those who are ol the household of faith (Gal. vi. 10). 2. How must they be taken up ? a. In such a way that no moral com- pulsion be exercised ; h. But so that all givers can bring their gifts willingly (vers. 25-28). — Only he who can say, with Paul, " I am sure that, when I come unto you, I shall come in the fulness of the blessing of the gospel of Christ," can cheerfully re- spond to a call to preach to another congregation (ver. 29). — The fulness of the blessing of the gospel of Christ. It consists : 1. In unconverted people being won to the kingdom of God ; 2. In converted people being furthered in knowledge, faith, and holiness (ver. 29). — The Apostle's request for the intercession of the Church at Rome in his behalf. 1. Motives: The Church should intercede for him : a. For the Lord Jesus Christ's sake — that is, for the sake of the Lord's honor ; b. For the love of the Spirit — that is, on account of the fraternal fellow, ship effected by the Holy Ghost between the Apos- tle and the Church. 2. 77ie object of the interces- sion : a. On the one hand, the deliverance of the Apostle from the unbelievers in Judea ; b. The friendly reception of his service of love (the collec- tion) by the saints there. 3. The desired result: a. That he should come to Rome in peace ; b. And might be refreshed with the Church in Rome (vera 444 THE EPISTLE OF PArL TO THE ROMANS. 30-32). — The God of patience and comfort is a God of hoi)e, and the God of hope is a God of peace (■Ter. 32 ; comp. vers. 5, 13). LuTHKR : On vers. 14, 15 : This is, though you do not need my writing, yet I am urged by my office, which I have by God's grace, to teach and to admonish every one of you. Starke : Blessed be the land which is full of the gospel of Christ ! That is more than if it were full of gold and silver (ver. 19). — Do not remove from one place to another without necessity and a good cause ; remain in your country, and live honestly (ver. 23). — Hedinger : Notice that Paul will not build on any other man's foundation ; but now it is nothing new in the Church for one to take from an- other his good ground, Christ, by clamoring, excit- ing suspicion, and other forms of wickedness (ver. 20). — What does love for Christ not do ? What a journey to Rome and Spain ? Friend, are you not an official successor of Paul, a pastor, and a shep- herd of souls ? How many miles do you have to go on the way to the preaching stations, the school, or the private house of one of your hearers ? How often, and how willingly, do you make the visit ? (ver. 24.) — Praying is the same as fighting. It is greater labor than ploughing. But how indifferently do you regard it ! (ver. 30.) Spener, on ver. 29 : Such confidence of the preacher in the fellowship of his flock effects much good, for it proves love. A want of confidence, on the other hand, destroys much edification. — To the ministerial office there belong : 1. Teaching ; 2. Care for the poor ; 3. Admonition of the hearers to prayer (vers. 14-33). — He is not worthy to be in Christ's kingdom and to enjoy it, who does not daily pray that it may be extended (ver. 30). Gerlach : Paul regards himself as a priest, who, by the preaching of the gospel, prepares and pre- sents to God the oSering of the whole Gentile world. Hkubner : Paul's solicitude lay : 1. In the office which was given to him, with which he also received strength ; 2. In the holy love which he had. Where both of these exist, admonitions are never wholly fruitless (ver. 15). — A minister who is merely a preacher, becomes a talker ; but, reversely, the priest should always be a preacher, or else he will be merely a Japanese bonze (ver. 16). — Christian love has regard for the rights of others (ver. 20). — The highest service of missionaries is, that they must begin from the very start, and labor with the rough material (ver. 21). — The change in the circle of operation. — The journeys of the Apostles, which were holy, abundant in blessing, and full of suffer- ing (ver. 24). — Spiritual benefactors are the highest, and though temporal blessings cannot perfectly re- quite their spiritual benefits, we should nevertheless repay even with them (vers. 26, 27). — Christians should not come empty to each other, but with spiritual blessings (ver. 29). — The power of Cdris- tian intercession (ver. 30). Besser : The Apostle's official seal to the Epis- tle to the Romans (vers. 14-33). — The pure sacri- ficial vessel is the gospel of God ; the Gentiles, brought by faith in this vessel, are an acceptable offering, sanctified by the Holy Spirit, who is the lacrificial fire from heaven (1 Peter i. 12), who con- tinues the holy burning by which Christ has sancti- fied himself for a burnt-offering for all (ver. 16).— Miracles in themselves are no proof of truth ; but as signs of the re;d Christ, the miracles of the Apos- tles imprint a seal upon their doctrine for the joy ol believers and for the judgment of unbeliever^ (vera 18, 19).— The fight of faith is fought by him who prays, seeing and feeling the opposite of his hope, and seeking the concealed face of God, who is l Cod of hope (ver. 30). — God gives peace everywhere and in every manner (2 Thess. iii. 16) : Peace in believ- ing on His grace (chap. v. 1), peace in reliance on the love of His government (chap. viii. 28), peace in the certainty that Christ reigns over His enemies (chap. xvi. 20), and peace in the love of the Spirit (ver. 33). [BuKKiTT : As we honor tha God of peace, whom we serve ; as we love the Prince of peace, in whom we believe ; as we hope for the comfort of the Spirit of peace, and as we cherish the success of the gospel of peace, let us preserve it where it is, and pursue it where it flies from us. — Henky: The blessing of the gospel is the treasure which we have in earthen vessels. When ministers are fully pre- pared to give, and people fully prepared to receive, this blessing, both are happy. Many have the gos- pel who have not the blessing of the gospel, and so they have it in vain. The gospel will not profit, un- less God bless it on us ; and it is our duty to wait upon Him for that blessing, and for the fulness of it. [Doddridge ; Let us adore the God of grace and peace, who works the most important ends by methods nnthought of by us ; and let us be very cautious that we do not raslily judge that He hath rejected our prayers, because we do not see them answered in that particular way which might have been more agreeable to our own wishes. — Clarke : Beware of contentions in religion ; if you dispute concerning any of its doctrines, let it be to find out truth, not to support a preconceived and preestab- lished opinion. Avoid all polemical heat and ran- cor ; these prove the absence of the rehgion of Christ. Whatever does not lead you to love God and man more, is most assuredly from beneath. The God of peace is the author of Christianity ; and the Prince of peace, the priest and sacrifice of it; therefore love one another, and leave off contention before it be meddled with, [Hodge : As oil poured on water smoothe.'^ its surflice and renders it transparent, so does kindneoa calm the minds of men, and prepare them for the ready entrance of the truth. Besides these qualifi- cations, he who admonishes others should be entitled thus to act. It is not necessary that this title should rest on his official station ; but there should be su- periority of some kind — of age, excellence, or knowl- edge — to giiw his admonitions due effect. — Barnes : The success of a minister is not for his own praises, but for the honor of God ; not by his skill or power, but by the aid of Jesus Christ. — God may disappoint us in regard to the mode in which w« purpose to do good ; but if we really desire it. He will enable us to do it in His own way. It may be better to preach the gospel in bonds than at liberty ; it is better to do it in a prison, than not at alU Bunyan wrote the " Pilgrim's Progress " to amusa his heavy hours during a twelve years' cruel unpria onment. If he had been at liberty, he probabJj would not have writtaa it at all. — J. F. H.] CHAPTER XVL l-2a 445 THIRD DIVISION. THE COMMENDATION OF COMPANIONS AND HELPERS IN A SERIES OF SALUTATIONS^ WITH WHICH IS JOINED A WARNING AGAINST SEPARATISTIC FALSE TEACHERS (JEWS AND GENTILES), WHO COULD HINDER AND EVEN DESTROY ROME'S DESTINY AND HIS APOSTOLIC MISSION. YET THE GOD OF PEACE WILL SHORTLY BRUISE SATAN (JUDAISTIC AND PAGANISTIC ERRORS) UNDER THEUl FEET. Chap. XVL 1-20. A. Phebe of Corinth. 1 I commend unto you Phebe our sister, which [who] is a servant [deaconess] 2 of the church which is at Cenchrea : That ye receive her in the Lord, as be- Cometh saints, and that ye assist her in whatsoever business she hath [may have] need of you : for she [too] hath been a succourer of many, and of myself also. B. Eoman friends. 3, 4 Greet Priscilla [Prisca] ' and Aquila, my helpers in Christ Jesus : Who have for my life kiid down their own necks : unto whom not only I give thanks, 5 but also all the churches of the Gentiles. Likewise greet \salute'\ the church that is in their house. Salute my well-beloved Epenetus, who is the first-fruits 6 of Achaia [Asia] * unto Christ. Greet [Salute] Mary, who bestowed much V labour on us [or, you].' Salute Andronicus and Junia [or, Junias],^ my kins- men, and my lellow-prisoners, who are of note among ' the apostles, who also 8 were in Christ before me. Greet [Salute] Amplias, my beloved in the Loi-d. 9 Salute Urbane [Urbanus], our helper in Christ, and Stachys my beloved. 10 Salute Apelles [the] approved in Christ. Salute them which [who] are of 11 Aristobulus' household [the household of Aristobulus]. Salute Herodion my kinsman. Greet [Salute] them that be of the household of Narcissus, which 12 [who] are in the Lord. Salute Tryphena and Tryphosa, who labour in the Lord. Salute the beloved Persis, which [who] laboured much in the Lord. 13, 14 Salute Kufus [the] chosen in the Lord, and his mother and mine. Salute Asyncritus, Phlegon, Herraas, Patrobas, Hermes [Hermes, Patrobas, Hernias],' 15 and the brethren which [who] are with them. Salute Philologus, and Julia, Nereus, and his sister, and Olympas, and all the saints which [who] are with 16 them. Salute one another with a holy kiss. The [All the] ' churches of Christ salute you. 0. Warning against false teachers. 17 Now I beseech you, brethren, [to] mark thera which [those who] cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine [teaching] * which ye have 18 l^amit have] learned ; and avoid them. For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus [«™»< Jesus] ' Christ, but their own belly ; and by [their] good 19 words and fair speeches " deceive the hearts of the simple. For your obe- dience is come abroad unto all men. I am glad [rejoice] therefore on your behalf [over you] : " but \omit but] yet I w^ould have you wise imto [con- tO cerning] that which is good, and simple [harmless] concerning evil. And the God of peace shall bruise Satan under your feet shortly. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you. Amen [omu Amen.] '* TEXTUAL. 1 Ver. 3. — [Instead of npiVxiAAav {Rec, versions and fathers), we find llpla ;. B. ; but it seems best to retain it.— E.] EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. Summari/. — A. Commendation of Phebe the deaconess ; vers. 1, 2. — B. The salutations to his Roman friends and companions in tlieir household churches, and the commendations therein expressed ; vers. 3-16. — C. Warning against false teachers, who create dissension. Benediction ; vers. 17-20. In the Apostle's salutations he does not merely take cognizance of friendly relations in a good- natured way, but rather designs, with a distinct section of his Epistle, and in the wise and sincere form oC his salutations, to awaken in the Church at Rome the consciousness that, in its principal ele- ments, it is indirectly a Pauline church — that is, one appropriated by him in his universal efforts.* Comp., on this point, the Introduction, p. 33, and the construction of the Epistle. It is characteristic, chat Aquila and Priscilla stand at the head of those whom he salutes ; by their settlement in Ephesus they had already prepared for his connection there, just as they now had done in Rome, and afterward do again in Ephesus ; 2 Tim. iv. 19. And so there are mtiny among those saluted who have preceded him, as his precursors. The whole body of those greeted is made up of different classes. Some are helpers of his missionary labors, who have labored with him, and part of whom have exposed themselves to dangers for him : Prisca, Aquila, Mary, Androiiicus, Juuia, and Urbanus. A number of them are his * [Ford : " Some persons, regarding this chapter as con- taining little more than a register of nnmnK, treat it with comp;irative indifference ; thereby defrauding their souls of much goo 1. St. Chrysostom, in his day, had cause to complain of the same neglect shown by many to the con- clusion of this Epistle. Hence he bestows special pains in explaining it. 'It is possible,' he writes, 'even from bare mimes to find a treasure : ' and then he at once proceeds to disclose what the treasure is." The list of names shows: (1.) Paul's personal regard ; (2.) The high place he accords to women ; (3.) The constitution of the Roman Church ; (4.) The gri'at influence he exerted, if so many friends oould be found in a church he had never visited. (5.) The undying name received from his friendly mention, is a type of the eternal blessing which belongs to those whose names »re written in the Lamb'.? Book of Life. Evidently there «re not many rich or great in this list — few of whom we know any thing save what is here hinted ; yet these names abide, while those of the wealthy and honored have been forgotten. E\en Horace and Livy give no such extended fame as Paul has done to bis friends and acquaintances at Eome.— B..1 relatives, such as Andronicus, Junia, and Herodion ; or very near friends, as Rufus and his mother. Be- sides, there are those whom he can distinguish as disciples converted tlirough his instrumentality, or well-known friends : Epcnetns, Amplias, Stachys, Apelles ; perhaps also Tryphena, Tryphosa, and Persis. We can further distinguish companies, a church in the house of Aquila, an assembly at the houses of Hermes, Hermas, and their companions ; at the houses of Philologus, Julia, and their com- panions. Perhaps the believers in the households of Aristobulus and of Narcissus also form separate divisions of the Church. A. Vers. 1 and 2. — Ver. 1. I commend. [Both an introduction and a commendation tire im- plied. The description consists of two parts : First, she is a sister, which is the general ground for wel- coming her ; then, more specially, she is a deacon- ess, who had faithfully discharged her duty (ver. 2). The name is derived from 'I'otp'o^, Phoeluis (xVpoho), but there is nothing remarkable in this, since the etymology would be as little recalled then, as now, in the case of proper names. — R.] See 2 Cor. v. 12. Phebe is usually regarded as the bearer of the Epistle. Who is a deaconess; (Udxavoq. On tho institution of deaconesses, comp. Church History and the Pastoral Epistles. Meyer furnisiies the spe- cial literature on p. 539. [The word (Si,aK6vi,rF(T(x occurs frequently in later ecclesiastical Greek. Pliny, in the celebrated letter to Trajan, says : "iVeccwa. rium credidi, ex duahus ancillis quae ministr^e dice' banlur, quid essri veri et per tonnenta qiicsrere?^ Their duties were, to take care of the sick, poor, and strangers in tiie female portion oF the Clmrch. " Tiiis office was the more needful on account of the rigid separation of the sexes at that day, especially among the Greeks" (Suhaff). Meyer refers to Bing ham, Orig. i. pp. 341-366; Schoene, Gcsrhichts- forsch. iiher d. Kirchli.ch. Oehrduche, iii. pp. 102 ff. ; Herzog, Encykloped., iii. p. 368 ; Neander, Pflaiu zunpy i. p. 265 f. The last named argues that the deaconesses must not be confounded with the ///o«» of 1 Tim. V. 3-16. See, however, Lange's Comm. in loco. We may add : Schaff, Apostolic C/nirch, p. 135 ; Suicer, Thexaurns, .tub voce. Of Phebe, Conybeare says {St. Paul, ii. p. 154) : " She was • CHAPTER XVI. 1-20. 441 widow of consideration and wealth, who acted as one of tlie deaconesses of the Church, and was now about to sail to Konie upon some private business, apparently connected with a lawsuit in which she was engaged." He adds : "She could not (accord- ing to Greek manners) have been mentioned as act- ing in the inde[)endent manner described, either if her husband had been living or if she had been un- married." — ]{.] Oenchrea. The eastern seaport of Corinth (see the Encyclopiedias). Ver. 2. That ye receive her in the Lord. She should be received with Christian interest. — And that ye assist her [xai na(jaarTjri ai'iT'^. Tlie verb is frequently used as a legal term, hence the conjecture of Conybeare, that her business at Rome was connected with a lawsuit. — II.] It is hardly probable that the early Church employed deaconesses to travel in the discharge of official business ; the business of Phebe seems to have been of a personal character. [For she too, xal yap avrrj. She herself aho, not alir/; (this one). — R.] The reason why the Romans sliould zealously support her in her afl'airs does not lie in an official call to Rome, but in her services for the churches at home, and for the Apostle in particular. ] I (JOfrrdrK; is a specially honorable designation. [It may refer to her official duties, but not necessarily so. The idea it implies is of service bestowed by a superior on inferiors. — Of myself also. " When and where, we know not. It is not improbable that she may have been, like Lydia, one whose heart the Lord opened at the first preaching of Paul, and whose house was his lodging ; " Alford.— R.] B. Vers. 3-16.— Ver. 3. Prisca. [This is the real name ; Priic'Ua is the diminutive, according to the common mode of forming such appellations. — R.] She belonged, like Phebe, to the women who were prominent because of the energy of their faith, and deserved the honorable position before the name of her husband, Aquila (comp. Acts xviii. 2). See 2 Tim. iv. 19. [The frequent sneers at Paul about his views respecting the female sex and their prerogatives might be spared us, were this chapter carefully read. Tlie order here is a suffi- cient answer : the wife's name first, because she was foremost, no doubt. The standard is, after all, ca- pacity, not sex. Both are called "my helpers," and it would seem that, as such, they were both engaged in -spiritual labors, which term includes vastly more than public preaching. — R.] Ver. 4. Their ovrn necks. Meyer translates the v7ii<9t]xav literally: have laid undrr, under the executioner's axe. But there has been no men- tion made in Paul's previous history of the execu- tioner's axe. Even Meyer himself doubts whether we should take the expression in its exact meaning. Since Paul was a member of their family, they were answerable for him in the tumults that arose in Cor- inth and Ephesus (Acts xviii. 12; xix. 23). — What they did for the Apostle, was done for all the churches of the Gentiles. V er. 5. Likewise salute the church that is in their house [ z « t t r]v y.ar olxov avnov i»xX>](Tlav]. The definite prototype of an apos- tolical household church, the type of the later par- ish. At the same time, the single household church- es in Rome are already connected by the bond of fellowship into one spiritual church. Accordingly, the church in the house is almost = the assembly ii a certain house.* Tholuck : " In the metropolis^ which was at that time about four miles in circum« ference, there were not le.ss than five of them (compt Kist, in Illgen's Zeitachrift fur hist. Theologie, iL, 2d part, p. 05)." Epenetus. " Unknovra, as all the following ones to ver. 15. (Rufus may be the son of Simon Mark xv. 21.) The legends of the Fathers made the most of them martyis and bishops, and the Spiopsit ot Dorotheus misplaces the most of them among the seventy disciples ; " Meyer. The first-fruits of Asia [aTiaQxv '''^S \4(Tla(;. "Acq TextU(d Note ^\ Asia proconsul ari9. The reading Achaia is less authenticated, and cre- ates difficulty, inasmuch as, in 1 Cor. xvi. 15, Ste- phanas is mentioned as the first-fruits of Achaia On the solution of this difficulty (by supposing thai Epenetus was a member of the household ot Ste- phanas, now in Rome), see Tholuck, p. 738. — [Eit, XQiffrov. Meyer, Philippi : idth reference tc Christ ; De Wette, Lange ; for Christ. The mean- ing obviously is : first converted to Christ. — R.j The first-fruits, or those first converted, were gen- erally the natural leaders of the incipient churches. Ver. 6. Mary. Not more definitely known. There is no need of explaining that the reading, bestowed much labor \ on m.v, is much more natural than the other, on you, for elsewhere the Apostle always brings out prominently the relations of the persons saluted to his own labors. [See 2^extual Note I— R.] Ver. 7. And Junia (or Junias). The word has often been taken, and by Chrysostom [Grotius] among the rest, as a feminine noun, Junia ; it seems more probable that it is Junias, an abbreviation of Junianus (see Tholuck, p. 739). [If feminine, it is the name of the wife or sister of Andronicus ; the Rec. accents thus: ^J owiav, which indicates the feminine. Most editors (not Tregelles) : 'J ovviciv. It is as impossible as it is unnecessary to decide the question, though Meyer thinks the added descrip- tion favors the masculine forni. — R.] My kinsmen. The expression aryyfvfTi; has been understood by Olshausen, and others, in the broader sense of ferow-counirymen. ; against which it has been remarked that, in that case, oth- ers than Jewish Christians have received this desig- * [Dr. Hodge suggests that, as a tent-maker, Aquila had better accommodations for such an assembly than most of the Christians. See Alford in Inco, where he quotes Justin Martyr's statements about these assemblies. Cer- tainly there is no warrant for suppoeino: that only tho household servants, &c., are meant. — It is clear that the early Church was formed quite as much upon the household model as upon that of the synagogue. No form of church government should ignore thit^, nor can Chri-tianity make true progress at the expense of ihe family. As the religion of Jesus Christ has sanctified household relations, and ele- vated them all, how far is the Church responsiblo for the manifestations of moral decay in social life? May not the schisms in families, produced by sectarian propagandism, so far interfere with any thing akin to these household churches, as to exercise a deteriorating intluence? Cer- tainly it i? diflBcult to conceive, that any Christians at Roma would lay in wait for Prisca's children, to iecoy them witlj presents to some other assembly. Yet that is a recognized form of ecclesiastical (I will not say Christian) etfort in these days I — E.l t [The verb Koniav, when not followed by Aoyu, refers to practical activity, not to preaching and teaching. Here^ probably, some acts of womanly kindness are intended, such as Paul would be more likely to have received than the whole Roman Church. Hence "us" is more probably correct than "you." Besides, why should Paul add thil description, were she so well known to that Church !— E.] 448 THE EPISTLE 01 PAUL TO THE ROMANS. nation, besides the three thus denominated. Dr. Baur finds in these kinsmen not only a mark of the unauthenticity of chap, xvi., but even of the unfair- ness of the author, wiio, by this fiction, would make for the Apostle the favorable appearance of having sustained a more intimate relation to the Jewish- Christian Ciiurch in Rome. My fellow-prisoners [(Tvvai./fia).o')rov(; ^0 1']. Further particulars are not known. But as, according to Acts xxiii, 16, the Apostle had a nephew in Jerusalem who took a deep interest in bis cause, and as it is said of Andronicus and Ju- nias, or Junia, that they were before him in Christ — that is, were believers — so it is natural to make a family from the names of Andronicus, Junias, or better, Junia and Herodion, and to suppose that these, as the early converted kinsmen of Paul, had already made an impression in Jerusalem upon the unconverted Paul, and, after his conversion, had taken an interest in him in his captivity. Then, these were specially adapted, like Aquila and Pris- cilla, to prepare the way for him in Rome. This would also give a simple explanation to among the apostles, iv rot? anoaro/.on;. They were highly respected as believers among the apos- tles in Jerusalem. So also Meyer : " distinguished — that is, most honorably known to the apostles. Thus Beza, Grotius, .and most others ; De Wette, Fritzsche, and Philippi. They take the right ground, for (i;T6(TTo^.o(,- is never used by Paul in the broader sense (as Acts xiv. 4-14), and therefore cannot be explained, with Origen, Ciirysostom, Luther, Cal- vin, &c., and Tholuck : among \i. e., among the number of] the Apostles.'''' * See Meyer for hy- potheses respecting their conversion. Ver. 8. Amplias. An abbreviation of Am- pliaton. — [Beloved in the Lord, " beloved in the bonds of Christian fellowship " (Alford). — R.] Ver. 9. Urbanus — Stachys. The Apostle's distinctions result from an exact view. Ver. 10. Apelles. This has been confounded (by Origen, and others) with ApoUos, but without any ground whatever. [Comp. Horace, Sat., i. 5. loo. Supposed to be a freedman, but the name was common among tliis class (Meyer, Pliilippi). Tiiere are various conjectures about the grouping of freedmen and slaves in these verses. — R.] The approved [tov (J6-ti/( or]. A predi- cate of tested steadfastness in faith. — Who are of the household of Aristobulus. That is, the Christians in the household, probably slaves of Aris- tobulus. See the additional tv xvijic) in the foUgw- ing verse. [Alford: "It does not follow that either Aristobulus or Narcissus were themselves Christians. Only those of their /ami/ite (toik; ex rwv) are here saluted who were tv xvqIo) ; for we must un- derstand this also after 'A(ii,arofiovXov.''^ — R.] Ver. 11. Narcissus. Grotius, Neander, and others, have regarded him as a freedman of Claudius (Sueton., Claud, 28). [This freedman, however, was • [liuther : welche sind herUhmte Apnslef. Yet even so high an Anslican as Dr. Wordsworth accepts the view of Meyer and Lange. An able defence of the less restricted use of the term ajroo-roAo? will be found in Lii^htfoot, Gniiitians, pp. 92 if. Still, in every case where Paul uses the word, it can be referred to others than himself and the Twelve only by catachresis. In 2 Cor. viii. 23, the article is omitted, and the word has obviously no eolesiastical sense. Alford thinks the meaninR adopted above "would imply that Paul hail tiiore frequent intercourse with the other apostles than we know that he bad." Yet how strange that "noted apostles" should require this certification from taul.— E.1 put to death two or three years before this Epistli was written. It is possible that the salutation if addressed to his family, known thus after his death. -R.] Ver. 12. Fersis. [The name is derived from Persia, as the native country of the bearer ; but it is not kn )wn that it was borne for this reason in this particular instance. — R.] She is thus candidly distinguished from the two just named. Ver. i;i Rufus. See Commentary, Mark, p. 151. — The chosen. A very expressive distinction, [Not merely " elect in Christ," but a chosen man, a distinguished Christian (Hodge). — R.] — His mother and mine [ x « t t // r fi ijt i(j a ao x ov y.ai i^ioTt. "/Tij mother by nature, miiie by uiaternal kindness" (Webster and Wilkinson). — R.]. Fervid expression of gratitude for the enjoyment of friend- ly care. Ver. 14. Hermas. This verse contains a nu- merous group, probably intimately associated, and less known to the Apostle. Hernias has been re- garded by Origen and Eusebius as the author of the work : 'U not-firjv. But tliis author belongs to the middle of the second century. — The brethren who are with them [toi/? a'w ai'/Toi? a d f ).

f Christian false teachers is wanting. Otliers have decided them to be Libertines. That the Apostle, at all events, had in view, besides the future Judaizing and Ebioiiitic zealots for the law, the gnosticizing and antinomian spirits of the future, is proved on looking at the arrangement for the reception of both these tendencies, which he, according to chaps, xiv. and XV., unquestionably found already in the Church. According to Do Wette, the kind of false teachers here mentioned cannot be more specifically deter- mined ; according to Tholuck, with reference to Phil. iii. 2, &c., the zealots of the law are meant. [Alford says : " Judging by the text itself, we infer that these teachers were similar to those point- ed out in Phil. iii. 2, &c. : unprincipled and selfish perxons, seducing others for their oun gain ; wheth- er Judaizers or not, does not appear ; but consider- ing that the great opponents of the Apostle were of this party, we may perhaps infer that they also be- longed to it." — R.] To mcirk [(jao^rftv. To notice carefully; used in Phil. iii. 17, with reference to those who should be imitated ; more intensive than ^).inn.v (Meyer). — R.] This, and the avoiding of them, Krehl thinks can be referred only to present fiilse teachers, which is very properly opposed by Tho- luck. — [Divisions and oflfences, Tott; (Tt/offra- (Tta? xat to. (rxdvda^.a. The articles point to known divisions and scandals, whether Paul re- ferred to any particular persons or not. Dr. Hodge seems disposed to refer the first word to doctrinal divisions, the latter to moral offences ; so Webster and Wilkinson. Philippi and Meyer seem to refer the first to divisions, however occasioned, and the latter to temptations to depart from the gospel ground of faith and life. ' The objeetion ^o the for- mer distinction is, that the " divisions " hinted at in the Epistle were mainly of an ethical rather than a doctrinal origin. — Contrary to the teaching, TiaQcc, tfjv Hida/^v. On the preposition, see Gal. i. 8, Lange's Comm., p. 19. Most German commentators are disposed to reject at least the ex- clusive reference to doctrinal instruction. As our English word doctrine suggests dogmatic t/ieology, we substitute teaching, which includes all instruc- tion. — A commendation of their teachers is implied, which hints at the indirect Pauline origin of the Church. — Avoid them, ixxXlvarf an' av- T(7)i'. There is no reference to official excommuni- cation, but to personal treatment of those who might or might not be church members. — R.] Ver. IS. Serve not our Lord Christ [tw uv^ifo ri/noiv X()t,(JtiJ) V 6 o v k f ii o v a I'V. See Fextunl Note ']. See chap. ii. 8 ; Phil. iii. 19 ; S Cor. ii. 20. Fanaticism, by its confusion of spirit- ual and carnal affections and motives, degenerates Into disguised sensualism. — Their own belly [t^ tavTMV xov).int,'\. This is a symbol of thtSr self-interest, selfishness, sensuality, and of their fina. aiming at a mere life of pleasure ; comp. 1 Tim. vi. 5 ; Titus i. 11. And by their good words and fair speech- es [rfKi T^t; )>^)t;^i. Greek word has been rendered "simple" just before (ver. 18). — R.] Meyer explains axtfjaioi'i; by pure [i. c, unmixed with, free from, evil], which does not make an antichesis to tlie foregoing (comp. 1 Cor. xiv. 20). Matt. x. 16, on the contrary, con- stitutes a harmonious antithesis to the whole pas- sage. For ditterent expositions of the axf(jalot'i;, see Tholuck. [Dr. Hodge : " Wise, so that good may result, and simple, so that evil may not be done ; " so most commentators. — R.] Ver. 20. And the God of peace, &c. [ode 0f6(,- rtji; fi(ji]vtji;, x.t./.] In the divine power of the Spirit and Author of peace. It is just as the God of peace that He will bruise Satan, wlio, by his false doctrines, causes divisions, and rends the Church asunder. The t." The few authorities which omit it altogether, seem to have done so with no intention of rejecting it. The variation in position is so readily accounted for, as to cast little doubt on the genuineness. Nor is the internsil evidence against it. The st\le is Pauline. Though the other Pauline doxologies are simpler, this was the close of the greatest Epistle. Eeiche thinks that, owing to the personal character of chaps, xv., xvi., the public reading closed with chap. xiv. ; that then a doxology was spoken, which crept into the text at that point, and afterward was transferred to the close. But this is mere conjecture. (See Meyer.) II. What, then, is its true pnsilionf We answer, without hesitation, at the close of chap. xvi. (1.) The weight, if not the number of diplomatic authorities favors this position. (2.) In accounting for the variation, it is much easier to account for the change from this place to chap, xiv., than for the reverse. The doxology forms an unusual coiicltision ; it was preceded by the usual closing benediction; the words vfia? trrripifai would seem to point to the "weak" (chap. xiv). Other theories are advanced, but this seems the simplest exi'lanation of the change. -The repetition in some authorities is easily accounted for, since the earlv criticism could not decide where it properly belonged, and yet feared to reject ; the omission arose from the same doubt (since F. G. both have a blank space in chap. xiv.). — Dr. liange's view of the connection renders extended critical discussion unnecessary. — R.] * [SuBSCEiPTioN. That of the Rec. is probably correct, but not genuine. N. A. B'. C. D. G. have : irpbf Twuaiov;; to this B^. and others add : eypaipr] anb KopivBov ; G. : creAeaflj). — R.] EXEGETICAL AND CEITICAIi. A. The salutations. — B. The doxology, in con- fomity with the fundamental thought of the Epis- tle, in the form of a liturgical antiphony. The ever- lasting Amen of the Church as a response to the everlasting gospel of God, as an Amen : 1. To the proclamation of the gospel in general ; 2. To Paul's proclamation of the call of the Gentiles ; 3. To God's command to bear the gospel forth unto all na tions, for the consummation of which our Epistle ia designed. A. Vers. 21-24. — ^Ver. 21. Timotheus. Se« Acts XX. 4; also the Encyclopedias.* — liUcius, * [Comp. Van Oosterzee (Lange's Comm.}, 1 Timo(hf Introd., § 1.— B.] 452 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. Not Luke (Origen, and others). " It is uncertain whether this is the Lucius of Cyrene in Acts xiii. 1." — Jason. Comp. Acts xvii. 5. — Sosipater. Acts XX. 4. The identity is, at least, by no means improbable. [In regard to these three persons com- mentators differ. All tliree may be identical with those nieutioncd in tlie Acts, yet all the names were common, while Sosipater and Sopater (Acts xx. 4) may be the same name, without the identity of per- sons being thereby established. — My kinsmen, o I (TvyYfVfii; /lov. See vers. 7, 11. It seems probable that some relationship more close than that of fellow-Jew is here referred to. — R.] Ver. 22. Tertius. Probably an Italian (he has, without any ground, been identified with Silas ; * see Meyer). The writer of this Epistle, which Paul dictated to him. On other untenable hypotheses (a clean copy ; a translation into Greek), see Meyer. It was natural that he should present liis own salu- tation. [Tholuck considers this irregularity a cor- roboration of the genuineness of the chapter. — R.] Groundless suppositions : 1. Paul wrote from ver. 23 with his own hand (Rambach) ; 2. From ver. 23, Tertius wrote in his own name (Glockler). ["En- tirely groundless also is the view of Olshausen : Paul wrote the doxology immediately after ver. 20, but on a special and small parchment, tiie vacant side of which was used by the amanuensis, Tertius, in order to write vers. 21-24 in his own name ; " Mey- er. The internal evidence is altogether against this. — In the Lord, iv xv(jio). Wordsworth follows Origen in joining these words with what immediately precedes, as implying that the work of an amanuen- sis, not less than that of an apostle, is done " in the Lord." Most commentators connect it with affTzd- tofiau, which is preferable. — R.] Ver. 23. Gaius. Gains. See the Laxicons on the frequent occurrence of the name. The identity with tiie C.iius in 1 Cor. i. 14 is very probable ; per- haps he is also the same person as the Caius in Acts XX. 4. Paul was now lodging with him, as he had already done with others. — Probably also a house- hold congregation gatliered in his house. [Or he may have been universal in his hospitality to Chris- tians (Alford). — R.] EIrastus. The city treasurer. The same name in Acts xix. 22 and 2 Tim. iv. 20 does not seem to denote the same person, unless, as Meyer remarks, Erastus had given up his position. — Quartus [ 7Co II a^ TO ^^ This shows how the Greeks trans- ferred the sound of the Latin Qu into their lan- guage. — R.] A brother in a general Christian sense. B. Vers. 25-27.— Ver. 25. Now to him who is able to stabUsh you [7'w de (Ivva/ie vm {'/ia(; (TT rjQ liai.. To this dative, that of ver. 27 corresponds, all that intervenes being dependent in some way upon di'va/t ivm. The real gram- matical difficulty is therefore in ver. 27. — R.] i'T//(i/iat. See chap. i. 11; 1 Thess. iii. 2; 2 Thess. ii. 17. He is very solicitous that the Church in Rome be steadfast and faithful. He clothes his solicitude in the form of a liturgical antiphony, in which he again takes up the first Amen, in order to say Amen to the three solemn representations of the gospel of God, m the name • [The ground of this supposed identity is that the Hebrew word answering to the Latin Tertius (^f ibtti) •ounds like Silas. But the latter is a contraction from Silvanus.—'R.] of the Roman Church, and of all God's churches in general. Comp. the liturgical meaning of the Ame» in 1 Cor. xiv. 16. According to my gospel [xara to fiiay- yt).t,6v /(onj. According to this view of the dox« ology, we do not explain kuto. in reference to my gospel, but according to my gospel, as an antiphony to my g()S[)el — and, mentally, for the first, second, and third time. If we mistake this liturgical form, this doxology becomes a network of exegetical diffi- culties. The first xaTci is explained by Meyer: may He establish you in relation to my gospel, that you may remain perseveringly true to my gospeL For other explanations, see the same author, p. 551 f. [Philippi, Alford, and others, agree, in the main, with Meyer : in reference to — i. e., in my gos- pel ; He can establish you, or, " in subordination to, and according to the requirements of" (Alford), my gospel. Dr. Hodge prefers through, which is scarce- ly defensible lexically. Dr. Lange's view of the preposition depends on bis view of the doxology ai a whole. — R.] And the preaching of Jesus Christ [viai to x/jQiiy^ia Jijoov X(j t.(Tr oT'^, As it is not only spread abroad in his gospel, but also outside of it, in all the world. Explanations : 1. The preach- ing concerning Christ (Luther, Calvin, Tholuck, and Philippi) ; 2. The preaching which Christ causes to be promulgated through him (Meyer, and others) , 3. The preaching of Christ during His stay on earth (Grotius).* According to the revelation [y.ura, ano' xdXv4ii.v. The y.ard is taken by Meyer, and oth- ers, as coordinate to the former one, and dependent on (TTijijliau ; by Tholuck, and others, as dependent on the whole opening clause, in the sense bf in con- sequence of; by Alford, and others, as subordinate to xr'j(jiiy/ia. — R.J This is the specific designation of the universality of the gospel according to Paul's view ; Eph. iii. 3, 9 ; Col. i. 26, &c. — The mys- tery relates particularly to the freedom or national enlargement of the gospel. [Philippi, and others, unnecessarily limit myatery here to this enlargement of the gospel. It seems best to take it in its full meaning. See chap. xi. 25. — R.] Ver. 26. [But now is made manifest, (favfQMSivToi; (ik vvv. This is obviously in antithesis to the latter part of the preceding verse. The question respecting the relation of the clauses is, however, a difficult one. Beza, Flatt, Meyer, De Wette, and others, join these words closely with ver. 25, making the rest of this verse subordinate to yv«)()i,(T Of vToi:. They render somewhat thus : " But which is made manifest in the present age, and by means of the prophetic Scriptures, according to the command of the everlasting God, is made known unto all nations, in order to lead them to the obedi- ence of the faith." Hodge, Alford, and others, join together the first part of the verse as far as " the everlasting God ; " while Dr. Lange takes the third y.ard as coordinate to the first and second. Be- sides, there is room for a grout variety of opinion in regard to the relation of the different phrases. — R.] Through the Scriptures of the prophets [(Jia Tf yQa(pi7iv tt (JOifTjrvAMV. The pres- ence of Tf seems to favor the connection with what follows, but Dr. Lange renders " as through," &e., * [Of these, (3.) seems most imten.able. (1.) makes thil phrase au extension of ttie preceding one ; (2.) an explai a- tion (if it. They are not, however, contradictory of eaci other. Dr. Lange seems really to combine them— B,.] CHAPTER XVI. 21-27. 453 thus adopting the other view. — R.] By this addi- tion, Piuil proves that tliis present revelation, wiiose apecial organ is Paul himself, is not ueologically new, but aceording to the analogy of faith. Throufih the Scriptures of the prophets means, that their eense has now become fully clear.* According to the commandment of the everlasting God [xar' iniTayiiv rov aio)- vioi' Hi-ol. See Texlual Noie^, on Dr. Lange's renderLiig. — R.] Here Meyer's view of the con- Btruction of xctTct does not hold good any longer, and therefore he makes the third principal propo- sition as a supplement to the second : and by means of the prophetic writings according to the comnianJ- ment of the everlasting God, &c. This command- ment is the last form, the last word, because it brings very near to the Church at Rome the obligatory duty of interesting itself in the work of the world's con- version. The commandment of the eternal God Bhould, as an injunction continually resounding, find an eternal rei'cho in the Amen of the Church. f Ver. 27. To the only -vri&e God, &c. [// ovw aoqiZ (■) nji , x.T./..] Meyer: "To the only wise God through Jesus Christ." \ Curious words ! Bet- ter : To the only wise God be the glory through Christ (Luther, Beza [E. V.] ). Yet the il op- poses this view, if we refer it to Christ. The w, in- deed, has been cancelled by Beza and Grotius, ac- cording to cursives 33, Y2, and Rufinus ; but it stands firm, and is also no obstruction to the proper construction of this doxology. For by all means there belongs to Clirist, or the Lamb, the honor of unsealing the book of God's mysteries, and in eter- nity the Church can utter thanksgiving and praise to Him for it in the Amen of the Church. Comp. Rev. V. 12. [It must be added, however, that while the glory may be very properly ascribed to Christ, it is grammatically^ harsh to refer the relative w to Chiist, since 0fw is the leading word in this verse, and by implication throughout. — R]. Because the force of the last Amen was mis- taken, many supposed that the Apostle was gradu- ally led, by the parentheses, from the doxology to God, to the doxology to Christ (Tholuck, Philippi). Such a great obscurity would be a bad crown to his grand and clear work. Besides, the previous repe- tition fiovo) (ToqiTi Ofo) is against it. Other suppo • [The sense is accordingly much the same, -whether this phrase limit " made manifest " or " made known." In the former case, the thought is suppUmentary : "It is made manifest in these gospel times, and that, too, by means of the prophetic writings;" in the latter, more emphasis would rest upon it. It is objected to the latter, that the writings of the prophets were not actually the means em- ployed in the universal diffusion of the gospel ; to the former, that there is an incongruity in thus speaking of a mystery "kept in silence," and yet made manifest now by writings of the earlier date. Either of these may be readily met. On grammatical grounds the preference should be given to the connection with what follows, unless Dr. Lange's syntax be a