^ 
 
 • LIBRARY 
 
 OF THE 
 
 University of California 
 
 Mrs. SARAH P. WALSWORTH. 
 
 Received October, 1894. 
 Accessions No. '^j^y^/ff. Class No. 
 
Digitized by tine Internet Archive 
 
 in 2007 witin funding from 
 
 IVIicrosoft Corporation 
 
 ittp://www.archive.org/details/commentabiblicalOOolshrich 
 
BIBLICAL COMMENTARY 
 
 NEW TESTAMENT, 
 
 ADAPTED ESPECIALLY FOR PREACHERS AND STUDENTS, 
 
 BY 
 
 HERMANN OLSHAUSEN, D.D., 
 
 PROFESSOR OF THEOLOGY IN THE UNIVERSITY OF ERLANGEN. 
 
 TRANSLATED FROM THE GERMAN BY CLERGYMEN OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND. 
 
 CONTAINING THE EPISTLE OF ST PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 SeconD (!^i}ttton, GarefuUs iHebto 
 
 EDINBURGH: 
 T. & T. CLARK, 38 GEORGE STREET. 
 
 LONDON : HAMILTON, ADAMS, AND CO. j SIMPKIN, MARSHALL, AND 00. ; 
 
 SEELEY AND CO.; WARD AND CO.; JACKSON AND WALFORD. 
 
 DUBLIN: JOHN ROBERTSON; HODGES AND SMITH. 
 
 MDCCCLIV. 
 

 Da quod jubes, et jube quod vis, Deus meus. — Augustinus. 
 
 EDINBURGH: PRINTED BY ANDREW JACK, CLYDE STREET. 
 
CONTENTS, 
 
 GENERAL INTRODUCTION TO THE EPISTLES OF ST PAUL. 
 
 Page 
 § 1 . Of the Life and Ministry of St Paul in general, ... 1 
 
 2. The peculiarities of St Paul's character, .... 8 
 
 3. Order of succession of St Paul's Epistles, . . . 14 
 
 THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS — INTRODUCTION. 
 
 § 1. Of the Genuineness and the Integrity of the Epistle, . . .27 
 
 2. Time and place of the composition, . . . . 33 
 
 3. Of the Roman Church, ...... 35 
 
 4. Argument of the Epistle, . . . . . 48 
 
 5. The value and the peculiar character of the Epistle, . . .52 
 
 6. Literature, . . . . . . . 56 
 
 PART I. 
 
 THE INTRODXJCTION. 
 (i. 1-17.) 
 
 § 1. The Salutation (i. 1^7), . . . . . .59 
 
 2. Introduction (i. 8-17), • • • . . . 70 
 
 PART II. 
 
 THE DOCTRINAL EXPOSITION, 
 (i. 18— xi. 36.) 
 
 A. SECTION I. 
 
 OF THE SINFULNESS OF THE HUMAN RACE. 
 
 (i. 18— iii. 20.) 
 
 § 3. Condition of the heathen world (i. 1 8-32), . . . .79 
 
 4. Condition of the Jews (it 1-29), . . . . 93 
 
 5. Comparison of the Jews and Gentiles (iii. 1-20), . . . i 19 
 
 B. SECTION II. 
 
 THE DESCRIPTION OF THE NEW WAY OF SALVATION IN CHRIST. 
 (iiL 21— V. 11.) 
 
 § 6. The doctrme of free grace in Christ (iii. 21-31), . . 133 
 
 7. Abraham justified by faith (iv. 1-25), . . . . 158 
 
 8. Of the fruits of faith (v. 1-1 i), . . . . . 174 
 
 C. SECTION III. 
 
 OF THE VICARIOUS OFFICE OF CHRIST. 
 
 (v. 12— vii. 6.) 
 
 § 9. Parallel between Adam and Christ (v. 12, 21), . . .184 
 
 10. The believer is dead to sin (vi. 1 — vii. 6), ... 207 
 
Vi CONTENTS. 
 
 D. SECTION IV. 
 
 OF THE STAGES OF THE DEVELOPMENT AS WELL OF INDIVIDUALS AS OF THE UNIVERSE. 
 
 (vii. 7— viii. 39.) 
 
 Page 
 § 1 1. Of the Development of the Individual until his Experience of 
 
 Redemption (vii. 7-24), . . . . . .236 
 
 1 2. Of the Experience of Redemption until the Perfection of the Individual 
 
 Life (vii. 25— viii. 17), . . . . . 258 
 
 1 3. Of the Perfection of the whole Creation with the Children of God 
 
 (viii. 18-39), . . . . . . .281 
 
 E. SECTION V. 
 
 THE RELATION OF ISRAEL AND OF THE GENTILE WORLD TO THE NEW WAY OF 
 SALVATION. 
 
 (ix. 1— xi. 36.) 
 
 § 14. Of the Election of Grace (ix. 1-29), .... 306 
 
 15. Israel's guilt (ix. 30— X. 21), . . . . .342 
 
 16. Israel's Salvation (xi. 1-36), ..... 355 
 
 PART III. 
 
 THE ETHICAL EXPOSITION. 
 
 A. SECTION I. 
 
 EXHORTATIONS TO LOVE AND OBEDIENCE. 
 
 (xii. 1 — xiii. 14.) 
 
 § 17. Of Love (xii. 1-21), 387 
 
 18. Of Obedience (xiii. 1-14), ..... 396 
 
 B. SECTION II. 
 
 OF BEHAVIOUR AS TO THINGS INDIFFERENT, 
 (xiv. 1— XV. 13.) 
 § 19. Of bearing with the Weak (xiv. 1-23), . . • .406 
 
 20. Christ an Example of bearing with the Weak (xv. 1-13), . 414 
 
 C. SECTION III 
 
 PERSONAL COMMUNICATIONS, 
 (xv. 14—33, 
 
 § 21. Apology (xv. 14-21), ...... 418 
 
 22. Notice of Journeys (xv. 22-33), . • . . 421 
 
 PART IV. 
 
 SALUTATIONS AND CONCLUSION. 
 
 (xvi. 1-27.) 
 
 § 23. Salutations (xvi. 1-20), . . . • • *25 
 
 24. Conclusion (xvi. 21-27), ..... 429 
 
NOTE BY TEANSLATOES. 
 
 A translation of Olsliausen's valuable Commentary on the 
 New Testament was projected by some members of the English 
 Church in the end of the year 1845, and the Epistle to the 
 Romans was selected as the portion which should be first 
 executed. 
 
 Before this part of the work was completed, however, the 
 whole Commentary was announced for speedy publication in 
 the Foreign Theological Library ; and, as it was evident that a 
 competition between two translations would not be desirable, 
 the translators of the Commentary on the Epistle to the Ro- 
 mans resolved to oifer their version to Messrs Clark, and to 
 abandon the rest of their original design. Hence it is that the 
 contents of the present volume appear as a part of the Pub- 
 lishers' series. 
 
 If the translators had brought out the work on their own ac- 
 count, and on their own responsibilityj they would have endea- 
 voured to adapt it to English use, by considerable omissions of 
 matter which relates to merely German opinions and controver- 
 sies, by condensation of the language, and by intimating their 
 own occasional diiferences from the respected author. Under 
 the actual circumstances, however, such a process of editing 
 w^ould manifestly be out of place. The book, therefore, is in- 
 tended to represent the original as faithfully as possible, al- 
 though the translators are fully sensible that their task has 
 been very inadequately performed. Their own very few ad- 
 ditions are marked by brackets. 
 
 Olshausen's Commentary extends to the Gospels, the Acts, 
 and the Epistles to the Romans, Corinthians, Galatians, Ephe- 
 sians, Colossians, and Thessalonians. In the following pages 
 there will be found frequent references to portions which the 
 author did not live to execute. It has seemed well to retain 
 
VIU 
 
 NOTE BY TRANSLATORS. 
 
 these, as tliey may be useful in directing the reader to a com- 
 parison of other commentaries ; and it appears better to men- 
 tion here, once for all, the limits of the actually existing work, 
 than to append to every such reference a statement that the 
 design is incomplete. 
 
 Four persons have been concerned in the translation ; their 
 respective portions are as follows : — 
 
 General Introduction, (pp. 1-24), 
 Introduction to the Epistle (25-58), 
 Commentary chap. i. 1, to v. 11 (59-183), 
 
 V. 12, to viii. 39 (184-304), 
 ix. 1, toix. 30 (304-342), 
 ' „ ix. SO to the end (342-431) 
 
 A. 
 B. 
 A. 
 C. 
 D. 
 B. 
 
 April, 1864. 
 
GENEEAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 TO THE 
 
 EPISTLES OF ST PAUL. 
 
 §. 2. OF THE LIFE* AND MINISTRY OF ST PAUL IN GENERAL. 
 
 The connected consideration of the Epistles of St Paul calls 
 for a summary view of his personal character in all its grandeur, 
 as well as of the ways in which the Lord of the Church pre- 
 pared this distinguished instrument for the execution of His 
 purposes. For so entirely are St PauFs writings the proper 
 growth of his own mind and spirit, almost, so to speak, living 
 parts of his very self, that it would be most difficult to under- 
 stand their peculiar nature without a clear perception of these 
 points. 
 
 St Paul was called, for the further spread of the gospel, to 
 form the connecting link between the Roman- Grecian and the 
 Jewish world ; it was necessary, therefore, that both heathen 
 and Jewish habits of life and thought should bear a part in his 
 education, in order that he might be able to understand and 
 sympathise with both. Born of Jewish parents, and in later 
 life brought up at the feet of Gamaliel, in the principles of the 
 Pharisees, Jewish views and feelings certainly formed the 
 ground-work and substance of his education. But, as his birth- 
 place was Tarsus, where Grecian art and science flourished in a 
 
 * On the life of St Paul, besides the older works of Pearson (Annales Paulini) 
 and Paley (Horae Paulinse), there have more recently appeared the writings of 
 Menken, " Blicke. in das Leben des Apostels Paulus, (Bremen, 1828), of Hemsen 
 (Gottingen, 1830), of Schrader (Leipz. 1830-32, iii. vols.), and of Schott (Jena, 
 1832), The work of Schrader is rich in new results, which, however, cannot bear 
 
 A 
 
2 GENERAL INTRODTTCTION. 
 
 high degree,* this could not fail to exert an immediate eifect 
 upon the outward form which his Jewish principles assumed; 
 indeed, that it did so, is still evident from the quotations made 
 in his writings from Grecian poets. (Acts xvii. 28 ; 1 Cor. xv. 
 33 ; Tit. i. 12.) So that it is at least more than probahle that, 
 in the later part of his life, when he had escaped from the stern 
 bondage of the narrow-minded system of the Pharisees, the 
 views he had gained in his youth of the nobler aspects of Grecian 
 life rose up again before his mind, and gave him that just ap- 
 preciation of Gentile life, which is discernible in his writings. 
 
 For just as Philo, and other Jews, who lived entirely amongst 
 Greeks, as well as the earlier Fathers of the Church (as, for in- 
 stance, Justin Martyr), regarded the better men amongst the 
 Gentiles as by no means excluded from the blessings of the 
 Divine Word, the Giver of the heavenly powers of holiness and 
 the knowledge of God ; even so did St Paul recognise within 
 the heathen world a spiritual Israel ; that is, spirits nobler than 
 the rest, who thirsted after truth and righteousness (Rom. ii. 
 14, J 5); and whom he sought, through the preaching of the 
 gospel, to lead to the covenants of promise. Even the birth, 
 therefore, of the Apostle, and the influences under which he 
 grew up, were all so ordered by the providence of God, as best 
 to train him for the teacher of the Gentiles (Galat. i. 15). For 
 though at first sight it might appear that his connexion with 
 the sect of the Pharisees would not conduce to that freedom of 
 spirit which he afterwards attained to, yet, on closer considera- 
 tion, we shall discern in this very circumstance the wisdom of a 
 directing Providence. 
 
 In the first place, there were found in this sect many ele- 
 ments of truth, more especially moral earnestness and strictness 
 of life; for it was in many only, but by no means in all, that 
 these became hypocrisy. And, besides this, just such a nature 
 as that of St Paul needed the full experience of all that one 
 system had to offer, before he would become fully conscious of 
 what was erroneous and one-sided in it, and embrace with com- 
 plete devotion, and all the powers of his being, the comple- 
 
 the test of an impartial criticism. — Very interesting and instructive are the re- 
 marks of Tholuck in the " Studien und Kritiken" of 1835. P. ii. p. 364, &e. 
 
 * Strabo (Geogr. xiv. p. 991, ed. Almelov.) places Tarsus, in this respect, on a 
 level with Athens and Alexandria. 
 
GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 3 
 
 rneritary truth which that system obscured or denied. The 
 energy and determination of his will made him carry out his 
 principles as a Pharisee to a fanatical extreme against the 
 Christians; and it was not till he had done this, that he was 
 possessed by that deep longing which this system of life could 
 not satisfy, and which led him to perceive the state into which 
 he had fallen. The miraculous vision which was imparted to 
 St Paul, and the startling nature of the announcement that he 
 who was still the raging opposer of the Crucified, was hence- 
 forth to be His messenger to the Grentiles, are of course to be 
 considered as the decisive causes of the sudden change in his 
 spiritual state ; at the same time, we cannot doubt that his sincere 
 striving after righteousness by the mere works of the law had 
 already, though perhaps without his own consciousness, awakened 
 in the depth of his soul the conviction, that his own strength 
 could not attain to the fulfilment of righteousness ; nay, that it 
 might even lead him, when his intention was good, into the 
 most fearful errors. This conviction brought with it that which, 
 though not the cause, was a necessary condition of his passing 
 into the new life; — namely, the longing after something higher, 
 and the power of appreciating such moral phenomena, as the 
 ministry and death of Stephen, in which that for which he 
 longed was presented to him in actual life. 
 
 Without entering more at length, in this place, into the con- 
 sideration of that event which made St Paul into that great in- 
 strument in the kingdom of Grod, as which we honour him, let 
 us notice, in the next place, the position which he obtained with 
 respect to the Twelve and the Seventy, after his conversion. 
 His relation to the Twelve it is of particular importance to deter- 
 mine; for though the Seventy seem to come nearest him, in 
 respect of their ministry, which, like his, was directed to the 
 Gentile world,* yet these so entirely disappear as a body from 
 the history after the resurrection of the Lord, that no trace of 
 them remains. The separate members of it might indeed have 
 been afterwards actively engaged in preaching the gospel, but 
 no rivalry could have arisen between them as such and St Paul, 
 since no one could doubt that St Paul was at least equal to 
 them. But the case was quite different with respect to the 
 twelve. These formed a strictly defined and limited body ; so 
 
 * See in this Comm. the Notes to Luke x. 1. 
 
4 GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 
 
 that, even after the Ascension, the vacancy* which was occa- 
 sioned in their number by the apostacy of Judas Iscariot was 
 immediately filled up by the express command of the Lord. 
 (Acts i. 15, &c.) This body was, in fact, to contain within it- 
 self the pillars and supports of the Church, in proof of which 
 w^e find the twelve Apostles spoken of as the spiritual Fathers 
 of the spiritual Israel. (Matt. xix. 28; Rev. iv. 10, xxi. 14.) 
 So that this question is immediately forced upon us: — in what 
 relation did St Paul stand, according to the mind of the Lord, 
 to this sacred Body of Twelve? Now, if we regard this question 
 entirely apart from the individuals, as a matter determined by 
 outward circumstances, it cannot be denied that the Twelve stand 
 higher than St Paul, as those who had been with the Lord 
 throughout this earthly pilgrimage (which St Peter considers 
 as requisite in a true Apostle, Acts i. 21), and the special wit- 
 nesses of the whole progress of the Redeemer's life on earth. 
 They are, and must continue to be, the real foundations of the 
 New Jerusalem (Rev. xxi. J 4), so to speak, the roots of the 
 whole tree, those who received from the Lord the first-fruits 
 of the Spirit. St Paul might indeed justly call himself a witness 
 of the Resurrection,-|- since he had beheld the crucified Jesus 
 as the risen Lord, and had experienced in his own person His 
 divine power; but he plainly had not the privilege of having 
 seen the whole course of the life of Christ, and in this respect 
 he stood, as it were, one step further from that throne of glory 
 which was immediately surrounded by the Twelve. But if we 
 turn our eyes from this view of the relation as it is in itself, and 
 look at the men themselves as they appear in history, we must 
 confess, on the other hand, that the Apostle Paul left all the 
 Twelve far behind him, in that " he (that is, the grace of God in 
 him) laboured more abundantly than they all." (1 Cor. xv. 10; 
 
 * It would help us to understand the important position which we find Jamea, 
 the brother of the Lord, afterwards occupying, if we might assume that he was 
 taken into the number of the Twelve in the place of James, who, we learn (from 
 Acts xii. 1), was beheaded. At the same time, we have no distinct historical 
 evidence on this point ; and, besides, he does not appear to have left Jerusalem, 
 whilst the Apostles were to travel. 
 
 + It would indeed appear probable, from 2 Cor. v. 16, that St Paul had seen 
 our Lord before His resurrection, on the occasion of his presence at the Passover in 
 Jerusalem ; but certainly no nearer connexion had subsisted between him and the 
 Saviour. 
 
GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 5 
 
 2 Cor. xi. 23.) And this arose by no means from his personal 
 devotedness alone, but also in a great measure from circum- 
 stances. For, since the vineyard of God's kingdom was taken 
 away from the Jews, and opened to the Gentiles, and St Paul 
 was called to labour especially amongst the latter, as the Twelve 
 in the first instance amongst the former, it was natural that 
 the ministry of St Paul should bear much richer fruit, and that 
 all the other Apostles should in comparison with him fall into 
 the back-ground. From this we may likewise easily perceive 
 how the relation of the gospel to the outward institutions of 
 the Old Testament, and the admission of the Gentiles into the 
 Church without observing these, should have become plain to the 
 Apostle Paul, at an earlier period, and more completely than to 
 any of the other Apostles — more especially than to St Peter, who 
 was called to labour immediately amongst the Jews, and who was 
 designed to represent, as it were, the element of stability in the 
 Church. In consequence, therefore, of this state of things, the 
 Apostle, whilst standing on a level with the Twelve, was also en- 
 tirely independent of them, and occupied a position of his own, 
 as called immediately by the Lord to be the Apostle to the Gen- 
 tiles. (Acts xxvi. 1 7.) And this is a point on which St Paul 
 often found it necessary to insist in his arguments with his op- 
 ponents, who wished to impugn his authority as an Apostle. 
 (See notes on Galat. ii. 9.) In doing so he laid particular stress 
 upon the fact, that he did not in any way receive his knowledge 
 of the gospel from the Twelve, or from any other Christian, but 
 immediately from the Lord Himself. (See the notes on Galat. i. 
 12.) Now, as regards the purely spiritual part of the gospel, 
 there is no difficulty in conceiving how St Paul could have made 
 this his own without any instruction from man. For the Holy 
 Ghost, who was imparted to him, filled his inner man as an all- 
 pervading light, and made plain to him, through his belief in 
 Jesus as the Messiah, the whole of the Old Testament, in which 
 all the germs of the New were already laid down. In the Spirit, 
 who is absolute truth (1 John- v. 6), was given the assured con- 
 viction of the truth of the gospel, and insight into its meaning, 
 in details. With regard, however, to the historical side of Chris- 
 tianity, the case appears to be different; and yet there are 
 points connected apparently altogether with this (as, for ex- 
 ample, the institution of the Lord's Supper, 1 Cor. xi. 23, kc), 
 
6 GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 
 
 of which the Apostle asserts that he had received them immedi- 
 ately from the Lord. Now, we should undoubtedly be running 
 into an erroneous extreme, if we were to assume that all histori- 
 cal particulars in the life of our Lord were imparted to him by 
 revelation. The general outlines of Christ's outward life, the 
 history of His miracles, of His journeys, and what belongs to 
 them, were no doubt related to him by Ananias or other Chris- 
 tians. But whatever in that life was necessarily connected with 
 the peculiar doctrines of the gospel, as, for instance, the institu- 
 tion of the Sacraments, the Resurrection, and similar points, 
 came, no doubt, to the Apostle in an extraordinary manner, by 
 immediate revelation of the Lord;* so as to accredit him as an 
 independent witness, not only before the world, but also to be- 
 lievers. No one could come forward and say, that what St Paul 
 knew of the gospel had been received through him. For it was 
 from no man, but from the highest Teacher Himself, that he had 
 received as well the commission to preach, as also the essential 
 facts of the gospel, and the Holy Spirit who gives light and life 
 to those facts. 
 
 By this, however, it is not intended to deny that there was a 
 development in the new Hfe of St Paul; though assuredly (as 
 will be shown more at length in the following paragraphs), 
 no further change of doctrinal views could have taken place in 
 him. But he himself doubtless advanced gradually from child- 
 hood to youth, and then to manhood in Christ. And so, when 
 the Apostle came forward as a teacher at Damascus immedi- 
 ately after his conversion (Acts ix. 1.9), it was but the expres- 
 sion of the true feeling of the necessity which lay upon him 
 at once to bear open witness to the change which, through 
 God's grace, had taken place in him. But he himself, no doubt, 
 soon began to perceive that, before he could labour with a bless- 
 ing, it was very necessary that his inner life should be much 
 deepened, and more thoroughly worked out. In consequence 
 of his perception of this truth, he retired into Arabia for three 
 years — a time which, it is probable, he spent chiefly in a tho- 
 rough study of the Scriptures. *" In the midst of these studies, 
 
 * According to the account given in the Acts, St. Paul was more than once 
 graciously honoured with a vision of the Lord. (See Acts xxii. 17, xxiii. 11.) 
 
 t See, on this point, the remarks on Acts ix. 20, etc. St Paul himself enjoins 
 Timothy (1 Tim. iii. 6) that no new convert shall be a bishop. Ib it, then, likely 
 
GENEBAL INTRODUCTION. 7 
 
 probably, the enlightening of the Holy Ghost first revealed to 
 him, as a connected whole, the great purpose of the Lord with 
 respect to the human race; and now inwardly ripened, and 
 firmly established in true principles of doctrine and life, he 
 went forth into the great field of labour which the Lord had 
 appointed him. As the waters of a stream are spread abroad, 
 so did he spread abroad, beyond the narrow^ depths in which 
 they had hitherto been gathered together, the quickening 
 powers contained in .the new doctrine; and the whole heathen 
 world, which, left to itself, had come nigh to entire corruption, 
 was made fruitful as by the fresh springs of an heavenly life. 
 Now, as an energetic character, as one whose whole work lay 
 out of himself, the Apostle was in danger of forgetting him- 
 self in his care for others; or, at least, of letting his incessant 
 labours drain and exhaust his inward life. In order to pre- 
 vent this, we perceive, on the one hand, the grace of God effec- 
 tually renewing him with the powers of the higher world (2 
 Cor. xii.), since the mighty labours in which he was engaged 
 had not been undertaken by him on his own impulse, but had 
 been expressly assigned to him by the Lord. And, on the 
 other hand, God so ordered his circumstances as to afford sea- 
 sons of rest to his spirit; to which belong, for instance, the 
 imprisonments which he had to undergo. In such times of 
 lonely stillness his spiritual life was more fully developed within 
 itself, so that the preacher of the world might not preach to 
 others and be himself a castaway. 
 
 The last step in the Apostle PauFs progress towards perfec- 
 tion must finally have been taken on the occasion of his mar- 
 tyrdom. That which St John experienced inwardly in the 
 spirit, St Peter and St Paul were to experience also in the 
 body.* It was in the centre of the heathen world, in Rome, 
 during the first great persecution which befel the Church of 
 God, that St Paul died, beheaded, as a Roman citizen, with 
 the sword. The fact itself of his death is established by so 
 many and ancient witnesses, (amongst whom the presbyter 
 Gains, and the bishop Dionysius of Corinth, are the oldest. 
 See Euseb. H. E. ii. 25), that it cannot be questioned. There 
 
 that he would have acted in opposition to his own rule? or would his wonderful 
 conversion have exempted him from a rule to which even the Twelve weje subject! 
 * See more on this subject in the notes on John xxi. 20, etc. 
 
8 GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 
 
 remains, however, an uncertainty as to the year of his death, 
 because in this is involved the doubtful question concerning St 
 Paul's second imprisonment at Rome.* This question must 
 not occupy us till later; and I only here remark, in passing, 
 that I think it necessary to assume a second imprisonment of 
 St Paul in Rome, and cannot therefore place his death earher 
 than the last year of the reign of Nero (a. d. 67 or 68.) 
 
 § 2. THE PECULIARITIES OF ST PAUL's CHARACTER.-(- 
 
 That St Paul was one of those energetic characters of whom, 
 in different ages of the Church, the Lord has taken so many in 
 some marked manner to Himself, is so evident that no one can 
 well fail to perceive it. Whatever a man may think of the 
 truths tauglit by the Apostle, even the sceptic must confess that 
 a powerful and earnest spirit J breathes through his writings, full 
 of the glow of enthusiasm for that which he held as true, and of 
 burning zeal to communicate what he knew to all. But it is of 
 the greatest consequence to obtain a more accurate knowledge 
 of the peculiarities of St Paul's mind; because the nature of 
 his writings and doctrine will be much more easily comprehended 
 if we keep before our minds a clear image of their author. 
 
 Now the simplest way of obtaining an insight into the peculia- 
 rities of St Paul's character is by comparing him with St John, 
 the Evangelist. Contemplation (Tvuets), in the highest sense of 
 that word, we found to be the peculiar feature of St John*s life.§ 
 The whole bent of his mind was inward and meditative. His 
 soul was entirely receptive, wholly occupied with gazing upon the 
 
 * Compare on this point, in Hemsen'a Life of St Paul, the concluding considera- 
 tions on his death. 
 
 t On the subject of the following paragraphs, compare the essay of Neander on 
 the Apostle St Paul, in his History of the Apostolic Age (Geschichte des Apos- 
 tolischen Zeitalters, vol. ii. pp. 501, sqq.) 
 
 J We are easily tempted to picture to ourselves St Paul's personal appearance, 
 as very powerful, or even colossal ; but, according to 2 Cor. x. 10, just the contrary 
 was the case: In the dialogue Philopatris (which, however, to be sure, was not 
 written earlier than the fourth century), St Paul is called, "The Galilean with 
 the bald head, and the hooked nose." (See Tholuck's Eemarks, noticed at the 
 beginning of this Introduction, in which he describes the temperament of the 
 Apostle as the cholerico-melancholic. 
 
 § See the Introduction to the Gospel of St John. 
 
GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 9 
 
 eternal ideas of truth. Thus outward labours were not so pro- 
 minent in his case, and the flower of his life was prophecy. The 
 image presented to us by St Paul is very different from this. He 
 was not, of course, without that living knowledge of the truth 
 which comes by contemplation ; but in his way of treating reli- 
 gion he gives a prominence, as St John never does, to the exer- 
 cise of the intellect, and exhibits the characteristic acuteness of 
 his understanding in working out the ideas received by the spi- 
 ritual sense into distinct conceptions. It was through this 
 talent for reasoning that St Paul became the author of a pre- 
 cisely defined doctrinal language, and the founder of Theology, 
 as a science, in the Cliurch of Christ. In him is represented 
 the necessity of science for the Church, even in the very narrow 
 circle of those on whom the Holy Spirit was first poured forth.* 
 And the same character of mind, which made him express his 
 religious ideas in a scientific form, made him also, in the fruitful 
 labours of his outward life, develop especially the gift of wisdom 
 (1 Cor: xii. 8) In addition to the energy which belonged to 
 him as a man of action, we may discern in his activity the pe- 
 culiar faculty of using the most difficult and complicated worldly 
 relations for the purest and noblest purposes of the kingdom of 
 God, so that we must distinctly recognise in this a distinguish- 
 ing feature of his character. This is very clear, if we compare 
 him with St Peter; for in the latter there was no less energy, 
 but it seems in him to be fettered with a stiffness which hin- 
 dered its adapting itself to circumstances ; and though this was 
 quite in keeping with his character, which was firm as a rock, 
 yet we cannot mistake the contrast it affords to St Paul's. 
 
 This bent of St Paul's mind influenced, as we might have ex- 
 pected, his whole apprehension of the gospel. While St John 
 
 * It is in this dialectic character of St Paul's discourse that we may find the 
 reason that Longinus places the Apostle on a level with the famous Greek orators, 
 if, at least, the famous passage of that rhetorician, in which he makes mention 
 of the Apostle, is really genuine. Besides vigorous powers of reasoning, the might 
 of deep conviction, and the glow of enthusiasm, manifest themselves in St Paul's 
 writings, so that Jerome (in his work against Jovinian) declares " quotiescunque 
 Paulum apostolum lego, non verba audire mihi videor, sed tonitura." (See Fladi 
 clav. S.S. Basil, 1567, p. 387, sqq., and the works of Bauer, Philologia Thucydi- 
 deo-Paulina (Halse 1773), Logica Paulina (ib. 1774), Rhetorica Paulina (ib. 1782). 
 Also Tzschirner's treatise in his opusc. acad., edited by Winzer. Leips. 1829. 
 Lastly, Tholuck's Remarks, pp. 387, sqq., as noticed at p. 1 of this Introduction. 
 
10 GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 
 
 received it more, as it is in itself, as an object of contemplation, 
 and so made what is revealed to us of God and Christ the centre 
 of his doctrine; St Paul, on the other hand, looked at the gos- 
 pel more directly in its bearing upon himself, and so made what 
 is told us of man's nature, and of the method of his salvation, 
 the prominent points of his theology. In the experience of his 
 own life he had seen the sinful state of the human heart, as well 
 as man's inability to deliver himself from it, and the consequent 
 need of a remedy which should come from God, such as was 
 realised in Christ; and from this living source his whole system 
 of doctrine springs forth and spreads itself. The Western cha- 
 racter of St Paul's mind is seen in this conception of the gospel 
 as clearly as in the bent of those two great kindred spirits to 
 his, St Augustin and Luther, in whom indeed his own course 
 of education was repeated. In St John, on the other hand, is 
 shown the Eastern spirit, which loses sight of itself in the con- 
 templation of that which is presented to it of God, and which, 
 through all the developments of doctrine in later ages, ever 
 dwelt by preference on what is revealed to us of God and Christ. 
 So that though there is no specific difference, no actual contra- 
 diction between the teaching of St Paul and St John, yet these 
 two Apostles do already exhibit in themselves the two chief 
 tendencies of the later development of doctrine. As the grain of 
 corn, though one, opens itself into two halves on the unfolding 
 of the germ, or as the magnet, from one middle point, discharges, 
 at the same time, a positive and a negative power ; so the two 
 chief tendencies of the Church, the Eastern and the Western, 
 which mutually complete each other, are represented in the 
 earliest ages by the two great Apostles, St John and St Paul. 
 
 From the vigorous and decided manner in which the Apostle 
 both taught and acted, we might at once conclude that it was 
 not likely that any considerable change would take place in his 
 convictions, after that first great spiritual conversion, by which 
 the fierce opponent of Jesus Christ became his fearless witness. 
 After his admission into the Church of Christ, he no doubt early 
 formed for himself a consistent view of Christian truth, and 
 therefore expresses himself, even in his latest epistles, in the same 
 way as in his earliest; from the Epistles to the Thessalonians 
 down to those to Timothy and Titus, we find the same fundamen- 
 tal truths ever recurring. In one single point only can we discern 
 
GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 1 1 
 
 in his later writings a different form of doctrinal statement from 
 that contained in his earlier epistles ; that is, in his views con- 
 cerning the second coming of Christ. In his earliest epistles, 
 St Paul expresses a hope that he may himself live until the 
 time of the Lord's return (see 1 Thess. iv.; 2 Cor. v.), but in 
 the latter he has renounced this hope, and longs to depart and 
 to be with Christ (Phil. i. 23). The modification of his views 
 in this point may, however, be easily explained, if we consider 
 the peculiar nature of the subject. The time of Christ's second 
 coming was, according to our Lord's own teaching, to remain un- 
 certain (see Matt. xxiv. S6, and the remarks on the passage) ; St 
 Paul himself, therefore, neither knew nor could know this time 
 (Acts i. 7). Whilst, therefore, the fervour of his love made him 
 at first regard all things as near, and long after the kingdom of 
 God upon earth as the highest good; at a later period the great 
 crisis of the Advent retreated, in his apprehension, to a greater 
 distance. We cannot therefore say that St Paul's convictions 
 on this point of doctrine underwent any change ; but only that 
 his own individual position with respect to the object presented 
 in this doctrine was altered. If, however, the above observations 
 show that the substance of St Paul's doctrine remained un- 
 changed, yet we may certainly observe a constant progress in 
 the merely formal development of it; for we cannot fail to per- 
 ceive, that his theological language is more full, and his con- 
 ceptions more complete and symmetrical, in the later epistles, 
 especially those to the Philippians and Colossians, than in the 
 earlier. 
 
 St Paul not only kept aloof from the gnostical tendency (the 
 relative truth of which is represented by St John), and vigor- 
 ously combated the errors into which, as is plain from the 
 epistles to the Colossians, to Timothy, and Titus, it soon led 
 some of its followers; but also from that judaico-materialist 
 tendency, which showed itself in so many of those who had left 
 the sect of the Pharisees to join the Christian Church. As a 
 tree torn from its original soil, and transplanted with all its 
 roots and fibres into other ground, such had been the change 
 effected in St Paul at his conversion ; and he therefore trans- 
 ferred nothing of the one-sidedness and narrowness of the 
 system of the Pharisees into his views of Christian doctrine. 
 The attempts which have been made to explain many leading 
 
12 GENERAL INTIIODUCTION. 
 
 features of his system from his Jewish views of life,* show just 
 as little knowledge of the human heart, as those which seek to 
 account for Augustin's doctrine by his former Manichsean errors, 
 and for Luther's by his education as a monk. We find, on the 
 contrary, that men of energetic character are generally inclined 
 after such transitions to despise too much the systems from 
 which they have escaped, and to reject even what is true in 
 them, rather than to transfer anything belonging to them into 
 their new line of thought and life. But from this error, into 
 which Marcion and his disciples fell, St Paul was preserved by 
 that fundamental Christian view, of which the Holy Spirit had 
 led him to see the importance, and which regards the Old Tes- 
 tament as divine in its nature, and containing, under a typical 
 and prophetical veil, all the essential truths of Christianity in 
 the germ. He perceived that the error lay entirely in the rigid 
 spirit of the Pharisees, who wished to have the husk of the 
 letter regarded as the substance of the spirit itself. St Paul 
 therefore represented that true and just mean, which lies be- 
 tween the false spiritualism of the Gnostics on the one hand, 
 and the materialism of the Jews on the other, whilst he held 
 the true Scriptural doctrine of the reality and importance of 
 both spirit and matter, in their proper relations to each other; 
 and this in such a manner as fully to maintain his balance, 
 without leaning t either error. In the theology of St John, 
 likewise, the same correct views of the relation of matter and 
 spirit cannot be mistaken, although in his gospel and epistles 
 we find an inclination towards genuine spiritualism, of course 
 without making any concession to Gnostic errors: it was only 
 in the Apocalypse that St John found the opportunity of bring- 
 ing forward in greater prominence that side of the gospel which 
 presents to us the material and spiritual in their connexion ; 
 and therefore any future author who wishes to give a just view 
 of St John's doctrine, must consider the ideas of the Apocalypse 
 as complementary of those of his remaining works. 
 
 * We need hardly remark that we do not therefore mean to deny that the his- 
 tory of Jewish doctrine furnishes us with a key to the further understanding of 
 many particular statements in St Paul's writings; we only wish to maintain, that 
 the essential points of his system are the results of his own inward experience; the 
 views which he entertained at an earlier period of his life at most only aflfecteti the 
 form in which he presented the truth. 
 
QENEBAL INTRODUCTION. 13 
 
 This well-balanced character of St Paul's whole disposition, as 
 well as of his theology, is also the reason why the feeling of the 
 Church, guided in this matter also into the truth by the Spirit of 
 Christ working in her, has regarded the collection of his epistles, 
 in which every thought is expressive of that correct mean which he 
 preserved in his doctrine, as the crown of the canon of the New 
 Testament. Whilst every separate gospel found its necessary com- 
 plement in other gospels, and altogether form the roots of the 
 New Testament, whilst the Acts of the Apostles only constitutes, 
 so to speak, the stem, which unites the roots with the crown of 
 the tree, — St Paul, without laying claim to any authority in point 
 of doctrine independent of the rest, stands before us in all the 
 riches of his personal endowments, spreading around on all sides 
 the fruitfulness of his inward life. He was the first, in whom 
 was reflected on all sides, as far as was possible in one man, not 
 of course the person of the Lord himself, but that Spirit which 
 he had bestowed upon the Church; and this universality of 
 character and gifts of grace madehim capable, through thepowers 
 of the same Spirit, of so unfolding the peculiar nature of the 
 principles of Christianity both in his doctrine and in his life, as 
 to represent it to the Gentile world almost in his sole person. 
 Whatsoever, therefore, appeared in the gospels as a bud but par- 
 tially disclosed, and indeed in the synoptical evangelists mani- 
 festly engrafted upon Old Testament principles, — that the 
 Apostle displays before our minds openly and freely, and in some 
 parts of his writings, for instance, in the Epistles to the Romans 
 and Galatians, in so strictly didactic a form, that it commends 
 itself as much hy the cogency of the arguments to the thoughtful, 
 as to the feeling mind by that glow of enthusiasm which breathes 
 throughout his statements. If, however, we compare the col- 
 lection of the Catholic epistles (with which we must also class 
 the Epistle to the Hebrews, as proceeding to the same starting- 
 point), with the Epistles of St Paul, we shall perceive that the 
 latter are more calculated for the beginning of the spiritual life, 
 whilst the concluding writings of the New Testament tend more 
 directly to the perfection of the fruits of regeneration in holiness 
 and sanctification. Accordingly, if in the epistles of St Paul 
 the central ideas, around which he considers everything to move, 
 Sire faith in opposition to the works of the law, justification and 
 atonement, and we cannot fail to perceive the earnestness with 
 
14 GENERAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 which he labours to impress these deeply on the minds of his hear- 
 ers and readers; the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Catholic 
 epistles, on the other hand, setting out with these doctrines as 
 their admitted foundation, teach from them how the man is to 
 perfect holiness in the fear of God. The latter epistles, therefore, 
 seem to bear more of a legal character, and on that account found 
 much less access to the mind of the Church than those of St 
 Paul. They demand, however, also for their right comprehension 
 a higher degree of development of the regenerate soul ; and be- 
 cause this was often deficient, a correct perception of the diffi- 
 culties of those writings deterred many expositors from attempt- 
 ing to explain them. The different collections, therefore, which 
 compose the New Testament canon, each proceed from a different 
 point of view, and on this very account mutually complete each 
 other, furnishing satisfaction for every stage of advancement, 
 and excitement to press forward to higher perfection. (See 
 Comm. P. I. Introd. § 2.) 
 
 § 3. ORDER OF SUCCESSION OF ST PAUL's EPISTLES. 
 
 From the thoroughly practical character of St Paul's life, we 
 might at once expect that his productions as an author would 
 have nothing of an abstract form about them. And in fact we 
 neither possess any treatises by him on religious subjects, nor 
 have we any reason to suppose that he ever wrote any. His 
 letters are all suggested by existing circumstances, and are there- 
 fore adapted to the most particular occasions of actual life. On 
 this account, everything in them is individual, marked, traced 
 with strong and definite outlines, and yet, by means of that 
 spiritual principle which animated the Apostle, truths of the 
 most universal bearing are reflected in those special cases, and 
 give to all his remarks and counsel a meaning and importance 
 for every age. In what manner those epistles of the Apostle 
 which have come down to us were formed into one collection, it 
 is now impossible to make out on satisfactory historical grounds. 
 We find, however, in the hands of Marcion the Gnostic, a collec- 
 tion of ten epistles of St Paul, the three pastoral epistles to 
 Timothy and Titus being wanting, whilst in the Catholic Church 
 the collection consisted of thirteen epistles (tliat to the Hebrews 
 not being included) : this might then be regarded as the original 
 
GENERAL INTRODUCTION. ] 5 
 
 neucleus of the collection of epistles, to which the pastoral epistles 
 were added at a later period. And yet if we consider the niatter 
 more closely, this does not appear probable, and we may there- 
 fore suppose that the pastofal epistles were only accidentally 
 omitted from the canon of Marcion. For w^e find that the order 
 of succession of the epistles, according to Marcion's arrangement 
 was an entirely different one from that of the collection sanc- 
 tioned by the Catholic Church ; but if the latter had only inserted 
 the pastoral epistles into Marcior/s collection, the order would 
 have remained unaltered. The cause of the discrepancy of the 
 order was, moreover, occasioned by the adoption of an entirely 
 distinct principle of arrangement ; the Marcionites arranging the 
 epistles, as we shall soon prove, according to their chronological 
 succession ; the Catholics, in the first place, according to the im- 
 portance of the churches to which the writings were addressed, and 
 then according to the dignity of the private persons who had re- 
 ceived them. This appears most plainly in the case of the Epistle 
 to Philemon; this letter would seem, at first sight, to belong to the 
 Epistle to the Colossians, where Marcion has also placed it, but in 
 the collection of the Catholic canon, it followed last of all, as being 
 the shortest epistle directed to a private person. The Marcionite 
 collection was most probably first formed in Asia Minor. In its 
 composition; the framers of it either proceeded on the principle of 
 omitting letters to private persons, and only admitting epistles to 
 whole communities (the letter to Pliilemon finding a place in the 
 collection merely as an appendage to the epistle to the Colossians) 
 or they w^ere unacquainted with the pastoral epistles. On the 
 other hand, the Catholic collection of St Paul's epistles probably 
 had its rise in Rome; and the authors of it followed the order of 
 importance of the communities to which the epistles were addres- 
 sed, and also admitted such private letters as seemed to be of 
 value for the Church at large. The tendency of the Roman 
 community to pay considerable attention to matters relating to 
 the outward constitution of the Church answers remarkably well 
 to this supposition with respect to the pastoral letters, and there- 
 fore also increases the probability that the Catholic canon of St 
 Paul's epistles was formed at this place. 
 
 In our investigation of the order of succession of St Paul's 
 epistles, we shall, however, not only exclude the Epistle to the He- 
 brews (which does not proceed from the Apostle himself, although 
 
16 
 
 GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 
 
 it was composed under his sanction*), but also the epistles to Ti- 
 mothy and Titus; for in these such complicated relations require 
 to be discussed, that they require a distinct consideration. We 
 liave therefore, in the first place, only to do with the order of suc- 
 cession of those ten epistles of St Paul, which even Marcion in- 
 cluded in his collection. With respect to the years in which these 
 are supposed to have been composed, a great discrepancy doubt- 
 less exists in the dates assigned by the learned, because the chro- 
 nology of the history of the apostles in general, and of St Paul's 
 life in particular, is so very uncertain. But our present subject 
 is properly only the order in which the epistles follow upon one 
 another; and in the determination of this point, the views taken 
 are by no means so widely different, as in deciding the j^ears un- 
 der which every single epistle ought to be arranged, because this 
 last question must always depend upon the chronological system 
 adopted by the particular investigation, a circumstance, however, 
 which aifords much assistance in judging of the accuracy of any 
 theory as to the order of succession of the epistles in general. 
 In order to facilitate our survey of the different views which 
 have been taken on this subject, we give, in the following tabular 
 form, the opinions of three scholars belonging respectively to 
 the earliest, modern, and most recent times. 
 
 Marcmi.f 
 
 Galatians 
 
 I. Corinthians 
 
 II. Corinthians 
 Romans 
 
 I. Thessalonians 
 
 II. Tiiessalonians 
 Ephesians 
 Colossians 
 Philemon 
 Philippians 
 
 Eickkorn. 
 
 I. Thessalonians 
 
 II. Thessalonians 
 Galatians 
 
 I. Corinthians 
 
 II. Corinthians 
 Romans 
 Ephesians 
 Colossians 
 Philemon 
 Philippians 
 
 Schrader. 
 
 I. Corinthians 
 
 II. Corinthians 
 Romans 
 
 I. Thessalonians 
 
 II. Thessalonians 
 Ephesians 
 Colossians 
 Philemon 
 Philippians 
 Galatians 
 
 * See the two critical treatises on the subject of the Epistle to the Hebrews in 
 Olshausen's Opuscnla Theologica. — [The author's theory is, that it was written by 
 the clergy in some church in which St Paul was sojourning, and that the Apostle 
 approved it when j&nished. Thus he thinks to account at once for the connexion of 
 St Paul's name with the epistle, and for the difference from the style of his undoubt- 
 ed compositions. (OpusculaBerol., 1834, pp. 91-122.) The reader may be referred 
 to Dr Mill's remarks, Prselectio Theologica, Cantabr., 1843, pp. 6, 7, and note 
 p. 32. B.] 
 
 t See Epiphanius. hoer. xlii., c. 9. 
 
GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 17 
 
 In the first place, from this table we cannot but perceive that 
 as we have already mentioned above, Marcion could not liave 
 placed the epistles in this order accidentally ; it corresponds too 
 exactly with the results of the most industrious critical researches, 
 not to have proceeded from the design of arranging the epistles 
 according to the date of their composition. The conclusions of the 
 most recent examiner, Schrader, coincide exactly with Marcion's 
 scheme, except with respect to the epistle to the Galatians. 
 Certainly, with respect to this composition, the discrepancy is so 
 much the greater; for whilst Marcion assigns to it tlie first 
 place, Schrader places it last. Eichhorn, in this case, agrees 
 rather with Marcion than with Schrader, in that he places the 
 epistle to the Galatians, in point of time, before those to the Cor- 
 inthians and Romans; at the same time, he differs from both in 
 respect to the epistles to the Thessalonians, for whilst they put 
 these letters immediately after the epistle to the Romans, Eich- 
 horn considers them to have been written first of all , Since 
 more exact information, with regard to the dates ofithe compo^ 
 sition of the separate epistles, may best be prefixed tt>tlxe spe- 
 cial introductions devoted to each, we will only bnefly consider 
 in thisplace the epistles of which the date is questiotiable, those 
 to the Thessalonians and Galatians, in respect of the time of 
 their composition, in order to advance a preliminary justifica- 
 tion of our adoption of the order assigned by Eichhorn, in favour 
 of which Hemsen and the majority of modern scholars have also 
 decided. 
 
 The peculiarity of Schrader's arrangement of the epistles of 
 St Paul is founded on a theory propounded by this scholar, ac 
 cording to which the Apostle made a journey to Jerusalem after 
 leaving Ephesus, (where, according to Acts xix., he passed more 
 than two years). He thinks that this journey took place in the 
 intei'val between the events recorded in the 20th and 2 1st verses 
 of this chapter. In consequence of this journey, in which he 
 supposes St Paul to have visited Thessalonica, Schrader places 
 the composition of the epistles to the Thessalonians at a period 
 subsequent to that of those to the Romans and Corinthians. 
 Schott has, however, already proved at length,* that nothing 
 
 * See Schott's Programm, *' Isagoge historico-critica in utramque Pauli ad 
 Thessaloiiicenses epistolara." Jense, 1880. And the same author's " Erorterung 
 einiger wichtigen chronolog. Punkte im Leben Pauli," (Jena, 1832), p. 48, etc. 
 
 B 
 
18 GENERAL INTRODUCTION, 
 
 can be found in the epistle to the Thessalonians which speaks of 
 their having been written at this later time, but rather that 
 every thing indicafes that they were written in Corinth immedi- 
 ately after the first visit of Si Paul to Thessalonica (Acts xvii.), 
 on the occasion of the first planting of that church. The epistles 
 to the Thessalonians must, therefore, necessarily be reckoned 
 amongst the earliest, and it is a decided mistake to place them 
 after the epistle to the Romans, if only for this reason, that Paul 
 did not write the latter until he was at Corinth on his third mis- 
 sionary journey. But Schrader's hypothesis, with respect to the 
 epistles to the Galatians, is even more capricious. His assumed 
 journey from Ephesus to Jerusalem is in fact supposed to be 
 that mentioned, Gralat. ii. 1, from which it would no doubt fol- 
 low that the composition of the letter belongs to a much later 
 period, since the Apostle, in tlie course of that chapter, men- 
 tions many other occurrences in his life. But the very circum- 
 stance that Barnabas accompanied the Apostle to Jerusalem, in 
 the journey alluded to, Galat. ii. I, whilst it is certain from the 
 account in Acts xv. 36, etc., that they had parted from one an- 
 other long before St Paul went to Ephesus, is a convincing argu- 
 ment against this wholly unfounded theory; and Schrader's 
 assertion that the difierence between St Paul and Barnabas had 
 previously been made up is likewise founded upon mere hypo- 
 thesis. For though I am very far from accounting for this sepa- 
 ration, as Scholt appears to do (Erorterung, p. 64, etc.) by sup- 
 posing a discrepancy in their views, and am much rather in- 
 clined to assume merely outward reasons as the cause of its con- 
 tinuance, yet the circumstance, that after Acts xv. 36, etc., 
 Barnabas is no more mentioned in connexion with St Paul, is 
 decisive against Schrader's assumption.* But the arguments, 
 which Schrader thinks he can adduce from the contents of the 
 epistle to the Galatians in favour of his hypothesis, are so com- 
 pletely overthrown by Scholt in detail (p. 65, etc.) that it is enough 
 in this place to refer to the latter writer's treatise. Schrader 
 thinks especially that he discovers in the passage, Galat. vi. 17, 
 
 * The passage 1 Cor. ix. 6, is the only one which appears to support a later 
 coming together of Barnabas and St Paul ; if we are not willing to admit that 
 Barnabas was se'^arated from St Paul in Corinth. He must, however, at all 
 event have visited this city, according to the passage above quoted, after the foun- 
 dation of the Christian community there. 
 
I 
 
 GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 1 9 
 
 a declaration of the Apostle, that he is looking forward to the 
 sentence of death, and, therefore, concludes that the composi- 
 tion of this letter must be referred to quite the end of St Paul's 
 life. But how entirely unfounded is such an explanation of t!ie 
 text will appear hereafter from our commentary upon it. Koh- 
 ler* also has made a similar attempt to refer the composition of 
 the epistle to the Galatians to a later period ; but he does not 
 understand the journey to Jerusalem mentioned in Galat. ii. 1, 
 like Schrader, of a separate journey made from Ephesus, but 
 thinks that he discovers in it the journey recorded in Acts xviii. 
 22. No doubt, as I have already endeavoured to represent as 
 probable in my commentary on the passage, St Paul did visit 
 Jerusalem about that time, (which Scliolt is mistaken in deny- 
 ing, p. 37); but for the assumption that this journey is meant 
 in Galat. ii. 1, there is not a shadow of proof; it is much more 
 more certain that it was that made from Antioch to the council 
 of the Apostles, Acts xv. Much less, however, can we assent to 
 Kdhler's view, that St Paul first preached the gospel in Galatia on 
 his journey through that province mentioned in Acts xviii. 23, 
 since the words added in that passage, sV/cr^jp/^wi/ 'Trdvrag rods 
 ficx.drirdg, plainly express that the Apostle wished to confirm in 
 the faith the churches which he had already founded in Galatia, 
 (See Acts xvi. 6.) Since, moreover, this scholar can only give 
 even a shadow of probability to his pQ§tponement of the com- 
 position of the epistle to the Galatians to the latest period of St 
 Paul's life, by means of a conjecture and hypothesis heaped upon 
 his first assumption, we cannot feel ourselves called upon by his 
 arguments to depart from that order of succession of the epistles 
 of St Paul, which is now almost universally received. This is 
 connected in the following manner with the principal events of 
 St Paul's life, according to the chronology which we have 
 adopted from Hug ; in this account, we must however, as we 
 have already remarked, leave the pastoral epistles again un- 
 touched, because they present peculiar difficulties as regards 
 their insertion into the history of St Paul's life, and on that 
 account demand a separate consideration. 
 
 After St Paul's conversion on the road to Damascus, (about 
 the year 36 after the birth of Christ), he went to Arabia, where 
 
 * " Uber die Abfassuiigszeit der epistolischen Schriften des N, T." Laipz. ]830. 
 
^0 GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 
 
 he remained three years. (Galat. i. 1 7.) After this he returned 
 to Damascus, but in this city he was persecuted by the Jews, 
 and only escaped to Jerusalem with extreme difficulty (2 Cor. 
 xi. 32. Acts ix. 24, 25). On this visit of St Paul to Jerusalem, 
 Barnabas introduced the Apostle to St Peter and St James 
 (Galat. i. 18, 19); he however only remained there fourteen 
 days. On leaving Jerusalem, the Apostle repaired first to his 
 native city Tarsus (Acts ix. 25, etc.), from whence Barnabas, 
 who it appears was the first to discover his wonderful gift of 
 teaching, fetched him away to Antioch, at which place, in the 
 meantime, Christianity had also begun to spread amongst the 
 heathen. (Acts xi. 19.) This happened about a.d. 42. St Paul 
 and Barnabas had been teaching together about a year in An- 
 tioch when the great famine made its appearance in Palestine, 
 in consequence of which they were both sent to Jerusalem (St 
 Paul for the second time) as the bearers of a contribution to the 
 necessities of the poor brethren at that place. Acts xi. SO. 
 Perhaps, however, Paul himself did not go to Jerusalem, for it 
 is not stated in the Acts that he did, and that difficult passage 
 Galat. ii. 1, would render the supposition probable. After the 
 accomplishment of this business, the people of Antioch expressed 
 a wish that the Gospel might be preached to the Gentiles in 
 other countries also. The elders of the church thereupon chose 
 St Paul and Barnabas^s their messengers to the heathen, and 
 they accordingly entered upon their first missionary journey 
 (about A.D. 45.) Their journey went first by Cyprus, through 
 Pamphylia and Pisidia, and they then returned to Antioch by 
 sea (Acts xiii. 5; xiv. 26.) The time of their return it is just 
 as impossible to determine with any certainty, as the length of 
 their subsequent stay at Antioch (Acts xiv. 28). At the same 
 time, there can be no doubt that the third journey of St Paul 
 to Jerusalem, occasioned by the disputes concerning the recep- 
 tion of Gentile converts into the Church, formed the conclusion 
 of this residence (Galat. ii. 1). The apostles and the presbyters 
 of the Church at Jerusalem examined into this question together, 
 and after hearing the reports of St Paul and Barnabas, decided 
 in favour of the milder course, according to which the heathen 
 were not obliged to submit to circumcision and observe the 
 whole law This important transaction, the so-called apostolic 
 
GENERAL INTRODUCTION. , 21 
 
 council (Acts xv.), happened a.d. 52 or 53. Immediately after 
 the return of St Paul from Jerusalem to Antioch, about a.d. 58, 
 he entered upon his second missionary journey, which he under- 
 took in company with Silas. On this journey he first of all 
 visited again the churches he had already planted, and then 
 proceeded to Galatia, and by Troas to Macedonia (Acts xvi. 9). 
 Philippi was the first city of this country in which St Paul 
 taught, but this place he was soon obliged to leave in conse- 
 quence of a tumult stirred up against him by the employers of 
 a female ventriloquist, and to betake himself to Thessalonica 
 (Acts xvi. 1 2, etc.) The apostle was only able to preach here a 
 few weeks, yet even in this short time a Christian community was 
 formed there. But a tumult occasioned by the Jews compelled 
 St Paul soon to fly from Thessalonica, and to go to Athens by 
 Berea, to which latter place his enemies continued to follow 
 him (Acts xvii. 1). His companions, Silas and Timothy, he 
 had left behind him at Berea, but soon called upon him to fol' 
 low him to Athens, probably that he might obtain intelligence 
 of the churches in Macedonia (Acts xvii. 15). However, he 
 immediately despatched Timothy to Thessalonica, in order that 
 he might establish in the faith that young and hardly-pressed 
 community (J Thess. iii. 2). In the meantime the Apostle, 
 after the dismissal of Timothy, left Athens, where he does not 
 appear to have laboured long, and repaired to Corinth (Acts 
 xviii. 1). Here he met with the famous Jewish family of 
 Aquila and Priscilla, which had been expelled from Rome by 
 Claudius; and as Aquila practised the same handicraft which 
 St Paul had learnt, the latter undertook to work with him, and 
 since his preaching produced great eifect, remained there a year 
 and a half. By means of the fact here mentioned, the expul- 
 sion of the Jews from Rome by Claudius, we also obtain pretty 
 exact information with respect to the date of St Paul's residence 
 at Corinth; it must have been in the year of our Lord 54 and 
 55. During this his stay at Corinth, it would appear that the 
 Apostle commenced his labours as a writer, at least nothing 
 remains to us of any letters which he may previously have in- 
 dited. In fact, when Timothy had returned from his mission 
 to Thessalonica, St Paul wrote his Fwst Epistle to the Thessalo- 
 nians, and soon afterwards the Second, likewise from Corinth, 
 
2*2 GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 
 
 All his apostolical epistles belong, therefore, to the later and 
 more mature period of his life, a circumstance which is certainly 
 not to be regarded as accidental. 
 
 After the lapse of a year and a half St Paul left Corinth in 
 the company of Aquila and Priscilla, in order to go up to Jeru- 
 salem to keep a vow (Acts xviii. 18.) In his voyage he touched 
 at Ephesus, without, however, being able to make any long stay 
 there, as he wished to be at Jerusalem for the feast of Pente- 
 cost. At the same time he promised to return thither as soon 
 as possible ; and, in accordance with this promise, immediately 
 after a brief sojourn in Jerusalem (his fourth visit to that city, 
 see Commentary on Acts xviii. 22) and in Antioch, he set oif 
 again to proceed to Ephesus ; this forms the commencement of 
 his ildrd missionary journey (about a.d. 57). The Apostle con- 
 tinued in this important city two years and three months, 
 and wrote from hence in the first place to the Galatians (per- 
 haps as early as a.d. 57, certainly not later than the beginning 
 of 58) ; he had visited them on his journey to Ephesus, and had 
 perhaps, even on this occasion, remarked sundry errors, or at 
 all events had soon after heard of such. Next the Apostle 
 began his correspondence with the Corinthian Church, writing 
 likewise from Ephesus, in consequence of the unfavourable ac- 
 counts which he had received of them also. The First Epistle 
 of St Paul to the Corinthians is lost (1 Cor. v. 9), but after it 
 was sent, new reports arrived from Corinth, which caused the 
 Apostle to send thither Timothy and Erastus (1 Cor. iv. 17, 
 etc., Acts xix. 22), and immediately afterwards he composed 
 that first epistle to the Corinthians which is yet extant. The 
 writing of this letter may be referred to a.d. 59, or the com- 
 mencement of 60. Scarcely, however, had St Paul finished 
 this letter, when the goldsmith Demetrius stirred up a tumult 
 against him in Ephesus, in consequence of which he was obliged 
 to fly. The Apostle proceeded by Troas to Macedonia, full of 
 desire to receive more exact information concerning the state of 
 things in Corinth. When he had received this from Timothy 
 and Titus, who came directly from Corinth, he wrote, about 
 A.D. 60, the second epistle to the Corinthians. Titus conveyed 
 this letter to Corinth; and the Apostle himself journeyed after 
 him slowly, through Achaia, to the same city. During this his 
 second stay in Corinth, St Paul found occasion to write to the 
 
GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 23 
 
 Romans, wliich he must have done as early as in the year 60, 
 shortly before his departure from Corinth, since, in Romans xv. 
 25, 26, he makes mention of the charitable collections made for 
 the Christians in Jerusalem, as well as of the journey he had 
 in prospect. This journey to Jerusalem, his fifth, the Apostle 
 accomplished by sailing from Philippi in Macedonia to the coasts 
 of Asia Minor, then proceeding to Syria, and from thence visit- 
 ing Jerusalem (Acts xx. 3, etc.). As early as the tenth day 
 after his arrival there, he was taken into custody, on the oc- 
 casion of an uproar of the people, and remained (from a.d. 60 
 to 62) two years in prison at Csesarea. When, however, Fortius 
 Festus was made Proconsul of Syria in the room of Felix, he 
 sent the Apostle to Rome, on his appealing to Caesar. On his 
 voyage to Rome, St Paul was shipwrecked upon the island of 
 Malta, and did not reach Rome, in consequence, until the be- 
 ginning of the year 63 (Acts xxv.-xxvii.). Here he remained 
 two years (from 63 to 65) in a mild imprisonment (Acts xxviii. 
 SO), and composed in this period the epistles to the Ephesians, 
 Colossians, Philemon, and the Philippians.* 
 
 The question concerning the date of the composition of the 
 three pastoral epistles, as well as the investigation concerning 
 the Apostle's second imprisonment and the time of his death at 
 Rome,-)* wliich is so closely connected with it, we leave here, as al- 
 ready remarked, untouched; inasmuch as the special introduction 
 to these epistles, which form, as it were, a little whole of them- 
 selves, will furnish us with a more suitable opportunity for the dis- 
 cussion of these points. We reserve also the more detailed exposi- 
 tion of our reasons for the place which we have assigned to each 
 of the epistles for the special introductory observations on those 
 epistles; and, finally, we explain them in the order followed 
 by the ordinary editions, since the plan of beginning with the 
 epistle to the Romans affords many advantages towards the 
 
 * The view which has quite recently been put forward by several scholars, and 
 especially by Bottger (Beitrage, ii.), that those epistles which have hitherto been 
 attributed to the period of St Paul's first captivity at Kome might have been writ- 
 ten during his captivity at Caesarea, we shall consider more at length in our intro- 
 ductions to these epistles, adducing the reasons by which it is supported, and our 
 own objections to it. 
 
 t Amongst the most recent investigators, Bleek declares himself decidedly for 
 the assumption of a second imprisonment, in his review of MayerhofF's work, in 
 the Studien, 1836. H. iv. p. 1028. 
 
24 GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 
 
 dogmatical exposition of the rest, and if any one should prefer 
 to study St Paul's epistles in their chronological order, nothing 
 would interfere with his thus submitting them to his more ac- 
 curate consideration, because every composition, with its com- 
 mentary, forms a little whole. If any important changes could 
 be pointed out in the course of St Paul's spiritual advancement, 
 it would certainly be the preferable plan to expound his epistles 
 in their chronological order ; but, as this, as we have already 
 seen, is not the case, it appears to us much better to follow the 
 ordinary arrangement. In observing this order, we have, first 
 of all, the opportunity, in the epistle to the Romans, of consi- 
 dering in their connexion the central ideas of St Paul's doc- 
 trinal system, presented, so to speak, in a dogmatical compen- 
 dium. A number of passages in St Paul's other epistles thus 
 receive their explanation by anticipation, whilst it would 
 be difficult to explain them at all if the epistle to the Romans 
 had not previously been interpreted. On the other hand, in 
 the epistles to the Corinthians St Paul's principles of practice 
 are developed, and the external relations of the apostolical 
 church are discussed with so much accuracy that, by their help, 
 much light is thrown upon many passages in the smaller epistles. 
 Such being the peculiar nature of the larger epistles of St Paul, 
 we are persuaded that every connected exposition of the apos- 
 tolical writings will best begin with them, because only on this 
 plan can the riches of St Paul's ideas be properly unfolded in 
 all their different relations, and without repetition. 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE EOMANS, 
 
27 
 
 INTRODUCTION.* 
 
 § 1. OF THE GENUINENESS AND THE INTEGRITY OF THE EPISTLE. 
 
 The authority of St Paul's Epistle to the Christians of Rome 
 is warranted by such a completeness of evidence, both internal 
 and external, that no one could think of denying, on any system 
 of impartial criticism, its claim to be the composition of the 
 Apostle. Nor, indeed, did any one in all antiquity dispute the 
 genuineness of the Epistle ; for, while it is true that the Judaists 
 and all Judaising sects make no use of St Paul's Epistle to the 
 Romans (as is also the case with his other epistles), the reason 
 is not that they consider it spurious, but, on the contrary, that 
 they see in it a genuine production of that apostle whom they 
 regard as the greatest enemy of Judaism, and ah apostate from 
 the truth. Even the searching criticism of later German theo- 
 logy has left this epistle altogether unassailed ; an Englishman 
 of the name of Evanson alone has, in his work against the 
 Gospels, cursorily expressed his doubts as to the genuineness of 
 the Epistle to the Romans also. His grounds, however, are of 
 such a kind that no better testimony in favour of the genuine- 
 ness need be desired than the fact that arguments of this qua- 
 lity are the only ones which can be brought against it. The 
 silence of the Acts of the Apostles as to this Epistle, the exist- 
 ence of a great Christian community at Rome before an apostle 
 had been here, and the numerous greetings to the Church of 
 Rome at a time when St Paul had not yet visited it, — such are 
 the chief points which appear to Evanson to render the genuine- 
 ness of the Epistle questionable. (Compare Reiche's Comm. 
 p. 20, seqq.) 
 
 * For the Introduction to the Epistle to the Romans, compare, among earlier 
 writers, J. L. Rambach's Introductio Hist. Theologica in Ep. Pauli ad Romanos. 
 Halae, 1730. In the most recent times, it has been most fully and learnedly treated 
 by Reiehe, in his Commentary, pp. 1-1 Ob". 
 
28 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 The case is diiFerent as to the integrity of the Epistle; while 
 its genuineness has been generally acknowledged, this has been 
 veiy often called in question, and especially in modern times. 
 All the more ancient witnesses, however — fathers of the church, 
 versions, and MSS. — regard the Epistle as a connected whole; 
 for Marcion's copies cannot be made to tell on the other side, 
 inasmuch as he treated the Epistles no less capriciously than 
 the Gospels; and Tertullian's quotation of the passage xiv. 10, 
 as contained in the "clausula epistolse'" (Adv. Marcion v. 14) 
 cannot possibly be used as evidence that he was not acquainted 
 with the loth and 16th chapters, since the expression clausula 
 is so general that it need not be strictly limited to the last two 
 chapters. The scholars of later times, consequently, found 
 themselves altogether restricted to the department of what is 
 styled the higher criticism — a department in which it is not 
 often that any very trustworthy results are to be obtained. 
 
 Heumann* led the way, by asserting that the Epistle to the 
 Romans properly ends with the xith chapter, and that c. xii. is 
 the beginning of a new letter, which extends to c. xv. This 
 letter he supposes to have been likewise addressed to the Ro- 
 mans, but not to have been composed by St Paul until after 
 the completion of the first and longer epistle, on occasion of 
 reports which had in the meantime reached him as to the 
 moral laxity of the Romans. In the sixteenth chapter, accor- 
 ding to this view, are contained some further postscripts, which 
 had been originally intended to accompany the first letter. 
 These, it is supposed, were written on the same parchment with 
 the two epistles, and thus the various parts came to be united. 
 This hypothesis, however, is so improbable, that it has not been 
 able to make any way. Heumann's process of dividing this 
 epistle might, with equal reason, be applied in separating the 
 doctrinal from the ethical part in every other of St Paul's 
 writings. In the passage xii. 1, the particle oh is evidently a 
 mark of transition from the preceding to the following por- 
 tion ; and so the ^/^^v at the end of c. xi. is clearly not the ter- 
 mination of the epistle, but merely of the doxology with which 
 St Paul very appropriately concludes the doctrinal portion. 
 
 The antiquity of the epistle was attacked in a different way 
 
 ' * Comp. Hemnann's Erkl. des N. Test. vol. vii, pp. 537, seqq 
 
INTRODUCTION. 29 
 
 by J. F. Semler, according to whom it is only in the xvth and 
 xvith chapters that a diversity of subject from the Epistle to 
 the Romans is to be traced.* The grounds on which he relies, 
 however, are, for the most part, of no greater weight than those 
 which had been advanced by Heumann. Still, there is some 
 plausibility in Semler's manner of turning to account the men- 
 tion of Aquila and Priscilla's family (xvi. 8, seqq.) These per- 
 sons, it is observed, were still at Ephesus when the first epistle 
 to the Corinthians was written (1 Cor. xvi. 19); since, then, St 
 Paul wrote to the Romans soon after the date of his Epistle 
 to the Corinthians, there cannot, in Semler's opinion, have been 
 time enough for Aquila first to travel to Rome, and afterwards 
 to send accounts of himself to the Apostle at Corinth, — which 
 he must be supposed to have done, as we find St Paul informed 
 that Aquila had again a church in his house. (Rom. xvi. 6.) 
 The case, however, is quite intelligible, if we only suppose that 
 Aquila left Ephesus suddenly, and that he sent an early report 
 of his^new circumstances in Rome to the Apostle at Corinth; 
 for it is impossible to determine exactly by months the dates 
 of the epistles in question, while, even with the slow means of 
 communication which the ancients possessed, 'a few months 
 would be sufficient for the journey from Ephesus to Rome and 
 back. In any case, a circumstance of this nature cannot be a 
 sufficient argument to justify Semler's theory. But when we 
 find this learned writer go on to make it a difficulty that seve- 
 ral places of Christian assembly are mentioned as existing in 
 Rome (xvi. 4, 14, 15), it appears to us that an exactly opposite 
 inference would be more legitimate; in a vast capital, the resort 
 of all the world, such as Rome was, the necessity of places of 
 assembly in various quarters of the city would surely become 
 manifest on the very first formation of a church ; and, in like 
 manner, the numerous salutations (c. xvi.) to a church which 
 St. Paul had not yet visited, may be easily explained from the 
 character of the city, which was continually receiving visitors 
 from every corner of the world, and in turn sending out tra- 
 vellers into all countries. Hence the Apostle may not have 
 been acquainted, except by reputation, with many of the per- 
 
 • Semler de duplici appendice epistolse Pauli ad Romanos, Halse, 1767. He sup- 
 poses e. xvi. to be a list of persons to be saluted by the bearer of the letter on his way 
 from Cm-inth to Eome, and c. xv. in like manner to be a separate writing, intended not 
 80 much for the Romans as for all brethren who might be met with on the way. 
 
30 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 sons who are named; and yet may have sent his greeting to 
 them, because he felt himself most intimately connected with 
 them by the bond of the same faith. 
 
 These objections to Semler's hypothesis hold good also against 
 the kindred view of Dr Paulus,* who is of opinion that c. xv. 
 is a special epistle to the more enlightened Christians of Rome^ 
 and that c. xvi. is addressed to the governors of the church 
 only. Ever}^ letter to a church, he observes, would, as a matter 
 of course, in the first instance, be put into the hands of the 
 presbyters, who read it in public, and delivered the greetings 
 which it contained: it could not be at once given to the whole 
 community. But it does not necessarily follow from this remark, 
 that the portion which contains the greetings was addressed to 
 the presbyters exclusively of the church in general^ and that, con- 
 sequently, it cannot be regarded as an integral part of the 
 epistle; and while, in like manner, we allow that in c. xv. the 
 Apostle writes in part with an especial regard to the more ad- 
 vanced members of the Roman church, still this circumstance 
 by no means obliges us to consider that chapter a letter by it- 
 self, inasmuch as the less advanced believers are not excluded 
 from a share in its instruction. 
 
 In the most recent times, the genuineness of the last two 
 chapters has been again denied by Baur, (Studien, 1836. No. iii.) 
 He supposes that a later writer of St Paul's school attempted 
 to effect a compromise between his party and the Judaizers, 
 who were predominant in Rome; and that, with this view, he 
 endeavours, by annexing these two chapters, to soften what was 
 offensive in the epistle. The only evidence offered for the theory 
 is of the internal kind — e.g., that c. xv. 1-13 contains matter 
 which has already been far better expressed in cc. xii.-xiv. But 
 against this it has already been remarked, by Klinge, (Stud., 
 1837. No. ii. p. 309,) that, while in c. xv. 1-13 there is a re- 
 currence of ideas similar to some which had before been treated, 
 they are reproduced with ingenious and spirited modifications, 
 in a way which quite accords with the Apostle's usual practice. 
 It is alleged further, that the phrase btdxovo? rra rrs^trof/.rig, (xv. 8), 
 is not in St Paul's manner ; that, in xv. 1 4, seqq., the captatio 
 benevolenticB seems unworthy of an Apostle ; and, lastly, that 
 
 • First set forth In a programme (Jena 1801) ; afterwards in his Erklarung dea 
 Roiner-und Galaterbriefs, (Heidelberg, 1831.) 
 
INTRODUCTION. 31 
 
 the mention of Illyria and Spain, in xv. 17-24, must be a spurious 
 insertion. These points I have already discussed at length in 
 my essay against Baur, (Stud. 1838. No. iv.) and they will be 
 more particularly considered in the commentary on the several 
 passages. I shall only observe further, that the first words of 
 c. XV. are of themselves sufficient to render Baur's supposition 
 altogether improbable. The expression rifj^zTg oi dwaroi charac- 
 terizes the Gentile Christians as the more liberal and enlightened 
 party; surely a follower of St Paul, writing for the purpose of 
 conciliating the Judaizers, could not have made choice of a more 
 inappropriate phrase. Moreover, Baur's idea of a Judaizing 
 tendency in the Roman church requires us to assume that the 
 presbyters too were members of the Judaizing party ; but how 
 can it be supposed that, in such circumstances, a disciple of St 
 Paul could add a forged appendage to the Apostle's letter? 
 Baur's hypothesis, then, appears to be nothing else than the 
 work of a misdirected acuteness and an unrestrained hyper- 
 criticism, and will, therefore, never be able to establish itself.* 
 We must notice, in the last place, the attempts of Eichhorn, 
 Griesbach, and Flatt,*]" to explain the different positions of the 
 concluding doxology, and its relation to the various forms of 
 conclusion which occur after xiv. 23, These writers assume, al- 
 though with a variety of modifications, that St Paul ended his 
 epistle on the large parchment at xiv. 23, and that the rest was 
 written on smaller pieces, which were afterwards shifted and ar- 
 ranged in different ways. This hypothesis, it must be allowed 
 — especially as it is stated by Eichhorn — explains all the critical 
 difficulties which occur in the last chapters. Still, it is not to 
 be denied that it has somewhat of a far-fetched and strained 
 character, and therefore we could wish for the means of dispos- 
 ing of these difficulties by some easier and simpler solution. J. 
 E. Chr. Schmidt (in his Introduction) supposed that an easier 
 explanation of this kind might be found by assuming the 
 spuriousness of the doxology ; and this supposition has lately 
 
 ♦ Bottger, in his Beitrage Supplem. Giittingen 1838, pp. 17 seqq. also declares 
 himself against Baur's theory. 
 
 + Eichhorn, Einleit. ins N. T. vol. iii. Griesbach, Curse in historiam textus Gr. 
 epistolarum Pauli, p. 45. Flatt, in the appendix to his Erkljirung des Romer- 
 briefs. Schulz has lately maintained that c. xvi. does not properly belong to the 
 Epistle to the Romans, but may have been perhaps intended for Ephesus. (Comp. 
 Stud, und Kriliken, for 1829, No. iii. pp. ?,09 seqq. 
 
32 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 been stated by Reiclie in a manner which really seems to render 
 it very plausible. If, he observes, the circumstances of the 
 case be closely examined, the difficulties of the last chapters are 
 all in reality to be traced to this doxology. But, in the first 
 place, it is altogether wanting in some MSS. (especially in F) ; 
 while in others, such as D and Gr, it is struck out by a later 
 hand. Then, in the copies which are of critical authorit}^ it is 
 found in three different places; (1) at the end, in B, C, E, and 
 several other critical authorities; (2) after xiv. 23, in the codex 
 J, and in almost all such MSS. as are written in small letters ; 
 and, (3) in both places, as particularly in the codex A. That 
 such differences are very ancient, is remarked by Origen in his 
 commentary on the epistle; only he does not state that he was 
 acquainted with copies which had the doxology in both places. 
 On the other hand, Jerome (on Ephes. iii. 5) knew of copies in 
 which the doxology was altogether wanting. Reiche, then, sup- 
 poses that the reading of the epistle in the public assemblies of 
 the early Christians probably extended only as far as xvi. 23, 
 since little that is of an edifying kind follows in the after part 
 of the epistle. In order that the conclusion in this place might 
 not be without a benediction, he supposes that the doxology was 
 first added in copies which were used in church; that it was 
 originally moulded after the doxology at the end of St Jude's 
 epistle, and was afterwards gradually extended, until at length 
 it was placed, as a full-sounding form, at the conclusion of the 
 whole epistle. In order to give this view additional support, its 
 learned author endeavours to show that the substance of the 
 doxology itself does not point to St Paul as the writer. He 
 considers it inflated, overladen, obscure as to the connexion of 
 the ideas, and merely made up from Pauline forms. But it is 
 precisely this which seems to me to be the weak side of Reiche's 
 theory. The supposition that the doxology is spurious would 
 indeed appear to me probable in the highest degree, if the na- 
 ture of the passage were different from what it is. In tliis 
 opinion Schott agrees (Einl. p. 250), as also Kollner and Fritz- 
 sche in their commentaries; the last-named expositor, in parti- 
 cular, may be considered to have settled the question by his 
 excellent defence of the doxology (vol. i. pp. 38 seqq.). The 
 
 very commencement, rw ds huvaiJ^h^ bfiag trrrip/^ai xara TO svayysXioi' 
 
 aov, X. r. X. is enough to make the assumption of its spuriousness 
 
 I 
 
I 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 83 
 
 exceedingly questionable. If the passage had originated in the 
 way which Reiche points out, we might expect to find it a 
 simple doxology, and in all likelihood a short one; but here the 
 personal circumstances of St Paul and of his readers are distinctly 
 marked. He addresses them, speaks of himself in the first per- 
 son, expresses ideas peculiar to himself exactly in the manner 
 usual with him, and yet so that the doxology as a whole appears 
 altogether new, and without a parallel in the Pauline epistles. 
 Such an addition would hardly have been ventured on by one 
 of the clergy who had no other object than to supply a good 
 conclusion for the public reading. 
 
 I am, therefore, unable to determine that the doxology is 
 spurious, and am rather disposed to adopt Eichhorn's view,* 
 although not insensible to its partly far-fetched character; it 
 has, however, the merit of solving the difficulties, and on this 
 account is to be adhered to until something more deserving of 
 commendation shall be discovered. But in any case it is estab- 
 lished that the various position of the doxology is the only sub- 
 ject to be discussed, and that this subject has no connexion with 
 any question as to the matter of the last two chapters. The 
 Epistle to the Romans, consequently, is not only genuine, but 
 it has also descended to us in a state of completeness, without 
 mutilation or addition. 
 
 § 2. TIME AND PLACE OF THE COMPOSITION. 
 
 The Epistle to the Romans, dictated by St Paul to a person 
 of the name of Tertius (xvi. 21), and sent by the hands of the 
 deaconess Phoebe (xvi. 1), contains such decisive indications as 
 to the time and the place of its composition, that there has been 
 little difference of opinion on these points, whether in earlier or 
 more modern times. The only diiFerence which can be properly 
 said to affect the subject, is that as to the general chronology of 
 the Apostle's life. Dr. Paulus, of Heidelberg, indeed, has (in 
 
 • The opinion of Koppe and Gabler, that the transposition of the concluding 
 doxology is to be traced to the ecclesiastical use of the epistle, would not be un- 
 deserving of attention, if only a sufficient probability could be made out for the 
 annexation of the doxology to c. xiv. While c. xv. has a good termination, it must 
 still be vei'y forced to suppose the final doxology transferred from the end of the 
 epistle, not to c. xv. but to c. xiv. If c. xvi. wei'e once omitted, it is most likely that 
 the doxology would also have been given up with it. 
 
34 INTRODUCTION, 
 
 the two publications already referred to) proposed the novel 
 opinion, that the epistle must have been written in Illyria, be- 
 cause the writer states in c. xv. 19, that he had travelled " from 
 Jerusalem, and round about unto Illyricum;'' but it is very 
 evident that the Apostle, in that passage, intends to name llly- 
 ricum only as the furthest point westward to which he had at 
 the time penetrated, and not as the country in which he was at 
 the moment of writing. An equally extravagant view as to the 
 time when the epistle was written has been proposed by Tobler,* 
 wdio maintains, on the ground of the Apostle's extensive a'c- 
 quaintance with the Christians of Rome, that it ought probably 
 to be referred to a date later than his first imprisonment. But 
 it is at once manifest what a violent construction this supposi- 
 tion would require us to put on such passages as i. 9, and xv. 
 23, in which the Apostle plainly declares that he had not yet 
 been at Rome. The ordinary view, then, — according to w^iich 
 the epistle was written from Corinth, during the visit which St 
 Paul paid to that city after having been driven from Ephesus, 
 and having travelled through Macedonia, — is the only one which 
 has the advantage of accounting easily and naturally for all the 
 passages in which he speaks of himself, his journeys, and his 
 undertakings. Thus, in 1 Cor. xvi. 1, he mentions an intention 
 of going from Corinth to Jerusalem with a collection ; and we 
 find from Rom. xv. 25, that he purposed to set out on this 
 journey immediately after dispatching his epistle to Rome. 
 Aquila and Priscilla, who were still at Ephesus w^hen St Paul 
 thence wrote his first epistle to the Corinthians, had, at the date 
 of the present epistle, again arrived at Rome. (1 Cor. xvi. 19 ; 
 Rom. xvi. 8.) We find from Acts xix. 21, that the Apostle in- 
 tended to visit Rome after he should have accomplished his 
 journey to Jerusalem about the business of the collection; and 
 in Rom. xv. 28, he speaks of the same design, only with the 
 difference, that his plan had been extended to the extremity of 
 the west (rg^^a rrig dvffsug), SO as to embrace a visit to Spain. If, 
 in addition to these chief grounds, we take into consideration 
 some coincidences in detail witli what we know otherwise of St 
 Paul's history, e. g., that he sends greetings to the Christians 
 of Rome from Caius (xvi. 23), a person mentioned in 1 Cor. i. 14, 
 
 • Compare Tholuck's Comment. Introd. p. x. Tobler's view is refuted by Flatt 
 in a programme which is inserted in Pott's Sylloge Comment, vol. ii. 
 
 1 
 
i 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 85 
 
 as then resident at Corinth ; that Erastus, from whom he in like 
 manner conveys greetings (xvi. 23), and whom he styles o/xo- 
 vofAog rrjg mXiug (i. e. of the city in which he was writing) is also 
 mentioned elsewhere as an inhabitant of Corinth, (2 Tim. iv. 
 20) ; that Phoebe, the bearer of the epistle, was a deaconess of 
 the church at Cenchrea, the port of Corinth — and other circum- 
 stances of a like kind — there can be no further doubt that the 
 Epistle of St Paul to the Romans was written from Corinth 
 during his second visit to that city. And consequently, ac- 
 cording to the system of chronology which we have adopted, the 
 time of its composition is to be referred to about a.d. 59. 
 
 The circumstance that the epistle was written in Greece, and 
 in an entirely Greek city, would at once render it highly pro- 
 bable that it was composed in Greek ; and this idea is confirm- 
 ed by the universal tradition of the ancient church, and by 
 the style of the composition, which throughout appears to in- 
 dicate an original. Indeed, both earlier and later writers have 
 been almost unanimous in the opinion that it was originally 
 written in Greek, since St Paul, as a native of Tarsus, must have 
 had the command of that language, while in Rome it was suffi- 
 ciently diffused to be generally intelligible. (Comp. Sueton. 
 Claud, c. 4. Dialog, de Orator, c. 29. Juvenal, Satyr, iv. 185, 
 seqq.) Bolton, however, (whose views have been adopted by 
 Bertholdt), has here, as in other cases, misapplied his acuteness 
 with a view of shewing that St Paul probably composed the 
 epistle in Aramean — a notion which is surely, from the nature 
 of the case, the most improbable that could well be conceived. 
 We might even rather suppose with Hardouin, that it was ori- 
 ginally written in Latin, and that it is still preserved to us in 
 this ancient form in the Vulgate, if it were not too evident that 
 this supposition is intended merely to enhance the glory of the 
 version received in the [Roman] Catholic Church. So manifest 
 is this, that the futility of the opinion has been shown even by 
 some more liberal members of the author's own communion. 
 
 § 3. OF THE ROMAN CHURCH. 
 
 The circumstances under which the Roman church was formed 
 and the date of its origin, are involved in a darkness which could 
 only be dissipated by the discovery of ancient documents hitherto 
 unknown — a discovery which we can now hardly venture to hope 
 
36 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 for. At the time vvlien St Paul wrote to the Romans, there al- 
 ready existed in the capital of the world which then was, a 
 church so considerable that it was spoken of throughout the 
 world (i. 8.) and required several places of assembly in the vari- 
 ous quarters of the city, (xvi.) The Church of Rome cannot 
 have been founded by an apostle ; for in that case St Paul would 
 neither have addressed it by letter nor have visited it in person, 
 since it was a general principle with him, and is expressly stated 
 as such in this very epistle (xv. 20), to avoid interference with 
 the work which had been already begun by another apostle : 
 and when, in addition to this, we find in the Acts no mention 
 of an apostle's having been at Rome, we may fairly reject the 
 assertion, which originated early, and has long been maintained, 
 by the [Roman] Catholic Church, that St Peter was the founder 
 of the Church of Rome.* On the other hand, the presence of 
 St Peter in Rome at a later time, and his martyrdom there, are 
 facts so well attested by historical evidence that they ought 
 never to have been questioned."|- In the first place, Caius, the 
 well-known Roman presbyter and zealous opponent of the Mon- 
 tanists, states that in his time (towards the end of the second 
 century ) the graves of the apostles were pointed out at Rome. 
 When it is considered that he wrote in Rome itself, and that he 
 is particular in mentioning the localities (viz., on the Vatican, 
 and on the road to Ostia), it is inconceivable that tliere should 
 be a mistake in this statement, since thousands must at once 
 have confuted him. If the apostles died at Rome, and that by 
 public execution, their death, and the place where their bodies 
 rested, could not possibly have remained concealed ; if they did 
 not die there, it is impossible to account for so early an origin 
 of the tradition that they died there, unless we suppose the whole 
 church to have consisted of mere deceivers ; and, moreover, 
 
 * It is surprising that even some Protestant writers, such as Bertholdt and 
 Mynster can have acquiesced in this altogether unsupported notion of the founding 
 of the Romish Church by Peter. 
 
 t The question has lately been again raised by Baur, in his essay on the party 
 "of Christ " at Corinth {Tubing Zeitschr. 1831, No. iv.), and even Neander appears 
 to have been shaken by his reasoning, (Apost. Zeitalter, ii. 4.59 seqq.) To me, 
 however, Baur's grounds seem altogether insufficient, and I consider the death of 
 St Peter at Rome a fact not to be denied. In this judgment Bleek agrees {Stud. 
 for 1836, No. iv. pp. 1061, seqq.) I have examined the matter more fully in a 
 separate essay against Baur's hypothesis, (.SVi/rf. 1838, No. iv.) Winer, on the 
 other hand {Real lexicon, new ed. Art. Pclrus) considers the accounts to be at least 
 doubtful. 
 
INTRODUCTION. 37 
 
 there must, in that case, have been some other discoverable state- 
 ment as to the place of St Peter's death, since it is not to be sup- 
 posed tliat the most celebrated of the apostles could disappear 
 without leaving some trace. But even allowing Caius to be no 
 valid witness, because he was a Roman presbyter, and might 
 have been desirous to enhance the lustre of his church by the 
 alleged fact, no such exception can be taken to Dionysius, 
 Bishop of Corinth, who lived half a century earlier; and, although 
 interested in like manner for the church of Corinth, yet plainly 
 witnesses that the two great apostles died, not in his own city, 
 but in Rome. (Comp. the passages of both authorities in Euseb- 
 Hist. Eccl. ii. 25.) To these testimonials are to be added those 
 of Irenseus {adv. Haer. iii. 1, in Euseb. Hist. Eccl. v. 8), Clement 
 of Alexandria (in Euseb. Hist. Eccl. ii. 14, 15 ; vi. 14), and of 
 the critical Origen, who, like the others, refers the martyrdom 
 of St Peter and St Paul to Rome.* (Euseb. H. E. iii. 1.) 
 
 As, then, the apostles must have died somewhere, and no other 
 city of antiquity claims the honour of their death, there is really 
 no sufficient ground for doubting the account which is thus 
 accredited. 
 
 Still, however, we do not from this get any light as to the 
 origin of the Roman church. For, even although the Apostle 
 Peter be styled by Caius and Dionysius the founder of the 
 church of Rome, it will naturally be understood that the ex- 
 pression is not to be referred to the original foundation of the 
 community, but to its enlargement and more complete establish- 
 ment by him ; and in this sense St Paul also is always named 
 with him as joint founder of the church in Rome. We are, 
 therefore, wholly left to conjecture on this point ; and perhaps 
 the most likely way of accounting for the formation of the com- 
 munity may be, to suppose that a knowledge of Christianity 
 was early conveyed to the capital by travellers, if not even by 
 the Romans who were present at the feast of Pentecost (Acts 
 ii. ] 0), and that through the influence of these persons a church 
 was gradually formed there. For if any one strongly prominent 
 individual had been the only agent in the foundation of the 
 
 • Reiche, (loc. cit. p. 40,) Note 8, doubts whether the account in Eusebius ought 
 to be referred to Origen; but the concluding words of the chapter, TKUTce, ^Cl^tyhu 
 Ku.To. k'i^iv K. T. k. evidently apply to the whole relation. We could at the utmost, 
 only doubt, with Valesius, whether the words from QufAut f^iv, k- t- X- be Origen 's ; 
 from Uir^oi Vi K. r. X. they are certainly his. 
 
 / 
 
"d8 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 Roman church, it is more than probable that his name would 
 have been preserved. And, again, the lively intercourse which 
 Rome kept up with all parts of the empire, renders it equally 
 inconceivable that Christians should not early have come to the 
 capital from Antioch or Jerusalem ; and if they came, their zeal 
 would have also led them to preach the word there. 
 
 We have not, however, any certain trace of the existence of a 
 Christian community in Rome earlier than the present epistle. 
 For whether (as many have supposed, and as appears to myself 
 probable) Aquila and Priscilla were already Christians at the 
 time of their banishment from Rome by the edict of Claudius, 
 is a point incapable of proof, since the passage. Acts xviii. 1-3, 
 does not expressly state it ; although, if we consider that other- 
 wise their conversion would surely have been related, it can 
 hardly be well doubted that this family brought its belief in 
 Christianity from Rome with it. 
 
 But even if it were not so, still it is evident that a community 
 so considerable as that of Rome appears from St Paul's epistle 
 to have been, could not have come into existence all at once, but 
 required some time for its formation ; and for this reason, if for 
 no other, we must refer the foundation of the church to a period 
 much earlier than the date of the epistle. 
 
 There is, however, a difficulty in reconciling this supposition 
 (which the contents of the epistle to the Romans oblige us to 
 adopt,) with the narrative of St Luke at the end of the Acts, 
 where it is stated that St Paul, on arriving in Rome, sent for 
 the elders of the Jews who lived there, and related to them the 
 cause of his being a prisoner ; to which they are represented as 
 answering, that they had not received any letters concerning 
 him ; but that, as to the sect of the Christians, they begged him 
 to give them some information, since they had heard no more 
 of it than it was everywhere spoken against (Acts xxviii. 17-22.) 
 From this it would appear that no church could then have ex- 
 isted in Rome, since otherwise it would seem inconceivable that 
 the Jews should not have been aware of its existence. This 
 conclusion was actually drawn by Tobler (Theol. Aufs., Zurich 
 1796), who, in consequence of it, referred the composition 
 of the epistle to the latest period of St Paul's life — an 
 opinion which is, of course, altogether untenable, as has 
 already been observed), but which has some excuse in the 
 
INTRODUCTION. 39 
 
 difficulties of this yet unexplained passage, since it is certainly 
 sufficient to remove them. If it be said (as Tholuck and Reiche 
 suppose) that the Jews may have concealed their knowledge of 
 tlie matter, it is impossible to see why they should have done so. 
 A man so dangerous as St Paul must have appeared from the 
 Jewish point of view, would surely have at once been met by 
 them with open opposition. But this supposition becomes yet 
 more improbable on a more particular consideration of the se- 
 quel, as related in the Acts. For we find that at their next 
 meeting with St Paul, the chiefs of the Roman Jews appear 
 really unacquainted with the subject of the gospel ; it is evident 
 that they hear it for the first time, and the announcement of it 
 raises, as was usual, a contention among their own number — 
 some assenting to it, and others opposing it ; and surely it is 
 impossible to suppose this contention feigned. Hence we might 
 suppose that the church may have been entirely broken up by 
 the persecution of Claudius (Sueton. Claud, c. 25), and that its 
 subsequent gathering may have been so gradual that the few 
 Christians who were at Rome when St Paul arrived there were 
 unknown to the Jews of the capital.* I had myself formerly 
 declared in favour of this opinion (Comm. on Acts xxviii. 17 
 seqq., 1st ed.) ; but it cannot well serve as a way of escape from 
 the difficulty, since the date of the epistle to the Romans falls 
 in the interval between the persecution of the Jews under Clau- 
 dius, and St Paul's visit to Rome, and the epistle supposes the 
 existence of a flourishing church ; it is, therefore, impossible 
 that at the later period there can have been but a small number 
 of Christians in Rome, as the community was already so numer- 
 ous at an earlier time. 
 
 There is, however, the greater reason for desiring a solution 
 of the difficulty, because thus light would be thrown on the 
 relative circumstances of the Jewish and the Gentile Christians 
 in Rome — a subject which is of so great importance for the ex- 
 planation of the whole epistle. For that there were Christians 
 in Rome when St Paul arrived there, appears (if indeed it yet 
 require any proof), from Acts xxviii. 15, where it is related 
 
 • There had been an expulsion of the Jews from Rome as early as the reign of 
 Tiberius. (Cf. Sueton. Tib. c. 36". Tacit. Ann. ii. 85; Joseph. Arch, xviii. 4, 15.) 
 Perhaps the passage of Suetonius about the expulsion of the Jews in the time of 
 Claudius may indicate also an expulsion of the Christians, who would not at fix'st b« 
 sufficiently distinguished from the Jews. 
 
40 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 that brethren went as far as Forum Appium and Tres Tabernae 
 to meet the Apostle ; nor is there any conceivable reason why 
 the Christians of Rome should have become fewer at the time 
 of St Paul's arrival than they were at the date of the epistle, 
 since (in so far as we know) nothing had happened in the mean- 
 time to disturb them ; and yet it would appear that the chiefs 
 of the Jewish community in Rome knew nothing of the Chris- 
 tians. This indicates a peculiar relation between Gentiles and 
 Jews, Gentile and Jewish Christians, in Rome, and so leads to 
 the important question — What was the nature of the Church 
 of Rome, or what may have been the tendencies existing in it 
 when St Paul wrote ? a question closely coinciding with the in- 
 quiry as to the occasion and object of the epistle, since the epistle 
 is the only source from which we can derive our information as 
 to the tendencies which, in the earliest times, were prevalent in 
 that church. 
 
 Now in the epistle to the Romans itself there is no special 
 cause assigned for its being written.* St Paul merely mentions 
 (i. 9 seqq. ; xv. 15 seqq.) his desire to preach the gospel, as to 
 the Gentiles in general, so especially to the inhabitants of 
 Rome, as being the capital of the heathen world; whence it 
 would simply appear that his object in writing his epistle was 
 of quite a general kind. Notwithstanding this, it has often 
 been attempted to point out particular causes, and particular 
 objects in connexion with these, for the sending of the epistle 
 to the Romans. It has been supposed by many writers, and 
 some of them highly distinguished, that the only, or, at least, 
 the most important, object was to mediate between contending 
 parties in Rome, especially the Gentile and the Jewish Christians. 
 Others find in the epistle a controversial design against Jews 
 or Jewish Christians; while others again suppose that St Paul 
 wished to guard against the abuse of his doctrine as to grace, 
 or that he meant to oppose the Jewish spirit of insurrection. 
 All these views, however (as to which more particular informa- 
 tion may be gathered from Reiche, pp. 75 seqq.), on closer con- 
 
 • Dr Paulus takes a naif view of the matter, inferring from xv. 1 9 that the 
 beautiful appearance of Italy from the high coast of Illyria awakened in the 
 Apostle's mind a longing for Rome. The aesthetic motive, however, is very 
 problematical, inasmuch as (not to mention other objections) it is well known 
 that Italy cannot be seen across the Adriatic. 
 
INTRODUCTION. 41 
 
 sideration, appear untenable; the whole exhibition of doctrine* 
 in the epistle is purely objective in its character, nor -is there, 
 except in passing, any intentional and conscious regard to any- 
 thing save the truth of the gospel. But it is, of course, in tlie 
 very nature of truth that it forms oppositions against all errors, 
 and thus far such oppositions appear in the epistle to the 
 Romans as elsewhere; and, moreover, it was a part of the 
 Apostle's wisdom as a teacher, that he all along represents the 
 doctrine of the gospel in such a manner that the statement it- 
 self may be a safeguard against the errors which could not but 
 fall in the way of the Christians ; but besides the endeavour to 
 exhibit the gospel to the Christians of Rome in its natural rela- 
 tion to the law, and in its practical results on life, it is quite 
 impossible to discover in the epistle to the Romans a further 
 design to oppose the Jews, and to keep differences with them 
 in view, such as is clearly expressed in the epistle to the 
 Galatians. 
 
 The idea of differences between the Gentile and the Jewish 
 Christians at Rome, for the appeasing of which it is supposed 
 that the Apostle's letter was intended, is, however, so widely 
 prevalent, that it is necessary for us to go into a more particu- 
 lar inquiry as to this point.*|" This opinion may probably have 
 at first been occasioned by the obvious parallel between the 
 
 • [Darstellung.] 
 
 f It has very recently been again proposed in a peculiar form by Baur 
 (Stud. 1836, No. 3), and Kling (Stud. 1837, No. 2) partly agrees with him. 
 I have more fully considered the treatises of these two writers in an essay 
 (Stud. 1838, No. 4), to which I must here refer the reader, contenting myself 
 with shoi'tly characterising the views of Baur and Kling. Baur supposes the 
 main part of the epistle to be, not cc. iii.-viii., but the section cc. ix.-xi. This 
 portion, he argues, is intended to assert against the Jewish Christians the uni- 
 versality of the Christian dispensation; and he supposes that cc. iii.-viii. were 
 intended to lead to this conclusion, the object of those chapters being to quench 
 the jealousy of the Jews at the influx of Gentiles into the church, by showing 
 that Jews and Gentiles stand in the same relation with respect to Christianity. 
 Thus it is supposed that a Judaizing spirit, opposed to St Paul, had prevailed 
 in Rome. Baur had previously endeavoured to prove this in the Tubinger 
 Zeitschrift, 1831, No. 4, and he now attempts to bring further evidence of it from 
 the Acts, which book he supposes to have been composed at Rome, for the purpose 
 of defending St Paul's course of operation against the antipauline party; a view of 
 which I have already given my opinion in commenting on the Acts. Kling is 
 inclined to adopt Baur's views, to the extent of recognising in the epistle a contro- 
 versial design against Jewish opinions; but finds fault with him for considering the 
 mass of the Roman Church as Judaistic, instead of regarding the Judaizers as only 
 one element in it. In the mass, he says (p. 320), the Roman Church might rather 
 be considered as animated by a Gentile-Christian tendency. 
 
42 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 epistle to the Romans and that to the Galatians; and next by 
 the idea, that on account of the large body of Jews in Rome, 
 there must also have been there a great number of Jewish 
 Christians; and that if so, it is not to be supposed but that the 
 Roman community came in for a share of the all- pervading 
 contentions between Gentile and Jewish Christians. But plau- 
 sible as this conclusion may appear, it is evident that it ought 
 in the first place to be capable of historical proof; not only, 
 however, is there an utter absence of such proof, but there are 
 very important reasons to the contrary. In the whole epistle 
 to the Romans there is not a syllable which mentions disputes as 
 to the relations of the law and the gospel, such as those which 
 prevailed in Galatia. In xv. 7 seqq., there is a faint hint that 
 in the case of the ascetics, towards whom the Apostle had re- 
 commended a tender course of dealing (c. xiv.), the difference of 
 Jewish Christians also came into question; and again, in xvi. 17- 
 18, there is a warning against such as might cause divisions; but 
 in V. 19 the Romans are plainly described as yet free from such 
 errors, so that it is only the possibility of a disturbance of their 
 peace that is contemplated. All that could be said, therefore, 
 is this, that, while the Apostle's argument is not openly directed 
 to the subject of divisions, it is yet so managed as to make 
 us feel through it that he has a covert regard to the two oppo- 
 site systems. 
 
 If, however, the matter be so understood, it must also be 
 allowed that this feeling may very easily deceive, and by so 
 much the more because these possible divisions are not expressly 
 represented as originating with the Judaizing party. Where such 
 differences actually existed, as in Galatia, St Paul speaks out 
 plainly respecting them; why then should he not do so in this case? 
 If he wished, independently of any possible or existing errors, to 
 set forth the nature of the evangelical doctrine of salvation, he 
 could not do so otherwise than by representing the relation of 
 this new element to the two old systems of the Gentile and the 
 Jewish life; both must, of course, fall into the background in 
 comparison with the gospel, and therefore his view* appears to 
 be polemical. But that it is not so, even in a covert intention- 
 ally-concealed manner, is shown by the notice in the Acts of St 
 
 • [Auffassung.] 
 
INTRODUCTION. 43 
 
 Paul's appearance at Rome, whicli has not been at all suffi- 
 ciently brought to bear on the inquiry as to the object of the 
 epistle to the Romans. If we conceive the state of the church 
 in Rome at the date of the epistle according to the common 
 view, the history of St Paul in that capital is utterly incompre- 
 hensible. It is supposed that the Roman Church was divided 
 into two parties ; that the strict Jewish-Christians wished still 
 to observe the Law of Moses even outwardly, with circumcision, 
 keeping of the Sabbath, and the like; that the Gentile Chris- 
 tians, on the other hand, had freed themselves from it. Must 
 we not, on this supposition, necessarily assume that the Roman 
 Jewish Christians adhered to the synagogue in Rome ? As the 
 Jewish Christians of Jerusalem remained attached to the 
 Temple, and did not renounce the Jewish polity, so, too, the 
 Jewish Christians of Rome could not have separated themselves 
 from the Synagogue. But now let us read the narrative in 
 Acts xxviii. 17, seqq., which represents the Christians as quite 
 unknown to the rulers of the Roman synagogue, and let us ask 
 whether, according to this, the supposition just stated has any 
 appearance whatever of probability ? There is in that passage 
 (as has already been remarked) no ground at all for supposing 
 an intentional concealment; and if this cannot be assumed, 
 there remains nothing else but to say that the chiefs of the 
 Jews really knew nothing of the Christians in Rome. The 
 speech of St Paul (Acts xxviii. 17-20) is evidently reported in 
 an abridged form ; he had spoken in it of his belief in Christ, as 
 is still indicated by the mention of the sW/g rov lepotrjX. On this, 
 then, the Jews declare Tspl rrjg aipidiu? ravrr} g yvcaffrov hriv i][jjTy on 
 TccvroL'xoxj avriXiyiTai. Do people speak thus of a sect which is 
 before their eyes — on whose struggles and contentions they are 
 looking? This can hardly be made to seem likely. And to 
 this is to be added the discussion which follows with St Paul 
 (xxviii. 23 seqq.), in which for a whole day he expounds the 
 Scriptures to them, in order to prove the Messiahship of Jesus, 
 whereupon there arises a contention among the Jews them- 
 selves : — all which would, according to the common view, have 
 been a mere mockery,* since by that view the Jews must be 
 supposed to have known of Christ long before, and to have de- 
 
 • [Gaukelspiel.] 
 
44 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 cided against Him.* It is only in the towns where there were 
 not as yet any churches that we find the Jews so free from pre- 
 judice as they here appear in Rome; where, on the other hand, 
 they were ah-eady acquainted with the Gospel through the 
 formation of a church, they do not admit of any expositions of 
 doctrine by Christians. As, however, there must yet have 
 been a church in Rome, the question is, how we are to explain 
 this remarkable position of the Jews towards it ? 
 
 The only possible explanation of this phenomenon — and it is 
 one which at the same time indicates the origin of the tendency 
 which we afterwards find in the Roman Church — appears to be 
 this.*f* It must be assumed that the Christians of Rome were 
 induced, by the persecutions directed against the Jews under 
 Claudius in the ninth year of his reign, to make their differences 
 from the Jews clearly and strongly apparent — perhaps in con- 
 sequence of the influence which even at that early time some 
 disciples of St Paul already exercised on the Roman Church ; 
 exactly as at a later date the Christians of Jerusalem separated 
 themselves from the Jews, tliat they might not be confounded 
 
 * This is decisive against the supposition of Meyer, that the Jews spoke only as 
 officials, and in this capacity showed an official reserve — that they merely meant 
 to say that nothing had been officially announced to them. But — besides that this 
 is an evident transferring of modern circumstances to the ancient world — the dis- 
 putes which arose among the Jews themselves in consequence of St Paul's preach- 
 ing will not allow us to explain the phenomena before us by the character of the 
 official body of the Roman Jews. 
 
 f For the further establishment of this view, and the justification of it against 
 the attacks of Baur, I refer to my essay, already cited above, in the Studien for 
 1838, No. 4. This only I remark here, that his appeal to Tacitus (Ann. xiv. 44), 
 by way of proof that the Christians were quite well known in Rome, is by no 
 means adapted to decide the question before us, since it is the Jews who are here 
 spoken of as unacquainted with the Christians, while Tacitus speaks of heathens; 
 moreover, it was only by means of the rack that the heathens extorted the names 
 of the members of the Christian community in Rome: which evidently speaks for 
 their concealed and retired condition. Kling (Stud. 1837, No. 2, pp. 307, seqq.) 
 refutes, indeed, the capricious fancies of Baur, but himself reverts to the old unte- 
 nable view, that the Jews of Rome only pretended to know nothing of Christians 
 there, in order to avoid disputes with them. That they wished to hear St Paul, is 
 explained by Kling merely from the forward curiosity* of Jews, which led them to 
 seek for an opportunity of heai'ing a discourse from a famous rabbi. But it is un- 
 necessary to show how unsatisfactory this representation is. The Jews of Rome 
 evidently hear of Christ for the first time; they fall into disputes among them- 
 selves; this, surely, cannot be pretence! Unless we suppose the Acts of the Apos- 
 tles to be tinged with fictionf (as Baur maintains), there remains no other explana- 
 tion than that here proposed, Bottger's explanation of the case is also extremely 
 unsatisfactory. He supposes that the difficulties are all of my own creation, and 
 that in reality there are none. Comp. Beirage, Supplem. pp. 27 seqq.) 
 
 ♦ Vorwitz. + [Soil die Apostelgcschichte keine romanhafte Farbe tragen.] 
 
INTRODUCTION. 45 
 
 with tlienij and might be allowed to live in Aelia. If disciples 
 of St Paul early acquired a decisive influence in Rome, we shall 
 also understand how it was that the Apostle could regard the 
 Roman Church as his own, and could open his correspondence 
 witli it without invading another's Held of labour. In conse- 
 quence of this persecution of the Jews, Aquila and Priscilla took 
 refuge at Corinth ; and there they were found by the Apostle 
 Paul (Acts xviii. 2), who, without doubt, became even at that 
 time acquainted, by means of these fugitives, with the Roman 
 Church and its circumstances. On this knowledge St Paul, four 
 or five years later, at the beginning of Nero's reign, on his third 
 missionary journey, wrote from Corinth his epistle to Rome. 
 There is little likelihood that any great number of Jews can have 
 ventured so early to return to Rome ; those who returned were 
 obliged to keep themselves in concealment, and it was naturally 
 the interest of the Christian community there to remain as far 
 as possible from them. Even three years later, when St Paul 
 himself appeared in Rome, the body of Jews there may still not 
 have been considerable, — in part, too, it may not have been com- 
 posed of its old members, who had lived there before the perse- 
 cution by Claudius, but of altogether new settlers, who were 
 unacquainted with the earlier existence of a Christian commu- 
 nity. And thus it might come to pass within eight or ten years 
 that the Christian community at Rome appears entirely sepa- 
 rated from the body of Jews in that city; and in such a state 
 of separation we find it, according to the notice at the end of 
 the Acts. As, according to the same narration, the Jews did 
 not receive St Paul, so that here also he found himself obliged 
 to turn to the Gentiles, this separateness continued to subsist, 
 and thus by degrees there was developed at Rome a directly 
 anti-Judaic tendency, which caused a prohibition of celebrating 
 the Sabbath, and of everything Jewish.* According, then, to 
 this representation, it is altogether unlikely that there should 
 have been Jewish Christians in Rome from whom contentions 
 
 * The latest expositor of the epistle, Dr Kollner, supposes that St Paul, during 
 his imprisonment, sent for the chief of the Jews for the purpose of gaining them, 
 and that St Luke did not intend to give an account of his intercourse with the 
 Christians. This, however, is but an evasion of the difficulty; the real point is, — 
 how the behaviour of the Jews, which is in question, can be conceivable, if in Rome 
 itself there existed a Christian community, in which there were Judaizing Chris- 
 tians. Kollner has not advanced anything towards the solution of the difficulty. 
 
46 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 with the Gentile Christians could proceed. Christians of the 
 former kind were in the habit of keeping up the connexion 
 with the synagogue, and if so, the chief persons of the syna- 
 gogues could not be unacquainted with the existence of a 
 community which declared Him who was crucified to be the 
 Messias. There might still have been Jews by birth or pro- 
 selytes among the members of the Roman Church, but these 
 would, in that case, have altogether taken up the freer Pauline 
 view of the law, and have detached themselves from the con- 
 nexion of the synagogue. If, indeed, there were any decided 
 testimony for the fact, that in Rome, as in Gralatia, there existed 
 within the Church itself a party of gross Jewish Christians, the 
 view which has just been given, and which rests on the evidence 
 of history, might still be combated with some appearance of 
 justice; but there is no such testimony whatever. There is, as 
 has been observed, an utter absence of clear statements on the 
 subject in the epistle to the Romans ; for (as I have above re- 
 marked) xvi. 1 7 seqq. points only to a possible danger, and the 
 proper doctrinal body of the epistle (chap, iii.-viii.) treats the 
 relation between law and Gospel in a purely objective way, 
 without any reference to differences in the bosom of the church 
 itself. Chapters ix.-xi. are evidently intended for Gentile 
 Christians only, who also are throughout exclusively addressed, 
 and, lastly, chapters xii. and xiii, contain wholly objective ad- 
 monitions. There remain, consequently, only the first and last 
 chapters; and in these very chapters the hints of such conten- 
 tions have been supposed to be found. In c. ii., it is said, the 
 subject is quite clearly the Jews, who are expressly addressed 
 (ii. 17, 27), so that the epistle must also necessarily be supposed 
 to have been written to Jewish Christians; in iii. 1, seqq. the 
 advantages of the Jews are discussed, and ^though in c. xiv. 
 the mistaken freedom of Gentiles is reproved, yet it is in con- 
 trast with Jewish scrupulousness, which must, therefore, neces- 
 sarily be also supposed to have had certain representatives in 
 the Roman church. To the observations from the opening 
 chapters, however, it is to be answered, that still St Paul assur- 
 edly did not write to Jews, and yet it is Jews, and not Jewish 
 Christians, who are addressed in the passages ii. 17, 27; the 
 address, therefore, is evidently not to be used as a foundation 
 for inferences as to the character of the readers, but is rather 
 
INTRODUCTION. 47 
 
 to be regarded as merely a rhetorical figure. St Paul's object 
 in the first chapters is only to prove of both Gentiles and Jews 
 that they had need of Christ the Saviour; but into these two 
 elements the whole world was divided, when regarded from the 
 theocratic point of view; and thus, in as far as St Paul has an 
 universal purpose in writing his epistle, in so far was he obliged 
 to contemplate Christianity in its relation to the previously- 
 existing systems,* without giving us a ground for thence deduc- 
 ing anything as to the composition of the Roman Church. 
 Hence it was quite necessary that the advantages of the Jews 
 also should be discussed, (iii. 1, seqq.,) inasmuch as it was neces- 
 sary for the Gentiles, even if they embraced Christianity with- 
 out any intermediate step, to know how they stood with rela- 
 tion to the Old Testament economy and to the people of Israel; 
 and, consequently, from a discussion on these points nothing 
 can be inferred for the existence in Rome of Jewish Christians 
 in the proper sense of the term, — i. e. of persons who not only 
 were of Jewish descent, (for in that sense St Paul himself would 
 be a Jewish Christian,) but who attached an exaggerated value 
 to Jewish views, and adhered to the connexion with the syna- 
 gogue and the temple. A more plausible evidence for the ex- 
 istence of such a party at Rome is c. xiv., — according to which, 
 undoubtedly, there must have been in Rome a class of persons 
 scrupulous as to the law. It is, however, extremely improbable 
 that these were Judaizers of the ordinary kind, such as were 
 found in Galatia ; for the latter had no scruple as to the eating 
 of flesh in general, but only as to the flesh of unclean animals; 
 whereas the Roman ascetics, on the other hand, disapproved of 
 all use of animal food, and lived wholly on herbs and fruits 
 Cxiv. 2). The whole question as to the character of these per- 
 sons, therefore, requires a closer examination, which we shall 
 institute in the exposition of the passage ; in any case, however, 
 we must say that c. xiv. is not adapted to prove the existence 
 of Judaizers in Rome, since the description is not at all suitable 
 to them. 
 
 We regard, consequently, the hypothesis of an intended settle- 
 ment of dispute between Gentile and Jewish Christians in Rome 
 as wholly untenable; and we find in the epistle to tlie Romans 
 
 * [LebensBtufen, degrees of life.] 
 
48 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 a purely objective statement of the nature of the Gospel, grounded 
 only on the general opposition between Jews and Gentiles, and 
 not on the more special opposition existing in the church itself, 
 between Judaizing and non-Judaizing Christians.'^ 
 
 g 4. ARGUMENT OF THE EPISTLE. 
 
 With respect to the plan of the epistle to the Romans, two 
 extremes are to be avoided: first, the view which represents the 
 Apostle as having written according to a most exactly elaborated 
 logical scheme; and, secondly, the supposition that, without 
 having any settled design, he merely abandoned himself to his 
 inward impulses. Betw^een the two view^s, the following appears 
 to come out as the true and correct idea — that certainly St Paul 
 had designed a general plan for the epistle, but without having 
 carried it into detail. His epistle, consequently, has not the 
 precision of a theological treatise, but preserves the freer form 
 of a letter ; still, there is expressed in it so determined and clear 
 a train of thought that St Paul cannot have written it without 
 any plan, and in mere obedience to the current of his feelings. 
 For how different a shape such an absolutely free and unpre- 
 meditated effusion takes, we see, among other instances, in the 
 epistle to the Ephesians. One leading idea, the relation of Law 
 and Gospel, is carried out so carefully by the Apostle, with the 
 necessary preliminaries for understanding it, and the most im- 
 portant consequences which result, that nothing whatever of 
 essential importance can be pointed out as missing in his state- 
 ment.*!* 
 
 • It were to be desired that the terms Jewish and Gentile Christians were more 
 carefully distinguished than they usually are from Judaizing and 7ion-Judaizing 
 Christians It is, indeed, certainly to be supposed that most of those who were 
 Jews by birth continued, even as Christians, to keep up a great attachment to the 
 Jewish law, and that most of those who were Gentiles by birth remained free fi'om 
 it as Christians; yet doubtless, there were also many Jews by birth (and conse- 
 quently Jewish Christians) who, as Christians, did not Judaize; and, in like man- 
 ner, many of Gentile birth might have already, as pi'oselytes, been so strongly im- 
 plicated in Judaism, that, even after becoming members of the Christian chui'ch, 
 they continued to follow a Judaizing tendency. The names of Jewish and Gentile 
 Christians, therefore, ought to be used only to signify descent, and the erroneous 
 spiritual tendency to be denoted by the epithet Judaizing. 
 
 + The view proposed by Baur, (Stud. 1836. No. 3,) that the main part of the 
 epistle consists, not of the section cc. iii.-viii., but of cc. ix.-xi., has been already 
 noticed above. The xmtenable character of this supposition has been shown in my 
 essay, already more than once cited, (Stud. 1838. No. 4,) to which I now refer 
 the reader. 
 
INTRODUCTION. 4.9 
 
 The whole epistle falls under four divisions. The first part 
 contains the opening^ (i. 1-17,) in which, after the salutation^ 
 (1-7,) is given the Introduction to the following discussion, 
 (8-1 7,). The last two verses expressly state the theme for the 
 whole epistle, viz., that the Gospel is a power of God, and in it 
 the righteousness from faith is revealed* 
 
 This idea is developed in the Second Part (i. 18 — xi. 36), 
 which, as being the doctrinal portion of the epistle, is that which 
 gives it its great importance. It falls into five sections, of which 
 i\iQ first, (i. 18 — iii. 20,) is a preparation for the deduction pro- 
 perly so called; being devoted to proving the universal sinfulness 
 of all mankind, in order to manifest the insufficiency of the law, 
 both moral and ceremonial, and the necessity of another way of 
 salvation, the righteousness of faith. First of all, the Apostle 
 proves the sinfulness of the Gentile world, (i. 18-32); next, he 
 treats of the Jews more especially, (ii. 1-29); lastly, he further 
 considers the relation of the Jews to the Gentiles, and allows to 
 the former great advantages in their calling, but declares that 
 they have forfeited these by their unfaithfulness, wherefore 
 there is now no difference between Jews and Gentiles in their 
 position with respect to the gospel, (iii. 1-20.) 
 
 With the second section (iii. 21 — v. 31), the Apostle then 
 enters on the doctrinal exposition itself. Since the law, whether 
 ceremonial or moral, was not sufficient to render men righteous 
 and holy before God, He has opened another way, namely this, 
 that men should become righteous and blessed through faith in 
 Jesus, who is set forth as a mercy-seat, + (iii. 21-3 J.) St Paul 
 indicates the germs of this righteousness by faith in the Old 
 Testament, as far back as the life of Abraham, who pleased 
 God, not by works of the law, but by faith, which was imputed 
 to him for righteousness, (iv. 1-25.) This holy way, then, by 
 which alone man in his sinful state can attain to peace with 
 God, has, through the love of Christ, been manifested to all 
 men; for which cause we may not now glory save in Christ only, 
 (ver. 1-11.) 
 
 The third section indicates the internal necessary connexion 
 of ^his way of faith with the nature of man. As from Adam 
 
 * It will be seen in the commentary that the author takes the words differently 
 fi*oni the English version. 
 
 t 'IXairWf/ay, ver. 25. Propitiation, Eng. version. 
 
50 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 the stream of sin poured itself forth over mankind, and hence 
 every one who is descended from him has fallen under sin, — so 
 from Christ does righteousness proceed, which He imparts to 
 the faithful in the new birth The law, therefore, is intended 
 only to make sin powerful, in order that grace may become 
 more powerful, (ver. 12-21.) The same, therefore, which took 
 place in Christ, has been accomplished in his people also, seeing 
 that all are in him, as they were in Adam. For this cause, 
 also, must not any one who has been incorporated into Christ 
 any longer serve sin ; for he has died in the old man, and, like 
 a woman who has been set free by the death of her husband, 
 he has become married to another husband, even Christ, (vi. 1 
 — vii. 6.) 
 
 After this follows, in the fourth section, the description of the 
 course of conversion in man, (vii. 7 — viii. 39.) From the first 
 movements of grace and the quickening of sin, the Apostle 
 proceeds to depict the process by which the inner life is evolved, 
 to the fully developed contest between light and darkness in 
 the soul, which at last is triumphantly ended by experience of 
 the power of the grace of Christ, (vii. 7-24.) With this is con- 
 nected the description of the life in grace itself, and in the con- 
 tinual growth therein, to the consummation of the whole per- 
 sonality in God, (vii. 25 — viii. 17.) Lastly, the Apostle passes 
 from the consummation of the individual to the consummation 
 of the whole, which is represented and assured in it ; and with 
 this is attained the purpose of the course of the world, since 
 thus all that was corrupted by the fall will be restored to its 
 original purity, (viii. 18-39.) 
 
 In the fifth section, (ix. 1 — xi. 36,) the Apostle leads back his 
 readers to the peculiar relation in which the Jews stand towards 
 the Christian system of salvation. It is primarily intended for 
 them; and, nevertheless, they appear as if expressly shut out 
 from it, and the Grentiles as if called before the Jews. In con- 
 sequence of this relation, the Apostle first unfolds the doctrine 
 of election in general, agreeably to the indications in the Old 
 Testament, and shows that the holiness and blessedness of the 
 creature are solely the work of God's gracious election, ^nd 
 that the unholiness and damnation of the creature are no less 
 to be regarded as solely his own work (ix, 1-29). He then 
 shows that it is the unfaithfulness of the Jews which has bin- 
 
INTRODUCTION. 51 
 
 dered them from laying hold on the righteousness which is by 
 faith ; they had obstinately clung to the law as the way of sal- 
 vation, whereas Christ is the end of the law, and in Him alone 
 dwelleth peace for Jews and Gentiles (ix. 30 — x. 21). And, 
 lastly, St Paul opens the prospect, that even for the Jews a 
 conversion to Christ is yet to be expected. He points to the 
 fact that a holy seed has yet remained in the people, which 
 will not be lost; and then, in bold prophetic glances, he passes 
 on to the end of days, when Israel shall again be engrafted 
 into the olive tree, in whose roots the Gentiles only have at first 
 been set as wild shoots. This contemplation incites the Apostle 
 at last to an enthusiastic* glorification of God, with which he 
 concludes this second and most important part of the epistle 
 (xi. 1-36.) 
 
 The third part, the hortatory (xii. 1 — xv. 33), may be divided 
 into three sections. In i)iQ first (xii. 1 — xiii. 14), St Paul gives 
 general admonitions to brotherly love, and to obedience. In 
 the second section (xiv. 1' — xv. 13), he treats of the regard to be 
 paid to such as are weak in faith, and suppose themselves 
 obliged to an exact observance of some altogether unessential 
 practices or precepts. The Apostle exhorts the stronger mem- 
 bers of the Church to treat these with a forbearing considera- 
 tion, and prays them rather, after their Lord's example, to re- 
 frain from using their liberty than to offend a brother. In the 
 third section, St Paul communicates notices respecting himself 
 and his intended journeys. 
 
 The fourth and concluding part forms the epilogue, and con- 
 tains greetings and good wishes for the readers (xvi. 1-27.) 
 
 According to this summary of the contents, the nine chapters 
 from the third to the eleventh form unquestionably the most 
 essential part of the epistle. They furnish a careful doctrinal 
 exposition of the nature of the Christian scheme of salvation,t 
 by no means, as Reiche says, (p. ^Q), apologetico-polemical con- 
 siderations on it. But the peculiar character of the epistle still 
 requires a special consideration, on which we enter in the fol- 
 lowing paragraphs. 
 
 • [Begeisterteu.] 
 
 t So, with substantial correctness, Hopfner, De consecutione sententiarum in 
 Pauli epistola ad Romanos; Lips. 1828. Compare also Fuhrman's Essay De Coa- 
 ciunitate in Ep. ad Rom. in Velthusen, &c., Syltoye, vol. i. 461 seqq. 
 
52 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 § 5. THE VALUE AND THE PECULIAR CHARACTER OF THE 
 EPISTLE. 
 
 Among the epistles of St Paul, three classes may be distin- 
 guished; first, epistles of doctrinal instruction ; next, epistles of 
 practical instruction; and, lastly, friendly outpourings of the 
 heart. To the last class belong the Epistles to the Ephesians, 
 the Philippians, the Colossians, and Philemon. All these pre- 
 suppose the common faith as known, and aim only at perfecting 
 of believers in it, and" confirming them in brotherly love. Those 
 which I have styled epistles of practical instruction are especially 
 occupied with the external side of the ecclesiastical life. The 
 Epistles to the Corinthians, to Timothy, and to Titus, are those 
 which, while they touch on individual points of doctrine, set 
 especially-before our view the ecclesiastical circumstances of the 
 apostolic age. But the Epistle to the Romans, with those to the 
 Galatians and Thessalonians, belongs, beyond the possibility of 
 mistake, to the first class — the epistles of doctrinal instruction. 
 In respect of subject, it is most nearly akin to that of the Gala- 
 tians ; both treat of the relations of law and gospel : while, 
 however, as has been shown above, this relation is treated alto- 
 gether objectively in the Epistle to the Romans, the Epistle to 
 the Galatians represents it 'polemically, in opposition to the 
 Judaizing Christians. The Epistle to the Galatians, moreover, 
 limits itself exclusively to this relation, and discusses it more 
 briefly than is the case in the Epistle to the Romans. In this, 
 on the other hand, the relation of law and gospel is set forth 
 didactically, in the proper sense of the word, nay, scientifically, 
 so that the doctrine of the sinfulness of human nature, which is 
 essential to its foundation, and the doctrine of the divine decree, 
 which furnishes the key to the passing of the gospel from the 
 people of Israel to the Gentiles, are also set forth in connection 
 with it* 
 
 Hence we may say that in the Epistle to the Romans is con- 
 tained, as it were, a system of Pauline doctrine, inasmuch as all 
 
 * That in the Epistle to the Galatians the relation between law and gospel alone 
 is treated, while in that to the Romans the doctrine of election is also considered, 
 may be regarded as the reason why Luther commented on the Galatians only; he 
 wifched undoubtedly to avoid declaring himself on predestination. 
 
INTRODUCTION. 53 
 
 tlie essential points which tlie Apostle was accustomed to bring- 
 forward with essential prominence, in treating of the gospel, are 
 here unfolded in detail. It is very appropriate that he, the 
 Apostle of the Gentiles, set forth this in an epistle of instruc- 
 tion to the Cliristians of Rome in particular, since that city 
 represented, as it w^ere, the whole Gentile world, in like manner 
 as Jerusalem represented the Jewish. The Epistle to the 
 Romans is thus far a letter to all Gentiles and Gentile- Christians 
 collectively (as the Epistle to the Hebrews is addressed to all Jews 
 and Jewish-Christians, with a view of bringing them nearer to 
 the more comprehensive Pauline position); — -and in consequence 
 of this significancy, its contents have also, in perfect accordance 
 with the process of the Church's development, become the basis 
 of all the doctrinal development of the Western Church. There 
 is in human nature an inclination to deviate ever again and 
 again from the essential character of the gospel, and to sink 
 back into the law. The difficulty of overcoming the law, and 
 of enforcing the gospel truth in its peculiarity, showed itself, 
 even as early as during the foundation of the Church. Even 
 those who had experienced the power of the gospel, like the 
 Christians of Galatia, might be again led astray, and drawn 
 back to the Old Testament position of the law. Afterwards, 
 during the medieval period, a new legal character was developed 
 in the bosom of the Church itself, and the righteousness of 
 faith, without the works of the law, was altogether misappre- 
 hended. By the light of the Word of God, and especially by . 
 the careful, profound, and experimental statement of the doc-/ 
 trine in the Epistle to the Romans, the Reformers ^gain dis- 
 covered the original doctrine of the righteousness which comes 
 of faith, and so they built the church anew on its eternal, inde- 
 structible foundation. Since the middle of the eighteenth 
 century, lastly, the Church again sank down to tRe legal posi- 
 tion, in the rationalistic-neological tendency which, from that 
 period, became prevalent ; and if the most recent time has been 
 able once more to find the jewel of faith under the ruins of the 
 demolished Church, it is mainly indebted for this to the com- 
 prehensive, and, to every yearning heart, convincing statement, 
 of the Apostle Paul, in his Epistle to the Romans.* And as 
 
 * That after this the Apostle's fundamental suppositions are the only part of the 
 epistle to which lleiche (vol. i. p. 91) is even now able to attach a value, is intelli- 
 
54 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 the Church, altogether, has always been in danger of losing tlie 
 evangelical truth, and sinking back to the position of the law, 
 so is the same to be observed in the development of the life of 
 the individual also. Every awaking of sin, and of the striving 
 after deliverance from it, proceeds from the endeavour to fulfil 
 the law of God, whether the inward law of the conscience, or 
 the outwardly given law of revelation. The vanity of the 
 struggle which arises from this striving is the first thing which 
 brings to the conviction that there must be another way which 
 leadeth unto life. From this feeling of the need of salvation, 
 arises, by means of the preaching of Christ, faith, and in it re- 
 generation, the changing of the whole inward man, and the 
 filling with the power of divine life. As, however, the old man, 
 in whom sin dwells, still remains alive in the individual after 
 this has taken place, there remains also for him the danger of 
 relapsing into the law, which becomes so much the more threat- 
 ening, if he is obliged to own that he has not avoided the oppo- 
 site extreme, relaxing in the struggle against sin, and falsely 
 taking comfort from the merits of Christ. And as this danger 
 of relaxing in the struggle threatens the individual, so again 
 does it threaten the aggregate also, and to the avoiding of it 
 are directed (as has been already observed) the catholic epistles, 
 with the Epistle to the Hebrews, which, in this respect, form a 
 necessary complement to the body of St Paul's epistles in gene- 
 ral, and to the Epistle to the Romans in particular.* 
 
 A writing of such penetrative significancy — which in the 
 course of centuries has been the regulating authority for the 
 Church in the most critical moments of her development — 
 which has already been, is, and to the end of time will continue 
 to be, the regulating authority for persons without number, as 
 to the training of their individual life — must have had the 
 deepest founcfation in the life of its author. It was only from 
 lively experience that the Apostle could treat a relation of such 
 uncommon difficulty in such a manner that his words still, after 
 thousands of years, tell as profoundest truth in the hearts of 
 
 gible from this learned writer's doctrinal position. Kbllner (p. 58) considers it 
 necessary to extract the kernel from the husk before we can get at abiding truths 
 in the epistle; he, too, regards its significance as a whole as only temporary, 
 
 • [Olshausen's views as to the authorship of the Epistle to the Hebrews have 
 already been mentioned in a note on the General Introduction, § 3.] 
 
INTRODUCTION. 55 
 
 millions, and in the collective consciousness of great ecclesiasti- I 
 cal communities. Indeed the whole substance of the vast expe- 
 riences through which St Paul had passed in his own life may i 
 be traced back to the relation between law and gospel. Before 
 his conversion, he knew no other way than that of fulfilment of 
 the law, and with all the ardour of his noble soul he threw him- \ 
 self on the mass of inward and outward precepts which the 
 Mosaic law and the tradition of the Pharisees presented to him, 
 with the intention of fulfilling them all. His zeal was honest, 
 and he advanced far; for he was regarded by those around him 
 as pious and God-fearing. In the depth of his soul, however, 
 the Divine Spirit testified the contrary to him; the life of the 
 believers, whom in his zeal for the law he persecuted unto 
 blood, showed him something in which he was lacking. To 
 the stirrings of this inward craving the power of grace attached 
 itself, and the appearance of the Lord near Damascus darted like 
 a ray from a higher world into his darkness. He was now pene- | 
 trated by a feeling at once of the infinite impotence of man, and ' 
 of the abounding power of grace. All his exertion in fulfilment 
 of the law had resulted in a fighting against God and His holiest 
 working ; him, the fighter against God, grace in a moment 
 changed into an instrument for His purposes. Hence the/ 
 Apostle, after this experience, knew not how to preach any- 1 
 thing save the grace of God in Christ, whereby man is enabled' 
 to accomplish whatever the rigid law can require, and still infi- 
 nitely more, without becoming high-minded, void of love, or 
 contemptuous towards the weak, inasmuch, namely, as it is 
 grace that works all in him, not he himself by his own might. 
 The words of Augustine — La quod juhes, Deus mens, et juhe 
 quod vis, — contain, therefore, the whole system of the Apostle 
 Paul. 
 
 Such being the nature of the contents of the Epistle to the 
 Romans, it may be understood why it is usually regarded as 
 very difficult. Indeed it may be said that where there is want- 
 ing in the reader's own life an experience analogous to that of 
 the Apostle, it is utterly unintelligible. Everything in the 
 epistle wears so strongly the impress of the greatest originality, 
 liveliness, and freshness of experience ; the Apostle casts so sure 
 and clear a glance into the most delicate circumstances of the 
 inward life in the regenerate; he contrives with such genius to 
 
56 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 place all that is individual in connexion with that which is most 
 general, that the reader who stands on the limited, inferior 
 ground of natural knowledge of the world, must at one time 
 become dizzy at the vast prospects into the periods of develop- 
 ment of the universe which St Paul discloses, and at another 
 lose sight of these, in order as it were to look into the, as it 
 were, microscopically exhibited circumstances which the Apostle 
 unveils with respect to the most secret processes in the depth of 
 the soul. Where, however, analogous inward experience, and 
 the spiritual eye sharpened thereby, draw near, the esssential 
 purport of the epistle makes itself clear, even to the simplest 
 mind, as Luther has shown in the most popular manner in his 
 celebrated preface to the Epistle to the Romans. It is not, 
 however, my intention by this to deny that, even where expe- 
 rience is pre-supposed, there still remain considerable difficulties 
 in the execution and form of the statement, and likewise in 
 particular parts of the epistle — e.g., in the dissertation on elec- 
 tion ; but these are still only the subordinate parts of the 
 epistle, as compared with the leading main ideas respecting 
 law and gospel. It would, however, be a great mistake to 
 suppose from what has been said that it is intended to represent 
 the study of the Epistle to the Romans as useless in cases where 
 the transition from law to gospel has not yet been experienced; 
 rather the thorough and laborious study of its profound contents 
 is often the very means by which a yet defective experience 
 trains itself. My intention is much more to warn against the 
 employment of guides who, without a glimmering of the true 
 sense of the Apostolic letter, can only hinder the beneficial 
 effect of the study of it by their erroneous explanations. 
 
 § 6. LITERATURE. 
 
 There is hardly any book of the New Testament which has 
 been so frequently and fully treated as the Epistle to the Ro- 
 mans — a circumstance which is sufficiently explained by the 
 significance of its contents. A comprehensive survey of the 
 literature connected with this epistle is furnished by Reiche 
 (pp. 95 seqq.); the following appear to be the principal works. 
 
 First, as to the Fathers of the Church — we have no commen- 
 tary from that doctor who would have been qualified above all 
 
INTRODUCTION. 57 
 
 others for a deeply-gi'ounded exposition of the epistle — Augus- 
 tine. We possess by him only a fragmentary exposition of 
 some passages, under the title, Expositio quorundam proposi- 
 tionum ex Epistola ad Romanes, and the commencement of a 
 work on too extensive a plan, and therefore left incomplete. 
 This does not embrace mOre than the greeting (i. 1-7), and is 
 entitled Inchoata expositio epistolae ad Romanes. On the 
 other hand, a commentary on the Epistle to the Romans by his 
 celebrated opponent Pelagius is preserved among the works of 
 Jerome and in the revision of Cassiodorus. The work of Origen 
 on this book we possess only in Rufinus' translation, by which 
 it has lost much of its value for us. Besides these, we have 
 commentaries by Chrysostom and Theodoret, executed in their 
 usual manner. The exposition by the so-called Ambrosiaster is 
 peculiar ; but his exposition of St Paul's Epistles is of more im- 
 portance with reference to history than to doctrine. In later 
 times Oecumenius and Theophylact employed themselves on 
 the Epistles of St Paul, and also on the Catholic Epistles; their 
 commentaries, however, contain but little of their own. But 
 the Greek Fathers altogether have, in consequence of their 
 Pelagianizing tendency, been very far from successful in the 
 exposition of the Epistle to the Romans ; the w^hole purport of 
 the epistle was too remote from them to admit of their master- 
 ing it. 
 
 The middle ages were especially unfitted by the prevailing 
 tendency to a legal system for the profitable illustration of the 
 Epistle to the Romans. It was not until the Reformation that 
 a new period for the interpretation of it commenced. Luther, 
 indeed, was in the same case with Augustine; he left no com- 
 mentary on this epistle. On the other hand, besides Calvin's 
 profound work, the most intimate associate of Luther, Melanch- 
 thon, has presented us with an exposition in which we clearly 
 trace the spirit of the great reformer. He published in 1522 a 
 shorter exposition, under the title of Annotationes in Epistolam 
 ad Romanes, Viteb. 1522, 4to. A more detailed commentary 
 afterwards appeared under the title of Commentarii in Epist. 
 ad Romanes, 1548, 8vo. Expositions of the Epistle to the 
 Romans also appeared by Bugenhagen, Zwingli, Oecolampadius, 
 Musculus, Bucer, in all which, however, as is easily accounted 
 for, controversy against the Romish Church predominates. In 
 
58 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 the seventeenth century, and in the earlier half of the eigh- 
 teenth, many additional commentaries appeared, in which 
 the same polemical reference was prominent. Among the 
 better of the expositors who took this direction is Sebastian 
 Schmidt, (Commentarius in Ep. ad Romanos, Hamburg, 1644); 
 Abraham Calov, in his Biblia Illustrata, combats Grotius, and 
 his often (especially in the exposition of the Epistle to the 
 Romans) very shallow views. Among the [Roman] Catholics, 
 Cornelius a Lapide wrote in the seventeenth century a com- 
 mentary on this, and also on all the rest of St Paul's Epistles, 
 which is still, at this day, not wholly without use. (Antwerp, 
 1614.) 
 
 From the middle of the last century until near its end, special 
 expositions of the Epistle to the Romans were written by Baum- 
 garten, (Halle, 1747.) Mosheim (whose work was edited by 
 Boysen, 1770), Koppe (first in 1783, the latest edition, under 
 the care of Yon Ammon., appeared in 1824), Andr. Cramer, 
 (Kiel, 1784), and Morus (edited by Holzapfel, 1794). 
 
 After this, for about a quarter of a century,* no labour of any 
 importance was bestowed on the epistle, until since 1820 the 
 activity of literary men has again been directed to it. The latest 
 expositions*!- are by Bockel, (Greifswalde, 1821), Tholuck (first 
 edition, 1824; third edition, 1830), Flatt, (edited by HoiFmann, 
 Tubingen, 1825), Stier, in the second Sammlung der Andeu- 
 tungen (Leipzig, 1828, pp. 205-451) Klee ([Roman] Catholic in 
 his view, Mainz, 1830), Ruckert (Leipzig, 1831), Benecke 
 (Heidelberg, 1831), Dr Paulus, (Heidelberg, 1831), Reiche, (2 
 vols., Gottingen, 1833-4), Glocker, (Frankfort, 0. M., 1834) 
 Kollner, (Gottingen, 1834), and Fritzsche, (Halle, 1836, vol. i.). 
 A work very important for the doctrinal part of the exposition 
 is Leonhard Usteri's Entwicklung des Paulinischen Lehrbe- 
 griflf's (Zurich, 1833, fourth edition), Dahne's Paulinischer Lehr- 
 begriff, (Halle, 1835), mry also be compared. Earlier works of 
 this kind, such as Meyer's Entwicklung der Paulinischer Lehr- 
 begriifs, (Gottingen, 1801), are but little adapted for use accord- 
 ing to the present standard of theological science. 
 
 * [Mehrere Decennien hindurch.] 
 
 t Compare Kling's essay, Der Brief an die Romer und dessen neuere Bearbei- 
 tungen, in Klaiber's Stud. vol. iv., No. 2, pp. 59 seqq.; vol. v., No. i., 1 seqq., and 
 his review of Reiche and Kollner in the Stud, for 1836, No. 3. 
 
fi9 
 
 EXPOSITION OF THE EPISTLE. 
 
 I 
 
 PART I. 
 (I. 1— I. 17.) 
 
 THE INTRODUCTION. 
 
 The Apostle opens the first part of his great doctrinal epistle, 
 according to his usual practice in all his epistles, with a saluta- 
 tion (i. 1-7); but the fulness of the ideas which he brings 
 before his readers even on his first address, is such as he seldom 
 (and perhaps never in such a degree) thus early presents to 
 them, and shows how entirely full his heart was with his sub- 
 ject; he hastens as it were even in the salutation to give a 
 sketch of the whole contents of the composition which is to fol- 
 low. "With the salutation is immediately connected some intro- 
 ductory matter, concluding with the introduction of the theme, 
 of which he designs to treat, (ver. 8-17.) We shall, therefore, 
 consider the first part of the epistle, according to these two 
 divisions. 
 
 § 1. THE SALUTATION. 
 
 (1. 1-7.) 
 
 We find an entirely distinct character impressed upon the 
 forms of salutation in St Paul's Epistles, in that they contain, 
 instead of the x'^'P^'^ (James i. 1) customary amongst the 
 Greeks, a benediction accompanying the name, the calling, and 
 the designation of those to whom the letter is addressed. The 
 blessing thus added has the same tenor in all the epistles, 
 except that in those to Timothy, besides x^P'i ^'^^ ^fpmi e>^««^ is 
 
60 THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 also mentioned: the same phrase is used in the Second Epistle 
 of St John, and a similar in the Epistle of St Jude — viz., ^a/?/?, 
 sJprivn Kul dyd<7rri <7rXr]dvvdstri, which last word is also found in the 
 two Epistles of St Peter. Peculiar, however, to the salutation 
 of the present epistle is the addition of intervening doctrinal 
 statements, by means of which it is converted into a small self- 
 contained whole; in the Epistles to the Galatians and to Titus 
 a similar peculiarity may be observed, but existing in a very 
 inferior degree. In three parentheses, which may be distin- 
 guished by the usual marks, the Apostle directs attention in the 
 salutation of his Epistle to the Romans — 1, To the pre-announce- 
 ment of the gospel by the prophets; 2, to the dignity of the Re- 
 deemer; and, 3, to his own calling to the office of apostle; by 
 means of these he would lead his readers to remark the nature 
 of the gospel, as well as its historical connection with the Old 
 Testament, and the personal relation in which the Apostle him- 
 self stood to it. 
 
 Ver. ] . St Paul generally calls himself at the beginning of his 
 epistles simply a-roVroXog 'I/j^oD xpiarov, only in this place and Phil, 
 i. 1, doZXog 'Irjffov xpiffTov, and in Tit. i. 1, dovXog Qeou. The term 
 dovXos designates here the spiritual condition of the Apostle in 
 general, whilst u'TrogroXog defines it more exactly. He had been 
 overcome by the Redeemer, conquered and subdued by His 
 higher d{jm/ji.ig, (i. 4.) But as one not merely outwardly conquered 
 and still disposed to resist, but inwardly subdued, St Paul had at 
 the same time become a willing instrument for executing the pur- 
 poses of his Lord, as an Apostle. Since the article is wanting 
 both to this word and to dovXog,yve may observe that St Paul places 
 himself upon a level with other servants and apostles of Christ, 
 without, however, in this place (as in Galat. i. 1) defending his 
 apostolical dignity with especial emphasis, since it had never 
 been impugned by the Roman Christians. Only the epithet 
 xXrirog designates his office as not chosen by his own will, but one 
 to which he was ordained by the will of God, (cf. Acts xxii. 21.) 
 KXriTog has not, therefore, here the general meaning (Matt. xxii. 
 14), according to which every member of the Christian Church, 
 to whom in any way the divine ytXriaig has come, is so designated, 
 (as in ver. 6 below,) but that special meaning, according to which 
 it is synonymous with hXsKTog. From the general number of 
 the xXyyTo/, a new and more exclusive KXrjtfig {i.e. the UXoyrj), 
 
CHAPTER I. 1. 61 
 
 called St Paul to be an Apostle. Consequently a'TroaroXos can- 
 not here mean any itinerant teacher of the gospel whatsoever 
 (as in Acts xiv. 4, 1 4, Rom. xvi. 7; 1 Cor. xii. 29), but it denotes 
 (as Galat. i. 1 , where the Apostle himself lays stress upon the 
 word) a teacher chosen by Christ himself, and standing upon a 
 level with the body of the Twelve. Besides St Paul, the only 
 one whom we find in this high position, standing entirely paral- 
 lel with the Twelve, is St James, the brother of the Lord, the 
 Bishop of Jerusalem (cf. Notes on Galat. i. ] 9. ii. 9), who filled 
 up that vacancy which occurred by the death of St James, the 
 son of Zebedee (Acts xii. 1), without, however, having been 
 formally elected, as St Matthias. In xX^jroj, therefore, the same 
 thought is implied, as is expressed, 2 Cor. i. 1, by dta dsXyju^arog 
 &SOV, or negatively in Galat. i. 1, by ovx, ai: av^p^Tcav. The words 
 d<pupifffji.svog uc, ihayylXiov 0£oD, appear therefore to be tautological 
 if we refer them also, as is commonly done, to ©go's, as the 
 Separator. Besides, if the Apostle had meant to say this of 
 God, he would scarcely have added, ©soS to svayyiXm. It is 
 therefore much better to regard this addition as a nearer defi- 
 nition of uToffToXog, and we may then, no doubt, see in them an 
 obvious reference to the account given in Acts xiii. 2, where 
 the Holy Ghost says, a^popiaan by] fj^oi rhv Bapvd^av xai rov lavXov sis 
 
 Th spyovj TpogxsjcXrifiai aurovg. Even Theodoret, amongst the 
 Fathers, appears to have thought of this reference (as later 
 Turretinus), in that he bids us remark how, not only the Father 
 and the Son, but also the Holy Ghost, had sent forth the 
 Apostle. The explanation of d(pMpi6i/.zvog (in Hebrew, tjj-^g), by 
 
 — T 
 
 referring it to the former state of St Paul as a Pharisee, must 
 be rejected altogether as a mere play upon words; neither is 
 the element from which St Paul was separated to be regarded 
 as the MCfjjog, but as the Christian Church herself, to which 
 he already belonged, when his original calling of God to be an 
 Apostle was outwardly confirmed by the choice of the Church 
 at Antioch. In the words ilayysXtov ©s&D, the genitive does not 
 denote the object, for that is Christ (ver. 8), but the author 
 of the gospel. The words g/V svayysXiov are rightly resolved into 
 sJg rb xnpuyfia zlayyiXiox), for unto the gospel in itself, i.e., to 
 the personal enjoyment and use of the gospel, every Christian 
 is separated, but not every one is commissioned to teach it. 
 (James iii. 1.) 
 
62 THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 V"er. 2. The first parenthesis * refers, as already remarked, to 
 the relation of the gospel to the Old Testament Scriptures; it is 
 intended thereby to declare that the former was not a thing 
 entirely disconnected with the previous history of the world, but 
 the blossom which had grown out of the roots of the Old Testa- 
 ment (cf. Acts xxvi. 22). St Paul does not, however, subjoin 
 this remark, in order to encounter Jewish opponents, for such 
 did not exist in Rome, but to impress upon his hearers from the 
 very first that truth which he proves at greater length in a sub- 
 sequent part of his epistle, — viz. that the Old and New Testa- 
 ments are closely connected. It was needful that the relation 
 of the two dispensations should be made not less plain to Gen- 
 tiles than to Jews; we are not therefore, from such allusions to 
 the Old Testament, to form any conclusion concerning the posi- 
 tion of the Jews, and Judaizing Christians in Rome, ©sog is to 
 be supplied as the subject of 'Tc^oiirriyyiWa.ro from the preceding 
 ihayy'iXiov Qzou. The prophets appear as the instruments of the 
 divine will, and their communications are considered to be con- 
 tained in the Holy Scriptures, whose divine authority is pre- 
 supposed as a matter of course. The T^o^^ra/ are not, however, 
 those persons merely who are called prophets in the more con- 
 fined sense, but all the sacred writers, inasmuch as they were 
 filled by God's Spirit. All the passages, therefore, which refer 
 to the Messiah are included in these words from Genes, iii. 25, 
 to Malach. iv. 2; for wherever a prophecy was uttered concerning 
 Christ it was uttered concerning the gospel, for He is Himself 
 the gospel. 
 
 iipoi'7:ayysX'Ki6&aij " to promise or grant anything beforehand 
 (before one's appearance)" is only found in this passage in the 
 N. T. — 'Ev ypa(paTg ayiant we cannot take with Dr Paulus as sig- 
 nifying " in passages of holy Scripture." The reason of the 
 omission of the article is simply this, that the expression is taken 
 as denoting a well-known whole; the words are therefore to be 
 translated, " in the collection of sacred writings with which you 
 are so well acquainted." The 0. T. was naturally introduced at 
 once even into communities consisting of Gentile converts. 
 
 • Fritzsche wishes to connect in^i tou viov aurou, not with ivccyyikiev Btov, but 
 with T^aiT^yyi'tXetro, SO as to avoid making ver. 2 a parenthesis, and to consider it 
 quite as part of the principal thought; but the position of -rt^i r. v. a. does not 
 appear suitable to this view. At the same time, we must allow that the paren- 
 thetical nature of the clauses in vers. 3, 5, is much more strongly marked than here. 
 
 I 
 
CHAPTER I. 2 — 3. 63 
 
 Ver. 3. The gospel of God treats of His Son, it is therefore 
 most nearly connected with Himself, and a special object of His 
 care. But the Apostle cannot mention the sacred person of the 
 Son of God without entering into a closer definition of His 
 nature; he describes Him, therefore, according to the two rela- 
 tions of His being, the human and the divine. The connection 
 of 'rnpi Tou uiou aJrou with ihayyiXiov Qtou is no doubt the most 
 natural, since 'ItjcoD Xpiarov in the 4th verse evidently has regard 
 in the same way to u/oD aurou, passing over the second paren- 
 thesis. Of this latter sentence the first half rov ysvo/jbsvou Iz (Sir's^- 
 [luTog Aa^ld jtaroe, cdpxa presents no difficulty. The meaning of 
 xara Gdp%ci can hardly be mistaken, if we define it by the help 
 of the words in opposition to it xara <7rvgD/Aa; it will then signify 
 the earthly human side of our Lord's being, that by which he 
 was subject to birth and growth, that in which he appeared to 
 the world. (vhidQoLi is opposed to ilmi. See Notes to St John, 
 i. 1.) 2ap| is, in fact, employed not merely to denote the sub- 
 stance of the flesh (see Notes vii., 14), but also the human soul 
 and spirit, that is to say, a complete human nature, which is 
 here designated by the word ca^g only in order to express more 
 strongly its identity with universal human nature (see Notes to 
 viii. 3). The special reference to the gmp/ji.a, Aa/3/5 is evidently 
 occasioned by the mention of the prophecies in the preceding 
 verse, which represent the Redeemer as being of the family of 
 David according to His human nature.* It might, however, 
 at first sight appear as if the Apostle used the name 6 v'tog rod 
 0iou not only of the divine, but also of the human nature of 
 Christ, that is of His whole Person, since rou ysvo/isvov is imme- 
 diately connected with v/ou avTou. But since, in the very next 
 verse, the fourth, vio? Qsov is expressly applied to the divine 
 nature, we must acknowledge that this connection of ysvofisvov 
 with vhv can only be explained by supposing that reference is 
 made to the unity of the Person in which the human and divine 
 
 * The supposition that St Paul here expresses his adoption of the Ebionite view 
 of the generation of Christ by the words U trvri^f^aros Aa/3/^ is altogether inadmis- 
 sible. Christ's descent from David through the Virgin Mary entirely justifies this 
 expression. The Apostle's object did not the least call upon him to specify how 
 Jesus was begotten of the Virgin Mary. Nothing but that rage for scepticism, 
 which announces itself in the assertion that Christ was not at all descended fi'om 
 David's family, but that this descent was only attributed to Him on account of cer- 
 tain passages in the Old Testament, can believe itself warranted in using this pas- 
 sage as if it denied the generation of Christ by the Holy Spirit. 
 
64 THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 natures are so united that it is in general impossible to separate 
 tliem expressly. That the application of this expression to the 
 God-Man is admissible, is founded upon the fact, that the Lord 
 as man is and may be called the Son of Grod just as well as He 
 is so as God. When, however, we consciously separate the 
 divine in Him from the human, the term v/h? &sov can only be 
 applied to the divine nature of Christ, to the eternal Logos. 
 (See this more fully discussed in the Notes to Luke i. S5.) On 
 this account there is no tautology in the words of this and the 
 fourth verse, v'lov avTou — bpic&hrog \)iou 0goD, for the u/oD ©soD (ver. 
 4,) is to be taken in opposition to the u'ioZ Aa^id in verse 3, or 
 the v'lou dvdpdo'ffov which is implied in the first part of verse 4. 
 
 Ver. 4. He did not, therefore, also become such. He only 
 manifested Himself as such in His eternal power. The words vib; 
 0goD form, therefore, in this place, an opposition and climax to 
 the vihg Aa^id. Christ was both at the same time the Son of 
 God from eternity, the Son of David in time. Amongst modern 
 exegetical commentators, Ruckert explains the passage in this 
 manner with especial force ami clearness. On account of the 
 choice made of the word opl^sa&ai, however, several ancient and 
 modern commentators have understood the words in an entirely 
 different sense. This word, namely, in the language of the 
 N. T., means *' to fix, to determine, to choose for some purpose." 
 (Luke xxii. 22, Acts ii., 23, x. 42, xvii. 26.) From this was 
 derived the translation, " God has chosen and appointed Him 
 to be the Son of God,'' which would at once lead to the Jewish 
 view of Christ's subordinate character, viz., that he was not the 
 Son of God according to His being, but only by God's election 
 QjcXoyri). (Justin Martyr. Dial. c. Tryph. Jud., p. 267.) In 
 close connexion with the above stands another interpretation, 
 w^hich makes bpic&ivrog to mean the same thing as r:poopt66svrog, a 
 word which Ephiphanius has even admitted into the text. Ac- 
 cordingly the expression is translated prcedestinatus est, and 
 referred to God's decree with respect to the incarnation. (Iren. 
 adv. hser, iii. 22, 32. August de praedestin. sanct., c. 15.) But 
 both views, to say nothing of the untenableness of the former 
 on doctrinal grounds, must be rejected, because from the con- 
 nexion it is manifestly not the decree of God, but the proof 
 before men of Christ's divine Sonship, that is here in question. 
 No other course, therefore, remains but to take hpiZ^s^&ai in the 
 
CHAPTER I. 4. Go 
 
 sense '' to declare, to exliibit as something," as Clivysostom has 
 ali-eadj rightly done. This explanation of the expression is, as 
 far as the thought contained in it goes, sufficiently supported by 
 passages such as Acts ii. 22, in which Christ is called " avrip dTrh 
 Tou 0goD d'Tobcdsiy/Msvo^ buvd,a,iffi zcci ripadt." We may, therefore, 
 render opiff^svrog, with Chrysostom, by dsi^dsvrog, a,m<pav&svrog. Only 
 there is some difficulty in proving that op/^icfdai is ever used in 
 this sense. For 6p/^w always means originally " to define the 
 boundaries," 6/?/^£(r^a/, " to determine or mark out for one's 
 self," i.e., to decree. No passage in which it means directly 
 " declarare, ostendere," is to be found either in profane or scrip- 
 tural writers. At the same time, the notion that Christ was 
 decreed to be the Son of God by His resurrection, is so entirely 
 at variance with every doctrinal system, and the whole range 
 of scriptural ideas, as well as with the language of the Bible, 
 (for, even supposing that v/hg ©sou meant nothing more than 
 "Messiah," yet Christ was not first appointed or made Messiah 
 by His resurrection), that nothing remains but to decide that 
 the Apostle has here used the word in a rather wider sense, 
 since it must mean in the present passage, in accordance with 
 the connexion, " to prove, or present." It can, after all, only 
 be regarded as an accidental circumstance, that a convincing 
 example of this use of the word is wanting; for when a man is 
 defined as to his character by means of some public act, such 
 as the resurrection, he is at once thereby declared to be that 
 which he really is. Thus only too can Iv duvd/Msi be fitly con- 
 nected with op/^sffdai; the resurrection is in fact considered as 
 an expression of the almighty power of God, as it is also usually 
 represented in other places of the N. T., (Acts xvii. 32 ; Rom. 
 iv. 24; 1 Cor. xv. 8, 17.) But that expression could not be 
 employed of the divine decree, and any other connexion what- 
 soever of the words h dwd/^ei is totally untenable. But if it has 
 ever been held, as even Tholuck believes, that the resurrection 
 of Christ was not adapted to prove the higher nature of Christ, 
 it is because men have started in this assertion with the sup- 
 position that the resurrection of Christ, like the resurrection of 
 Lazarus, was nothing but the revival of his mortal body; but 
 in our exposition of the history of the resurrection \ve have 
 proved at length, that the resurrection was the glorification of 
 the humanity of Christ, a view which gives to this event an 
 
 E 
 
66 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 importance such as the N. T. attributes to it. We have already 
 remarked, in our observations on Matt. xxii. 29, that this is 
 the only passage in which avdarasis vsxpuv stands instead of U 
 vsxpuv* But no doubt it is only the preceding Ix which has 
 caused the omission of that preposition before vexpuv. To un- 
 derstand this formula as having the same signification as eg oS 
 dvetfrrj, and to refer it to the work of the glorified Redeemer by 
 means of His Spirit in the Church, would not be objectionable 
 with respect to the idea ; the fact of the resurrection is always 
 presented to us in the N. T. as that from which the ascension 
 and all the operations of the Spirit in the Church proceed as 
 simple consequences. But xaru 'rvevf^a can only form in this 
 place, according to the context, the opposition to xard adp^a^ 
 and cannot, therefore, be referred to the operations of the 
 Spirit; and, moreover, if this reference were not admitted, that 
 is to say, if we took if dmffrdgsug as merely indicating the time 
 at which the operations of Christ began to manifest themselves, 
 no stress would be laid upon the resurrection as especially de- 
 claring Him to be the Son of God. Finally, with respect to 
 the expression zard, -n/sD/Aa dyiuffvvrjg, the indeterminateness of 
 the word dyiuffuvrj in the language of the N. T. prevents us from 
 gaining any certain clue to its meaning, and we must therefore 
 be guided entirely by the context. For which dyiorng signifies 
 the state of holiness (Heb. xii. 10; 2 Maccab. xv. 2), and 
 dyiacfMog denotes the becoming holy or sanctification (Rom. vi. 
 19; 1 Thess. iv. 3; 2 Thess. ii. 13), dyicaamri is sometimes taken 
 as synonymous with dyiac,mg (2 Cor. vii. 1; 1 Thess. iii. 13), 
 and sometimes appears to be equivalent to dyioTrig. In a mere 
 question of language it might be considered, therefore, equi- 
 valent to <rrviviicL ayiov. But if resting on this grammatical pos- 
 sibility we were to apply the expression of the text to those 
 prophecies of the 0. T. which were given by the Holy Ghost, 
 (as if the words stood xa^wg rh 'Xvsiifia, clyiov 'TTpoiiprixi), or to that 
 Spirit who was imparted to Christ at His baptism, both inter- 
 
 * The expreesion ktiixru.ffit vtK^uv has so fixed an usage as signifying the resur- 
 rection of the bodt/, that we cannot suppose there is in this any reference to that 
 spiritual resurrection, which Christ brought into the world; perhaps, however, St 
 Paul here chose an expression which does not so emphatically designate the resur- 
 rection of Jesus alone, ayuffTa<ns i» vtx^uy, in order to intimate, that with Him the 
 saints of the Old Testament had also risen (Matt, xxvii. 53> At the same time 
 this also was but a partial avuffratris, and it was therefore necessary to distinguish 
 the iytca-Tatrif vtx^u* once more from the uvaffracrts r u v it%K^uv. 
 
CHAPTER I. 4, 5. C)7 
 
 pretations would be inadmissible, according to the context, 
 wliich must here alone decide. The opposition to xard ffdpxa 
 requires it to refer to the Person of the Redeemer Himself, and 
 therefore the third Person of the Godhead cannot here be 
 meant, though certainly the divine nature of Christ may be. 
 In order to denote this, the expression Tveu/^a is chosen on ac- 
 count of the irapg which has gone before, just in the same way 
 as in 1 Pet. iii. 18, compared with Rom. ix. 5. The divine 
 nature of the ith? Qsov is therefore here very properly said to 
 consist in the 'rrvsvij^a, which is the substance of God (John iv. 
 24), and forms an opposition to the (fdp^, in which the eternal 
 Word veiled Himself (John i. J 4). (See also 1 Tim. iii. 16, 
 1 John iv. 2, 2 John ver. 7, Heb. ii. 14.) But this Spirit, as the 
 absolute Spirit, is not only in Himself the Holy One, but also 
 the Sanctifier of collective humanity, i.e., He who communi- 
 cates His nature to the creatures; this last sense, however, does 
 not come prominently forward in this place, which is occupied 
 more particularly with the description of the person of the Lord 
 himself. 
 
 Ver. 5. At the naming of the holy name of Jesus Christ, the 
 common Lord of all believers, the Apostle feels himself con- 
 strained to expatiate in another parenthesis on that which this 
 bountiful Lord had done for him, who was so undeserving of it. 
 We must not think that any polemical allusion is intended (as 
 in Galat. i. 1), and therefore suppose an implied contrast of ov 
 5/' dv^po^rrm with dt' ov. St Paul mentions this grace of the Lord 
 out of a pure feeling of thankfulness for the mercy which had 
 been shown to him. Xdpi? xai d'lroaroXri is not to be taken as h 
 bid duoTv, but as a designation of the general grace (that of call- 
 ing and forgiveness of sins), and of the particular grace (his 
 election to be an Apostle), Augustin says justly, "gratiam cum 
 omnibus fidelibus, apostolatum non cum omnibus comriiunem 
 habet." On account of the drroaroXr}, and the nearer definition 
 added to it, hxdSofnv can only refer to the Apostle. The whole 
 
 following sentence, g/g vfraKonv -T/Vrewg Iv Tac/ roTs" Uvsfftv vTrsp Tov 6v6- 
 fjLurog avrov is Hebraistic, and answers to the words ^*'t3??n^ 
 
 V2W hv D'^lnn hb^, ny^T^^n- I" pure Greek this must have 
 
 : - • - : T v: T 
 
 run, i'va ocraxOL/wfi'/ 5/ Ifiov ^dvra rd 'i6vri rfj rriffrst x. r. X. St Paul 
 
 often uses the word vTruKcrj (the opposite to -ra/^axo;?, " neglect of 
 
68 EPISTLE TO THE llOMANS. 
 
 lieariiig, the turning a deaf ear," 2 Cor. x. 6), for instance, 
 Rom. XV. 18, xvi. 19, (also found 1 Pet. i. 2), in the sense of 
 " obedience to the influences of divine grace," properly the 
 listening to anything, giving earnest heed to it. n/or/s (see 
 this subject treated more at length in the Notes on Rom. iii. 
 21) does not mean the doctrines of the faith, but the disposition 
 of faith which necessarily supposes the v'Traxorj. But the opera- 
 tions of the Apostle were to extend to the whole Gentile world, 
 and therefore the Romans could not be excluded from them, 
 since their city was the centre of all Gentile life (cf ver. 11). 
 Of the words v'rsp rou ovS/jbarog aurov we must certainly regard 
 the most important meaning to be "for the honour and glory 
 of His name'' (cf Acts xv. 26, xxi. 18), where oi/o/^a = q^, 
 
 stands for the being, the personality itself (cf. Comm. on Matt, 
 xviii. 21, 22, John xiv. 11-14). At the same time we must 
 not overlook the fact, that in the language of St Paul, as in 
 the discourse of all persons of comprehensive minds, especially 
 when their style is not perfectly formed, sentences often occur 
 which are loosely and indeterminately connected, and therefore 
 allow of manifold applications. Such instances of grand in- 
 definiteness a considerate expositor will not dare to sweep 
 away with a single hasty explanation ; he will take them just 
 as they present themselves. The wide range and bearing of 
 single thoughts gives, in fact, a peculiar charm to the language; 
 it enables us to take a view of the world of the author's ideas, 
 even though it did not permit him, on account of its very 
 riches, to express at one time all that filled his mind as he 
 desired. Thus, in this very instance, it cannot be denied that 
 the connexion, which Tholuck has defended, of these words 
 with I'ffaxon '^rlffTsug, so as to give the meaning, "ut obediatur 
 fidei ob ejus nomen," is just as unstrained as the above ; all 
 things in all both are and shall be for God and for the execution 
 of His will, whether it be St Paul's apostoHcal office, or the 
 faith of the whole heathen world, or that of every individual 
 member of the Church. 
 
 Vers. 6, 7. The Christians in Rome therefore are also members 
 of that great Gentile world which was committed to him; and in 
 that place the Gentile element from the very beginning assumed 
 considerable prominence in the Church. The glory of their call- 
 
CHAPTER I. 5 — 7. 69 
 
 ing to be members of the kingdom of God, the Apostle represents 
 by means of several commendatory epithets; he styles them 
 called, beloved of God, holy. The name dya<?rriroi &sov is not found 
 in any other place in the N. T. It answers to the Hebrew 
 "-y^pf^ or -fJ|-y^ This name, as well as the following, cty/o/, denotes 
 
 Christians to be the spiritual Israel of the new covenant; for 
 what is called Israel after the flesh in the N. T. also bears the 
 name Q'^tlj^p, Deuter. xxxiii. 3, 1 Sam. ii. 9, Ps. iv. 4. With re- 
 gard to dyiog ay/a^g/v, see the observations on John xvii. 1 7, and 
 Acts ix. 13. The w^ord, in its proximate meaning, denotes no 
 degree of moral perfection (the Corinthians, who were in so 
 many respects deserving of blame, are called dyioi), but refers 
 to the separation of believers from the great mass of the 
 xoV.aos', the Gentile world. But doubtless the idea is also im- 
 plied, that Christians have been made partakers of the principle 
 of a higher moral life, which, as in a course of development, is 
 gradually to pervade the whole man, and produce perfect holi- 
 ness. Now this principle is the Spirit of Christ, so that St 
 Paul's idea, hyupi^usiy vj/j^dg h rQj ^jya^jj/Asv^, is also to be applied 
 to the conception of ayiog. Christians are holy on account of 
 Christ, who lives in them, and who is their true self. The very 
 juxtaposition of xXrirol and dytoi, which we find here, points to 
 the gradual development of holiness; for, as Augustin justly 
 observes, '' non ideo vocati sunt, quia sancti erant, sed ideo 
 sancti eflecti, quia vocati sunt.'' 
 
 The words x^P'^ ^l^^^ ^^'' ^kn^n-i finally, contain the special form 
 of salutation, xdpt? is no doubt the Latin saluSy which was 
 also the customary form of greeting in letters ; but in the 
 mouth of the Apostle this expression, as well as s/V^jv??, which is 
 the Eastern form, receives a deeper significance. Xdpi? and 
 ilpnvn are related to one another as cause and eifect ; %a^/5 is the 
 divine dyd'Ttn manifesting itself towards sinful humanity, vprivn 
 is that state of inward harmony of life which arises in the man 
 from the reception of the xdpig. Grace, however, does not 
 merely begin the new life ; it also supports it every moment, 
 and is capable of an infinite increase, as a consequence of which 
 the ilprivr^ is also perfected in its turn. The source of grace is 
 God, the Father of all men ; the organ by which it is communi- 
 cated is the Son, the eternal Word (I John i» 1), by whom all 
 
70 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 things were o^^ginally made, and by whom the fallen creature 
 must be again restored. And nothing, we may observe, speaks 
 more decisively for the divinity of Christ, than these juxtaposi- 
 tions of Christ with the eternal God, which run through the whole 
 language of Scripture, and the derivation of purely divine influ- 
 ences from Him also. The name of no man can be placed at 
 the side of that of the Almighty. He only, in whom the Word 
 of the Father, who is himself God, became flesh, may be named 
 beside Him ; for men are commanded to honour Him, even as 
 they honour the Father. (John v. 23.) 
 
 § 2. INTRODUCTION. 
 
 (1. 8-17.) 
 
 Tlie Apostle begins the letter itself with the expression of his 
 hearty joy for the faith of the Romans, and with the mention 
 of his desire to be permitted to visit them. For, since his 
 commission was directed to all Greeks and barbarians, he natu- 
 rally entertained the wish to preach the gospel at Rome also. 
 The essence of this gospel St Paul immediately points out to be 
 that righteousness of God by faith which is revealed in it; he 
 thus then propounds the subject, which he intends to treat more 
 at length in the epistle itself. 
 
 Ver. 8. St Paul opens most of his epistles with giving thanks to 
 God for the faith of his readers ; it is only in the second Epistle to 
 the Corinthians, and in that to the Galatians, where he was 
 obliged to find decided fault, that this thanksgiving is wanting. 
 But as in the life of the believer everything is received through his 
 relation to the Redeemer, so also here the Apostle thanks God dta 
 'Ijjffou Xpi(fTov. We must not regard this as a mere phrase, but 
 as a true expression of the Apostle's deepest consciousness. 
 Thanksgiving and prayer are only pleasing to God when offered 
 through the Spirit of Christ dwelling in the heart. The object 
 of these thanks is, however, the Roman Christians themselves, 
 not anything in them, for the life of faith is a matter of the 
 deepest inward personality ; by means of this life St Paul had, 
 as it were, himself gained them, and could therefore return 
 thanks for them as brothers given to him. It followed from 
 the very nature of the case, that the faith of the Roman Chris- 
 tians would be known generally amongst believers, since Rome 
 
CHAPTER I. 8, 9. 71 
 
 as the capital of the world, had connexions with all parts of it 
 hence Irenseus (iii. 3) designates the Roman Church as that, 
 " in qua fidelis undique conveniunt/' In the faith of the capi- 
 tal city, therefore, was contained, in the Apostle's view, the 
 pledge that this faith would soon spread itself universally over 
 the Gentile world. 
 
 St Paul had in his mind at first a dsur pov ds to correspond to 
 the preceding vpoorov f^&v, but left the second half of the sentence 
 uncompleted. Instead of vTsp A.B.C.D., read 5rgp/, which is in- 
 deed often interchanged with Ocrsp ; at the same time we may 
 very well prefer b'Trsp in this place, as it seems to express the 
 more uncommon thought, that the Romans themselves are the ob- 
 ject of the Apostle's thanks. That no stress is to be laid upon h 
 oX(fj tOj Kofffioj, is self-evident ; we must refer it to the countries in 
 which the gospel had already spread itself; beyond the limits of 
 the Christian Church little was as yet known of Christianity. 
 
 Ver. 9. As the reason of the thanks, which he presented to 
 God on their behalf, the Apostle appeals to his continual prayers 
 for them, prayers which he no doubt offered up to God, as for 
 the Roman community, so also for all the churches in the world. 
 This calling God to witness is not here intended to obviate any 
 mistrust on the part of his readers, but only to give the thought 
 more emphasis. But if St Paul here calls himself the servant 
 of God, as he above called himself the servant of Christ, 
 it is plain that he only served God through Christ, and in 
 Christ only served God. The expression Xarpsvu^ how- 
 ever, represents more the spiritual aspect of the relation, than 
 dovXeiJu (see Phil. iii. 3). And therefore in this place (as well 
 as in the passage cited) the worship is referred to the Tvsu/Aa, 
 without, however, any antithesis to the Jewish religion being 
 intended. Against Theodoret's interpretation of these words as 
 designating a spiritual gift, on account of which the Apostle 
 rejoiced, it is sufficient to adduce the fiov; but it is also inadmis- 
 sible to take 'xviZfia fiov as a mere designation of personality. 
 Both eSj/na and -^u^'n can be put to represent personality, by no 
 means, however, promiscuously, but under such conditions as 
 are supplied by the context. (See on this subject Olshausen 
 opusc. theol. p. 156, seqq.) With regard to the addition, h tSj 
 ivayysXiuj, we are not to think merely of St Paul's activity as a 
 teacher, the words denote also that element in which his own 
 
72 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 personal religious life was exercised, and his worship of God 
 performed. That strong form of affirmation, which has some- 
 thing of the nature of an adjuration, /j^dprv^ /mov 6 Gs6g, is often 
 found in St Paul's writings. See 2 Cor. i. 23, xi. 31 ; Phil. i. 
 8 ; 1 Thess. ii. 5. The w? before a3/aXg/Vrws is here rightly 
 taken by Fritzsche as equivalent to on; Calvin, Heumann, 
 Flatt, Reiche, take it erroneously in the sense quam. — (The 
 form ahakiiitrw? [j^niav mtovfj.ai is one of the favourite expressions 
 of St Paul, see Ephes. i. 15 ; Phil. i. 3 ; Col. i. 3 ; 1 Thess. i. 2.) 
 
 Ver. 10. As the subject of his prayers, St Paul now mentions 
 his wish to reach Rome, by which visit the Romans would re- 
 ceive the surest pledge of his frequent thoughts of them. This 
 desire, with respect to which the Apostle expatiates at some 
 length in what follows, doubtless proceeded from his longing to 
 preach the word of reconciliation at the very centre of the 
 Gentile world. He could not think that he had fulfilled the 
 command which the Lord had laid upon him before he had 
 preached the gospel in Rome, the mistress of the world. 
 
 E/Vwg Tibri mri must be rendered, " if not at length at some 
 time.'' See on the use of nbri in the sense " at length," Har- 
 tung's Partikellehre, vol. i., p. 283. — 'E.hoboZv means strictly " to 
 prepare a good way for some one," and then generally " to fur- 
 ther, to favour," and therefore I'johvc&ai must signify " to pro- 
 ceed favourably, to succeed." (See 1 Cor. xvi. 2 ; 3 John ver. 
 2.) The Apostle has learnt to place himself and his plans en- 
 tirely under God's guidance and superintendence. 
 
 Ver. 11. Entirely possessed with the great object of his 
 calling, St Paul longs to comm.unicate to others out of the 
 fulness of his own spiritual life in Rome also, and to strengthen 
 the believers there. We are not to think, as Reiche justly re- 
 marks, of any of the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit (1 Cor. 
 xii.) as intended by this yjLpiciLa 'xnufiartytov, for St Paul did 
 not estimate these so highly as to consider the communication 
 of them the business of his life ; but we are to understand 
 by it the spiritual renewal of faith, and love, and hope, in 
 short, of the Christian life in general. {xdpi<ffjLa=du)prifxcx,, Rom. 
 V. 16, 1 7.) The Apostle therefore presupposes that the spark 
 of the divine life has been kindled in his readers, and only 
 contemplates the increase of the same. 
 
 '^Ti^pfX^r,v(Xf^=(Ss^aiov<fdai, Rom. xvi. 25 ; 1 Thess. iii. 2, 13 ; 
 
CHAPTER I. 10 — 13. 73 
 
 2 Tliess. ii. 17. As to sJg to with an infinitive following, see 
 Winer's Grammar, p. S04<. 
 
 Ver. 12. Far, however, from wishing to intrude himself upon 
 the Roman Christians as a teacher, the humble-minded Apostle 
 only places himself upon a level with them as a brother; he 
 desires to establish himself together with them in the faith. 
 
 The compound word cuiMirapaxaXusOai is only found in this 
 passage in the N. T. in the sense, " mutually to strengthen one 
 another in spirit/' The infinitive is to be taken as standing in 
 opposition to ffrripix^/imi, not, as Tholuck asserts, to be referred 
 back to sri'Trd&ui, in fact it explains ffrripix^nva.! only. The words it 
 dXXTjXoig must, as Reiche well observes, denote that which is 
 reciprocally strengthening and quickening in the life of faith. 
 On the other hand, that which is common to all in the posses- 
 sion of faith is expressly declared, and more distinctly brought 
 before the consciousness, in the words v/!aojv rs zai sfiov. 
 
 Ver. 1 3. St Paul's wish to go to Rome had already several times 
 grown into a distinct resolution,* but at the same time he had 
 always been prevented from carrying his resolution into eifect. 
 Nothing at all is known of the causes which hindered him; 
 whatever, therefore, may be said on this subject can only rest 
 upon mere conjecture. St Paul represents as the object of his 
 journey to Rome, " that he might have some fruit there also," 
 such as he had already gathered amongst the other Gentiles. 
 That, by this fruit, he meant nothing for himself, but only ac- 
 quisitions for the kingdom of God, is manifest; at the same 
 time, under the influence of pure love he regards this as his 
 own gain, according to the principle, " all things are yours." 
 
 St Paul frequently uses the formula, ou ^sXw vfMoig dyvosTv, see 
 I Cor. X. 1, 2 Cor. i. 8. For this very reason, the reading oux. 
 o/>a/, furnished by D.E.G., is perhaps to be preferred, because the 
 alteration of so common a form of expression is scarcely to be 
 expected. This is the only passage in the N. T. in which dsvpo 
 denotes time, it is elsewhere constantly used of place. The 
 reading Tivd xapTov is by all means to be preferred, as well on 
 account of its MSS. authority, as for the sake of the sense; xapvov 
 riva would imply a doubt whether any fruit of his labours would 
 
 • According to Act xxiii. 11, the Apostle St Paul had a vision of Christ, in which 
 it was expressly said to him, '• Thou must bear witness of me at Rome also." L)ut 
 this vision did not take place until nfter the composition of the Epistle to the Romans. 
 
7i EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 ever be seen, and to doubt this were to doubt the power of 
 Christ. The image of the sower lies at the bottom of the ex- 
 pression xa^^og in the Apostle's mind. 
 
 Ver. 14. St Paul regards his relation to the Gentile world as 
 that of a debtor who has to pay his creditors. In the gospel 
 an infinite treasure had been committed to him, out of which 
 he considered himself bound to impart to all Gentiles without 
 exception. The expression, "EXX»j(r/ rs xai (3af>l3dpoig signifies, 
 therefore, nothing more than the universal heathen w^orld; tlie 
 Jews, whom even Philo {vit. Mos. p. 685) reckons amongst the 
 barbarians, are not mentioned at all here, since St Paul did not 
 consider himself as their debtor. (See Notes to Galat. ii. 7.) 
 The Romans, however, inasmuch as they partook of the general 
 civilization of the world at that time, are naturally to be reck- 
 oned amongst the Greeks, which expression in the Apostle's 
 time had lost, to a certain degree, its merely national applica- 
 tion, and had obtained this wider meaning, merely because the 
 culture of the old world had proceeded from the Greeks. The 
 second contrast, ao(poTg rs xai avorjroig is not, however, by any 
 means parallel to the first; amongst the Greeks there were 
 many dvoriroi, and amongst the barbarians were to be found indi- 
 vividual co<po/. Whilst, therefore, the first contrast is founded 
 upon a general distinction, the second refers to particular, indi- 
 vidual differences ; but the gospel is equally well calculated for 
 all difierences of national and personal character, and therefore 
 St Paul regards himself as a debtor to the whole of the vast 
 Gentile w^orld. These expressions would, howeverj have a very 
 startling eifect in the Epistle to the Romans, if, as Baur sup- 
 poses, the Church in Rome had indulged in a Judaizing ten- 
 dency, and was therefore composed for the greater part of Jews. 
 But the supposition, either that St Paul was entirely silent 
 about his readers, or else (if we consider the Jews included in 
 this expression), counted them amongst the barbarians, cannot 
 certainly be admitted. 
 
 Ver. 15. From this his general spiritual relation, St Paul 
 then deduces his readiness to serve the Romans also. 
 
 With respect to the grammatical connexion of this verse 
 with the preceding, we may best consider ovru as elicited by a 
 xad(J!)g, to be understood in verse 14. To connect it with the 
 xa6(*)g so far back as verse 13, only increases the difficulty. At 
 
CHAPTER I. 14 — 16. 75 
 
 the same time it is not absolutely necessary to supply xa^w?; 
 for the sentences may be mucli better taken merely consecu- 
 tively according to the analogy of Acts xvii. 33, xxvii. 1 7, 44, 
 1 Cor. xi. 28, xiv. 25. "I am debtor to all the Gentiles — so, 
 as such, I am ready to preach to you also." Thus in profane 
 writers also ovrug stands directly for oZrog. (See Matthioe's Gr. 
 Gramm. vol. ii. p. 1235.) The words rb xccr J^? irpohfiov are 
 best taken in the sense, " my inclination, my readiness." Up6- 
 Qvfiov, as substantive, is found in the best authors, e.g. Eurip. 
 Medea, v. 178; Iphig. Taur. v. 989. And Ttar Ifjt^'s is a circum- 
 locution for l/xou, this form of expression being chosen to point out 
 more distinctly to xad'h/j^ag on the other side. — 'Euocy/sXI^u and 
 (ffdui = -^^3, is construed in the N. T. either with r/v/ or Tivd. 
 
 Ver. 1 6. With a sudden, but, as far as the thought is con- 
 cerned, well-managed transition, St Paul now comes to the 
 nature of the gospel itself Both the doctrine of Christ cruci- 
 fied, and the circumstances under which it must be preached 
 in Rome, seemed to the eye of man to render a successful 
 result of St Paul's preaching there very improbable. In the 
 magnificent capital of the earthly potentate of the then world,* 
 in a city where all the schools of Grecian philosophy had their 
 representatives, it might well appear hopeless to the natural 
 man to preach the crucified Son of God, a Master who could 
 only promise his disciples death and suffering as far as this 
 world was concerned. Nevertheless, under the conviction of 
 that divine power which resided in the gospel, St Paul utters 
 his ouK s':rai(Jx^vo[Mai. This must be considered as a Litotes, in- 
 asmuch as the preaching of the gospel was to him the subject 
 of his highest glory (1 Tim. i. 8, etc). In order to show plainly 
 how little cause there was for him to be ashamed of the gospel, 
 he terms it a humiiig ©soD. The expression combines a reference 
 to the exalted source, and to the almighty power of the gospel, 
 which stand in strange contrast with its insignificant, yea 
 strange, startling outward appearance, at which both Jews and 
 Gentiles stumbled. (1 Cor. ii. 2, &c.) It is not, however, the 
 doctrine in itself which is regarded as this duva/it^y but the doc- 
 trine in living unity with the events to which it is related. 
 The gospel is a divine act^ which continues to operate through 
 
 • Alexander Moras says very strikingly on this subject, "audax faciuus a 
 erucem vocare terrarum dominos." See Roiche on this passage. 
 
76 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 all ages of the world, and that not in the first place outwardly, 
 but inwardly, in the depths of the soul, and for eternal pur- 
 poses, {lurrjpia is the opposite to aTwXg/a. See Matt, xviii. 
 11. Because salvation from temporal and eternal ruin is the 
 highest end of Christianity, the gospel itself is called ihayy'Ojov 
 T^g gurrjpias, and Christ apxnyog T7)s (furvjptag.) The condition of 
 its operation in man is only -Trlffris. (With respect to the con- 
 ception of mffrig, see the notes to Rom. iii. 21.) The medicine 
 only works when it is taken by the patient, and, in like man- 
 ner, the gospel is only effectual when the man receives it in 
 faith. But this faith is of God's grace possible to every one, 
 the time of whose calling has arrived; the Jews have, however, 
 the first claim to this calling. The contradistinction of Jews 
 and Greeks has nothing in common with that of Greeks and 
 barbarians in ver. 14. There the Apostle was speaking of his 
 personal relation to all classes of the Gentile world, here he is 
 speaking of the purely objective relation of the gospel to the 
 human race. Looking at mankind as presented to us in the 
 divine economy of the world, he considers it divided into two 
 halves, the Jewish and the Gentile world, and ascribes to all 
 the privilege of being called to believe, whilst he recognises a 
 certain prerogative on the part of the Jews (see also ii. 9, 10). 
 This prerogative was no mere pretension advanced on the part 
 of that people from pride and blindness,* but a divine ordinance, 
 which had the design of erecting amongst the people of Israel 
 a hearth and an altar for God,*|- from which, as a centre^ the 
 sacred fire might then be more easily spread over the whole 
 earth. (See notes to John iv. 22.) How the Jews lost the 
 advantage thus assigned to them, by their unbelief, is mentioned, 
 later in chapter x. 
 
 Ver. 17. The Apostle again, by means of the particle ydp, 
 annexes the reason, why the gospel could be thus effectual as a 
 
 * From the general prevalence of this view arose, no doubf, the omission of 
 ^euTov, observable in some MSS., viz., B.G,, which is, however, certainly quite 
 erroneous. No doubt, in the case of the Jews, there was frequently connected 
 with the consciousness of their election, arrogance and contempt of the Gentiles, 
 instead of humility ; but the conviction of their election was not, on that account, 
 by any means, itself an error. 
 
 + U^urov is therefore not merely to be referred, as is done by the Greek Fathers, 
 to the earlier calling, but also to their larger, endowment with the gifts and fulness 
 of grace. Theodoret erroneously asserts that t^utov designates merely tkIsws 
 
CHAPTER I. 16, 17. 77 
 
 divine power unto eternal salvation; namely, because in it a 
 new way of salvation is discovered, ^ythe righteousness of God, 
 proceeding from faith." The explanation of the leading ideas 
 in the theme which the Apostle thus proposes, i. e., the bixaioGmr, 
 Qeovj and T/aris, will be found in the introductory observations 
 on iii. 21. I will only make this preliminary remark, that the 
 former word does not here signify the divine attribute of right- 
 eousness, or goodness, or faithfulness, as has been supposed, 
 but that the Apostle opposes the dixuioauv/j &eov (or Ik ©sou, Phil, 
 iii. 9), to the biTiccioGmn sx, vo/jlov (or !§ w^^^wtou, i. e., Ihia), and re- 
 gards the whole pecuHar influence of tlie gospel as determined 
 by this difference. The realisation of absolute perfection\ 
 CMatt. V. 18) is the highest end of man's existence; the law \ 
 could not effect this any further than the bringing forth of au 
 outward legalit}^, but by regeneration an inward condition is 
 through grace produced in believers, the diKawovvr} ©eoD, which 
 
 answers the highest requirements. This new way of salvation 
 was hidden from all eternity (Eplies. iii. 9; 1 Cor. ii. 7), it 
 needed therefore to be revealed by Christ in his actual accom- 
 plishment of the work of redemption; St Paul's business was 
 simply to communicate this information. From the connexion 
 with ver. 16, which exalts tlie gospel as the power of God, it is 
 plain, that btxaiocbvri 0£ou cannot signify the mere declaring a 
 person righteous, but the real making him righteous. This St 
 Paul declares not only of those who were then living, but also 
 of all later generations, because he considered the righteousness 
 of all as absolutely realized in Christ. That which in Him was 
 perfected once for all, is gradually transmitted to individual 
 men in proportion to the degree of their renewal, and is received 
 by them in faith, and reckoned to their account. Peculiar in 
 the present passage is the addition of ik vicnv. But doubtless 
 this is not so to be understood, as if in this place an increase of 
 faith were intended, an inward development of faith from a 
 lower degree to a higher, the advance from a more external 
 mode of personally appropriating salvation to an inward mode. 
 There was plainly no occasion whatsoever here for St Paul to 
 allude to the development of faith, which in itself must by all 
 means be acknowledged to be a fact; on the contrary, if we 
 were to adopt this interpretation, the principal point connected 
 with the mention of the righteousness of God, namely, that it 
 proceeded (on man's part) from faith, would remain entirely 
 
78 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 untouched. 'Ex does not therefore indicate in this place, as 
 Reiche has justly remarked, the point of departure with respect 
 to an advance, but the ground of obtaining righteousness, the 
 personal appropriation of the divine benefit, which becomes also 
 particularly clear, if we for a moment leave tig mgnv out of sight. 
 In the same way that the Apostle proves in a subsequent 
 part of his epistle (chap, iv.) by the example of Abraham, that, 
 even in the case of the pious men who lived before Christ, it 
 was faith which made them righteous ; so also in this place he 
 describes the new way of salvation in its historical connexion. 
 We must not consider this a mere accommodation, and appli- 
 cation of Old Testament expressions to entirely different rela- 
 tions ; this retrospective use of the 0. T. is rather to be derived 
 from that scriptural fundamental view of it, which supposes 
 that in it all the germs of the N. T. are already really con- 
 tained, and that, therefore, the N. T. is only the crXjj^w^r/g of the 
 Old. (See notes to Matt. v. 17.) The quotation from Hab. 
 ii. 4, is also made use of in Galat. iii. 11, and Heb. x. 38, in 
 both with reference to faith, and the righteousness of the N. T., 
 and we must acknowledge with justice, since it is but one faith 
 at different stages of its development which is represented in 
 both the Old and New Testament. (See Heb. xi. 1, etc.) 
 Eternal life (^^<rgra/ is used in a pregnant sense =• ^u^v dimiov 
 s^si) is never obtained otherwise than by means of faith. Ac- 
 cording to the Hebrew text, hTT'' in^^?;2t^2l p^*^!^» ^^ '^rienug 
 cannot be connected with dlaaio?, yet it must be thus taken ac- 
 cording to the sense in which it is used by St Paul. We fre- 
 quently meet with such free interpretations of the 0. T. text, and 
 it has already been remarked, that the indeterminateness of the 
 connexions in the Hebrew very much favours such a proceed- 
 ing.* Applied in a profane spirit, as by the Rabbinical writers, 
 this method perverts the Scripture ; but when exercised in the 
 Holy Spirit, this liberty is a means of manifesting the infinite 
 fulness of its contents. (The LXX. must have read '^rii^?^^^^ 
 for they translate it sx cr/tfrsw^ fiov, and ascribe faith, i. e.y faith- 
 fulness to God. But the faithfulness of God is doubtless mani- 
 fested in sending the Messiah, and in his work, so that this way 
 of taking the passage leads us back to the right thought again.) 
 
 * See the notes to Luke i v. 1 8, 1 9. 
 
79 
 
 PART II. 
 (1.18— XLJJ6.) 
 
 THE DOCTRINAL EXPOSITION. 
 
 SECTION I. 
 
 OP THE SINFULNESS OF THE HUMAN RACE. 
 
 (I. 18— III. 20.) 
 
 The very nature of the Apostle's undertaking required that 
 he should prove the necessity that existed for a new method of 
 salvation for man, before he entered upon his account of the 
 true nature of that method. It was further requisite that this 
 necessity should be pointed out in both those great divisions, 
 under which the human race is considered according to the idea 
 of the kingdom of Grod, that is to say, amongst Jews as well as 
 Gentiles or Greeks; in order that it might plainly appear that 
 such a new and complete way was needed by both in common. 
 St Paul, therefore, from the 18th to the .S2nd verse of the first 
 chapter, treats exclusively of the condition of the Gentiles; 
 from the 1st to the 29th verses of the 2nd chapter, the Jews 
 principally occupy his attention; and lastly, from the 1st to the 
 20th verse of the 3rd chapter, he draws a parallel between the 
 two, in which he considers the different relations in which they 
 stand to the remedy provided by the mercy of God. We will 
 treat this first section according to these three divisions. 
 
 § 3. — CONDITION OF THE HEATHEN WORLD. 
 
 (I. 18-32.) 
 
 In describing the necessity of a new way of salvation for the 
 heathen world, the Apostle naturally set out with considering 
 their depraved moral condition.* But it was also required that 
 this state of alienation from God should be traced to its origin. 
 Even the Gentile world was not without some knowledge of 
 
 * See Usteri's Paulinischer Lehrbegriff, 4th ed. p. 1 5, seqq., and the pnssagea 
 there quoted. 
 
80 EPISTLE TO THE liOMANS. 
 
 God, and in consequence some insiglit into the divine law; but 
 the knowledge which was thus within their reach, the Gentiles 
 lost by their own fault, and with their theoretical errors, the 
 stream of their practical transgressions rose to a most fearful 
 height* The mere recovery of that general knowledge of God, 
 which they once possessed, could, of course, effect nothing in 
 this evil case, for if it had not been effectual in preventing them 
 from sinking into vice, still less could it raise the mass from the 
 slough of iniquity into which it had fallen ; it was therefore 
 necessary that a new element of life, advvafiig esou should be in- 
 troduced into the world, and that by its means the possibility 
 should be given of a new beginning for man; such the gospel 
 proved itself to be. 
 
 Ver. 18. The Apostle had already used ydp three times in 
 succession in the 16th- J 7th verses, and uses it yet a fourth time, 
 in order to connect this verse with the preceding, as (1 Cor. ix. 
 ] 6, &;c.) For he is contrasting the revelation of God's right- 
 eousness in the gospel with the revelation of his wrath in the 
 law, as the former comes sJg 'jrienv^ i. e.y s/g Tavrag '^tiGnvovrag, so 
 the latter s'^ri iruaav dffs^siav. But the last yap connects what fol- 
 low^s in such a manner with what has gone before, as to direct 
 attention to the life which is by faith: "Those only who are 
 just by faith shall live, for God's wrath reveals itself against all 
 unrighteousness" (which cannot be avoided by him who lives 
 not by faith). Looking upon ydp as intended to connect or ex- 
 plain the clauses of an argument (see Hartung's Partikellehre, 
 i. 363, &c.), we may here translate it by "yea; " it points back 
 to the well- know truth of God's justice in punishing sin, which 
 the life of faith alone can satisfy. In this general idea, there- 
 fore, that God punishes sin, on which the Apostle Paul grounds 
 his w^hole argument, he already brings distinctly forward the 
 contrasts between the two dispensations; for vers. 17, 18, ex- 
 actly correspond to one another. Sinful man has the most 
 pressing need of the revelation of the Bixa/osvvfj Qiov, for without 
 this he is subject to the opyri ©sou. (The endeavours to force 
 another meaning upon ydp, "but," for instance, are altogether 
 to be rejected. Comp. Winer Gramm. § 423, &c.) The divine 
 anger we of course consider as merely signifying the manifesta- 
 tion of God's justice against sin ; this is here represented in its 
 
 ♦ See Notes to Matt, xviii. 34, 35, Job. iii. 35, 3G. 
 
CHAPTER I. 18. (SI 
 
 two principal forms, as alienation from God (affs/Sg/d^, and discord 
 in earthly relations (a^/x/a), and these in all possible cases, 
 greater as well as smaller (craca). The only separate question 
 is this, how are the words acroxaXu-Trrgra/ kt' ovpavov to be taken? 
 Grreat stress has been laid upon the expression a^' ovpavov, 
 and some have interpreted it of some particular judgment of 
 God by lightning and so on, or have referred it to the last judg- 
 ment. But the general character of the whole passage by no 
 means admits of such special applications. Each and every, 
 outward as well as inward, present as well as future, utterance 
 of God's punitive justice is here designed; they are for this 
 reason only represented as coming a-r' ovpavoZ, inasmuch as that 
 eternal harmony which reigns in the heavenly world of spirit, 
 from which alone all pure manifestations of. the divine proceed, 
 even those of holy and just punishment is opposed to the sin of 
 the earth. 
 
 In the opposition ruv rr^v aXyjkiav Iv abma -KariymTitiV^ truth, as 
 
 the principle of every thing good, is set against falsehood, as the 
 mother of all sin (as well of acs/Ss/a as of ddiTtia), and the former 
 is represented as oppressed by the latter by means of the abiytla.. 
 (We are not to take h adixlcc as equivalent to ddixCjg, or dvofMug, 
 since it needs no words to prove that the suppression of the 
 truth is criminal; the thought expressed is rather this, that un- 
 righteousness = dvofiia, departure from the divine law, stifles 
 the truth, and gives birth to error and lies.) (Karsx^iV) in the 
 sense " to keep under, to restrain the activity of," is found also 
 in 2 Thess. ii. 6, Acts xxvii. 40.) Here, moreover, the truth 
 that is kept under is to be referred neither altogether to its in- 
 ward effects, nor altogether to its outward, but to both together. 
 This pernicious energy of sin naturally begins in the hearts of 
 individual men, but extends itself gradually more and more, 
 and darkens the conscience of whole nations and ages, in that 
 it makes it incapable of perceiving the voice of truth and duty. 
 Thus, in the case of the Romans, from the total obscuration of 
 conscience, wickedness reached such a pitch, that the gladiato- 
 rial games, one of the most horrible outgrowths of sin which has 
 ever appeared in the history of mankind, were the general 
 custom.* Accordingly there is contained in this passage an 
 
 * It may be said that the practice of causing thousands of their fellow men to be 
 slaughtered merely to feed their eyes with a sight of shows, was almost worse even 
 
82 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 assertion, that ever since the fall, and in the state of hereditary- 
 sin, there was and is a truth in human nature, which by con- 
 stant active sin may be kept under and finally stifled. St Paul 
 does not represent man as being, in consequence of hereditary- 
 sin, in such a state that he can sink no deeper, but much rather 
 as having a light in himself; by the extinguishing of which 
 light he may become at length wholly blind. 
 
 Ver. 19. The Grentile world was not, however, excusable in 
 these its errors, from what might be thought the impossibility 
 of its attaining to the knowledge of God — God, on the contrary, 
 revealed Himself to it. This thought is expressed in the 19th 
 ver., where it is stated that the knowledge of God is founded 
 upon the manifestations of the divine energy; God, in fact, is 
 spoken of as He who Himself manifests Himself to men. And 
 it is just on this account that their knowledge of God is so un- 
 deniable, viz., because it is conveyed by the beams of the ori- 
 ginal source of light, God Himself The expression rh ymcrhv 
 rov 0goD, is peculiar to this passage; the word yi/ugrov may mean 
 either that which is known, or that which may he known; ac- 
 cording to the first meaning, the phrase would mean the same 
 as yvvaig rod ©goD; according to the latter, it w^ould, on the other 
 hand, distinguish that which may be known of God from that 
 which may not. (1 Tim. vi. 1 6.) In our choice between these 
 two interpretations, we can be guided only by the whole con- 
 nexion of the passage, according to which (as will soon be 
 shown more at length), the absolute incapacity of the heathen 
 for the knowledge of God, is just as strongly denied, as the 
 possibility of their unlimited knowledge of him. The expres- 
 sions yvoiaig, or smyvuffi? rou 0soD denote, however, in the language 
 of the New Testament, that absolute knowledge of God which 
 is conveyed to man by means of the manifestation of God in 
 Christ; from which we may assume that the form ro ymcrU ro\i 
 ©sou was purposely chosen by the Apostle, in order to designate 
 that lower degree of acquaintance with God, which was given 
 to men on the footing of the Gentiles, and which was only gra- 
 dually obscured by sin. 
 
 than that of eating human flesh, which appears to have proceeded at first only out 
 of the unbridled fury of battle. That the gladiatorial games were not only main- 
 tained at the time of the highest civilization of the ancient world, but then first at- 
 tained a definite form, shows how little the education of the head without the real 
 reformation of the heart humanizes the manners. 
 
CHAPTER I. 19, 20. 83 
 
 However, it is plain that the knowledge of God, which is here 
 spoken of, is not to be referred merely to His government of 
 the world, and His works in it, but also particularly to Himself 
 
 Tvuffrog in the N. T generally means recognised, known (Acts 
 i. 19, ii. 14, iv. 10, «foc., Luke ii. 44, xxiii. 49), for which in 
 classical Greek the form yvuTog is usual. The N. T. affords no 
 example of the word used in the sense, " which may be known,"' 
 to support that interpretation here ; the usage is however abun- 
 dantly supported by passages of the Classics.* The words h 
 avroT? refer to the internal nature of the knowledge of God; the 
 meaning of the Apostle is, that the nature of God is represented 
 in the soul as in a mirror, so as not to be mistaken. It gives 
 quite an erroneous view of the passage to suppose with some 
 that this expression is used only of the philosophers who lived 
 in the Gentile world, for the Apostle is here treating of an uni- 
 versal character of human nature, and what is here said of the 
 heathen, it is needless to say, refers to Jews also. 
 
 Ver. 20. Once more with a fresh ydp (the seventh, which fol- 
 lows without interruption from ver. 16, for dton, ver. 19, is in 
 meaning exactly the same as ydp) the Apostle annexes a 
 thought in which that energy, by means of which God reveals 
 himself, is described more closely. We c?ji point to no mani- 
 festations of Deity either immediate or by means of angels to the 
 Gentile world, such as were vouchsafed to the Jews ; but God re- 
 vealed Himself to them by His creation from the very beginning. 
 'Ato TiTidsoii xorsfj^oxj, can only refer to time, Riickert and Reiche 
 justly observe; (on which account, also, k<pav'spw(ss stands in the 
 past tense at ver. 19); otherwise the use of rroirifMaTa immedi- 
 ately afterwards, by which is denoted the created w^orld, could 
 not but be tautological. f The determination of the time is be- 
 sides particularly important here, because the Apostle has the 
 express intention of proving, that at no time, and under no cir- 
 cumstances, was there any excuse for the deep moral depravity 
 of the Gentiles, since the knowledge of God in the works of 
 nature was always within their reach. At the same time, what 
 God was pleased to reveal concerning himself, is more exactly 
 
 • See Herrmann's note on the Oedip. Rex. of Sophocles, v. 362. Even the 
 general analogy of the verbals in ro; also supports this interpretation. 
 
 f On the word xrltrts, see the remarks on viii. 19: It denotes properly and pri- 
 marily the act of creation, whilst KTtfffix is used for that which is created ; in the 
 N. T., on the other hand, xria-is denotes commonly v.hat is created. 
 
84 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 declared in the words rk aopara aurov, which expression is ex- 
 plained and limited at the end of the verse by ri rs aibiog avrou 
 dumfjbtg xai Quorrig. The aUio? bhrnfiig is very definite and easy to 
 understand. In the contemplation of the creation, the infinite 
 'power, which this presupposes, first impresses itself upon the 
 spirit (see Wisdom, ch. xiii.); and as compared with the merely 
 temporal evolutions of the physical powers, creative power comes 
 forward as eternal. On the other hand, the expression kioryig 
 is both striking and obscure, since ©soD is necessarily added to 
 it. But doubtless the Apostle by this word, as above, by choos- 
 ing yvoiCTov, intended to mark the incompleteness of their know- 
 ledge. The divinity of God, i. e., his higher nature in general, 
 the dominion of a mighty power over the elements of the world, 
 and of a condescending benevolence in the care of all the 
 creatures, — all this may be recognised in the mere contempla- 
 tion of nature; but by no means the true ^g/oV/j? of God, His 
 personal existence as the absolute Spirit, as well as His justice 
 and holiness. But, after all, the most remarkable part of this 
 passage is the dopara dvrov; it appears from this that there is an 
 ooocrbv Gsov. And doubtless this is just the meaning of the 
 Apostle. The world is the mirror in which the inward nature 
 and being of God is displayed;* the garment which clothes His 
 very Self (Ps. civ. 2). Therefore, also the world, in order to 
 lead man to the knowledge of God, needs to be contemplated 
 
 with a spiritual eye'(voovfji,svcc ftahparcci = h tSj vOj %a&oparai)\ as 
 only the spirit can comprehend the spiritual expression of the 
 human countenance, because in this case, likewise, the invisible 
 being of the man is mirrored in his visible form, so also nature 
 speaks of God's might and goodness to him alone, who beholds 
 her with more than the mere bodily eye; the latter finds only 
 disorder in her. 
 
 Krkis %(i(S(j^oM (see Notes viii. 1 8) cannot mean the world, that 
 which was created, but only the power that was put forth to create 
 it. If we take it in the former sense, the connexion with xa^o- 
 fara/ by means of aitd would present a difficulty; if this had 
 been intended, ex would have been chosen, as it is in an entirely 
 parallel passage in Wisdom xiii. 5. Meyer, to be sure, refers to 
 
 • Calvin justly observes on this passage, Deus per se invisibilis est, sed quia 
 elueet ejus majestas in operibus et creaturis universis, debuerunt illico homines 
 agnoscere, nam artificem suura perspicue declarant. 
 
CHAPTER I. 20. 85 
 
 Matt, vii 16, where is found a-ro rciv ytap^rruv lmyv<L<si<sk (Berl. 
 Jahrb. 1836. N. 113). But the construction xadopagTai with dro 
 would never be found. — 'Atdiog from ae/, everlasting, eternal; 
 d'/dr];, invisible. — The expressions &s6rr}? and dstorrig differ from 
 one another as 0i6s, and hTog, of which they are the abstract 
 nouns. The fulness of the dsiorrig resides in the world, the ful- 
 ness of the horn? in Christ (Coloss. ii. 9); in Him alone can the 
 Father be contemplated as a Person. 
 
 And now, at this remarkable passage, the question arises, 
 what does St Paul wish particularly to impress upon us by this 
 thought ? For w^e might think it necessary to understand by 
 the passage, that men in earlier times, when they stood nearer 
 to the first age of the world, might have been able to acquaint 
 themselves with Grod through nature, but that, by continual un- 
 faithfulness, they had all of them, without exception, lost this 
 knowledge, and were abandoned to idol- worship. But this is 
 plainly not the meaning of the Apostle, rather is he speaking 
 here of human nature, as it manifests itself at all times and 
 places, so that he conceives, the knowledge of God might always 
 have developed itself afresh from the contemplation of the world, 
 whether by reflection on its phenomena, or through immediate 
 impressions on the mind, or through awakenings of the con- 
 science. The germ of sin, which existed in all men, would not 
 indeed have been done away with, but certainly checked in its 
 development, by obedience to that knowledge of God which was 
 thus within their reach. But instead of this, men gave them- 
 selves up to the evil desires of their hearts, darkened thereby 
 the knowledge of God which yet remained to them, increased 
 thereby, in return, their lusts to such a pitch as to violate the 
 laws of physical nature, and thus first fell away into idolatry, 
 which is the violation of the laws of the spirit. But there were 
 at all times individuals who proved, by leading a nobler life, 
 even in the most depraved state of the heathen world, that it was 
 at all times possible for man, by the earnest contemplation of 
 nature, to raise himself to a certain knowledge of God. This 
 power given to sinful man of acquainting himself with God in 
 nature, is brought forward by the Apostle in other places also, 
 for instance, Acts xiv. 15, &c., xvii. 23, &;c. The Redeemer 
 himself assumes such a power in passages like Matt. vi. 22, 23, 
 John viii. 47. (Comp. Usteri's Paul Lehrbegriffe, § 21. There 
 
86 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 is, therefore, nothing in the passage we are now considering that 
 is not found elsewhere. But as this passage is found in the 
 Apostle's proof of the sinfulness of human nature, the impres- 
 sion has been produced upon many minds, that the idea ex- 
 pressed in it concerning the capability of man to raise himself 
 to the knowledge of God, limits the greatness of man's depra- 
 vity. But in this the truth has been overlooked, that moral 
 depravity has not its immediate ground in the understanding, 
 but in the will, and presupposes the want of real love, on which 
 account even the morally evil spirits are said to have the 
 knowledge of God. (James ii. 19.) In fact, the capability of 
 knowing God heightens the moral depravity of man ; for that 
 they, notwithstanding this knowledge, can go on further and 
 further in sin, supposes a higher degree of aversion of the will 
 from the law than if they had sinned without this knowledge. 
 But the [Roman] Catholic Church, as well as Rationalists, take 
 an entirely false view of this verse, whilst they understand by 
 the simple ymarh rov ©soD, true love and obedience together. 
 But, at the same time, as we have already observed, the Apostle 
 restricts that knowledge of God to which man can attain by 
 means of the mere contemplation of nature, to the knowledge of 
 the might and goodness of God. For the proper nature of God, 
 as the Supreme Spirit, and pure Love, i. e., communication of 
 self, remained unknown to the heathen, as well as to most of the 
 Jews themselves; on which account Christ is so often obliged to 
 tell the Jews, that they know not God. Accordingly, St Paul 
 might, with the same justice, have here brought out the idea 
 (if-it had happened to suit his argument), that man, from the 
 mere contemplation of nature, could never arrive at the true 
 knowledge of God ; passages, therefore, such as Eplies. ii. 2, 
 are by no means inconsistent with the present. Even the best 
 of the heathen, with their weak glimmering of the knowledge 
 of God, remained without hope, because it was able to awaken 
 in their minds only fear, at most a longing after the unknown 
 God. But when Schneckenburger says that St Paul might 
 have derived this view from the Alexandrian Gnostics, he 
 brings forward a very unnecessary hypothesis; it is much sim- 
 pler to suppose that it arose independently in his own mind, as 
 it did also in that of the Alexandrians, from the immediate 
 contemplation of the nobler moral phenomena amongst the 
 
CHAPTER I. 22, 2'3. 87 
 
 Gentiles. Even supposing that St Paul had heard of the doc- 
 trine of the Alexandrians, yet he did not adopt it from them, but 
 only propounded it on account of the deep truth which he re- 
 cognised in it by the light of the Spirit. 
 
 Ver. 21. St Paul points out the unfaithfulness of the Gentiles 
 to the measure of the knowledge of God which they possessed 
 as the beginning of their errors. (The yvovTsg rbv &e 6v is 
 not inconsistent with the more general term de/orris which has 
 gone before, for here he is only speaking historically of that 
 true knowledge of God which existed in men originally, and 
 which they gradually lost.) God, as the absolutely highest 
 Being, claims man entirely, with all his adoration and all his 
 gratitude; and indeed, since God is Spirit and Love, and man 
 is so likewise according to his true nature, spiritual adoration, 
 and spiritual gratitude, i. e., the complete surrender of self, and 
 the obedience of the inmost powers of life. ThuSj as the highest 
 Spirit, and the purest Love (w? @s6v), they honoured Him not, 
 even if they did not fail in outward homage likewise. The con- 
 sequence of their forsaking the truth was then their sinking 
 into vanity {/xaraiovffdai = ^'^3Dn> J^^- ^^- ^)> ^^ their forsaking 
 the Light, the sinking into darkness, the element of sin. 
 
 The btaXoyidfLoi are the actions of the vovg (see Olshausen's 
 opuscula theologica, p. 157) hence both vou? and xapd/a,, the two 
 principal powers of the man, are drawn down deeper into sin. 
 With the voug begins also the restoration of the man in the new 
 birth (See Comm. vii. 25). 
 
 Ver. 22, 23. Gradually the Gentile world became more and 
 more degenerate, till the idea of God was entirely obliterated, 
 so that men, and even beasts of the meanest and most disgust- 
 ing forms, received divine honours. Amongst modern exposi- 
 tors, Reiche has contested this profound derivation of idol- 
 worship from sin, which is yet undeniably expressed in the Old 
 Testament. (Jer. ii. 11; Ps. cvi. 20.) His opinion is rather 
 (p. 158), that the deification of the powers of nature, and indi- 
 vidual created things, preceded Monotheism, because all the con- 
 ditions for the highest development of the religious feeling were 
 wanting. But in this Reiche has set out with the quite un- 
 scriptural, and in every respect untenable view, that the course 
 of the development of humanity begins with the completest 
 rudeness, and proceeds to the gradual perfection of the inward 
 
88 EPISTLE TO THE llOMANS. 
 
 as well as outward life. But the doctrine of the Apostle is 
 founded on the opposite view of a gradual sinking out of a 
 nobler state into sin, parallel with which degradation appears 
 the restoration of man to his original glory, by means of a suc- 
 cession of manifestations of God's grace. He does not, there- 
 fore, mean to say, that the degradation of the human race 
 showed itself suddenly in the fearful form of the worship of 
 created powers and images, but that this indicated a continual 
 succession of transgressions, and developments of sin.* In con- 
 sequence of these the higher power of man's life (the '^rvsv/ji^o!,) 
 vanished almost entirely, and only the brutal inclinations and 
 instincts remained, without a ruler. In this way man, of course, 
 fell a prey to the powers of nature, in which he perceived that 
 working on a mighty scale which he felt to be active in himself. 
 It was especially the generative and receptive powers of nature 
 which were recognised by men as the most powerful in them- 
 selves, and in external things, and these were, on that account, 
 in all nature-worship honoured with all kinds of cruel and im- 
 pure services. Where holy love to the Highest Good was lost, 
 another love must necessarily have occupied the heart, for with- 
 out love man cannot exist; but according to the object of his 
 love does the man himself become, for love implies self- surrender. 
 The speculative reason of man could not free him from this 
 bondage of the powers of nature, for it awakened no higher 
 love, and led at best to a hylozoistic Pantheism. The wisdom 
 of man was foolishness. (1 Cor. iii. 9.) The law, at the same 
 time, could only awaken the feeling of bondage, and the longing 
 after freedom; but freedom itself, and the raising of the spirit 
 to communion with God the Spirit, could only be wrought by 
 the imparting of a higher principle of love through Christ, 
 wherefore it is the Son alone who makes free. 
 "uxxa^uv do^av x. r. X. answers exactly to Ps. cvi. 20, where 
 
 the LXX. have t]XXd^avro rr^v do^av avrutv (i.e.y Jehovall sv b(jjOiU)iJj(iTi 
 
 (idsy^ax). In h o{j.oiu)(j.art i/Kovogf is, no doubt, an allusion to Gen. 
 
 * The necessity of a preaching of the name of the Lord (Genes, iv. 26) is the 
 first indication of that falling away from the true God, which it was the object of 
 the preaching of the successive patriarchs to prevent 
 
 f The expi'essions xar cIkovo. kx) xkS^ of^oiaa-iv (Genes, i. 26), which there form 
 a Hendiadys, are here compounded into one expression, o/u-oluf^a iIk'ovos, — God 
 will be worshipped only in the perfect image of His Son, not in Adam, and his 
 childien. 
 
I 
 
 CHAPTER I. 24-27. 89 
 
 i. 26. Man, according to God's will, is certainly intended to 
 present an image of Himself in holiness and righteousness, but 
 this image is not to be misused as if it were for adoration : since 
 he, as <p6(x,pr6g, is separated from the afdaprog by an infinite chasm. 
 With respect to o[Loi(a[j.ot, and of^oiuffig, see Com. on Rom. viii. 3. 
 
 The worship of beasts had developed itself in Egypt into the 
 rudest forms, and had issued in the most hideous errors, so that 
 even bestiality came forward as part of their worship, as in the 
 service of Mendes. The expressions used by the Apostle are 
 applicable to the worship of the Ibis, Apis, Crocodile, &c. &c. 
 
 Ver. 24, 25. God punishes sin by sin, that sin may bring with 
 it those fearful consequences which first tend to lead man to the 
 consciousness of his alienation from God. He, therefore, with- 
 drawing the influences of His grace, now left men in their blind- 
 ness to their own evil lusts, which showed themselves especially 
 in the unchecked dominion of the most powerful of their natural 
 instincts, viz., the desire of the sexes, and to the power and 
 Prince of darkness, who is the Lord of sin and all its manifesta- 
 tions. By aTif/.d^sff6at ru ow/^ara Iv iavro/g unnatural lust is not 
 yet meant, but simply lust in general, which always in its sin- 
 ful exercise defiles the body, whilst other sins are without the 
 body. (1 Cor. vi. 18. The opposite is xracdai ffjuvog h r/fxfi. 1 
 Thess. iv. 4.) Such abominations, which were not only con- 
 sidered lawful, but the proper service of their gods, proceeded 
 from the wandering aw\ay from truth into falsehood. 
 
 'AX^^g/a and -^svdo? are here to be taken absolutely, not as 
 logical, or simply formal, mathematical truth and falsehood, but 
 as substantial, real truth. God himself is the Being, and the 
 Truth (cf John i. 14); sin is the absence or perversion of the 
 real, is nothingness and lie. 2s/Sa^g(r^a/ = 'Trpocx.uvsTv is only found 
 in this place in the N. T. The words cra^a rov xr/cavra are best 
 taken as meaning, putting into the back ground, passing over 
 the true God, or being hostile, opposed to Him. The doxology 
 is intended to give prominence to the contrast between the 
 heathen's forgetfulness of God, and the honour which was due 
 to Him. 
 
 Ver. 26, 27. God let the Gentiles sink to yet lower degrada- 
 tion, in permitting them to fall into unnatural lusts. Here hu- 
 manity appears degraded below the beasts ; in the indulgence 
 of natural passions, man falls under the power of a very strong 
 
90 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 appetite, and lias in that a certain excuse, but sins of unnatural 
 lewdness are sheer abominations of unmixed wickedness. That 
 they were so much in vogue in the Roman and Grecian world, 
 is a convincing proof of the depravity of the age, notwithstand- 
 ing all its outward polish of cultivation. (Compare Tholuck's 
 Abhandlung uber den sittlichen Zustand der Heidenwelt, at the 
 beginning of Neander's Denkwurdigkeiten, B. I. 
 
 Ver. 28. The punishment of such abominations was the com- 
 plete spiritual ruin which accompanied it {avTiiMta&iav h lavroTg, 
 i. e.j ev ruj vu) a'TToKa/jj^dvovrsg, ver. 27), in consequence of which 
 the relations of men to one another, as members of a state and 
 neighbourhood, must further have been destroyed. God per- 
 mitted them to fall into this condition, to bring the consequences 
 of their sin completely home to their consciences. 
 
 As the knowledge of God is eternal life (John xvii. S) so St 
 Paul rightly finds in the absence of it the source of all sins, and 
 their results. The expression aUy.i(io? i/oDg contains a play upon 
 the words oh% IhoTiifi^atsav. The fact that they did not consider 
 God, who is the Good itself, as good, made them reprobates ; in 
 rejecting Him, as they supposed. He cast them away, and they 
 cast themselves away. The corruption is represented as having 
 penetrated to the deepest spring of life, in that the aboxiiLia. has 
 reference to the vou? itself; the voui was intended to govern both 
 body and soul, how great then must be the ruin, if the highest 
 principle, the power by which man receives the divine, is itself 
 destroyed. (Matt. vi. 22.) Sexual impurities are set forth as 
 the source of all other vices, because they destroy the most 
 sacred and delicate relations of human nature. 
 
 29-31. In the following catalogue of sins (a similar list is 
 found Galat. v. 19, &c., 2 Tim. iii. 8) by which the mind that is 
 estranged from God discovers its enmity, no very distinct suc- 
 cession can certainly be traced out, and occasionally the Apostle 
 is guided in the connexion by the similarity of sound of the 
 words; at the same time it cannot be denied that, setting out 
 with the more general forms of sin, he rises to its more special 
 manifestations.* 
 
 • GlCckler's attempt only confirms me in my view, that we must not attempt to 
 go further in demonstrating the order of the words in the following catalogue of 
 the manifestations of sin. He wishes to regard ahxia, xaxta, and xaxortS^ua as the 
 general expressions, and all that follows upon them, as the special manifestations 
 
CHAPTER I. 29-31. 91 
 
 The reading vopviia is not found in A.B.C. and several other 
 MSS. and documents of critical authority. Without doubt this 
 reading is not here genuine, as St Paul had already treated at 
 length of sins relating to the sexes. Copiers, who thought that 
 this very sin was here missing, added this expression instead of 
 rrovripia. iiovrip/ot, and xaxicx, are certainly nearly allied, at the 
 same time the idea of producing mischief and evil is. more pro- 
 minent in the former ; 'Trovripog is more the corrupting, xaxo's the 
 corrupted, ^dovov and (povov are connected in the same way on 
 account of the sound in Euripides Troad, v. 763. Kaxorikia 
 denote depravity of mind, inclination to evil, the opposite to 
 ivrikia. iri&vpi(frrigf a secret calumniator, backbiter; xardXaXog 
 every slanderer, even the common, public evil-speaker. Ac- 
 cording to the latest investigations, the distinction between 
 hogrvyris, God-hating, and hoarvyrig, God-hated, is unfounded.* 
 The active meaning, despisers of God, is probably to be here 
 preferred, since all evil-doers, as such, are without exception 
 displeasing to God, but sin does not rise in all to the actual 
 despising of God. The ancients also mention the particular 
 sin of ©soffsx^p/a,. See Aristoph. Vesp. v. 416. By b^piarri? is 
 meant the violent and insulting, whilst l'!tiprt(pavo^ marks him 
 who is proud of his personal dignity, &c. ' AewWoug is wanting 
 in several documents of authority, but still it is to be retained 
 as genuine on account of the Paranomasia with dffw&srovg. It 
 is most suitably taken as "foolhardy, rash in wicked enter- 
 prises, whilst affvvdsrou? denotes the covenant-breaker. — 'Aa-toi/- 
 doug is not found in A.B.D.E.G. and several other copies of autho- 
 rity, at the same ttme it was probably only omitted by the 
 copyists on account of its, similarity in form to the other words, 
 if at least it has not found its way into this passage from 2 
 Tim. iii. 3. As to its meaning, it differs from the kindred dam- 
 6sTo? in this, that it marks not the breaking of the covenant, but 
 the refusal to enter into one, and therefore implies implacable - 
 ness, want of love. 
 
 Ver. 32. Into this flood of sins the holy God permitted un- 
 
 of these. But against this so much may be urged in almost every particular ex- 
 pression, that it is better to consider the order of succession as more free. 
 
 * The accentuation of the word as an oxytone is to be preferred, in conformity 
 with the rule, that compound adjectives in vs are always oxytones. See Buttmann's 
 Larger Grammar, B. II. p. 317. 
 
92 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 holy men to sink ; not by means of any special influence tending 
 to make them bad, but according to the necessary law of the 
 moral order of the world. For where God and His holy Being 
 is not, and therefore the vanity of the creature's self is the rul- 
 ing power, there sin begets sin, and punishes itself by sin. In 
 this law divine love shows itself as plainly as divine justice; for 
 the frightful consequences of sin are intended to awaken in the 
 man the germ of those better feelings that slumber there. And 
 if even within the Christian world instances of all these mani- 
 fold forms of vice present themselves, this is only a proof how 
 carefully the visible Church of Christ is to be distinguished 
 from its invisible reality; indeed, if even in the heart of the 
 believer traces of some of the sins which are here denounced as 
 heathen are to be found, this only declares the truth, that in 
 him too the " old man'' is living, who, as such, carries with 
 him that alienation from God which is the mother of all sin. 
 But as in the new man, in the case of the individual believer, 
 so also in the invisible Church, in the case of that community 
 of Christ on earth to which so much is yet lacking, there is, by 
 means of the Spirit which fills her, a new principle active, 
 which recognises the true character of all these abominations, 
 corrects them in itself and others, and contains within itself the 
 power gradually to overcome them. But it is just this, truth 
 existing in the very state of sinfulness, i. e., true repentance, 
 which the Apostle so painfully feels the lack of in the heathen 
 world. It knows the commandment of God, it knows how de- 
 serving of death are its transgressions, and yet it not only 
 practises them itself, but praises others also who practise them. 
 A/xa/w/Aa is used here in the sense of svToXrj, pp|, ordinance, 
 See notes on Rom. iii. 21, and on the thought itself notes on 
 Rom. ii. 14, Jo. The MSS. D.E.G. and several versions contain 
 
 after t'Tnyvovrsg the words ovx, sv6v}(fav, or oxjK 'iyvuGav oh ffvv7^x.av. 
 These additions have, however, only arisen from a misapprehen- 
 sion of the thought here expressed; the meaning of the Apostle 
 is just this, that they not only recognised sin, but also punish- 
 ment as its just desert. In af/o? davdrou is implied the idea, 
 that death is the consequence of sin from its very nature, in 
 the same way that life is the consequence of righteousness. (See 
 Rom. viii. 13.) The Apostle had mentioned many fruits of the 
 sinfulness of the heart, which, considered by themselves, could 
 
CHAPTER II. ]-29. 9o 
 
 not be punished with death by the civil power ; but in tlie indi- 
 vidual they never appear isolated, and in the sight of God, who 
 knows the inmost disposition of the heart, the lesser outward 
 transgression is considered as just as culpable, if it has been 
 committed under aggravating circumstances, as ihe grosser 
 outward offence committed under circumstances of palliation 
 A man's own sinful deed commonly disturbs, by the increased 
 force it gives to the lusts, his power of clear judgment; and 
 therefore to take pleasure in the sins of others when one's own 
 evil desires are more subdued, and therefore the voice of con- 
 science is more easily heard, indicates a higher degree of sinful 
 development than the sinful action itself. 
 
 § 4. THE CONDITION OF THE JEWS. 
 
 {II. 1-29.) 
 
 That condition of moral depravity amongst the Gentiles, 
 which was depicted in the first chapter, made apparent the ne- 
 cessity of a new way of salvation; but previous to describing the 
 nature of thi^way, the Apostle also directs his attention to the 
 second great division of the human race, as considered from the 
 theocratic point of view, that is to the Jews. It is, however, 
 only in ver. ] 1 that St Paul expressly begins to treat of the 
 Jews; for in the first verses he is still speaking of Gentiles, of 
 those, namely, who had been preserved from the grosser forms 
 of vice. He represents these as excusing themselves, and de- 
 claring the gross sinners to be alone culpable. This denial of 
 the charge of sinfulness lay also in the spirit of the Jewish 
 people, who were accustomed to look down upon the whole 
 Gentile world as sinners compared with themselves ; therefore 
 the Apostle, in these verses which form a transition to the 
 other subject, amalgamates this part of the Gentile world with 
 the Jewish world, which must have recognised its share in the 
 rebuke, in order that he might in the first place exhibit the de- 
 gradation of the latter the more plainly, by contrasting it with the 
 excellencies of some really noble spirits amongst the Gentiles. 
 The Apostle^ therefore, first proves that the state of sinfulness 
 does not the less exist, in cases where it even produces no such 
 
94 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 outward evil fruits. The manifestations of sin only assume a 
 less gross and prominent appearance, without being on that ac- 
 count really different. None should therefore judge his neigh- 
 bour, but rather judge himself, and let the goodness of Grod lead 
 him to repentance, knowing that the just God punishes without 
 fail all sin, whether refined or coarse, whether outward or in- 
 ward, and only rewards the good. Now if this principle was 
 applicable to all men, it was so in an especial manner to the 
 Jews, who had received an express law; but on this very account 
 they would but be more strictly punished if they had not ob- 
 served this holy law, and put to deep shame before many 
 heathens, who had walked according to their inferior knowledge 
 more faithfully than many Jews who had followed their deeper 
 acquaintance with God. Even circumcision, the seal of their 
 election to be God's people, had then only any significance, 
 when it was recognised as an obligation to a faithful observance 
 of the law. The real character of the Jew was not therefore 
 something outward but inward, and depended upon the circum- 
 cision of the heart. 
 
 Ver. 1. The view, that the Apostle addresses himself to the 
 Jews alone from the very first verse, has been supported by 
 Flatt, Tholuck, Riickert, and Reiche, besides other expositors; 
 this view, however, appears to be altogether untenable from 
 the general character of the expressions which the Apostle 
 makes use of For instance, w av&pwrs ora? (in ver. 1) in con- 
 nexion with cratra -^vxri av6pu)<7ro\) (ver. 9) is SO general, that 
 Jews alone cannot well be meant by it.* Besides, aOra 
 'xpdagiig (ver. 1) if it is taken according to the usual explana- 
 tion, that is, if it is spoken of the outward practice of all Jews, 
 receives no proper sense, inasmuch as the Jewish people col- 
 lectively were actually much more free from gross vices than 
 the Gentile world. At the same time it is quite true that those 
 Gentiles, whose condition is depicted in the first chapter, can- 
 not be spoken of in the second, (though some older commenta- 
 tors, for instance Calovius, have supported this view); for the per- 
 
 • Glockler recognises the gemral character of these expressions, but supposes 
 still that St Paul is merely speaking of the Jews; he does not, however, show how 
 these two views can co-exist. The first passage u aifpun to.? might still be con- 
 strued as is done by Fritzsche, " whosoever thou art, even if thou shouldst belong 
 to the people of God." But ver. 9 is clearly to be taken quite generally. 
 
CHAPTER II. 1. 95 
 
 sons, who outwardly indulged in all the vices there delineated, 
 certainly would not dare to judge others under the sense of their 
 own innocence. Such persons could only be either hypocrites 
 or idiots, with whom further argument would be useless. The 
 connexion appears then only to be natural and complete, when 
 we assume that St Paul is speaking to Gentiles indeed, but 
 only to such as lived in outward respectability, addicted to no 
 such flae-rant vices. These considered themselves to be better 
 than their degraded fellow-countrymen, and therefore sat in 
 judgment upon their sins. The Jews, too, stood in a similar 
 position. In general, tliey were more free from gross vicious - 
 ness than the Gentiles, and this made them inclined to condemn 
 them ; in this manner, then, the Apostle obtains an easy tran- 
 sition to the consideration of the condition of the Jews, in that 
 he points out how the germ of all those vices is also slumbering 
 in their hearts, as well as in those of the better Gentiles.* 
 Augustin rightly understood the passage in this manner, and 
 it is only thus that the argument of the Apostle receives its full 
 truth. All the Gentiles did not actually live in the commission 
 of the crimes painted in such glaring colours in chapter i., and 
 but few of the Jews especially ; nevertheless, they are all, both 
 Jews and Gentiles, sinners without exception, because they all 
 bear in their hearts the seed w^hich is able to produce all vices. 
 The Gentiles, who are commended in chapter ii. 14, 15, only 
 receive this commendation because they assent to this truth. The 
 Apostle therefore distinguishes in his description three classes 
 of men,i who indeed are all, without exception, sinners, but yet 
 stand in a different relation to sin. The first class consists of 
 all those who live unconcerned in flagrant vices ; to this class 
 belonged the great mass of the Gentile world, and some few 
 individuals amongst the Jews. The second class consists of 
 those who check the grosser outbreaks of sin, but nevertheless 
 bear in their hearts the germ of sinfulness, and with it all its 
 
 • Very instructive for the right understanding of this passage is Gal. ii. IS, 
 where it is written, yi/mT? (pv^n 'lov'SaTei, kou oIk \% iS-vuv afta^ruXoL Here then, 
 also, the Gentiles are called xar t^o^vv the uf^oe^TuXot, as the most morally sunken, 
 according to which the Jews as a body must be conceived of as the ^ixenoi, i. e., of 
 coui'se, as the righteous after the law. 
 
 t These three classes we meet with again in all places and at all times, and 
 therefore the Apostle's statement has not merely a temporary import, but depicts 
 in an entirely objective manner the nature of man's heart in and by itself. 
 
96 EPISTLE TO THE IIOMANS. 
 
 subtler marxifestatioiis, but without recognising their sinful con- 
 dition, and without longing for something better. To this class 
 belonged the great mass of the Jews and individual Gentiles. 
 Tlieir condition is only apparently better than that of those be- 
 longing to the first class, since, whilst they lacked the latter's 
 coarse sensuality and vice, they suffered from spiritual blindness 
 and want of love, so that their apparent virtues were in fact but 
 *' splendida vita/' To the third class, lastly, belong those who 
 not only have avoided the grosser outbreaks of sin, but at the 
 same time also recognise, with penitent sorrow, tlieir inward 
 sinfulness, and entertain a longing for a more perfect condition. 
 Of these alone can it be said, that they keep that law (ii. 14, 15, 
 26, 27) which demands love and truth. They fulfil the law of 
 love in that humility which will not permit them to judge their 
 weak fellow-creatures ; they fulfil the truth in that repentance 
 which teaches them to condemn their own sins, even when they 
 do not break out into gross iniquity. A picture of this genuine 
 Gentile piety is presented to us in Cornelius (Acts x.); and St 
 Paul can only have meant such, according to his fundamental 
 principles, in chapter ii. 14, 15, 26, 57.* 
 
 Accordingly the person mentioned in ii. 1, as judging others, is 
 a man who has not indeed outwardly indulged in the same grosser 
 sins which he condemns in others, but who is in fact inwardly 
 living after a subtler form in the same corrupt frame of mind; 
 and it is just this which is expressed by the words ra yup ahra 
 Tpdffffs/g. According to the usual interpretation, it must be e.g. 
 a murderer who condemns another for murder, an assumption 
 which has altogether something unnatural about it, as we have 
 already observed. According to our view, on the other hand, 
 the man who judges the murderer does the same things if he 
 hates his brother. It is, however, very conceivable, that a man 
 may not recognise the same sin in the hatred as in the murder, 
 and will therefore set himself above his fellow-creature. Just 
 
 * The greater number of modern expositors have misunderstood the Apostle's 
 representation in this place. Benecke comes the nearest to the truth, but at the 
 same time he has not accurately and pointedly conceived the character of the pious 
 Gentiles described in ii. 14, 15, inasmuch as he also only understands by these per- 
 sons men outwardly faithful to the law, without recognising in them the elements 
 of repentance and faith. The manner in which he approximates to the view taken 
 by us, shows itself especially in his remarks on ver. 33, where he calls attention to 
 the fact, that in the very act of condemning others, that very sin is incurred which 
 in its tui'n condemns the condemner. 
 
 i 
 
CHAPTER II. 2 — 4. 97 
 
 in the same way, therefore, as our Lord, in the Sermon on the 
 Mount, is the Apostle here engaged in bringing to men's con- 
 sciousness their sins in their root. 
 
 A/0 refers to i. 32, where the knowledge of God's law is attri- 
 buted to sinners. On account of this knowledge, even he who 
 transgresses the law in a less obvious manner, and judges his 
 fellow-man, has no excuse, for the law requires also humility 
 and compassionate love. 'Ei/ w is not to be explained by means 
 of ■^\2ji^3,, but as the following words ra aura show, by supplying 
 ev rovruj. The stress is laid upon the fact, that the person judg- 
 ing commits the same sin as the person condemned. 
 
 Ver. 2. The Apostle illustrates the foregoing thought by the 
 idea of the divine justice. God's judgment is an absolutely true 
 one, and therefore punishes sin as well in its subtler as in its 
 grosser manifestations, since the law demands its perfect ful- 
 filment. 
 
 Kara aXrikiav is to be construed with jcpi/Mu, as designating the 
 nature of the divine agency in the work of judgment. The 
 verdict of men is often erroneous, God's judgment alone can 
 judge hidden sins according to truth. 
 
 Ver. 3, 4. In order to awaken the consciousness of sin in 
 these persons, the Apostle next points out that the impunity 
 they had hitherto enjoyed in their sinful state was not to be 
 considered a sign of God's grace towards them, since the only 
 object of God's long-suffering was to lead them to repentance. 
 That therefore which the law was intended to produce /^sravo/a, 
 was just the thing which was still wanting in them, whilst 
 those who are depicted afterwards (ii. 14, 15) had obtained this 
 blessing. 
 
 In ver. 3 XoyiZ^ri ^e rouro is to be understood, ''But canst thou 
 suppose or dream ? '' Ver. 4. The expressions y^pnaTorrig, oLvoxn 
 and iMOLKpohiMict contain a climax describing the relation of God 
 to this class of sinners, who are often with the most difficulty 
 convinced of their guilt. xpnaTorra namely denotes goodness in 
 general, clvox/i its exercise in postponing punishment, (/.aKpo^ufLict 
 again signifies continued avo-x/i- To all three St Paul applies 
 the expression vXovrog, which he frequently uses as synonymous 
 with irXripoiiMa. (See Rom. ix. 23, xi. 23 ; Ephes. i. 7, ii. 7, iii. 
 16 Coloss. i. 27.) Msravo/a denotes in this place, exactly as in 
 
 G 
 
98 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 the gospels (see notes to Matt. iii. 2), the painful conviction of 
 sin, accompanied with a longing hope of help from above. Re- 
 pentance is the mother of compassion, and covers a brother's sin, 
 instead of judging it. This expression is not, however, one of 
 those in current use with St Paul ; it is only found besides 
 in 2 Cor. vii. 9; 2 Tim. ii. 25. 
 
 Ver. 5. The abuse of the long-suffering of God only leaves 
 therefore in the mind of the impenitent a fearful looking for of 
 future judgment which is ever becoming more oppressive. 
 
 "ixXriporrig denotes that state in which a man has no power, i.e., 
 no desire of receiving spiritual things, by which the influences of 
 divine grace are rendered ineffectual, and the exercise of repent- 
 ance prevented. The form ufiiravorirog is only found in this place 
 in the N. T. Kara is here to be taken in the sense of "accord- 
 ing to the proportion,"' but not as Koppe suggests, as if it stood 
 for the dativus instrumenti. The ij/Mspa hpyri? is to be under- 
 stood of the general day of decision, of the judgment of the 
 world, on which the manifestation of the righteousness of God 
 so long deferred will infallibly take place. Now the man who 
 despises the goodness of God is increasing his guilt against this 
 day of decision, and therefore increasing that punishment which 
 proceeds from God's punitive justice. In the expression trea- 
 sured up hpyrij therefore, the cause is put for the effect. The 
 substantive 5/xa/oxp/<r/a is only found in this passage of the N. T.; 
 the only other place in which it is used is in a Greek translation 
 of Hosea vi. 5. A/xa/ox^/r^g is found 2 Maccab. xii. 41. Instead 
 of u'7roxaX\j-^i<t)g some MSS. read avra-ro^oVsw?, at the same time 
 the preponderance of evidence of critical authority requires us 
 to retain the common reading. A considerable number of MSS. 
 read xa/ after dcroxaXu-v^ewj, and Mill, Wetstein, and Knapp have 
 approved of this reading ; at the same time xa/, it is plain, has 
 only been inserted on account of the three consecutive genitives, 
 and therefore it is better with Griesbach to erase xa/. The pas- 
 sage loses all appearance of singularity, if we only consider 6/xa/o- 
 xpieia rou ©sou as one conception, and the subject of the a':ro}to!.' 
 
 Ver. 6-8. This passage, which describes so simply the course 
 of retributive justice, has been misunderstood on the part of the 
 [Roman] Catholics, and used as evidence against the Protestant 
 doctrine of justification by faith; it has in consequence been in- 
 
CHAPTER II, 6 — 8. 99 
 
 terpreted with an excess of caution on the part of the Protestants. 
 We cannot in fact agree with them in thinking that the Apostle 
 intended to speak merely objectively of the judgment of God, 
 and that he wished to assert, not that any one would actually, 
 on account of his works, receive eternal life, but only that if 
 any one had these to show, he would receive it; the fact being 
 that no one has them, because all without exception are sinful, 
 and therefore no one can, on account of his works, obtain ever- 
 lasting life. Now, there is no doubt that this argument is in 
 perfect harmony with St Paul's principles, but if he had intended 
 to use it in this place, surely he would not immediately after- 
 wards have spoken of Gentiles, who did the works of the law 
 (ii. 14, 15). The key to the interpretation of this passage is 
 rather to be found in the definition given in ver. 7 of a true 'ipyov 
 uya&6v, by means of which the words -ro/g/v m rou vofiov will like- 
 wise receive their correct meaning. From the whole tenor of 
 the Apostle's argument, it is plain that the term 'ipyov aya&6v 
 cannot be understood merely of an outward work done in 
 obedience to an outward law, which work might be combined 
 with inward self-conceit and pride, but only of works proceeding 
 from a genuine state of penitence, of which state faith always 
 forms an element. As Abraham and other saints, before the 
 coming of Christ, lived a life of faith, so individual pious Gen- 
 tiles had also those germs of faith in their hearts,, with out which 
 no spyct aya6d are possible, because where they are wanting the 
 best actions to outward appearance remain spyn vexpa. We may 
 therefore affirm, that God always judges men according to their 
 works, as well those who lived before Christ, as those who live 
 after Him, because, in fact, the inward man must ever be mani- 
 fested in certain outward appearances, and the latter bear testi- 
 mony to the character of the former. We may, however, also 
 say, vice versa, that as well before as after Christ, men are 
 always judged according to their faith, because it alone is the 
 principle of good works ; indeed, we might call faith itself the 
 greatest and most important work (see notes to John vi. 29), 
 inasinuch as it is the mother of all good works. The faith of 
 men before and after Christ is not therefore something specifi- 
 cally diiferent, but only different in degree and in object. (See 
 notes to Rom. iii. 21, etc., Heb. xi. 1, etc.) But as faith in its 
 highest exercise causes men to judge themselves, in so far are be* 
 
1 00 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 lievers under the New Covenant not judged at all (John iii. 18), 
 and thus the difficulty of the present passage vanishes when 
 viewed on this side also. The remark, therefore, which Hopfner 
 and Usteri make, that St Paul is here considering the subject 
 from a merely legal point of view, is so far well founded, as, 
 that if this had not been the case, St Paul would not have so 
 expressed himself* At the same time, the thought, although 
 the Apostle proceeds from legal premises, has acquired such an 
 universal application, that it has its truth, with regard to God's 
 judicial dealings, for all stages of spiritual development. The 
 distinction between the blessedness of heaven and the degrees of 
 this blessedness, which latter depend upon the man's works, 
 whilst faith is the condition of the former, is no doubt in itself 
 correct and scriptural (see notes to 1 Cor. iii. 11, etc.), but it 
 has nothing whatever to do with the present passage. Reiche's 
 interpretation of this text is quite a mistaken one. He wishes, 
 namely, that a distinction should be made between the moral 
 order of the world and the limitation of this order by the grace 
 which is in Christ; in this case the former is alone spoken of, 
 and the latter left entirely out of sight. But he considers the 
 latter to be merely an amnesty once allowed for certain circum- 
 stances, and which admits of no farther extension so as to em- 
 brace the world after Christ. It is manifest, however, that the 
 very nature of Christianity, as a means of salvation, as an in- 
 stitution calculated for all men in all ages, would be entirely 
 destroyed by such an assumption. The grace of God in Christ 
 does not contract the range of the general moral order of the 
 world, but establishes it upon its real principles, and gives it 
 the fullest scope. Finally, this and similar passages (as e. g. 
 iii. 6, xiv. 10, 1 Cor. v. 13) on the subject of the last judgment, 
 are particularly important as coming from St Paul, inasmuch 
 as we may conclude from them that St Paul did not entertain 
 any discrepant views with respect to the damnation and the 
 resurrection of the wicked. He expresses himself openly, in 
 fact, on neither subject (only in 2 Thess. i. 9, we find the words 
 " eternal destruction''), and much in his epistles seems to speak 
 
 • At the same time we find, even in 1 Sara. xxvi. 23, *' The Lord recompenses 
 every roan according to his righteousness and his faif.h. On the other hand, in 
 Ps. xxviii. 4; Ecc. xii. 14; Jer. xvii. 10, as well as in Matt. xvi. 17, mention is 
 made of wm-ks only. 
 
CHAPTER II. 7, 8. 101 
 
 to the contrary. (See notes to Rom. xi. 32, 1 Cor. xv. 24, etc.) 
 But from his description of the day of judgment it is yet pro- 
 bable that, whilst St Paul kept that side of the question in the 
 back-ground, he fundamentally entertained the same views as 
 the other writers of the N. T. 
 
 As regards the construction, Reiclie has tried to connect once 
 more, ^rjroufft with '(^nv aJuiviov, and, on the other hand, to attach 
 do^av X. r. X. to a-ro^wcs/; but, although this connexion is not 
 altogether impossible, we prefer, in common with almost all 
 other expositors, the connexion of ^W5^i/ a/wiz/ov with umbuxsu^ in 
 which case Sogav ^yirovgt stands in opposition to roTg fih %. r. X. 
 Yet it is still undeniably a very forced construction to connect 
 ZriTouat ^w^j/ aiuvwv with roTg ds, and then to let the accusative, ' 
 which is governed by droduxss/, come between. In the conception 
 of the epyov ayafiov WO are to have respect, as has been already 
 observed, not merely to the lawfulness of the dead, but especially 
 to the sincerity of the motive, which can be nothing but faith, 
 without which it is impossible to please God in any stage what- 
 soever of spiritual life it stands therefore opposed, not only to 
 the £^701' 'TovTjpov, but also especially to the spyov vsKpov. The ad- 
 dition, Kad' \)'7ro[Lovn\ (see Rom. xv. 4; 1 Thess. i. 3; 2 Cor. i. 6), 
 refers to the continuance of activity in well-doing, and forms 
 the contrast with those transient ebullitions of better feelings 
 in the heart, of which even the wicked are not entirely desti- ^ 
 tute, but which disappear as quickly as they arise. The ex- 
 pression may be resolved into -ratr/ ro7g VTO/Jjsvovtnv h spyuj aya&l^. 
 The sense of spiritual need which belongs to those who receive 
 eternal life, is pointed out in the opposition, in which ZyinTv de- 
 notes the hungering and thirsting after righteousness. Aoja, 
 r//A?j and d<pdap6ia are to be regarded as forming a climax. The 
 future glory is contrasted with the present shame, which is 
 often the lot of the humble man here below; the r/^^ with that 
 drtfLtct which he recognises as his desert ; the d<pdapffia with that 
 fjiaraiorrig and (p&opd with which he feels himself now burdened. 
 
 Ver. 8. The accusatives opynv zai dvf^ov ought to have followed 
 the preceding t,mv alojmv. The Apostle, however, drops that 
 construction, and finishes the sentence as if drrododTjasrai had 
 gone before, sdmrog should also, properly speaking, have been 
 opposed to the idea of life in the preceding clause ; the words 
 opyri y.ai hfMog, however, denote the cause instead of the effect, 
 
102 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 just as in verse 5. With respect to the expression 0/ ej hikta;, 
 we may remark, that it is founded upon the figure of the being 
 born of a certain element, an idea which is elsewhere expressed 
 bj vihg or rexvov. (See Phil. i. 16, 17; 1 John iv. 5.) The word 
 ipikia * is only found amongst classical writers in the works of 
 Aristotle (Polit. v. 2, 3); he uses it in the sense of *' faction, 
 party/' The etymology of the word is doubtful ; it may come 
 from spi&svu (from spiov, " wool,'') which means " to work in wool," 
 and then "to work" in general, *'to work at a person, to seek to 
 bring a person over to one's own side;" or it may come from sV'S, 
 " strife," and from the verb s^t^siv, when it would signify " love 
 of strife." This meaning is best suited to the use made of the word 
 in the language of the N. T. (See 2 Cor. xii. 20; Gal. v. 20; Phil, 
 i. 1 7, ii. 3; James iii. 1 4.) Since, in this place, spihia is opposed 
 to s^yov dya&hvj it can naturally only denote rebellion against 
 God, which is contrary to self-surrender to Him, and devotion 
 towards Him. In this condition the man believes himself to 
 possess all that is necessary for him, and is, therefore, without 
 spiritual desires and aspirations. The opposition xa/ dmikZai 
 %. r. X. gives here a more exact description of the state of the 
 godless, as the opposition above ^rirovffi x. r. x., of the condition 
 of the righteous. The root of their sin is disobedience to the 
 truth. The lie should properly be set against the truth in this 
 passage ; the Apostle, however, puts for it ddtjc/a, inasmuch as 
 this word, which forms the contrary to dijcaioavvri, contains in it- 
 self the idea of the lie. 
 
 Ver. 9, 10. The Apostle repeats once more the same thought 
 for the sake of greater emphasis, but, in the first place, with 
 that modification which is usually found in the accounts of the 
 divine judgments given in the N. T., namely, that the gracious 
 acceptance of believers, and not the just rejection of unbelievers, 
 is mentioned last, so as to leave upon the mind the cheerful 
 impression of that redemption which has been accomplished 
 (see notes to Matt. xxv. 41-46); and, in the second place, with 
 a more distinct reference to the Jews, whose condition alone 
 he considers in fuller detail in what follows. In fact, in the 
 case of the Jews, both blessing and curse must necessarily mani- 
 fest themselves with increased intensity, since they had much 
 fuller means of becoming acquainted with God, as the following 
 
 * With respect to tftfttx see the Excursus of Fritzscho, vol. i., p. 143 sqq. 
 
I 
 
 CHAPTER 11. 9 — 13. ]0:i 
 
 representation proves. The Jews, therefore, are so far from 
 being exempt from the general judgment as the chosen people 
 of God, that it visits them the more severely in case of un- 
 faithfulness. 
 
 The opposite to (Sriwyjapia, that is to say ihpuy^oipta, is not 
 found in the N. T., though it is used by classical writers. The 
 word denotes, like QXi-^ig, the spiritual punishment of sin, since, 
 in this place, it is not the earthly consequences of wickedness 
 that are spoken of, but the punishments inflicted at the jj/^g^a 
 hpyn? (ver. 5), on which account also it is said cratra -^u-xjh 
 dv6pu)<7rovj which cannot be said of earthly punishments, since 
 many wicked men escape them altogether. In the same way 
 the expressions 5oga, r/^^, and g/>jjv>j, in this passage, only refer 
 to the inward aspects of man's life (see ver. 16), for to all out- 
 w^ard appearance the contrary is the case in this world, on 
 which account the natural man, in his false security, sup- 
 poses that he shall be able to escape the judgment of God, 
 (ver. 3.) The more special definitions of ver. 7, 8, are here 
 resolved into the abstract terms xaxdv and dya^ov. The verb 
 'ipyjrai or 'Uri must be supplied. 
 
 Ver. 11. The higher position of the Jews, simply on account 
 of their descent from Abraham after the flesh, a prerogative 
 which they were always so ready to assert against the Gentiles, 
 is denied by the Apostle on the grounds of the impartiality of 
 God ; the free improvement and application of those means to 
 which each man has access, is that which alone determines his 
 character in the sight of God, (see notes to Matt. xv. 14, etc.) 
 The privileges of the Jews therefore only heightened their re- 
 sponsibility; it was the faithful use of them which alone raised 
 the worth of the possessors. We are not, however, to think 
 that the converts from Judaism are alluded to in this text; the 
 Apostle is rather treating the subject, as well as regards the 
 Jews as the Gentiles, entirely irrespectively of individuals, in 
 order to demonstrate from it the necessity of some other way 
 of salvation than that which the law presented. (The sub- 
 stantive 'Trpoffoj'xoXri'^icx, is also found Eph. vi. 9 ; Col, iii. 25 ; 
 James ii. 1.) 
 
 Vers. 12, 13. As the cause of the greater responsibility of the 
 Jews, and the lesser of the Gentiles, the Apostle brings forward 
 the law of Moses which the Gentiles did not possess. But the 
 
104 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 grace of God always supposes the exercise of free will in man, 
 and therefore wherever this grace is at work, the gnilt of man 
 may be increased through the abuse of his freedom. 
 
 'Avo/Aw? is not intended to express here the absolute absence 
 of all law,* as ver. 15 shows, but only the want of the positive 
 law of Moses. In 1 Cor. ix. 21, 'ivvo[iog is found as the opposite 
 to avofMo?. The opposite terms bia vofiou and avofj^ojg are naturally 
 to be understood as signifying, " with or without reference to 
 the law of Moses." The words avo/^wg xa/ aToXoD^ra/ are startling, 
 we might expect that they would not be judged at all. But 
 because no one is absolutely without law, he shall be judged 
 according to his knowledge. The a-rwXg/a cannot therefore either 
 be considered as something absolute. In the same way we find 
 Luke xii. 48, that he who knew not his Lord's will received 
 few stripes, but by no means none at all. We shall reserve 
 for the notes on Rom. iii. 21, the more exact determination of 
 the meaning of biTtaioi, and 8iKaiud/i(fovrai, and only in this place 
 observe with respect to them that they stand opposed to dmXouv- 
 rai and xpi&^<fovrai. In this passage, cw^stf^a/ might have been 
 substituted for dixaio? zlmi or dixaiovadai, since it is only the 
 divine acknowledgment of the existing dixaioffvvr) which is in- 
 tended ; but of course, God, who is eternal truth, cannot recog- 
 nise anything which does not exist. The miTirai rov vo/mcv have 
 therefore in St Paul's opinion a certain bi>tutoG\jvri at all stages 
 of their spiritual life. But since the performance of the law 
 before regeneration is that which is here spoken of, the hxaia- 
 6\iv7iy which God recognises in the doers of the law, can of course 
 only be understood of the ibia dixaidw}. This must, however, 
 be recognised as far as it goes; it is by no means, in conse- 
 quence of hereditary sin, a matter of indifference, whether a 
 man endeavours to observe the law or not. The righteousness 
 of the law in its genuine form, that is to say, when the man re- 
 tains the consciousness of his own need, prepares the way for 
 the reception of that righteousness which is by faith, whilst 
 unfaithfulness renders it more difficult. For that opinion, of 
 which we have already spoken in our observations on ver. 6, 
 
 * In classical writei's ava^wj is only found in the signification of " contrary to 
 law;" even in Isocrates Panegyr. p. 28, edit. Mori, this meaning is to be retained, 
 although in this passage the other meaning " without aw," is also interwoven 
 (See Alberti observatt. in N. T., p. 473.) 
 
CHAPTER II. 14, 15. 105 
 
 which afSrnis that the Apostle is here only speaking hypothetic 
 cally of the performance of the law, since that was altogetlier 
 beyond the power of sinful man, it is plainly inadmissible, since 
 he speaks in the verses immediately following of Gentiles who 
 do perform the works of the law. That this, however, does not 
 deny the truth, that man in his natural state is unable to keep 
 the law, will be shown in the following remarks. De Wette's 
 interpretation of the passage is entirely wrong; for he asserts 
 that ver. 13 refers altogether to the Jews, and that St Paul 
 only returns to the mention of the Gentiles in ver. 14 Rather 
 does ver. 13 refer to all who keep the law, whether they be 
 Jews or Gentiles ; but since the possibility of observing the law 
 might appear to be inconceivable in the case of the Gentiles, 
 it is explained in ver. 14 how far this might be predicated of 
 them also. 
 
 Vers. 14, 15. In order to prove that it might be said of Gen- 
 tiles also that they performed the law, the Apostle proceeds to 
 demonstrate, in the first place, that a law was in fact also given 
 to the Gentiles. He defines this law as a vofLog ypavrhg h raTc, 
 xapbiaig, which expression forms a contrast with the law of the 
 0. T., which was engraven on tables of stone (see 2 Cor. iii. 2, 
 3), and obviously means by this term the voice of God in the 
 conscience, which makes itself heard, in however indistinct a 
 manner, even in the most degraded state of the heathen world. 
 But with respect to the relation which this inward law bears to 
 the outwardly given law of Moses, we must allow that the latter 
 is not only more clear and definite, and much more exact in its 
 demands, but also that it stands much higher on this account 
 especially, that it claims most expressly to be the law of Ood 
 himself. The want of this distinct reference of the law to God, 
 in the case of the inward law of the heathen, manifests itself 
 most clearly by the inward struggle of their thoughts ; for the 
 language of lust and sin always succeeds in making itself heard 
 in conflict with this better voice, because the latter is not ex- 
 pressly recognised as that, which it really is, the voice of the 
 Most High God; at the same time, the more indistinct the in- 
 ward law appears, the more exalted is the faithfulness of those 
 who yield obedience to its weak and confused admonitions. The 
 difference, therefore, between the law of the heathen, and the 
 clear law of Moses, invested as it is with undoubted divine 
 
] 06 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 authority, is immense, and, in consequence, the advantage of 
 the Jews in the possession of this law was very great also. At 
 the same time, this difference appears to be somewhat dimin- 
 ished by the fact, that the Mosaic law with all its definiteness, 
 required for any particular case an application determined by 
 the manner of its exposition and interpretation; and this natu- 
 rally depended as much upon the whole state of mind of the 
 individual Jew, as the interpretation of the inward law upon 
 that of the individual Grentile. However, the number of the 
 purely external commandments was so great, that, by means of 
 them, even in those characters, amongst the Jews, in which the 
 moral feeling was but little developed, there was continually 
 preserved alive the consciousness of a Grod, who came to men 
 with inexorably strict requirements. But even more important 
 than the information, that even the Gentiles were not absolutely 
 without law, is, in the second place, the express assertion of the 
 Apostle, that they were also in a condition to follow this law, to 
 keep its commandments, and to fulfil it (see ver. 26, 27). It 
 has already been remarked (on ver. 1), that this is not to be 
 understood merely of an external and legal observance of it, in 
 that this would by no means deserve to be called the fulfilment 
 of the law i^ipyov aya&ov^ ver. 7), but that the necessary condition 
 of every good work, faith and love,* which never exist without 
 one another, must also be pre-supposed in the case of the pious 
 Gentiles. But now the question arises, how is this assertion to 
 be reconciled with the doctrine, that it is only through the grace 
 of Christ that really good works can be produced ? Through 
 Christ a pure and holy principle of life has been acquired for 
 man, the ff'Trspf/.a rod 0£oD, which is absolutely without sin, even 
 as God. The regenerate in whom this principle dwells, cannot 
 sin (1 John iii. 8) ; the sins of the regenerate are in fact only 
 the utterances of the sinful old man, who at some moment forces 
 back the new, but the inmost centre of their life remains un- 
 touched by sin. (See more on this subject in the notes to Rom. 
 vii. 25.) Such an absolutely pure principle wrought neither in 
 the Gentiles, nor in the time before Christ in general; it was 
 first made possible for men to receive it on the completion of 
 
 • With respect to the sense in wliicli it may be said of the Gentiles also, that 
 tliey have faith and love, further remarks will be found in the notes to Matt. xxv. 
 31, etc., Rom. iii. 21, etc., Heb. xi. 1, etc. 
 
CHAPTER II. 9, 10. 107 
 
 the work of Christ. (See the notes on John vii. 39.) Therefore 
 also the doctrine of the sinfulness of all men without exception, 
 even of those who do the work of the law, retains its full truth ; 
 for in the first place, not only is he under sin, who commits it 
 constantly or often, but also he who commits it only once, or 
 only transgresses the law on one side. (See notes to Gal. iii. 10.) 
 If, therefore, the devout Gentiles sometimes, or even often, fol- 
 lowed their better motions, yet they did not always do so, and 
 therefore they remained sinners. But again, the conception 
 which men have of sin, is very different according to the degree 
 of their spiritual knowledge. Even the better Gentiles were in 
 this respect but little advanced, and their performance of the 
 law could never, therefore, be anything but a relative one; only 
 that man, who fails not even in a single word, can be reckoned 
 entirely perfect and without sin. (James iii. 2.) The possibility 
 of a relative fulfilment of the law is however in contradiction 
 neither to the Scriptural nor Church doctrine of the sinfulness 
 of human nature; both Scripture and Church only deny the pos- 
 sibility of an absolute fulfilment of the law.* On this account 
 also the relative obedience of the Gentiles cannot of course as 
 such be taken as the foundation of their eternal blessedness; this 
 could only be supplied by such an absolute holiness as is possible 
 to no mere man ; but in connexion with that whole frame of 
 mind, which even a merely relative fulfilment of the law pre- 
 supposes in a Gentile, it could form such a foundation, in that 
 this state of mind would render him capable of receiving, in 
 penitent faith, that salvation which is offered in Christ. As, 
 therefore, the true children of Abraham are the children of pro- 
 mise in Christ, so also are the devout Gentiles, because they also 
 are true children of Abraham. (See ii. 28, 29.) This ap- 
 propriation of the salvation which is in Christ on the part of the 
 Gentile world, is recognised in Scripture as possible in the doc- 
 trine of the " descensus Christi ad inferos." 
 
 A limitation of the conception of a fulfilment of the law, on 
 the part of the Gentiles, is therefore by all means required ; at 
 the same time, notwithstanding this necessary restriction, there 
 is still contained in this passage a most consolatory truth. Even 
 in the wilderness of the heathen world, does the Apostle teach 
 
 • This manifests itself particularly in the doctrines of the gratia universalis, and 
 of the actus manuductorii ad conrersionevi. 
 
108 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 US, the Xoyog 0'7:ipiLaTi%6c, had scattered his precious seed ; there 
 were Gentiles, who, by means of a certain conviction of their 
 sins, had become humble and contrite, who had an earnest de- 
 sire to be faithful to the light which was vouchsafed them, who 
 cherished longings for a better spiritual state, and therefore 
 possessed the capacity for apprehending Christ, when He pre- 
 sented Himself to them, wherever it might be. These elements 
 were sufficient, according to their particular stage of spiritual 
 development, to constitute a foundation for eternal blessedness; 
 in fact, that which did not accrue to them here, they received 
 in the regions of the dead, after Christ's manifestation there. 
 (See notes to 1 Pet. iii. 18.) Humble faithfulness to that know- 
 ledge of the Divine which a person possesses, however small it 
 is, if at least this ignorance is not self -incur red, will, the Apostle 
 means then to say, receive its reward in whatever stage of 
 spiritual development it may exist. Unfaithfulness, on the 
 other hand, even when accompanied by the greatest privileges, 
 receives at all times its deserved punishment. But the reward 
 of the Gentile world, so far as it was well-pleasing to God, was 
 this, that it was capable of being led to Christ, because it pos- 
 sessed in fijirdma the capacity for apprehending Him. It was 
 not, therefore, even in the case of the pious Gentiles, works as 
 such, which were the condition of their salvation, but the germ 
 of faith from which they proceeded. That which they retain of 
 undiscovered sin is forgiven them without works, through the 
 merits of Christ, as they inherited the same without conscious 
 guilt from Adam. Christ appears, therefore, as the Redeemer 
 of all those who do not positively reject Him, and retain the 
 capacity for receiving him into their hearts. (See notes to Acts 
 X. 34-36.) 
 
 It is quite wrong to understand orav 'xoifi of a merely ideal 
 'possibility, the Apostle plainly speaks of an actual reality (vers. 
 26, 27) ; because there do really exist pious Gentiles, St Paul 
 concludes they must have some law or other which they follow. 
 'OroLv, with the subjunctive mood after it, no doubt denotes a 
 merely possible, but also a frequently recurring circumstance, 
 with respect to which it is only left indeterminate where and 
 when it actually occurs. St Paul does not wish to designate 
 any particular persons, but certainly to affirm that such exist. 
 (See Matthise's Greek Gr. § 521, Winer's Gram. p. 255.) Ben- 
 
CHAPTER II. ] 5. ] 09 
 
 gel, whom Riickert has on this point followed, takes (pucti with 
 f;i^ovra, but the coUocation of the words as well as the sense de- 
 mand that it should be connected with what follows. It was, 
 in fact, unnecessary to remark that the Gentiles had not any- 
 thing by nature, since the Jews especially already rated their 
 condition low enough ; but it w^as very needful to call attention 
 to the fact, that they could without higher support obey the 
 law in a certain measure. ^^uc/?, namely, has here a dogmati- 
 cal meaning. It denotes in the N. T., 1st, The natural con- 
 stitution of anything (it is thus used Rom. i. 26, xi. 21-24, 
 Galat. iv. 8), or else the natural descent after the flesh, as in 
 Galat. ii. 15. 2nd, The condition of man without the grace of 
 God, as he is flesh born of the flesh. (John iii. 6.) In this 
 sense it is found in Rom. ii. 27, and especially in Ephes. ii. 3, 4. 
 St Paul, therefore, manifestly supposes that in the fallen nature 
 of man the seeds of something better still remain, which, in 
 particular persons, will sometimes succeed in developing them- 
 selves in a surprising degree, so as to produce complete recep- 
 tivity for the grace of God. So, for instance, in the Canaanitish 
 woman. (See notes to Matt. xv. 32, etc.) The natural man 
 finds himself indeed burdened with a *' proclivitas peccandi," 
 but no " necessitas peccandi," so far at least as action is con- 
 cerned ; in respect, however, of evil desires, and an inward con- 
 formity to the divine law, man appears altogether incapable. 
 By the words lauroTg si<fi vo/Aoi is not intended to deny that God 
 is the author of this inward law also, but only to call attention 
 to the fact that the Gentiles are not conscious of this connexion, 
 and, therefore, in so far appear as if they were a law to them- 
 selves. The inward law of God, which exists indeed constantly 
 in man, and makes itself known to him, so that he cannot mis- 
 take it, by means of the motions of his conscience and tjie 
 inward conflict of his thoughts, will hereafter at length be- 
 come manifest to all in the actual consequences of obedience or 
 disobedience to this law, hdeiTivvvrai sv ri/j^spcf, x.r.X., in that many 
 will wonder that so many heathens have been thought worthy 
 to sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the king- 
 dom of heaven, whilst so many Jews are excluded. "Epyov rov 
 vo/j^ovj 1 cannot consider with Tholuck to be pleonastic, nor can I 
 regard it with Reiche to be synonymous with the plural ra spyocj 
 for particular g>ya are not written in the heart of the man, since 
 
1 J EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 they are elicited by circumstances. The Apostle's intention is 
 rather to declare that there is not merely a knowledge of the 
 law in the minds of the Grentiles, but also that their will has 
 the power of observing this law to a certain degree. On this 
 account the man's thoughts may accuse him with justice, be- 
 cause he actually had the power to abstain from the sinful 
 deed. And, therefore, 'ipyov is to be considered equivalent to rh 
 lpyZ^di66ai' Glockler takes it similarly as that which the law 
 is intended to produce, that is to say, righteousness. In 
 the same way that St Paul speaks of a vofio? ypa'xrog h Ta.7g 
 xapdiat?, SO also Plutarch (Moral, vol. v. p. 11, edit. Tauchm. ad 
 princ. in erud. c. 3) of a v6/xog oux h ^i^Kloig s^w ysy^a/Mfisvog, c'XX* 
 id-^vxos u/v dv&^ui'xu). It is that v6[Log roZ vo'og, of which St Paul 
 treats, Rom. vii. 23, and of which we shall speak at greater 
 length at that place. But cunihridn possesses always, in addition 
 to the knowledge of the law, the consciousness in itself of being 
 able and bound somehow or other to observe that law. At the 
 same time, this original law must be accurately distinguished 
 from that which, according to Jer. xxxi. 32, Heb. ix. 10, is 
 written in the hearts of the regenerate by the Spirit of Christ. 
 This latter is the absolutely perfect law, which communicates at 
 the same time the highest power for its fulfilment, and, there- 
 fore, also strengthens the will; the former is a weak glimmer 
 of that light which filled the heart of the first man.* 'S.viifiao. 
 TuoiTaQat is only a stronger form of fia^TvpsTffdat, i. e. to testify, and 
 thereby bring before the consciousness. Aoyitr/j^og is also found 
 
 2 Cor. X. 4. More common expressions are diaXoyig/j^o? (i. 
 21), diavorifia, vo?j/aa, to denote the operations of the Xoyog or 
 vovg. The accusing principle is that of the Divine Spirit, the 
 excusing that of the natural life; this inward heaving and 
 tossing of the thoughts is wanting in those who are wholly 
 dead, but also in those who are perfectly sanctified, whose souls 
 enjoy peace like that of the unruffled mirror of the ocean. 
 This inward conflict, then, as more fully described by St Paul 
 in the 7th chapter, is but a melancholy advantage, a conse- 
 quence of the awakening of the inner life, a witness of that 
 
 • In the Rabbinical writers the law in the conscience is called n**l?ni2 m or also 
 n-rau n*nn from yao nature. (See Buxtorf. lex. rabb. et talmud. p. 332 and 1 34.0.) 
 The opposite to this is formed by the nnD^tt? min lex quae scripta est scil. in btau- 
 lis lapideis. 
 
CHAPTER II. ] 7 — 20. ] 1 1 
 
 original holiness which man has lost, and yet this is better than 
 death. 
 
 Ver. 16. With an implied reference to ver. 5, the Apostle 
 declares that this manifestation of the state of the Gentile 
 world, of which the Jews in particular would know nothing, 
 will be deferred till the decisive day of judgment. 
 
 Reiche has defended the old way of connecting ver. 16 with 
 ver. 12, so that vers. 13-15 form a parenthesis. However, this 
 connexion has its difficulties, not only on account of the length 
 of the parenthesis, but also on account of the contents of vers. 
 13-1 5. For the subject of these verses stands in the closest con- 
 nexion with ver. 12, and forms the foundation of the ideas ex- 
 pressed in the last verse; it is impossible, therefore, to place them 
 in a parenthesis. The whole difficulty of the passage disap- 
 pears, if we only, as Bengel has done, lay the emphasis upon hdsU- 
 vvvTai in ver. 15. Conscience and the accusing and excusing 
 thoughts are no doubt always at work in the heart of man, but 
 are not manifested in conjunction with their consequences. 
 This shall only take place in the case of all, as well of those 
 who have followed the admonitions of the inner voice, as of 
 those who have neglected them, at the day of judgment. 
 (See notes to Matt. xxv. 31, etc.) It is only by this con- 
 struction, too, that ivdstKvvvrat forms a suitable opposition to ra 
 xpvTrrd; these inward transactions which take place in the depths 
 of the soul generally remain quite indiscernible, on which ac- 
 count the Apostle deems it necessary in this place to bring 
 them before the consciousness of his readers in general, and of 
 the Jews amongst them in particular. They remain indeed hid- 
 den not merely to others, but also, as regards their real nature, 
 to the man's own self, in that the good principle considers itself 
 worse, and the evil principle better than it is. The parable in 
 Matt. xxv. 31, etc., is therefore in this respect an excellent 
 commentary on the present passage. It is intended that we 
 should here take notice of both the acquitting and condemning 
 voice of conscience on the day of judgment. Other explana- 
 tions of the relation of ver. 1 6 to what has gone before, such as 
 Heumann's view, that vers. 13-15 might have been written 
 afterwards by the Apostle on the margin, or Koppe's opinion, 
 that /Asragu is to be taken in the sense of /nBrsTBira, are altogether 
 untenable. In itself (isra^u can indeed signify " afterwards," 
 
112 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 (see notes to Acts xiii. 42), but here the connexion with aXXjJ- 
 Xwv will not allow of this meaning. Christ is here, as ever in 
 the N. T., represented and conceived of as carrying into effect 
 the last judgment of the world, (See notes on Matt. xxv. 81, 
 etc.; Acts vii. 17, 31.) The addition xara rb ihcijyWm does 
 not refer, as was erroneously supposed by the ancients, to a 
 written gospel of St Paul's, but designates merely the spirit 
 and substance of his preaching of the gospel. 
 
 Vers. 17-20.* St Paul now finally directs himself to the Jews 
 in a distinct address, and in the first place brings forward pro- 
 minently all those advantages which had been vouchsafed 
 them, in order then to make them perceive, how little they 
 had shown themselves worthy of them, and how therefore they 
 could make no boast of being in a better condition than the 
 Gentiles, amongst whom noble natures were to be found. It 
 has been erroneously concluded, as already remarked in the 
 Introduction, from this address, that there must have been in 
 Rome a party of rank Jew-Christians. St Paul however speaks, 
 as already observed in the Introduction, not of Jew- Christians, 
 but quite generally of all the Jews and all the Gentiles in the 
 world, and this distinct address can therefore only be regarded 
 as a rhetorical figure. If therefore there were even amongst 
 the Roman Christians, as is probable, those who had formerly 
 been Jews, yet these were not affected with a Judaizing ten- 
 dency ; but the only concern that we have with this circumstance 
 is in the question respecting the composition of the Roman 
 community. 
 
 The reading of the textus receptus \hi has been rightly re- 
 jected by the greater number of modern critics and exegetical 
 commentators, s/ 3g has not only the most important MSS. of 
 critical authority in its favour, especially A. B. D. E. and others, 
 but is also preferable on account of the connexion. To be sure 
 an anacoluthon is occasioned by it, but it is probably only to 
 the endeavour to get rid of this \hi owes its origin. 'E-Troyo/^a^g/i/, 
 eVavacraug/f are sonorous words chosen on purpose to mark dis- 
 tinctly the excessive self-conceit of the Jews. With respect 
 to the form xaup^aera/, see Winer's Gr. p. 72. In the words h 
 &eu} is contained a reference to the special relation in which 
 God stood to Israel as its covenant God. The objective law of 
 
 • On the passage il 17-29, see Augustin. de spir. et litt. c. 8. 
 
CHAPTER II. 21 24. 113 
 
 God is taken as the rule of self-examination. In consequence 
 of this position of privilege, the Jews, blind as to their own glar- 
 ing unfaithfulness, arrogated to themselves the most decided 
 spiritual authority over the Gentiles, whom they regarded as 
 altogether blind in comparison of themselves. In oorjyog 
 rv(pXZv there is no doubt an allusion to Matt. xv. 14. This ten- 
 dency in Judaism to overrate their mere outward calling had 
 developed itself most strongly amongst the Pharisees. The ex- 
 pressions a(p^ovsg and vy}'7rioi have this difference, that the former 
 denotes a low degree of knowledge, in this case of divine 
 things, the latter a low degree of spiritual development in 
 general. If the law is described as a (Lo^cpuxstirrn yvMdsojg %a) 
 aXrik'iag, it is plain that this expression still indicates an ad- 
 vantage on the side of the Jews; the Gentiles had not even a 
 typical representation of essential truth. At the same time, in 
 the choice of the word fAo^(pmig it is implied, that in the 0. T. 
 the substance itself was not yet given. Mb'^^wc/i; is used here in 
 the sense of picture, outline (see 2 Tim. i. 13, iii. 5) like the 6}ila, 
 as contrasted with the ffuf^a. (Coloss. i.l7.) Knowledge 
 (John xvii. 3) and truth (John i. 1 7) are really imparted in the 
 N. T., and not merely typically. 
 
 Ver. 21-24. In what follows, the unfaithfulness of the Jews 
 is presented in the most glaring contrast with their assumptions. 
 Notwithstanding their possession of the divine law, the Jews 
 transgressed its holy commandments in particular cases out- 
 wardly, and the great mass of them inwardly, in cherishing evil 
 desires; and thus, by their openly immoral or arrogant conduct, 
 and that want of real self-knowledge which it betrayed even to 
 the pious Gentiles, they injured the cause of truth, instead of 
 promoting it according to God's will by their faithfulness and 
 humility. And whilst in such a condition themselves, they 
 wished yet to teach others, from a feeling of their proper voca- 
 tion, that they were mainly intended to be the teachers of the 
 world ; but to them may be applied those words of the Psalmist 
 (Ps. 1. 16, 17), "What hast thou to do to declare my statutes, 
 or that thou shouldest take my covenant in thy mouth, seeing 
 thou hatest instruction and castest my words behind thee?" 
 
 The second clause of the sentence should properly have fol- 
 lowed in ver. 21, connected with the first clause by diaH, or 
 some such word, but instead of this, the Apostle drops the con- 
 struction I w^ould rather not take the following sentences in- 
 
114 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 terrogatively, as Knapp does ; the address becomes more empha- 
 tic by the use of the decided declarations, You are unfaithful. 
 In the mere external sense, it is impossible to understand these 
 sins as committed by all the Jews ; for as now, so also then, 
 the grea mass of the Jews lived outwardly with morality, 
 especially in respect of sexual intercourse. B^s-Xucrfec^a/, to 
 entertain abhorrence; particularly against idolatrous practices ; 
 therefore (SdsXvy/Ma = y'!\p)^, an idol. (1 Kings xi. 5, Isaiah ii. 
 8.) With this, however, hpoguXsTv forms no proper contrast, for 
 the latter word can only mean to plunder or rob the sanctuary. 
 But no doubt covetousness, the national sin of the Jews, was 
 present to the Apostle's mind when he made choice of this ex- 
 pression; covetousness he always regards as an inward idol- 
 atry (Col. iii. 5), so that in this way the contradiction between 
 the profession and practice of the Jews is plainly expressed, as 
 if he had said : " Thou abhorrest idols, and yet, in thy covet- 
 ousness, thou practisest idolatry.''* No doubt 'npffuXsTv cannot 
 in itself mean, " to indulge covetousness," but inasmuch as hpo- 
 GuXsTv is the most daring manifestation of the covetous spirit, 
 this crime may be used to express that which is the motive to 
 it.*f* Israel was in God's purpose intended to exhibit to the 
 Gentiles a picture of truly holy national life; its unfaithfulness 
 therefore dishonours God himself; it causes the Gentiles to say, 
 *'The God of this nation cannot be the true God!" This fear- 
 ful operation of Israel's sin (which is repeated in the case of all, 
 who are called upon at any period to be the focus of divine life, 
 and by unfaithfulness fall away from their vocation), is already 
 rebuked by the prophets of the Old Testament. See Isaiah Hi. 
 5, Ezek. xxxvi. 20; another parallel is, 2 Sam. xii. 14. 
 
 Ver. 25. St Paul, however, by no means loses sight of the 
 prerogatives of Isra'el (see iii. 1, etc., where he considers them 
 at greater length); he only shows that they demand faithful- 
 ness to those responsibilities which are connected with them by 
 God, if they are not to turn out to the deeper condemnation of 
 their possessors. The Apostle, therefore, presupposes, in all 
 
 • Stier, in his "Andeutungen" (part ii. p. 2G7), follows Luther, who says on tliis 
 passage," Thou art a thief towai'ds God, foi' honour belongeth unto God, and this 
 all self-righteous persons take from Him." The connexion, however, points to 
 actual sin, not to mere self-righteousness. 
 
 t An example of such sacrilege is related bj^ Josephus (Arch. xxii. 6, 2), wlio 
 tells us that the presents of the rich pi'oselyte Fulvia were pilfered by the Jews, to 
 whom they had been entrusted. 
 
CHAPTER II. 25 27. 115 
 
 stages of spiritual life, the possibility of a certain measure of 
 faithfulness and moral earnestness, corresponding to the degree 
 of knowledge ; and the personal condition of the individual is 
 determined by his exercise of this faithfulness. 
 
 The i:ipiro[/j7i is here regarded as the seal of the divine election, 
 so that in it, all theocratical privileges are considered as concen- 
 trated. The Jews, therefore, with their materialistic tendencies, 
 attributed the greatest value to the outwardly accomplished 
 operation of circumcision. In consequence of this view, it is 
 declared in the Talmudic treatise Schemoth (see Schottgen on 
 the passage), that in the case of Jews who are damned, the 
 foreskin must first be outwardly restored. The Grentile world 
 is therefore also called at once dxpo^vffr/a = nS"^^' ^^ unclean, 
 lacking the sign of the covenant* 'Edv in ver. 25 as well as 
 in ver. 26 is not used conditionally, for St Paul does not over- 
 look the transgressions of the Jews, and the faithfulness of 
 many Gentiles; but in the same way as orav in ver. 14, where 
 the fact is regarded as certain, whilst however it remains un- 
 certain in what particular case it occurs. 
 
 Ver. 26, 27. If such a degradation of the Jew to a lower 
 station as to privilege and honour was conceivable to him, from 
 the dreadful threatenings under which the 0. T. demanded 
 obedience (see Deut. xxviii. 15, etc.); yet the reception of the 
 Gentiles to grace Avas to him inconceivable. And yet the 
 Apostle asserts this also, and sets the Gentiles before the eyes 
 of the Jews as rebuking the latter by their good conduct. 
 
 A/xa/w^a = hroXri, the particular command of the general 
 vdi^o;. In the phrase Xoyilz^&ai e/g crs^/ro/^^jv there is evidently an 
 allusion to the "Koy/^sff^ai dg dixaio(fuvrjv (in iv. 3); that which 
 they have not is imputed to them as if they had it. Now the 
 ground of this imputation is this, that though they have not 
 indeed the sign, they have instead of it the germ of that reality 
 which the sign represents, i. e., a good conscience, which they 
 maintain faithfully, according to the small measure of know- 
 ledge which God has given them, is their bond with God; and 
 therefore they may not untruly be regarded as such as have 
 the sign also, ver. 27. Ka/ is best taken as carrying on the 
 question with ov^i understood. In xp/vsiv that rebuke is of 
 course only intended, which unrighteousness is constantly re- 
 
 • The form of the word in pure Greek was »K^o-raerB-t». See on this point 
 Fritzschc,vol, i.p. 136. . 
 
116 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 ceiving from righteousness from its very nature. (Matt. xii. 
 42, Heb. xi. 7.) The connexion of s^ (pvffsM? is uncertain; at 
 first sight, on account of the arrangement of the words, the 
 only one which seems admissible, is that with dx^o/Suor/a, so 
 that it would mean the natural circumcision as opposed to 
 circumcision in a spiritual sense. Thus Tholuck, Riickert, and 
 Reiche. At the same time, however much may apparently be 
 in favour of this construction, I cannot hold it to be the 
 right one. For in the first place the addition of U <pUsu? to 
 ay^pQ(3vgr/a is quite unnecessary; if St Paul had thereby wished 
 to distinguish born Grentiles from Jews with Grentile sentiments, 
 and such is the .meaning of dxpo^varia in ver. 25, he would have 
 been obliged to add Jx (pUscfjc to dx^o/Sutfr/a at once in ver. 26; 
 but since he twice uses axpo^uarioi. in ver. 26, without this addi- 
 tion, it appears to be unsuitable in ver. 27. On the other hand, 
 the opposition to 6 bia y^dfifiarog xa! rrspko^T^g craga/Sdr^jg, impera- 
 tively demands that Ix (pUiug be referred to human nature left 
 to itself, whilst y^dfj./Jt.a (x= vofMog, or vofiog y^a'Ttrog, 2 Tim. iii. 15, 
 in so far as it is contemplated amongst the Jews as some- 
 thing externally given, and standing over against the man) and 
 'TTiPiroiJ.ri denote the grace of God, in which the Israelites made 
 their boast. Koppo observed this uite rightly, but made this 
 mistake, that he wanted to refer Jx (pldiog immediately to rgX- 
 0Li<ra, to which course however the order of the words offers too 
 much resistance. But the case is otherwise, if we take dx^o/Sutf- 
 r/a rh vofj^^v rikoZtsa as making up one conception ; Jx (pbcuug then 
 becomes related to this one collective thought, and the whole 
 idea comes out clearly, whilst the reference of the words to dxpo- 
 jSuoT/a alone always introduces some awkwardness. The mean- 
 ing of the words is then " that Gentile world, which, without 
 special help from above, observed the law, judgeth thee who, in 
 the possession of this special help from above, transgressest the 
 law.'' Beza's interpretation of htd in its instrumental sense, so 
 that the sense becomes, " the law and circumcision were to the 
 Jews occasions of sin,'' expresses a thought in itself correct; 
 but it is improbable that St Paul should have so far anticipated 
 the course of his argument as to introduce it here; he only 
 enters upon that topic later (vii. 14). Riickert rightly derives 
 the application of 6/d in question from its local signification, 
 according to which it may mean, " with, during, under the cir- 
 cumstances." See Rom. iv. 11, xiv. 20. The meaning, "not- 
 
 I 
 
CHAPTER II. 28, 29. 117 
 
 withstanding, in spite of,'' which Glockler supports, is unprece- 
 dented. The way in which Meyer endeavours to justify this 
 meaning, " breaking through as it were its limits," has mani- 
 festly something very strained about it. 
 
 Yer. 28, 29. In these verses is contained the key to the whole 
 of the Apostle's argument in the two first chapters of the Epistle 
 to the Romans. St Paul exhibits to us the contrast of Jews and 
 Gentiles in a manner full of deep meaning. It is not the bodily 
 physical descent, or the circumcision of the flesh, which consti- 
 tutes the true son of Abraham, but conformity to Abraham's life 
 of faith (for their ancestor, Abraham, had also sons, who were 
 not partakers of the promise, Rom. ix. 7, Gal. iv. 22), and that 
 circumcision of the heart, by which the sinful 'Trpomprrjfiara rris 
 -^v-x/ig are removed. In the outward Israel, i. e., after the flesh, 
 there exists therefore a heathen world, which God, in that great 
 judgment which visited the Jews at the destruction of Jeru- 
 salem, condemned, whilst the few genuine Israelites were either 
 received into the Christian Church, or preserved for later times 
 as the germs of a new generation (Rom. xi.) But in the Gen- 
 tile world also there is to be discovered an Israel, — that is to say, 
 a number of noble souls, truly capable of receiving every thing 
 of a higher nature, for whom the divine promises are not less in- 
 tended than for Israel after the flesh, for those at least of it who 
 belong also to the spiritual Israel; at the same time, however, 
 it is not to be denied that, ceteris paribus, the children of Abra- 
 ham after the flesh had a more comprehensive vocation, so that, 
 for instance. Gentiles could not have been numbered amongst 
 the Twelve, nor could Christ have been born with the same 
 propriety of a Gentile mother. (See notes to John iv. 22.) 
 This view is not found merely among the later Rabbinical 
 writers,* who might have adopted it from the eflects of Chris- 
 tian influence, but also in the 0. T. Scriptures. These demand 
 not only the circumcision of the heart (Deut. x. 16, xxx. 6; 
 Jer. iv. 4, compared with Coloss. ii. 1 1, Phil, iii. 2), but also re- 
 present the true children of God as scattered throughout all the 
 
 • Compare the remarkable words of Rabbi Lipmann, in the Nizzachon, p. 1 9 : 
 " li'risit nos Christianus quidam dicendo: mulieres quae circumcidi non possunt, 
 pro Judseis non sunt habendse; verum illi nesciunt, quod fides non posita sit in 
 circumcisione, sed in corde. Q,uicunque vero non ciedit, iilum circumcisio 
 Judseum non facit; qui vero recte credit, is Judseus est,etiam si non circumcisus." 
 Reiche adduces a very striking passage from Plutarch (de Isid. et Osir. p. 352), 
 where, on the principles of Ihe heathen religions, the same is said of the genuine 
 worshippers of the gods. 
 
118 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 world, and amongst all nations. Thus especially in Isaiali xliii. 
 5, etc. Here the Lord commands that His children be brought 
 from the ends of the world, " even every one that is called by 
 His name, and whom he has created for His glory." The dis- 
 persion of Israel after the flesh amongst all nations is not spoken 
 of in this passage; by these, then, can only be meant those nobler 
 souls scattered amongst all nations, those in whose hearts the \oyog 
 C'Xipf/jaTiTto? has planted his seeds. In the same sense the Re- 
 deemer speaks of other sheep, which are not of this fold, i. e., 
 of the community of Israel after the flesh. (See the notes to 
 John X. 16, xi. 52, and in the 0. T. the passage of Micah ii. 12.) 
 According to this scriptural exposition, therefore, the election 
 of God appears in complete harmony with the free self-deter- 
 mination of man. In the case of every man, whether much or 
 little have been entrusted to him, all depends upon the personal 
 faithfulness with which he improves the privileges to which he 
 has been called, and by the faithful employment of that which 
 has been A^ouchsafed to him the most insignificant individual 
 may outstrip the man to whom the greatest gifts have been 
 entrusted, if the latter shows himself unfaithful. The difficulty 
 returns upon us, however, with increased strength, when, pene- 
 trating deeper into the subject, we come to regard faithfulness 
 itself as a fruit of grace; we shall not, however, arrive at this 
 before we consider Rom. ix. The whole passage, moreover, is 
 in so far remarkable, that it exhibits the manner in which the 
 Apostles and writers of the N. T. explained the 0. T.; verbally 
 indeed, but by no means literally. 
 
 Ver. 28. The yap in this verse is to be explained by the 
 thought which is implied in ver. 27, '' Jews can also be re- 
 jected." To this, then, as its reason, is annexed the thought, 
 that the true idea of the Jew as a member of the -theocratic 
 nation, and of circumcision as the seal of the theocratic cove- 
 nant, is not an outward but an inward one. The external de- 
 scent from Abraham, the external operation of circumcision, 
 has no real meaning without the inward foundation of a right 
 disposition. K^u-rroV, as the opposite of (panpog, used of the 
 moral disposition, is also found 1 Pet. iii. 4. 
 
 Ver. 29. There is a difficulty in the words oh jpdiLiiart, on ac- 
 count of the indefinite character of the connexion of h 'rrvibfj.art 
 with what precedes. The contrast of ypafxiia and 'Trnvfj.a is not 
 very different from that of ca^g and ^vgu^^a. In the same way 
 
CHAPTER III. 1 — 20. 119 
 
 that the body is the clothing of the spirit, so constituted that 
 by it the spirit presents its own impress, and without it cannot 
 manifest itself as a personal being here below, — so also in Scrip- 
 ture, the letter is the transparent veil of the spirit, without 
 which the spirit cannot be fixed. In this way, then, we should 
 arrive at the exact contrast of <pavsp'6v and kpu-tttov. But because 
 these last expressions have already occurred, ypd/jb/j^a and -rvgu- 
 iut>a cannot well, without tautology, express this same contrast; 
 and, on this account, it is no doubt better in this place, with 
 Beza, Heumann, Morus, and Reiche, to understand ypaf/^f^O', as 
 in ver. 27", of the law, but of course of the law in so far as it is 
 considered on the side of the letter. For, regarded as to its in- 
 ward nature, there was the Tvev/na also in the law. And there- 
 fore Ruckert is right in understanding 'rrveu/j.a of the New, ypafji^- 
 /Ma of the 0. T., for the spirit in the 0. T. is just the New Testa- 
 ment in its '7rXr}pM(fig. (Matt. v. 17.) Ver. 29 is therefore to be 
 understood thus : " but the inward Jew and the circumcision of 
 the heart is the true circumcision, in that it contains the reality 
 of the thing represented by the outward sign, after the spirit 
 and not after the mere letter.'" The concluding sentence, ov 6 
 sVa/vog, X. r. X., refers, of course, to the leading idea, that is to 
 the true Jew, though it may also refer to crvgD^a, which, as far 
 as the sense goes, comes to the same thing; the judgment of 
 God on the man, as the true judgment, is opposed to the false 
 judgment of man, which is determined by outward appearances. 
 The preposition h is very suitable, for a commendation pro- 
 nounced by man can also he from God, if it is a just one. 
 
 § 5. COMPARISON OF THE JEWS AND GENTILES. 
 
 (III. 1-20.) 
 
 This spiritual view of the relation between the Jevrs and the 
 Gentiles might, however, as the Apostle, not without reason, 
 feared, be easily misunderstood. St Paul, therefore, finds it 
 necessary to call attention to the fact, that by this representa- 
 tion of the relation it was by no means intended to depreciate 
 in themselves those advantages which the Jews possessed above 
 the Gentile world ; on the contrary, he confesses that they were 
 of the greatest importance. Only these advantages had annexed 
 
] 20 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 to them the condition of faithy and this condition had not been 
 fulfilled by the mass of the nation; although, therefore, the 
 promises of God had been accomplished notwithstanding their 
 unbelief, yet the people of Israel, as such, had lost their theo- 
 cratical prerogative, and the spiritual Israel alone, composed of 
 Jews and Gentiles, had received the promise, as the true chil- 
 dren of faithful Abraham. According to this view of the con- 
 nexion, those difficulties disappear, which have been supposed 
 to embarrass this portion of the Epistle to the Romans. The 
 Apostle does not at all lose the thread of his argument (so that 
 it were necessary to assume, as even Reiche still proposes, that 
 it is only at Rom. ix. 4 that the same is resumed), but he com- 
 pletely obviates an objection, so far, at least, as it was needful. 
 For that no hibnpov follows the 'rrp^rov in ver. 2, is naturally ac- 
 counted for by the fact, that this first which is adduced includes 
 in it everything else which could have any claim to be men- 
 tioned besides. The passage iii. 9 stands, however, in no con- 
 tradiction with ver. 2; for, whilst this passage treats of the 
 original calling of the Jews, the former speaks of the actual 
 state of their relations to God which had been introduced by 
 their unbelief All the promises of the Old, as well as the New 
 Testament, are, in fact, conferred upon the condition of believ- 
 ing obedience ; if this does not exist, they are, eo ipso, annulled, 
 nay more, the blessing is converted into its direct opposite, the 
 curse, (See Deut. xxviii. 1, etc., 15, etc.) St, Paul might there- 
 fore have expressed himself even more strongly than he does in 
 iii. 9; he might have said, " the Jews have not only no advan- 
 tages over the Gentiles, but the Gentiles are now preferred to 
 them, they have been grafted into the olive tree instead of those 
 branches which have been hewn oif. But, according to Rom. 
 xi. 20 etc., the same condition holds good also of the Gentiles, 
 and they may through unbelief just as well forfeit their calling 
 to privileges, as the Jews did before them. Chapters ix.-xi. are 
 therefore a kind of extended commentary upon this passage, 
 but without being a continuation of what is here begun. 
 
 Ycr. ], 2. With a glance back at the foregoing deduction of 
 the sinfulness of the Jews, the Apostle now asks, what then 
 has become of the privileges of the Jews? Their sinfulness had 
 placed them on a level with the Gentiles, for the law had not 
 attained its exalted object in their case at all. The law was in- 
 tended to produce the fV/'/vojitf,-? kfiapriug (iii, 20), tliat is to say, 
 
I 
 
 CHAPTER III. 1 — 20. 121 
 
 true repentance, instead of which, on account of their unbelief 
 and the unfaithfulness which this gave rise to, it only produced 
 sin itself, and indeed the very worst form of sin, the exact con- 
 trary to repentance, the arrogant opinion that they were with- 
 out sin, and as the descendants of Abraham after the flesh, were 
 already inheritors of the kingdom of heaven. Nevertheless, the 
 divine promise retained its objective reality; those Jews, who 
 apprehended in faith the salvation ofiered to them in Christ, 
 received also His full blessing, notwithstanding the great body 
 of the nation forfeited it. 
 
 Th 'jrspiffffhv is to be taken as a substantive, just as rb 
 'yvu(frh\/ in i. 19, in the sense of ''advantage or prerogative.'^ 
 We are not to suppose that in this passage either, as Reiche 
 justly remarks, St Paul was disputing with actual personages ; 
 the matter is treated quite objectively. The opposite to xara 
 -TTavra rpovirov is found 2 Maccab. xi. 31, x-iir ovdsva rpoirov. No 
 
 doubt 'x^urov iih points as far as form is concerned to other ad- 
 vantages, which St Paul intended to name. But he felt quite 
 rightly, that all was in reality contained in that one which he 
 had adduced. In the interpretation of e'Tncrsvdrjffav, Reiche is 
 inclined to adopt the view of Koppe and Cramer, according to 
 which it is translated, " the divine promises were confirmed to 
 them." But the usual meaning of the word, " were confided 
 to them," is plainly more suitable to the connexion, since in 
 \vhat follows it is just their dcr/trr/a in the possession of these 
 promises which is spoken of Mention is made of the divine ^r/Vr/s 
 only in consequence of this ccrigr/a. (On the w^ell-known con- 
 struction of the passive see Winer's Gram. p. 237.) The Xoyia 
 rou Ssov arc no doubt in the first place the promises (Acts vii. 
 38; 1 Pet. iv. 11; Heb. v. 12), and indeed especially those of 
 the Messiah and the kingdom of God, to which all the others 
 were related. But inasmuch as these promises constituted the 
 most important part of Holy Scripture, the whole Word of God 
 is also indicated by this expression. 
 
 Ver. 3. It is not altogether easy to follow the course of the 
 Apostle's thoughts in this transition; Tholuck has, however, 
 already rightly supplied the links which are wanting. The 
 Apostle namely presupposes the notorious fact of the unbelief 
 of the Jews, just at the time when the promises were being ful- 
 filled, and deduces from thence that even if the blessing was 
 lost to the nation collectively, it yet, according to God's faith- 
 
1 22 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 fulness, remained even now confirmed to individual believers, 
 and should hereafter also belong to. the whole of Israel when 
 God should have led them back by wondrous ways. (Rom. xi. 
 25.) He forbearingly calls the unbelievers rivk in the hope 
 that many in Israel might yet turn to Christ. See ix. 1, etc. 
 
 For ri'TrUrriday the M.S. A. reads r,'jn'iri&(sav, because the Xo 
 yia were taken as synonymous with the law. The matter is 
 understood more in accordance with St Paul's views, by re- 
 garding unbelief as the root of disobedience. (See notes to 
 John xvi. 9.) With regard to -r/or/s, cr/Vrsuw and its opposite 
 d'T/ffriu, see notes to Rom. iii. 21. With respect to the word 
 xaragyg/v, which occurs SO frequently in St Paul's language, see 
 notes to Luke xiii. 7, the only place in the N. T. in which it is 
 found except in. St Paul's writings. In the LXX. also it occurs 
 but four times. 
 
 Ver. 4. With man's unfaithfulness is now contrasted the un- 
 changeable faithfulness of God, who knows how to form for 
 Himself, in spite of sin, the inheritors of His promises. For 
 God's promises cannot be fulfilled without the existence of 
 persons to accept them ; He is therefore not only true in giving 
 and keeping His promises for His own part, but He is also 
 faithful in creating such as are worthy to receive them, so that 
 if all men were to be faithful they would not be unfulfilled. 
 In chap. ix. this idea is carried out more at length, and it is 
 only when tlius understood that the words, '' if we believe not 
 yet He remaineth faithful. He cannot deny himself," receive 
 their full meaning. The streams of the divine grace, when im- 
 peded on the one side, turn themselves to the other, and form 
 for themselves amongst Jews and Gentiles organs for the king- 
 dom of God, without, however, operating by constraint, without 
 any prejudice to man's freedom, rather by really establishing 
 and completing it. 
 
 M95 ysvoho answers to the Hebrew nS^'^Hj which latter word 
 
 . T . T 
 
 IS thus translated by the LXX. (See Gesenius' Lexicon under 
 ^'y^'n-) I^ ^s also frequently found in Polybius, Arrian, and 
 others, and particularly often in St Paul's writings in the N. T., 
 thus again in the epistle to the Romans iii. 6, 81, vi. 2, 15, vii. 
 7, etc. To translate y/vicfdoo ds, " let it be rather so, God is faith- 
 ful, etc.," is forced. Reiche justly observes, the imperative is 
 only used to express emphatically the irrefragable nature of the 
 
CHAPTER III. 1, 5. 123 
 
 assertion. The words 'itaa av^^M-xog -^suarrj^ are taken from Ps. 
 cxvi. 11. They have so far their perfect truth, that man in his 
 separation from, or even opposition to God, who has alone 
 essential being and truth, becomes untrue and unfaithful; so 
 far as he is good and true. God is in liim. Whenever, there- 
 fore, tliis divine truth takes up its abode in a heart, the man 
 confesses himself to be untrue without God, and with this first 
 truth begins his true life. (See notes to ver. 10.) For further 
 confirmation, Ps. li. 6 is quoted exactl}^ after the LXX. In this 
 Psalm the struggles by which the soul works its way out of the 
 nio'ht of sin are described in an inimitable manner. David 
 wrestles as it were with God, and has a controversy with Him, 
 whilst God, by the operation of His Spirit, convinces him of 
 his sin ; the confession of David is the victory of the truth in 
 him. On a greater scale the same struggle is going on in this 
 sinful world, and the moment in which any individual emerges 
 into the element of light is that in which he makes the confes- 
 sion here expressed. God is ever the victor, when the creature 
 ventures into a controversy with Him, appearing as just in all 
 His promises. This "judging'' of God takes place whenever 
 His guidance is distrusted. AixaiovaOai means here " to be re- 
 cognised as just '' See notes on iii. 21. The parallelism would 
 certainly lead us to suppose that Xoyot means here, in the first 
 place, law-suits, as in Acts xix. 38, but according to St Paul's 
 application of the passage, this expression stands parallel to Xo/zw, 
 ver. 2. Accordingly, xpm<rdai in the Apostle's use of it can only 
 be taken as the passive, although, according to the original 
 text, the active meaning should predominate. 
 
 Ver. 5. According to the Apostle's view, therefore, God is 
 the only good being, the Good in all good, so that even the 
 best has no merit ; sin alone is man's property and his fault; at 
 the same time even this must serve to manifest God's glory and 
 excellence the more brightly. The man who is estranged from 
 God does not recognise this relation of truth to falsehood, of 
 righteousness to unrighteousness; he thinks that God could not 
 punish sin, if it produced what was good. But it is God who 
 works that which is good by means of sin, not sin itself; sin 
 remains notwithstanding what it is, that, namely, which de- 
 serves a curse, and has its punishment in and from itself. 
 
 AiKaioam and ddixia are here to be taken in the most general 
 sense, see the notes on Rom. iii. 21. 2vv/(froivs/v signifies here to 
 
124 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 represent, and by representation to make anything known in its 
 real nature. Rom. v. 8. — St Paul often uses the formula r1 
 tpoufisv especially in objections. Rom. vi. 1, vii. 7, ix. 14. — 
 Reiche has some very happy remarks on this passage with re- 
 spect to the formula Tiara av^pwrov Xeyu. He justly observes, that 
 the meaning of this phrase of such multifarious significations is 
 to be determined solely by the context. It may be used either 
 of the way of all men, or of the majority, or of a certain class of 
 men. Here it may be most properly referred to the natural 
 man as alienated from God, who is without the real knowledge 
 of God, and is therefore incapable of forming a judgment of 
 God's dealings. In the passage Rorn. vi. 19, dvQpd.'rrmv Xsyu is 
 used instead, for which in profane writers xara H dv^pMrnvov, 
 dv&pMmmg Xsyu are found. See the passages cited by Tholuck 
 on ver. 19. 
 
 Ver. 6, 7. The unreasonableness of the above question is de- 
 monstrated by St Paul from that truth which all Jews acknow- 
 ledged, that God would judge the Gentile world; but this would 
 be impossible, if, from the fact that man's unrighteousness 
 exalts the righteousness of God, it should follow that He could 
 not punish sin. For then the Gentile might also say, " My sin 
 too has magnified God's righteousness, how then can I be con- 
 demned as a sinner?" Reiche has proved by convincing argu- 
 ments in opposition to Tholuck and Riickert, that ver. 6 is not 
 to bo understood of the universal judgment, but only of the 
 judgment of the Gentiles, who from the Jewish point of view 
 were considered as the x6g(mo? in its proper sense, as the dfj^aprukoi 
 %ar s^o'^Tiv. (Galat. ii. 16.) In fact, it is only in this way of 
 understanding it, that the argument can hold, because that 
 which is uncertain must ever be proved by that which is ac- 
 knowledged. For it was only considered certain with respect to 
 the Gentiles that God would judge the world, the Jews enter- 
 tained doubts on this subject as regarded themselves, (ver. 5.) 
 To this may be added, that it is only by this explanation we 
 can gain any distinct notion of the person referred to in xijt'yw. 
 *' I also," says the Gentile, "might claim exemption from judg- 
 ment, for in this case also the same holds true." The only 
 thing which could be urged against this reference of the pas- 
 sage to the Gentile world with any show of reason, is this, that 
 the above Jewish notion of the judgment which shall visit the 
 Gentile world is false, and that St Paul would not argue from 
 
CHAPTER III. 6 — 8. 125 
 
 an error. But this view of the Jews was not in and of itself 
 false, it only became false in consequence of their supposing 
 that this judgment would concern the Gentiles only, and not 
 the Jews also. Now it is just this very falsehood in it that the 
 Apostle combats, and we need therefore surely feel no scruple 
 about assuming his argument to be as stated above. 
 
 As regards the meaning "Gentile world'' sometimes belong- 
 ing to %o(SiLO's, I cannot say that I agree with Reiche in so ren- 
 dering %d(iihoi in the passages Rom. iii. 19; 1 Cor. vii. SI,* 
 though no doubt the context imperatively demands it in Rom. 
 xi. 12; 1 Cor. i. 21. There can be no doubt but that this 
 meaning may be justly attributed to the word, since the general 
 idea which belongs to it, " that of the creature in its alienation 
 from God,'' may be confined to the Gentile world, because in it 
 the corruption of the creature was represented in its most glar- 
 ring colours. T£u(r^a is found in no other place in the N. T. 
 In opposition to akri^ia it denotes that whole state of falsehood, 
 i.e., of alienation from God, from which all the particular utter- 
 ances of sin proceed. The divine ho^a is here the knowledge 
 of God's sublime attributes, which are brought put more dis- 
 tinctly by the contrast of man's sin. 
 
 Ver. 8. As at all times, so also even in the Apostle's day, the 
 Gospel was reproached as tending to 'promote sin,-f and teaching 
 men to do evil that good might come, but this did not deter 
 him from declaring God's faithfulness amidst our unfaithfulness. 
 St Paul therefore finds himself obliged (vi. 1, etc.), to refute 
 this error with greater care, and to discover it in all its absur- 
 dity. The man who can make such an assertion as this pro- 
 nounces his own condemnation, in that he makes known, that 
 the nature of divine grace, and of that love which it kindles in 
 the heart, is wholly unknown to him. Doubtless, it was men 
 such as the Judaizers, whom St Paul had to oppose in Galatia, 
 who circulated such blasphemies. 
 
 * In his explanation of Rom. iii. 1 9, this scholar rightly understands the whole 
 human race to be meant by «o(r^aj. His adducing the passage as above, can there- 
 fore only be an oversight. 
 
 •f" Of such hypocritical slanderers Luther says, " God grant us grace that we may 
 be pious sinners (that is, poor in spirit, humble), and not holy slanderers (that is, 
 outwardly observers of the law, apparently holy, but really pi'oud.) For the Chris- 
 tian is in the state of becoming such, not in the state of having become so; whoso- 
 ever therefore is a Christian, is no Christian, that is, whosoever thinks that he is 
 already a Christian, whilst he is only becoming one, is nought." 
 
126 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 "VVitli respect to the construction of the sentence xa/ [li] is to 
 be taken as an anacoluthon; the Apostle intended at first to 
 proceed with 'Troinffufiiv but afterwards connected the principal 
 thought bj means of 6V/ immediately with Xsynv in the paren- 
 thesis. The conjecture sn is therefore just as inadmissible 
 as the omission of on. "EvdrAog, that which is founded h rfj 
 dhri, is only found besides in the N. T. at Heb. ii. 8. 
 
 Ver. 9. After obviating these misunderstandings of that im- 
 portant truth, that the unfaithfulness of men does not annul 
 the faithfulness of God, the Apostle could bring forward the 
 concluding thought of the whole argument contained in the 
 first two chapters, and assert, that all Jews as well as Gentiles 
 are under sin. He in no way contradicted by this assertion his 
 previous declaration as to the great advantages of the Jews 
 (iii. 1), for to every Jew who acknowledged his sinfulness, 
 in whom, therefore, the law had accomplished its purpose, 
 in stopping his mouth (ver. 19), and awakening him to a 
 knowledge of his own sin and need of redemption (ver. 
 20), these privileges were still available in their fullest ex- 
 tent. But to those rmg (ver. 3), who formed the mass of the 
 nation, these advantages were no doubt lost, for in them the 
 truth had so far yielded to the lie, that they did not any 
 longer even retain the fundamental truth of confessing their 
 own sinfulness, but boasted of external things as if they had 
 been substantial privileges. And, therefore, the true inward 
 Jews, amongst Israelites and Greeks, the poor in spirit, the 
 humble, the hungering and thirsting after salvation, and these 
 only, received the promise. But since it was in every one's 
 power to become such an one, in that he only needed to give 
 up his active resistance to the Spirit of Truth, which bore wit- 
 ness to him of his sin, no one could complain; God appeared 
 just, as in His promises, so also in their fulfilment. 
 
 T/ ovv is best taken as a separate sentence. It is found 
 complete in Acts xxi. 22. upoixo) is found nowhere else in the 
 N. T.; in the active it means " to have advantage over,"' prce- 
 stare. But in this case the passive form must be derived from 
 the meaning " to prefer,'' an usage which is completely estab- 
 lished even in classical Greek writers; "are we then preferred 
 by God?" The application of the meaning, " to advance as a 
 pretext," so as to make the words signify " have we anything 
 to urge in palliation/' which Meyer and Fritzche have lately 
 
 I 
 
CHAPTER III. 9 — 18. 127 
 
 defended after the example of Ernesti, Moms, Koppe, etc., is in 
 point of language quite allowable, but not suitable to the con- 
 text. For the question is not, whether the Jew has anything 
 to defend himself with, to allege in his defence, but whether or 
 not lie has any advantage over the Gentiles. In oh 'Trdvrug, 
 the negative particle could no doubt limit the meaning of 
 cravrwj, SO as to make the whole signify "not in every re- 
 spect; but the context plainly demands that Tavru? be taken 
 as giving emphasis to the negation, nequaquam. If persons 
 have demurred about giving to 'Trdvrsg its full signification, 
 and have wished to explain it by 'xoXkoi, although the ohb'i 
 iig which follows leaves no doubt as to the Apostle's mean- 
 ing, this has arisen from the unclearness of their views as to 
 the peculiar nature of the aTtpo^ugria. vo/xov rsXovga (ii. 27), to 
 which, however, we must of course suppose a 'jspirofMTi vo/ji^ov 
 TsXovffa (xi. 4) to correspond in every age of history. This un- 
 clearness has presented a considerable obstacle to a well de- 
 fined conception of this section in the case of the greater num- 
 ber even of modern expositors. A more detailed explanation 
 of this subject will immediately follow in the notes upon verses 
 10-18. upoamdofMai is found nowhere else in the N. T. In 
 the words v!p dfMaprtav slvai sin is represented as a tyrannical 
 power from which a Xurpuffig is needed. (See the notes on 
 
 Rom. vii, 1 etc., and vii. 14. 'Trs'Trpufisvo^ V'tto rriv d/ut^apriav.) 
 The two parallel passages, Rom. xi. 32, Gal. iii. 22, throw 
 an uncommon light upon this passage. See the exposition of 
 them. 
 
 Ver. 10-18. Since nothing is more intolerable to the high- 
 minded natural man than the confession of his sinfulness, i. e., 
 not only of individual sinful actions, but of sinful corruption in 
 general, and the inability to do anything good of himself, the 
 Apostle justly applies all his power to the proof of this point. 
 By a long succession of passages from the Old Testament, he 
 proves that the Word of God corroborates his doctrine, in that 
 it ascribes to no man, without exception, a true dixaioffuvr;. The 
 question now arises, how are the assertions of the Apostle, ii. 
 14, 26, 27, to be reconciled with the present text. For there 
 individual Gentiles were spoken of v/ho observed the law, and 
 we must of course therefore assume, that amongst the Jews 
 also there were many pious men of whom the same might be 
 said. (See Luke i. 6.) The usual assumptions that the Apostle 
 
128 EPISTLE TO THE llOMANS. 
 
 is only speaking of his contemporaries; or, secondly, that the 
 observance of the law is only to be understood of an external 
 observance, and not of that inward law as more strictly defined 
 by Christ in His Sermon on the Mount ; or, lastly, that the 
 words of the Apostle only refer to the whole mass, and that he 
 is not here concerned with particular exceptions, are yet nothing 
 but ways of escaping from the difficulty, and not of solving it 
 in its foundation, though we would not deny the truth which 
 lies in the second remark. The last view is especially erroneous, 
 namely, that particular exceptions are to be admitted to the 
 general rule of man's sinfulness, for the Apostle's whole demon- 
 stration of the necessity which exists for a new way of salvation 
 for all men without exception, rests upon the fact that all, 
 without exception, are sinful. As has already been indicated 
 above, but one interpretation of the passage is possible, and by 
 means of this all St Paul's ideas preserve their full harmony. 
 The Apostle namely understands by the faithful men who ob- 
 serve the law, such as unite with earnest endeavours to walk in 
 conformity with their knowledge, the humble insight into their 
 spiritual poverty, and real need of redemption, men of whom 
 the centurion Cornelius (Acts x.) furnishes us with an example. 
 These faithful persons are then so far from being excluded from 
 the general state of sinfulness, that they confess themselves in 
 the most decided manner to be sinners, and acknowledge the 
 justice of the charge which the Word of Grod brings against 
 tliem.* Those, in whose minds the earnest endeavours to keep 
 the law is not united with humility, have nothing but a mere 
 apparent righteousness, inasmuch as they grossly violate that 
 law, all whose commandments may be reduced to the love of 
 the truth, in its innermost substance by their want of love, and 
 denial of their alienation from Grod. To them, therefore, ap- 
 ply the Apostle's words in Rom. ii. 1. All men, therefore, 
 without exception, are sinners; the only difference between them 
 is this, that some give honour to the truth, and acknowledge 
 themselves as such, and in their case the law has accomplished 
 its purpose and they are ripe for the gospel; whilst others are 
 either in a complete state of death, and serve sin without any 
 rebuke from conscience, or if they have been brought by con- 
 science to make certain efforts to observe the law outwardly, 
 
 * This confession is the first work in them, which is wi'ought in God, wherefore 
 they do not shrink back from coming to the light. (See notes on John iii 20, 21.) 
 
I 
 
 CHAPTER III. 19. 129 
 
 still only derive to themselves from these efforts fresh sin, 
 that is to say, proud self-complacency, and contempt of others. 
 
 In the Codex Alexandrinus the collection of texts which S 
 Paul here adduces are adopted into Psalm xiv., doubtless only 
 from this passage. — Vers. 10-12 are cited freely from Ps. xiv. 
 1—3. 2vvta)v = ^*)'^\^J2- — 'e.xkXivm = •^"^D. — ' Kyjudoi is not found 
 elsewhere in the N. T., but frequently in Polybius. — Ver. 13 is 
 from Ps. V. 9. The image is probably derived from beasts of 
 prey. — 'E3oX/oj(rav is a Boeotian form for sdoXiovv. The words !hg 
 dff-r/duv -l-Trh rd %s/X>} avruv are taken from Ps. cxl. 3. — Ver. 14 is 
 after Ps. x. 7. The Hebrew text has r\'^?D"^0' which does not 
 mean mxpla but deceit. Probably the LXX. had another read- 
 ing. — Vers. 16, 17 are taken from Isaiah lix. 7, 8. — ^uvTplfi/ia 
 za! TotXat'Troipia answ^er to ^"y^^ liij- — Ver. 18 is from Ps. xxxvi. 
 1, 'ATsvavTi rm h(p&oi.X(jjMv ahrojv = y^y\vi T^^^. These passages of 
 the 0. T. refer indeed undeniably in their primary connexion 
 to more special relations, but in these the Apostle perceives the 
 universal to be depicted ; and justly. For every germ of sin 
 contains within it the possibility of all the different forms which 
 it can assume, and no one is without this germ. The more en- 
 tirely, therefore, the inward eye is opened, the more ready is 
 the man to recognise in his heart the source of every error 
 whatsoever. Even the least leaven leavens the whole lump; 
 and man is in God's sight only either entirely holy or entirely 
 a sinner. 
 
 Ver. 19. The delineation of sinfulness in the above-cited 
 passages has so objective a character, that it applies not only to 
 the Jews, but just as well also to the Gentiles. The law of nature 
 also forbids such manifestations of sin not less than the written 
 law of Moses. Therefore the Apostle, in conclusion, considers 
 the position of men with respect to the law quite universally, 
 and declares that the law condemns every one who has such sin- 
 ful motions in himself, and that as no one can entirely acquit 
 himself from these, every one also, without exception, falls under 
 the curse of the law. The connexion requires that vofia^ be 
 taken in the same sense in vers. 19 and 20; now" the conclusions 
 which St Paul derives from the substance of the two first 
 chapters are quite general, and therefore voi/^og must also in this 
 place signify in the most general sense the law as such, as well 
 tlie Mosaic law (and that especially in its moral requirements) 
 
130 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 as the law written in tlie heart, (ii. 15.) No reference can 
 therefore be intended in this place to the passages above cited 
 as such, but only a reference to the substance of the thoughts 
 which they express. Every law forbids such sins to tliose who 
 are subject to it. Reiche most inconsistently understands by 
 voij^og the law of the Jews only, and yet proceeds to refer <xag 6 
 M(S[Log to all men. The context indeed imperatively demands 
 the latter reference, but on this very account vcij^o? must also be 
 taken in the most comprehensive sense. 
 
 The expressions Xiynv and XaXuv are to be accurately distin- 
 guished in this place, according to their true conception ; the 
 former denotes more the inward aspect of speech, the production 
 of thoughts and the formation of words; "kaXuv more the outward 
 side, the expression of what is within. The dative "kaXu roTg h 
 rOj vo/x^fj is naturally to be taken thus, " this it declares for those 
 living under the law,'" i. e., in order that they may fulfil it. By 
 the expression oi h v(>ixu) we are led, indeed, to think, in the first 
 place, of ii. 12, where it denotes the Jews; but the context in 
 the present passage is too distinctly general to allow us to retain 
 this meaning here. We must, therefore, understand the thought 
 so that all those who are subject to the sphere of the law may 
 be included in it, without its having particular respect to the 
 wider or narrower sphere of the law, amongst Jews and Gen- 
 tiles. 2ro/xa (ppdff(fsiv is a strong expression for "to reduce to 
 silence,'' in this case by convincing of unrighteousness. 'TTodtxog, 
 to fall under d/KV), is not found elsewhere in the N. T. Most in- 
 terpreters, even Tholuck and Reiche, erroneously understand 
 /Va in this place as denoting the event and not the purpose. 
 The strong delineations of man's sinfulness, in Scripture, have 
 the object of excluding every excuse. Calvin rightly said, long 
 ago, ** ut prsecidatur onmis tergiversatio, et excusandi facultas.'* 
 
 Ver. 20. As the great and decisive result of his whole argu- 
 ment concerning the nature of sin, the Apostle therefore, with 
 a retrospective glance at Rom. i. 16, 17, sets forth this truth, 
 that man in his natural condition cannot attain to true dr/iott- 
 nffvvn* by means of the works of the law, because the law pro- 
 duces the conviction of sin. And therefore the revelation of a 
 new way of salvation was needed, in consequence of whicli 
 
 * The first half of this verse, like the parallel passage in he concluding words of 
 Gal, ii. 16, appears to be a reminiscence of Ps. cxliii. 2. 
 
f 
 
 CHAPTER III. 20. Ipy] 
 
 hxaioduvn should be revealed and communicated without law ; 
 and this way both Jews and Gentiles had to follow in order to 
 obtain salvation, (Ver. 21, etc.) The impossibility of attain- 
 ing to dixutoauvT} by spya v6/j>o\j is founded, in fact, upon the 
 absolute character of the law, in consequence of which the 
 smallest transgression, and that only once commitiedj* consti- 
 tutes a transgression of the whole law and that for ever. (Gral. 
 iii. 10.) Human weakness (<ra^g) cannot, without the help of 
 the divine TcsiJ/xa, satisfy these absolute requirements. It is, 
 moreover, by no means the purpose of the law to realise the 
 true duaioouvTi in man (Gal. iii. 19, 21), it is only intended to 
 present moral perfection as the object of man's endeavours, 
 thereby to produce i'rr/ymaig a/xaprlag, and to pave the way for 
 the reception of the gospeL (Gal. iii. 25.) This k^rrlyvuGn ai^ap- 
 r/ag is, however, by no means to be regarded as a mere un- 
 concei'ned knowledge about sin; this may be possessed by one 
 who is entirely unawakened, and in whom the law has not at all 
 done its work; it is to be understood as a true acquaintance 
 with sin, a knowledge of its nature and reality. This can only 
 be conceived as existing in connexion with deep sorrow on ac- 
 count of it, and a lively longing desire to be delivered from it. 
 The sV/yvwc/g afiaprtctg is, therefore, synonymous with that (Mror- 
 vota unto which, as the proper fruit of the Old Testament 
 economy, St John the Baptist baptized those who came to him. 
 (See notes on Matt. iii. 1.) It relates not merely to particular 
 unlawful actions and their unpleasant consequences, but to sin 
 itself, to that sin which affects the whole man, and therefore to 
 the habitus peccandi.-\- But sin in its true nature is always 
 d-r/tfr/a (John xvi. 9), from which, as their source, all other 
 sinful outbreaks proceed. We may, therefore, affirm that the 
 £T/yvu(fi? ajtiapTiag, as the X-jt^j, xara @s6v (2 Cor. vii. 10), has 
 necessarily the germ of faith already existing in it. It is only 
 
 * The popular feeling has embodied this truth in a proverb : He who has once 
 stolen is, and ever remains, a thief ; [Once a thief always a thief ?] even if he never 
 steals anything again, yet he remains for ever one who has stolen. Thus the trans- 
 gressor in the smallest matter retains also for ever the character of the sinner in 
 the sight of the holy God, until the ec(pi<ns tvh u/^.a^rixs and hxatiaxns have erased 
 this character indelilnlh. 
 
 t Stier distinguishes in a very marked manner (Andeut. P. ii. p. 269), between 
 the i<r't'yvuffi5 &/u,a^Ttxs and the mere sTt'yvuiris rod '^ix.ch&i/u.xtos rov @iov (i. 32, ii. 2), 
 which the depraved, as well as the only apparently reformed, may have in their 
 conscience. 
 
132 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 the truth wliicli can discover the lie in its true character, only 
 -T/tfr/? which can fathom cLirtdria. Although, therefore, the law- 
 brings down the curse (Gal. iii. 10), and the man who lies 
 under the k'jriyvMCig aij^apriag bitterly experiences this curse, 
 yet this feeling again always contains within itself a hlessingj 
 and the deepest repentance is, on this very account, the farthest 
 from despair, because the humble and contrite heart, as an 
 already believing heart, is well pleasing to Grod (Ps. li. 19), and 
 because it is only out of that which He has already reduced to 
 nothing that the Lord creates something, that is to say, the new 
 man created in Christ Jesus unto good works. 
 
 SECTION II. 
 
 (Ill 21— V. 11.) 
 
 THE DESCRIPTION OF THE NEW WAY OF SALVATION IN CHRIST. 
 
 After having thus laid the foundation for his superstructure 
 of doctrine, by proving the necessity that existed for a new way 
 of salvation, the Apostle proceeds in the next place to describe 
 this, way itself In this everything assumes a different aspect 
 from that which it wore under the Old Testament ; instead of 
 the demands of the law we hear the voice of grace, instead of 
 works faith is presupposed, and yet the law is not abolished, but 
 rather confirmed (iii. 23-31). Of this way of salvation, says 
 St Paul, even the Old Testament itself gave intimations, especi- 
 ally in that Abraham, the great progenitor of Israel, was justi- 
 fied by faith and not by works, and only received circumcision 
 as a sign and seal of that faith which he had whilst yet uncir- 
 cumcised. Faith in Christ, therefore, was truly a new way of 
 salvation, but yet, after all, the ancient way, which all the 
 saints had trodden (iv. 1-25). This is therefore the only w^ay 
 which leads to the desired end, and even the sorrows, which are 
 connected with walking in this way, must minister to the per- 
 fection of the man. For, instead of the spirit of fear, the spirit 
 of love will be thereby shed abroad in his lieart, — of love en- 
 kindled by the exceeding abundant love of Christ (v. 1-11.) 
 
 I 
 
CHAPTER III. 21 — 31. 133 
 
 § 6. THE DOCTRINE OF FREE GRACE IN CHRIST. 
 (III. 21-3].) 
 
 Before we enter upon the explanation of tliis important pas- 
 sage, the citadel of the Christian faith, we must give exact de- 
 finitions of the leading expressions which St Paul uses to com- 
 municate his ideas, and throw some light upon the various 
 points of view from which these ideas have been considered. 
 To the leading conceptions with which we have to do in the 
 endeavour to comprehend St Paul's doctrine, belongs in the 
 very first place d/xa/offvvri, by which word is denoted the com- 
 mon object as well of the 0. T. as of the N. T. dispensation. 
 In the definition of this term, the common mistake has been, 
 either to reckon up too many meanings of it, deduced from a 
 mere superficial view of particular piftssages (thus Schleusner 
 has noted not less than fourteen significations of ^/xa/otfui/jj), 
 or else, as Bretschneider and Wahl have done, whilst assuming 
 fewer meanings, to neglect to trace them in their derivation 
 from the radical meaning. Notwithstanding several separate 
 treatises on this term, as those of Storr (in his opusc. acad., 
 vol. i.), of Koppe in his fourth Excursus to the Epistle to the 
 Galatians, of Tittmann (de synonymis N. T. i. p. 19, sqq.), and 
 of Zimmermann, we are yet in want of a thoroughly satisfac- 
 tory development of this important expression from its original 
 meaning. I therefore propose the following essay to the con- 
 sideration of scholars. 
 
 The root of drKaiog, d/Kaiogvvrif and all expressions connected 
 with it, is the word dUri, whose original meaning, as we learn 
 from Timseus in his Lexicon to Plato, is, " manner and way, 
 right relation,'" 6 rpo'rrog xat i] bfj^oiorr^g. This term came to be 
 prmcipaiiy applied in common language to the relations of 
 law, and hhri therefore denoted the right relation between 
 guilt and punishment, between merit and reward. In its appli- 
 cation to earthly concerns, the use of dr/,a/og, bixamuvriy accord- 
 ing to this original signification, presents no difficulty; but 
 when it is transferred to higher matters, indistinctness arises 
 from the manifold nature of the relations involved. In this 
 case it is best to distinguish two relations, first, that of God to 
 
134 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 men, and secondly, that of men to God; from tins distinction 
 arises the following difference of meanings. Since in God as 
 the absolute Being all qualities are absolute, we must conceive 
 of the biKaiotsxivn in Him as absolute, so that He orders all re- 
 lations with absolute justice. The justitia Dei, qua Justus est, 
 manifests itself therefore differently according to the differences 
 in men's characters. Towards the wicked it manifests itself as 
 punishing, towards the good, on the other hand, as rewarding. 
 Hence di>caioffvv7i, applied to God and His relation to men, has 
 not merely the signification of punitive justice, but also that 
 of goodness, grace. That nDi^, in the language of the 0. T., 
 
 'tt :^ ^ 
 
 as well as of the Rabbinical writers, is also used in the same 
 manner, has lately been proved at length by Tholuck (Ex- 
 position of the Sermon on the Mount, p. 347, etc.) (Comp. 
 Ps. xxiv. 5; Prov. xxi. 21; with Matt. i. 19, vi. 1; 2 Cor. ix. 
 10.) But as regards, in the second place, the position of man 
 with respect to God, this is, first of all, in his present condition, 
 a dijimJDed relation to God,_aia/a. The right relation, the dr/,aio- 
 Gvvyj, must be sought after by him. But this endeavour can 
 only gradually attain its object. Man, in his alienation from 
 God, commences, namely, with considering that law of God 
 which meets him from without as something external, and by 
 sincere endeavours, corresponding to his knowledge, to observe 
 this as an outward law, he enters into a relation to God which is 
 relatively true. On this account there is ascribed* to him a 5/xa/c- 
 G-jvTj Tov v6/JjO-j, or £X vo^ov Si brA.uio(S-ovr\ ibia (Rom. x. 3; Phil. iii. 9), 
 
 because the man renders this obedience with, so to speak, his 
 own powers, those moral powers which remain to him after the 
 fall, w^ithout the operation of grace. But if we consider the 
 matter more deeply, Ave must of course regard these powers also 
 as of God, and man's own righteousness also as incapable of 
 being produced without God and His co-operation ; only grace 
 in its proper and special sense does not yet appear to be opera- 
 tive in this case. But it is not intended that man should re- 
 main in this relatively true condition, rather must he arrive at 
 an absolutely ri ght relation ; not merely his outward act, but 
 his inward disposition and inclinations must be conformed 
 
 * St Paul also uses, as equivalent to this, the words lntc/.toZtrim l| 'ioya^v v'f/.ov, or 
 tv y«^«, },u vofABv, see Gal. ii. 16, 21, iii. 1 1. 
 
CHAPTER III. 21 — h]. 1.35 
 
 to the divine law. But this, because it presupposes an in- 
 ward transformation, the man cannot of himself, and by 
 his own strength, accomplish; on this account it is called 
 dtKatog'jvri Qiov, or ex. -r/Vrswg = dia <7riarsojg (Gral. ii. 16), be- 
 cause God gives it, and man receives it in faith. In this I 
 case it is God Himself in the man, the Christ in us, who! 
 satisfies that which God demands of him,* and therefore, that \ 
 which on the side of evil exhibits itself not as substance, but 
 as a mere relation, has on the side of good in its completion 
 passed into substantiality; for nothing is really good but God 
 Himself and His influences; but where He works, there He also 
 is. From these considerations we may very easily explain the 
 use which is made of the expressions derived from di>iaiog.\ 
 A/jca/ow = p^-y^^p^, denotes the divine agency in the calling] 
 
 into existence dixaioffuvt], which naturally includes in itself the 
 recognition of it as such. Aixaiou<r6ai = r^^'r^, denotes, on the 
 
 other hand, the condition of the d/xam sJmi, and of being re-^ 
 cognised as such. In both expressions, at one time, the notion 
 of making righteous, or of being made righteous, at another, 
 that of accounting or declaring righteous, or being accounted 
 or declared righteous, comes forward most prominently, but al- 
 ways in such a way that the latter presupposes the former. 
 Nothing can at any time be reckoned or declared righteous 
 by God which is not so. AiKaiuf/^a = to dlxa/ov signifies that 
 which is right in any particular relation, so that it may be taken 
 as synonymous with hroXri, tODtl??:^' i7fl* AiKaiojG/g, on the 
 
 other hand, denotes the action of dr/,aiu(fig, taken abstractedly, 
 the ^nefoy of mak inpfj^ip-htoous (Rom. iv. 25, v. 18.) Only in 
 two passages, Rom. v. 16, 18, does the signification of dixaiufia 
 pass over into that of ^/xa/wtr/g, which cases are, however, ac- 
 counted for by the peculiarity of the context, as will be shown 
 more at length in the exposition of the passage. 
 
 From this explanation it is plain, that the common rendering 
 of the word bixaioclvri^ by " virtue or uprightness,'' proceeds 
 from the Pelagian and Rationalistic view of the subject, and is, 
 therefore, at most, only admissible for the diKccioGuvrj rou voiiov, 
 
 * Therefore it is termed in St Paul's writings ^iKcuotrvv/i ix GtoZ (Phil. iii. 9), 
 which is equivalent to ^meiiu^nyai U "K^tsru (Gal. ii. 17), because union with Christ 
 by faith {iv^i6r,vai iv X^i<rrM Phil. iii. 9) is tlie means cf obtaining it. 
 
136 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 This meaning does not answer at all for that righteousness 
 which is bj faith ; we shall therefore do best to translate dr/,a,t- 
 offjvr) by *' righteousness/' and, indeed, '' the rigliteousness of 
 God/'* since even the expressions "justification," or " righteous- 
 ness which avails in the sight of God," so far as they are con- 
 sidered as synonymous with " the recognition as righteous," do 
 not, at all events, express the immediate and original meaning 
 of the word, as the phrase ymadai dizaioauvn &sou Iv xpiarip, 2 Cor. 
 V. 21, evidently proves. 
 
 To the common end of bixaio^uvn, therefore, two ways lead; 
 first, that by the voiMog, secondly, that by %ap/g. With both of 
 these, on the part of man, are connected certain corresponding 
 acts, with the vo/Mog, '^pyoc, with %a^/^, T/Vr/g. These terms now 
 equally need a closer definition. With respect, in the first 
 place, to the term vof^o^, this designates, in its widest sense, the 
 divine will, so far as it meets man with certain requirements. 
 The particular expressions of the law, in concrete cases, are 
 termed svroXa/ or Bixaioofjiara. But the divine law manifests 
 itself as well amongst the heathen, by the inward voice of 
 conscience (Rom. ii. 25), as in the 0. T., by means of the 
 Mosaic institutions (in which, besides moral, ceremonial, and 
 political injunctions also are found), and finally, as in the N. T., 
 where Christ, especially in His Sermon on the Mount, estab- 
 lishes the law in its 'xXripuiStg. The essence of this 'jr'kripcaaig does 
 not consist in imparting altogether new laws, different from 
 that of conscience and that of Moses; but in revealing the 
 nature of these same laws in their inmost depths. It is, there- 
 fore, nothing but a development of that one principle, *' Be yc 
 perfect even as God is perfect," (Matt. v. 48), which is the same 
 thing as, Love God above all things, for it is, in fact, by means 
 of love that the Perfect One communicates Himself, and pro- 
 duces what is perfect. It is, then, quite false to confine the 
 conception of the law to any one of these forms of its manifes- 
 tation, in an exposition of St Paul's view of the way of salva- 
 tion, as is especially done by those who, considering the subject 
 from the Pelagian and Rationalistic point of view, are accus- 
 tomed to think only of the ceremonial part of the Old Testa- 
 ment law The Apostle speaks of all men, Jews as well as 
 
 • See Augustin (de spir. et Htt. c. 9), who observes with great justice: " justitia 
 Dei, non qu4 Justus est, sed qna induit hominem, cum justificat impium." 
 
CHAPTER III. 21 31. 137 
 
 Gentiles, and therefore the law is also to be taken in its widest 
 sense, so that the meaning of x^P'^ "^/^o" ^s, "in no form can the 
 vofji^ot produce dixaioffvvri in its inward reality; only an apparent, 
 simply outward bixatoevvn is possible to a person standing on 
 a legal footing."' Further, if we consider more closely the 
 relation of man to the law,* i. e., the spya which the law requires 
 or forbids, we find that three classes of them may be distin- 
 guished. First, spya 'TTovripd or xaxa (Rom. xiii. 3), i. e., open 
 transgressions of the commandments, spya ffxorov? (Rom. xiii. 12), 
 or Cdpxoi (Gal. V. 19), also called ot^Laprrjft^ara, '^rapa'TrruifxaTa^ 
 '7rapa(3d(r£ig, in short, the utterances of dfiaprta, of the sinful 
 nature of man. Secondly, spy a vsxpd (Heb. vi. 1, ix. 14), or vSf^ov, 
 i. e., works, which outwardly correspond with the command- 
 ments, but do nol proceed from the absolutely pure disposition; 
 these, therefore, in their extension over the whole life, consti- 
 tute the condition of dixuioguvri Ibia, which is no doubt in itself 
 higher than the state of open disobedience to the law, but yet 
 only in case it is accompanied by a consciousness of distance 
 from the mark, by true /^graj/o/a. If it does not include this, it 
 becomes Pharisaic self-righteousness, which is not less displeas- 
 ing to God than gross transgression of the law, for it is in fact 
 itself a gross, yea, the grossest transgression of the law, because 
 it sins against that which is the fundamental principle of all the 
 commandments, — against love, which is self-renunciation, whilst 
 the former state implies self- exaltation. (See notes to Rom. ii. 
 , etc.) The third class of works, lastly, are the 'ipya aya&d, or 
 irkntag, also called 'ipya xaXd (Tit. ii. 7, 14; Col. i. 10), 'ipya roZ 
 0£oD (John vi. 28); in them is realized not merely an outward, 
 but also an inward conformity to the law. They are, therefore, 
 only possible by means of that faith which receives the powers 
 of %«/?/; ; for good works are fruits (xapToi), i. e., the organic pro- 
 ductions of the inward life, and it is, of course, only the tree 
 which has been made generous that can bear generous fruit; 
 this can, however, never be conceived as without fruit, because 
 the powers of its inward life necessarily prodace them. When, 
 therefore, St Paul declares of the works of the law, that they 
 
 • The genei'al charactei' of the legal position is the prominence of activity (the 
 ToiiS), whilst that of the New Testament is marked by the predominence of pansiv- 
 ify, that is, an openness to receive the divine powers of life, by which, however, 
 certainly a new and higher activity is generated. 
 
loS . EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 are incapable of leading to bizato^mri, lie means especially those 
 of the second class; but he does not say the contrary even of 
 those of the third class, because he would rather lay stress up- 
 on the 'principle Trlgng, than upon the effects; St James speaks 
 differently (ii. 24.) 
 
 Now, with respect to the second way, that of grace, this is 
 found also in the Old Testament, in the same manner that the 
 law is recognised in the New; but whilst grace forms the pre- 
 dominant feature of the new covenant, and manifests itself 
 there in its full power, before Christ it only appeared indis- 
 tinctly revealed. For in its most comprehensive signification 
 Xot'p'i is the will of God, as it exhibits itself in communicating, 
 and not in demanding.* Since now justice and grace are the 
 eternal forms of God's revelation of Himseli^ He worked also 
 imder the form of grace amongst Jews and heathen, but grace 
 > in these phases of spiritual life could only manifest itself in 
 consolations and promises, it was not until after the accomplish- 
 ment of Christ's work that grace appeared in the N. T., really 
 imparting itself and calling forth a new creation. All the for- 
 mer operations of divine grace were thereiore, so to speak, the 
 breathing of the Spirit upon humanity, it was only in the 
 Redeemer that the streams of grace were poured forth. (See 
 notes on John i. 14.) It is to Christ, therefore, that x^P'^ is 
 especially ascribed, whilst a/ao-Tj, i. e., the source of %ap/g, re- 
 sides in the Father. (See notes on 2 Cor. xiii. 13.) But we 
 are by no means to regard grace as the mere heightening of the 
 natural powers of the man from within, but as the communica- 
 tion of a higher, absolutely pure, and perfect principle, that is 
 to say, of the Tv£u,aa dyiov, to which the human IrvlufLa stands in 
 the same relation as the -^vxn to the ^veD^a in man. (See notes 
 on Rom. viii. 16.) 
 
 Finally, with respect to man's relation to %a^/? i. e. 'Triam, we 
 have no doubt spoken already several times concerning this 
 term, in our observations on Matthew viii. 2, xiii. 58; Mark 
 ix. 20-27; Matt. xxi. 17; but the importance of the subject de- 
 mands in this place a fresh and more comprehensive considera- 
 
 * In relation to the creature, therefore, ;t;a^/j conveys the idea of that which is 
 undeserved, see Rom. iii. 23, iv. 4. The communication of the life of the Father 
 to the Son is not called x,°^^i$, but a^a-r^. But, inasmuch as the creature is at the 
 same time regarded as miserable, 'iXtos, <r?rX«y;^;k'a are substituted for ;^«j/j. (Comp. 
 the principal passage, 2 Cor. xiii. 1 3.) 
 
 i 
 
CHAPTER III. 21 o\. 139 
 
 tion. We start in the first place with the assertion, that this 
 term also has in all the writers of the N. T. but one radical 
 meaning, though it is modified according to certain relations in 
 which it appears. Holy Scripture itself gives us this radical 
 meaning in a formal definition, inasmuch as it designates faith, 
 as JXcr/^o/Asi/wv v'TToffTa?!?, 'TTpayfidrojv sXsy^og oh ^\iiro[Xivm (Heb. xi. 
 1.) Faith, therefore, taken in its most general meaning, 
 forms the opposite to that knowledge of the visible, which ap- 
 pears to the natural man to be the most certain of all, as well 
 as to that beholding of invisible things which belongs to a 
 higher state of being, and which St Paul denotes by the ex- 
 pression rspiTTaTsTv diu s'Idovg (2 Cor, V. 7, compared with 1 Cor. xii. 
 12). Now, man's relation to that which is invisible and eternal 
 may be regarded as threefold; it is either entirely founded 
 upon the thinking faculty, or it is entirely based upon the will 
 and the affections, or lastly, it rests uniformly upon all the 
 powers of the man. In the first of these significations. Scrip- 
 ture ascribes T/Vr/j even to the devils (Jas. ii. 19), and supposes 
 the possibility that faith may exist in men,* without a corres- 
 ponding life, (Jas. ii. 17, 20; 1 Cor. xiii. 2). Such a dead headA 
 faith, faith in the letter, as this, is not only of no use to men, 1 
 but even makes them more deeply responsible. -f* In the second 
 relation, it appears as the faith of the heart, i. e., as a living * 
 capacity for receiving the powers of the higher world, the soul 
 absorbing, so to speak, the streams of the Spirit as a thirsty 
 land. It was this kind of faith, which, as we showed, in the 
 above quoted passages of our Commentary, was exhibited by 
 those who came to Christ to be healed, as recorded in the gospels. 
 In these persons we could only assume a very imperfect and in- 
 distinct knowledge of divine things, but they manifested a heart 
 glowing with love, and were therefore capable of receiving 
 Xoi'Pii- We in consequence also designated faith as identical j 
 with receiving love, wliilst grace is imparting love. Since now * 
 from the heart proceeds life (Prov. iv. 3), such faith as this 
 
 * Petrus Lombardus makes the following just distinction between " credere 
 Deuin, i. e., credere quod Deus sit, quod etiam mail faciunt," and " credere in Deuni, 
 ?. c, credendo amare Deum, credendo ei adhserere." The belief in God is a dedi- 
 cation, a consecration of ourselves to Him. 
 
 f The case of the man who is burdened with such a dead faith is doubtless worse 
 than if he did not believe at all; yet not for those around him. The word which is 
 !i«i»oken even Hfy one who is dead, may be the means of awakening others to life. 
 
1 40 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 is ever a living faith, even though it may often be an imperfect 
 faith. For it only shows itself as a complete faith when, in the 
 third place, it takes possession of the whole man, when, there- 
 fore, it combines a living capacity to receive wdth clear and 
 comprehensive knowledge. At the same time, we find that it 
 is the practice of the writers of the N. T. to apply the word 
 yvuGtg to such a true knowledge of the divine as springs from 
 participation in the divine reality, so that ^/Vr/g and ym6ig are 
 complimentary to one another, representing the life of God in 
 the heart and in the head. But if in the passage in St John 
 xvii. 3, yvu6tg presupposes mcng^ there are many other passages 
 in which, vice versa, cr/tfr/g presupposes yvQjaig. Neither can be 
 conceived as absolutely without the other, so long as both re- 
 tain their true nature; but in order that each may receive an 
 equal and harmonious cultivation, particular circumstances are 
 required; the latter, therefore, is not necessary to salvation, 
 though the possession of T/Vn^, as heart-faith, is absolutely so; 
 because, without this, it is impossible to take up into one's own 
 being the divine element of life. But if 'jriaui is not only modi- 
 fied in this way by the extent to which it reigns in men, its 
 character depends equally upon the object to which it refers. 
 In fact, Wfl-r/g is the universal foundation of religion at all stages 
 of spiritual development, so that not only in the N., but also in 
 the 0. T., (see the whole 11th chapter of the Epistle to the 
 Hebrews), and, indeed, amongst the Gentiles themselves, the 
 existence of cr/Vr/j must be recognised. "Without faith it is 
 impossible to please God." (Heb. xi. 6.) Those faithful Gen- 
 tiles, therefore, whom God regards as the circumcision (Rom. 
 ii. 14, 26, 27), must have been well-pleasing to God from their 
 faith, in the same way that the true Israelities were. It also 
 appears from the gospel history, that there existed in many 
 Gentiles (the centurion of Capernaum, the Canaanitish woman, 
 and others),* a very powerful faith, and a lively receptivity for 
 the powers of the divine life. What, then, is the difference 
 between these degrees of faith ? From the point at which the 
 nohle Gentiles stood the object of faith was the Divine as an 
 undefined and general idea; on which account, in their case, it 
 
 * Worthy of especial remark are the passages with respect to Rahab, to whom, 
 as a Gentile woman, faith and the works of faith are attributed, Heb. xi. 31; Jus. 
 ii. 25. • 
 
CHAPTER in. 21— ol. 141 
 
 could only manifest itself as a longing, testifying of the remains, 
 of the divine likeness in man. This longing is not, properly ' 
 speaking, faith, until the moment when the desired object pre- 
 sents itself and is embraced by it, in the same way that the eye 
 does not see until the sun discovers itself. We might, therefore, 
 ascribe to the noble-minded Grentiles faith potentid, i. e., the 
 completely developed capacity for believing, which can only 
 come forward actu on the revelation of the divine to them,^ 
 either in doctrine or in life. The condition of a-r/tfr/'a may, on 
 the other hand, be considered as the undeveloped, or even sup- 
 pressed, capacity for believing, according as the term is taken 
 merely in the negative, or also in the privative sense. Even, 
 therefore, when this Gentile faith, so to speak, was exercised 
 towards the person of Christ Himself, as, for example, in the 
 case of the centurion of Capernaum, &;c. (Matt. viii. 1, etc.), it 
 remained still incapable of recognising in Him more than some- 
 thing divine, in a general way, although the thirst of the spirit 
 found itself truly quenched in coming to Him, in the same way 
 that the eye of the child rejoices in the sun, without knowing 
 what it is. On the other hand, from the position at which the 
 ti^ue Jews stood, the object of faith appears sis the personal 
 Godhead, and of this truth they were also conscious. But the 
 faith of the Jews still conceived of this personal appearance of 
 God as one merely future, to be realized in the Messiah, and 
 as something outway^d. It is only Christian faith that is able 
 to raise itself to the conception of the Divine Personality, as 
 having appeared in Christ, as a present and inward reality 
 Christ will not merely shine upon men from without by His 
 work and His Being, but he will dwell in them and work in them 
 inwardly, in order that man may become what He is. (J John 
 iv. 17.) As the human race in general has therefore to pass'^l 
 through these different stages of faith, so also the individual. I 
 In childhood, when the personality of man himself is as yet 
 but imperfectly unfolded, he believes only in the divine; in the 
 progress of his life the Divine personality becomes revealed to 
 him in Christ, but first only as an outward fact, whose full in- 
 fluence upon his heart is yet future; at last he experiences His 
 operation as something present and inward, and then only is 
 his ffiitlj completed; it becomes a devotion of himself to God, 
 an espousal of his soul to the heavenly bridegroom, whereby he 
 
1 " 
 
 142 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 becomes one with Christ, and Christ's whole work and Being 
 become his own. (Hosea ii. 20.)* In this form, therefore, faith 
 is one and the same thing with regeneration^ because, whilst 
 faith thus manifests its power, the whole disposition becomes a 
 new creature, the man of earth has becomxe a man of heaven 
 and of God. (2 Tim. iii. 17.) The lower degrees of faith, on 
 the other hand, are as yet without regeneration. (See notes to 
 John i. 1 7.) In all stages of development, the nature of fajJiL 
 remains the same, the receptivitj, of the inward life for that^ 
 winch is divine; but the latter reveals itself differently, in the 
 manifestation of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, and 
 on this account that faith which is one in its nature presents 
 itself in several forms. Nothing farther is needed towards the 
 explanation of t/ot/? in its subjective signification (fides qua 
 creditur), except to distinguish it from '?ri6rii, as used in an 
 objective sense, of the substance of that revelation which is 
 believed (fides quae creditur), but this need only be briefly 
 alluded to. When used of God (Rom. iii. 8; 2 Cor. i. 18; 2 
 Tim. ii. 13, several times) it denotes the faithfulness of God in 
 the fulfilment of his promises. 
 
 From this unfolding of the various meanings of tlie terms 
 used, we proceed now to the consideration of the contents of 
 the passage itself, Rom. iii. 21. In the first place, vwi {= h nZ 
 v\j\) Tiaipuj, Galat. iv. 4, and below in ver, 26), is evidently to be 
 referred to the time since the accomplishment of the work of 
 the Lord, so that the ages before Christ appear as the mighty 
 past.^l* In these, indeed, redemption, as a future blessing, was 
 announced beforehand, and confirmed by witnesses, in the 
 Thorah (Gen. xlix. 10; Ex. xxxiv. 6; Deut. xviii. 15) and in the 
 Prophets (Jer. xxiir. 6, xxxiii. 1 6; Is. xlv. 1 7, liii. 1, etc.); but 
 in these and in the symbols of the sacrificial worship, it was 
 hidden under a veil, on which account the saints of the 0. T. 
 itself had only an indistinct presentiment of the mode of re- 
 
 • When faith is represented as a ;^;a^/V^a (1 Cor. xii. 7, xiii. 3), it denotes the 
 capacity for appropriating the divine power, so as to perform miracles by means 
 of it. Faith, indeed, is requisite for the reception of all gifts of the Spirit (see 
 Matt. xvii. 1 9, 20), but it appears in a particularly heightened and concentrated 
 form as a special gift of grace in the passages above cited. 
 
 + Fritzsche wishes to take vwt ^i as a mei'e form of transition, and it is no 
 doubt correct to suppose that no determination of time is indicated in the relation 
 of ver. 21 to ver. 20. But the subsequent mention of the law and the prophets 
 renders it necessary to assert for vwt the sense of time. 
 
CHAPTER III. 21. 143 
 
 demption (1 Pet. i. 10, 11); it was not until the death and 
 resurrection of the Redeemer that the mystery was revealed. 
 (Rom. i. 18, xvi. 25, 26.)* Now the subject of this revelation 
 is this : the lofty aim of man, the 5/xa/ocrui/?j ©sou, is to be 
 obtained without law through faith in Christ. By the x^P'^ 
 vo[j.o\j, however, as is self-evident, it is not intended to express a re- 
 nunciation of the law, for the law is holy and good (vii. 12), and 
 necessary for all phases of life, but to designate the altered posi- 
 tion in which man stands to the law. By nature man stands under 
 the law, and is impelled by the law to dixamuvri ; this relation is to 
 cease; man can indeed never be above the law, but can very well 
 live ill the law, and really bear the law in his heart. Accord- 
 ingly, in 1 Tim. i. 9, it is said 3/xa/w vofMog ou xiTrai, on which pas- 
 sage Augustin's excellent remarks should be consulted (de spir. 
 et lit. cap. 10). This condition, in which man is thoroughly one 
 with the law, even as our Lord tells us God Himself is (Matt. 
 V. 48), constitutes exactly that hiTtaiosdvn ©soD, to which faith 
 brings us, because through faith man receives the being of God 
 into the depths of his soul. In this passage, therefore, x^P'^ 
 v6[Jjo\) is exactly parallel to %wf/V 'ioym vofiou (Gal. ii. 16), by which 
 it is not denied that good works cannot exist in the life of faith, 
 but only asserted that these works form the foundation of that 
 right relation to God which is restored under the new covenant, 
 good works being, in fact, merely the consequences of this rela- 
 tion. This foundation lies positively in the work of Christ, 
 negatively in faith, from which works both outwardly and in- 
 wardly conformable to the law necessarily proceed. Dead works, 
 in the sight of God, do not even constitute a dixaiotjvvri vofjbov, these, 
 therefore, cannot at all be meant. The profound meaning of 
 this verse will unfold itself before our eyes most plainly in de- 
 tail, if we review the false interpretations to which it has been 
 exposed. Of these the coarse Pelagian and Rationalistic view 
 refutes itself. According to this, vof^og is to be understood 
 simply of the ceremonial law, cr/cr/s of the assent of the under- 
 standing to the doctrine of Christ, and diTtaioffuvr) of morahty; so 
 that the sense would be, " outw^ard religious exercises avail no- 
 
 * St Paul does not merely say: The way to attain to the righteousness of God 
 is manifested, but this latter is itself revealed, for it is personally in Christ, and 
 appears in men only as Chi-ist in us; man has no righteousness of God besides 
 Christ; whatsoever of this righteousness the regenerate man possesses is entirely 
 of Christ. 
 
144 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 thing, but only virtue according to the pure moral precepts of 
 Christ/' In this entirely external view, however, one small cir- 
 cumstance has been overlooked, that according to the Apostle's 
 doctrine it is impossible for sinful man to exhibit this pure mora- 
 lity (viii. 3), the question therefore is, whence does the man ob- 
 tain strength for this work? That which is new in the gospel 
 does not consist in a more excellent system of morality, but in 
 this, that trie gospel opens a new source of strength, by means of 
 which true morality is attainable. Much subtler is the error of 
 the [Roman} Catholic Church in its doctrine of d/xaiodvrj. The 
 point of difference with respect to this doctrine between her and 
 the Protestant* Church is this, that the latter considers ^/xa/o- 
 ffvvT} as a judicial act of God (actus forensis), as a recognition as 
 righteous (declaratio pro justo),-f* whilst the former regards it 
 as a condition of soul called forth in the man (habitus infusus), 
 according to which " justificatio" has its degrees; so that on 
 the whole the Protestant view exalts the objective side, and the 
 Roman Catholic view the subjective. The Protestant Church by 
 no means denies the truth contained in the [Roman] Catholic 
 view; she places the subjective side under the name of sanctifica- 
 tion, immediately on a line with justification, and asserts that 
 sanctification is the necessary consequence of justification. The 
 Roman Catholic Church, however, denies the truth contained 
 in the Protestant doctrine, and it is just in this point that her 
 doctrine is erroneous. Considered as a mere question of gram- 
 mar, 5/xc6/oD(y^a/ is no doubt more properly interpreted "Justus 
 effici'' than, according to the Protestant Church, " pro justo 
 declarari;'' but since nothing can be declared by God to be 
 righteous which is not so in fact, it follows that the translation 
 of di-/,aiO(ruvyi, by the " righteousness which avails before God/' 
 is not false but only derived; 8ixa/ogvvrj &sou means in the first 
 place the righteousness which is wrought by God^ but thai 
 which God produces answers to its idea, and must therefore 
 
 * [Evangelische Kirche. The term Protestant has been adopted in the transla- 
 tion of this passage, as more suitable than Evanyelical, accordhig to the common 
 EngUsh usage of the words. 
 
 t It is quite false to suppose, that the Protestant Church regards justification 
 as something merely outward, because she sees in it a declaration of God, as 
 Mahler misrepresents us in his Symbolik. Justification contains, according to 
 Luther's system of doctrine, not merely remissio peccatorum, but also impulatio rn'riti 
 Christiy and the adoptio in filios Dei. The divine declaration is consequently to be 
 regarded as an inward operation in the consciousness of the man, as is, indeed, 
 necessarily implied in the idea: what God declares, is so by His very word. 
 
I 
 
 I 
 
 CHAPTER III. 21. HS 
 
 avail before Him,* The [Roman] Catholic Church, therefore, 
 gains nothing at all by this grammatical advantage; on the 
 other hand, she has not only let slip an important element of 
 the truth, but also, when this was proved to her, opposed it, an 
 element which the Protestant Church has established with 
 greater grammatical accuracy upon the formula XoyiZis&ai sig 
 diy.a/oduvriv, than upon the expression biy-aioG-jvri ©sol This import- 
 ant point is in fact the purely objective nature of justification, 
 which the expression actus for ensis is intended to affirm, so that 
 justification does not depend upon the degree of sanctification, 
 but entirely upon the purpose of God in Christ Jesus; by the 
 passive and active obedience of Christ the sin of all has been 
 expiated, and the obedience of all fulfilled in Him. God now 
 regards men no more as in Adam, but in Christ, from whom in 
 the work of conversion the germ of the new man is transmitted 
 to the individual. Thus only does the gospel become in truth 
 good news, since according to it the salvation of man does not 
 depend upon his own unstable conduct (on which supposition, 
 as the [Roman] Catholic Church desires and requires, a constant 
 uncertainty must remain in the man's mind here below whether 
 or not he be in a state of grace), but on the contrary, by the 
 unchangeable purpose of God, which the man apprehends in 
 faith, the instability of his own character is corrected. " If, 
 therefore, the man believes not, yet God abideth faithful, He 
 cannot deny himself" (2 Tim. ii. 13), and the unfaithfulness of 
 man is not removed by the fact that he strives to be faithful 
 (for this very endeavour is unfaithful, and in the best case can 
 only bring presumptuous pride to light), but simply and alone 
 by believing in the faithfulness of God in Christ, by means of 
 which faith he becomes partaker of a higher power. As, there- 
 fore, the mother of all sins is the not believing in Him whom 
 God hath sent, so to believe in Him is the mother of all virtues 
 (John xvi. 9) ; beside faith there can exist no virtue, but all that 
 is true and real in man proceeds /ro??i it. The [Roman] Catho- 
 lie Church erroneously understands by faith, fides formata, i. e., 
 fides cum aliis virtutibus, arriving at this notion by always re- 
 
 * Benecke's opinion that ^ixatotruvT] @tev in this passage, as well as in ver. 25, 2(5, 
 means the just Uia Dei qua Justus est, is just as inadmisisible, according to the con- 
 text, as his view, that •jr'i<rrii 'Iriffou denotes the faithfulness which Jesus exercises. 
 Faith stands here evidently in opposition to the i^yeis implied in the words x.'^^)?. 
 vpfiou. That, however, the grace and faithfulness of Christ produce faith also in 
 men, is brought forward by him with perfect justice. 
 
 K 
 
i46 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS, 
 
 garding faith as a dead assent of the understanding to a thing 
 as historically true, whilst, according to the Protestant view, as 
 well as according to Scripture itself, it is life and blessedness. 
 The doctrine of a meritum congrui, and meritum condigni, has 
 arisen entirely out of the Pelagianizing views of the [Roman] 
 Catholic Church, according to which man in the fall has only lost 
 a donum supernatarale, but still possesses- all his natural facul- 
 ties uninjured, and, consequently, the capability of loving God 
 and keeping His commandments. According to my view, the 
 transition from the state under the law to the state under the 
 gospel (of which we shall treat more at length in the notes to 
 chapter vii.), must be conceived of somewhat after this manner, 
 rin his state under the law, the man is able, by means of his na- 
 / tural powers, which, however, can never be considered as wholly 
 ' separated from the influences of the Logos, to perform certain 
 opera civilia. But the more powerfully the light of truth works 
 in a man's mind, the more plainly will he perceive that all his 
 endeavours to establish a perfect righteousness are vain, and 
 that his best works, on account of the selfishness which cleaves 
 to them, are, as Augustin says, severely, indeed, but yet truly, 
 but splendida vitia, i. e., the wild fruit of a degenerate tree. 
 With this l-r/yvufft? rr^ a[Laprirx(s (iii. 20) is connected the longing 
 for deliverance (vii. 24), and if the preaching of the gospel 
 brings the true Redeemer within his reach, faith apprehends 
 this Saviour and appropriates both Him and His work. On 
 the man's side no merit, no righteousness, is pre- supposed, but 
 simply a living faith in the merits and righteousness of Christ ; 
 these faith takes up into itself, and thus everything which is 
 Christ's becomes the man's. This transfer to the sinful man 
 of the being of Christ is denoted by the expression, " righteous- 
 ness is imputed to him." That work which was objectively ac- 
 complished upon the cross, is thus subjectively applied to the 
 individual believer, that germ of the new man which exists in 
 Christ is grafted into and born in the old man. This act of 
 transfer is, therefore, a mysterious occurrence in the depths of 
 the soul, a new creation, which none can effect by his own 
 power, a pure gift of the Spirit, who " breatheth where He 
 listeth." Since, however, in every regenerate man, the old man 
 is still living, and, therefore, sinful motions must still exist, the 
 question arises, how can God, the Omniscient, the Holy, the 
 Just One, regard the imperfectly sanctified man as entirely 
 
 I 
 
r 
 
 CHAPTER III. 21. 147 
 
 righteous? The anwser is: Because as God judges the man, not 
 according to that which is realized in him, but according to that 
 which is in Christ. As all men have fallen in Adam, so in Christ 
 have they all been raised again ; God therefore recognises all as 
 righteous in Him, even generations yet to come. If the divine 
 declaration of this great fact is made to a man, and he receives 
 it in faith, it produces in him the new life; but inasmuch as this 
 life is derived from another, and can, therefore, also be lost, it 
 does not constitute the decisive point in the divine judgment as 
 to the state of grace. And therefore, also, the believer, in his 
 own judgment, must not found his hopes of salvation upon his 
 inward condition, but upon the merits of Christ ; however, as an 
 evidence of being in a state of grace, the inward condition is im- 
 portant, because faith in Christ unto justification cannot be con- 
 ceived to exist without an inward transformation, and powers 
 received from above, which enable the regenerate man to do that 
 which under the law he could not do. (See notes to Rom. vii. 
 24, viii. 3.) '^' 
 
 Ver. 22, 23. This way of salvation by faith is now equally 
 necessary for all, because the voiLog could conduct none to the 
 diKotioffvvvi Qsou in that all without exception have sinned, even if not 
 actually in such gross forms as those mentioned in chapter i. and 
 ii., yet inwardly, because the germ of all sins lies in every one. 
 
 In the £/V Tai/ras" xal svi 'xdvTas we may observe not merely a 
 heaping together of synonymes, but a climax ; the image of a 
 flood of grace seems to be at the foundation of the expression, 
 a flood which penetrates to all, and even streams over all. The 
 words bixaiotsbvn Qeou (scil. sp^srai) he Tavrag are, however, only to 
 be understood of the divine purpose, " it is intended for all,'' 
 without any intimation of the actual restoration of all. The 
 expression mgrts 'ivjgou stands for o-Ztfr/^ etg "i^govvy as elsewhere 
 Ti'ffrig QsQv for g/V Qsov. (Mark xi. 22; Acts iii. 16; Gal. ii. 20.) 
 In the words 'ruvreg rKJjaprov we are not to think merely of actual 
 sin, the consequence of hereditary sin, but especially of the 
 latter. Even where no peccata actualia have been committed, 
 as, e. g.f in the case of unconscious children, the power of re- 
 demption is still needed. (See notes on vii. 12.) To under- 
 stand v(frspovff&ai rrjg do^rjS rou Gsou of the approval of God, as 
 "Winer, Fritzsche, and Reiche still wish, or a cause of boasting 
 before God, for which xot,uyri[j.a commonly stands, as Rosen- 
 miiller and Tholuck explain it, is plainly feeble. RUckert has 
 
148 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS, 
 
 decided in favour of the old interpretation, which makes it 
 refer to the image of God in which man was created, and this 
 appears to me also to be alone admissible. There is no diffi- 
 culty in giving this meaning to the expression do^a rov ©sou, 
 according to the analogy of niJl*' lilS (^^^ notes on John i. 1), 
 even though it does not happen to occur again in the N. T. 
 Lastly, the comparison of these words of St Paul in ver. 22, dixai- 
 o<fuvY} &SOV 3/a T/gTiMs with the parallel passage, Gal. v. 5, U 'rrla- 
 rsui i'k'riba hixamhvrig a<Ki%hiyJi(j.i^(x. is instructive. The words in 
 the present passage are spoken by the Apostle, whilst taking an 
 entirely objective view of the subject; in Christ the righteous- 
 ness of God exists for believers absolutely complete; but the 
 subjective mode of contemplating it has also its truth, althougli 
 this occurs less frequently in St Paul's writings. From this point 
 of view diTiawffuvri is an object of hope, because in this world it can 
 only be imperfectly realized in man. (See the Com. on Gal. v. 5.) 
 Ver. 24, 25. Since, then, they cannot become righteous by 
 merit, they are made righteous gratuitously, i. e., without pre- 
 vious works and proper deserts, out of pure grace through the 
 redemption of Christ. (Grace is the operative cause, redemption 
 the means by which it works.) We arrive now at another very 
 important point, namely, at the question. How then has Christ 
 introduced the possibility of the dixaioavvn Qsov through faith in 
 Himself? The Apostle answers this question by laying stress, 
 not upon the communication of a higher spirit through Christ 
 and upon His divine glory, but just on the contrary, upon His 
 deepest humiliation. His sufferings and His death, by which he 
 declares that redemption was accomplished. Now, in the first 
 place, with respect to the language of the Bible on this point, 
 we meet with three expressions, by which the redemptive 
 agency of Christ is designated. 1st. The term aTrcXurpwc/g, of 
 which we have already treated in the notes on Matt. xx. 28. 
 St Paul generally makes use of this form (Ephes. i. 7, 14, iv. 
 30; 1 Cor. i. 30), inasmuch as the a^rr expresses the idea of 
 making free more strongly than the simple Xurpua/g. The figure 
 of slavery lies at the foundation of this word,* from wliich 
 slavery man must be redeemed by means of a ransom (on which 
 account f^ayopd^oj is used. Gal. iii. 13, iv. 5), in order to attain to 
 
 • No doubt, therefore, redemption and atonement are symhoUc.nl expressions, 
 but symbols full of essential truth, which cannot find any substitute whatsoever in 
 human language, and are therefore necessary. 
 
CHAPTER III. 24, 25. 149 
 
 freedom, in the ^same way that (furrip/a, (Rom. v. 9, 10), implies 
 some great danger or distress, d'TruiXnot, from which he is to bo 
 delivered. The Xurpov is the blood of Christ, which constitutes 
 the offering made by love to justice, by means of which objective 
 transaction alone it is that real forgiveness of sins in God, and 
 the appropriation of the same in the individual instance, become 
 possible. 2nd. We find the expression xaraXXayr} (Rom. v. 11, 
 ix. 15; 2 Cor. v. IS, 19), at the root of which lies the idea of an 
 enmity which is done away with. The choice of this particular 
 word to express this thought is, however, of the utmost import- 
 ance; KaraXXdffffu, in fact, means, in the first place, " to change, 
 exchange,'" and only afterwards " to reconcile.'' (Rom. v. 10; 
 2 Cor. V. 18, 19.) In reconciliation, namely, those contraries 
 which stand harshly opposed to one another, make, so to speak, 
 mutual exchanges, and form once more an harmonious unity. 
 So Christ takes upon Himself our misery, and imparts to us 
 His glory, in order to reconcile us to God. The distinction 
 which Tittmann assumes between 5/aXXa<r<rw, to remove a reci- 
 procal enmity, and xaraXXactfw, to remove an enmity existing 
 on one side only, has been proved by Tholuck to be utterly un- 
 founded (Bergpred. p. 192, etc.)* We find, 3rd, and lastly, the 
 expression / 7.o6s (1 John ii. 2, iv. 10; /Xacxgc^a/, Heb. ii. 17), 
 the proper term, even in Old Testament language, for expres- 
 sing the idea of expiation by sacrifice.*!* Christ is therefore 
 Himself called the Sua/a or rr^ocrtpo^d (Ephes. v. 2, Heb. x. 12; and 
 vdcya, 1 Cor. v. 7), or else diLvog (John i. 29, 36; 1 Pet. i. 19), 
 dow'oj/ (Rev. v. 6, 8, 12, 13, vi. 1, etc.) With respect to the 
 relation in which these expressions stand to one another, we 
 may, however, further remark, that xaraXXay?? and yXao;aog 
 always denote the beginning of Christ's work, whilst acroXu- 
 Tp(,)Gig does not only include the beginning, but the end also (see 
 
 * In Heb. ii. 15, we find 0c.9rxXXu.rTnv but = Ikivh^ouv. 
 
 t Nitzsch, in his " System of Christian Doctrine," distingnishes between " Ver- 
 sohnung" and " Versuhnung," i.e., "reconciliation" and "propitiation,*' This 
 distinction is vei'y serviceable for the maintenance of the diflPerence between KxraX- 
 Xa.yn and tXenrfios. That a separation of these two expressions has not long ago 
 been established, may be explained from the fact, that the deep meaning which re- 
 sides in the idea of propitiation had entirely escaped the mind of our whole time. 
 It was not, in fact, merely in theology that the importance of this idea was over- 
 looked, but also in the science of law; punishment was degraded into a mere means 
 of man's invention Jbr deterring men from crime, instead of receiving its sanctiHca- 
 tion by means of that propitiation of justice which is manifested therein. In the 
 recovery of this idea, an essential advance has been made towards deeper views of 
 the whole work of Christ. 
 
1 50 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 notes on Rom. viii. 23 ; 1 Cor. i. 30), so that this is the most 
 comprehensive term, comprising even ayiaa/Mog itself; (it stands 
 
 parallel to a^eC/g ruv a/^a^r/wv, Ephes. i. 7; Col. i. 14, whilst (ir\ Xoy/- 
 ZofJ^ivog ccvroTg ra rrapaTrdJ/nara uvtuv stands in opposition to xaraX- 
 Xdffffuv, 2 Cor. V. 19). 
 
 But in the second place, as regards the ideas themselves, de- 
 signated by these terms, they belong to the most difficult in 
 Holy Scripture. At the same time, the last few years have 
 brought to light such profound views on these subjects, that, in 
 fact, very much has been done towards their solution. We may 
 indeed not only consider that rationalistic view to be set aside, 
 which wholly misunderstands the essence of Christianity, whilst 
 it reduces the work of Christ to doctrine and example, but also 
 the infinitely deeper mode of representation of Schleiermacher 
 (Glaubenslehre P. ii. p. 252) to be disproved.* The latter 
 theologian, namely, considers the work of Christ as the Re- 
 deemer to precede His work of reconciliation, and considers 
 both only from his own subjective point of view. Accordingly, 
 redemption is, in his opinion, only the communication to be- 
 lievers of the sinlessness and perfection of Christ, and reconcilia- 
 tion the adoption into that blessed fellowship with Christ, which 
 follows, as a necessary consequence, from that communication. 
 This is, however, an entirely arbitrary definition of the terms. 
 But besides this, in the above view, a most essential point is 
 left out of sight, namely, the blottiTig out of the guilt of siriy 
 which Schleiermacher was obliged in consistency to omit, be- 
 cause he had denied the reality of evil, and was therefore satis- 
 fied with a mere replenishment of man's emptiness. This one 
 point, therefore, it yet remains for us to discuss, — how the 
 death of Christ is related to the forgivenness of sins, and 
 whether this fact has reference merely to men, or also to the 
 Divine Being Himself. And here, in the first place, I feel my- 
 self constrained to remark, that the views expressed in my 
 notes on Matt. xx. 28, implying that reconciliation was an act 
 on man's side alone, have been modified by some recently pub- 
 lished profound researches, as I have also taken occasion to re- 
 mark in my notes to John iii. 16 (in the second volume of the 
 
 * Usteri, in the fourth edition of his " Paulinischer Lehrbegriff " (p. 86, etc.), 
 still adheres to Schleiei-machei-'s view of this doctrine. Amongst the most recent 
 exegetical commentators, RUckert has, in particular, taken a correct exegetical 
 view of St Paul's doctrine, without, however, having been able to adopt the idea of 
 an atonement, not merely on man's part, but also on God's. 
 
 J 
 
I 
 
 CHAPTER III. 24, 25. 15J 
 
 Commentary, third edition, p. 108, note). For the most pro- 
 found observations on this subject we are indebted to a man 
 who has deserved well of Theology and Philosophy, no less than 
 of Law, Carl Friedrich GdscheL* In fact, we may say, if recon- 
 ciliation were an act taking place in man only, we could have no- 
 thing to do with a *' ministry of reconciliation'' (2 Cor. v. 18); 
 for then to preach reconciliation would not be to announce an act 
 of Godj but only an act of men^ and indeed only of a few men, 
 for how many are there who will not be reconciled unto God ! 
 Even if, therefore, in the N. T., the expression, " God is recon- 
 ciled,'' does not occur (see the note to John iii. ] 6), because He 
 appears throughout it as the Author and Founder of this recon- 
 ciliation, yet there is contained in the very idea of sacrifice and 
 expiation (as the 0. T. plainly shows), a necessary reference to 
 an altered relation of God Himself Every sacrifice is intended 
 to expiate the guilt of men, and propitiate the anger of God, 
 consequently the sacrifice of all sacrifices, in which alone all 
 the rest have their truth, must effect that which the others only 
 foreshadoiu. Since now the view of the Scotists (gratuita ac- 
 ceptatio) disproves itself, inasmuch as God can never regard an 
 object as that which it is not, and the view of Grotius (accep- 
 tilatio) is erroneous, inasmuch as according to it the law and 
 righteousness are to be considered as detached from the Divine 
 Being and Nature; nothing remains but the highly acute 
 theory of Anselm (satisfactio vicaria), a theory, when rightly 
 understood, just as consonant with the doctrine of Scripture as 
 with the demands of philosophy. The elements of which it is 
 composed are, on the one side, the enormity of sin in itself, and 
 the guilt and liability to punishment which proceed from it; 
 and, on the other side, the impossibility of conceiving in God 
 one attribute as active without the other, that is to say, there- 
 fore, in this case love without righteousness, on which account 
 God cannot forgive sin on mere repentance, as a man can who is 
 himself a debtor; and between both these elements comes the 
 Person of the God-Man, who is not a man, amongst and by 
 
 • See Goschel's '* Zerstreute Blatter aus den Hand und Hiilfsacten eines Juris- 
 ten." Erfurt, 1832. See besides the Essays in Tholuck's lit. Anseige, 1833. 
 Num. 8-14. An essay of the same in the Evang. Kirchen Zeitung. 1834, January 
 No. Very well worth reading are also the treatises of Stier, which appeared earlier 
 (Andeut. P. i. p. 379, sqq., more accurately defined in the Andeut P. ii. p. 24, 
 sqq.), of Meyer (in the " Blatter fUr hOhere Wahrheit," vol. vi. 384, etc., xi. 206, 
 etc.), and Tholuck's work " Von der SUnde, und vom VersOhner." 
 
152 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 the side of many others, but the man, the second spiritual Adam 
 of the whole race,* who is just as much connected with sinners 
 by means of His true though most holy humanity, as with the 
 Lord of the world by means of His divine Nature, in whom 
 love is manifested as brightly as righteousness in the Father, 
 and who again reveals the Father's love as brightly as His own 
 righteousness. Tliat, therefore, which cannot be conceived as 
 united in any human act (in that man can ever only exercise 
 either grace or justice), the highest act of grace, the absolution 
 of a whole sinful race, and the perfectly righteous punishment 
 of sinners, in the death of Him who bore the whole race in 
 Himself (as the centre embraces the collective rays of the cir- 
 cumference), is all harmonized in the death of Christ; and 
 therefore the giving up of the Son by the Father, and the free 
 sacrifice of the Son, constitute the highest Act of God, worthy 
 to form the subject of preaching to the whole human race, be- 
 cause it has power to breathe life into the dead bones, and 
 truly to impart that peace which flows from the forgiveness of 
 sins. It is to this objective act of God that faith attaches it- 
 self according to Protestant doctrine, and by the powerful glow 
 of its flame all those half or wholly Pelagian views must be 
 dissipated, which would have the divine life of love to derive 
 assistance from the exertions of man's natural powers. For 
 where life is not awakened by gazing on that serpent which is 
 lifted up (an effect just the contrary to that produced by be- 
 holding the head of Medusa), there the most exactly defined 
 commands, and the most fakir-like exertions and acts of self- 
 denial, can only produce a bare respectability, or ridiculous 
 conceit. In this fountain thus opened alone flows the water of 
 life, on this altar alone can heavenly fire be obtained; — here 
 righteousness and grace melt into an ineffable unity, as they 
 are one in God himself; for the forgiveness of sins on account 
 
 of the death of Christ is ohbs xara v6[x,ov, obb\ Kara v6fj.o\i, aXka uvsp 
 
 v6[Jjov xai vrtip vofiovy i. e., not according to the law, foj.* by that 
 man was to bear his own sin, and yet not against the law, since 
 in the sufferings of Christ satisfaction was rendered to his de- 
 mands, but above the law, because grace is mightier than right- 
 
 * With respect to the representafim character, a more detailed explanation will 
 be found in the notes to Rom v. 12, sqq. We are immediately concerned in this 
 place only with the idea of satisfaction, which is quite scriptural, even though the 
 expression is not found in Scripture. 
 
CHAPTER III. 24, 25. 153 
 
 eousness, and for the law, because it is itself established there- 
 by. (See Tholuck " von der Sunde, p. 108, 3rd edition.) 
 
 It is only in this mode of comprehending it that the represen- 
 tation of the Apostle receives also its exact verbal interpreta- 
 tion. He calls Christ iXaffrTipm, a word which is not, however, 
 to be taken=;Xao'/A05, or to be explained with the addition of 
 dvfjba of the sin-oifering, but which must be understood, with 
 Imh/j^a supplied, of the covering of the Ark of the Covenant, in 
 which expression, at all events, the idea of expiation is most 
 distinctly enunciated, even according to the etymology of the 
 word. This covering, in fact, made of fine gold, 2i cubits long 
 and a cubit and a half broad, at whose ends the two cherubim 
 stood overshadowing the ark with their wings, was the throne 
 of the Shechinah, symbol of the presence of God; on this ac- 
 count it is called, Heb. iv. 16, dpovog ^dpiTo^. (See Exod. xxv- 
 17, etc.) On this mercy-seat the High Priest sprinkled once 
 every year, on the great day of atonement, the blood of a bul- 
 lock seven times, and the blood of a goat seven times, to make 
 atonement for the sin of the people (Levit. xvi. 18, etc.) This 
 lid is called now in the 0. T. j-^'^b^, from *^n5, " to cover," i. e., 
 according to the Old Testament view, " to forgive,'' because sin 
 in this dispensation could not yet be entirely removed, but only 
 remained suspended through the long-suifering of God, until 
 the completion of that true sacrifice which was able to take it 
 away. The LXX. translate it iXaffrriptov. As now the whole 
 form of worship of the 0. T. was symbolical, so this institution 
 also represented the real truth in an image. As the mercy- 
 seat of the tabernacle presented itself to the spirits of the 
 people as the place from which the forgivenees of their sins 
 proceeded ; so also is the Redeemer solemnly presented, in the 
 Holy of Holies of the universe, as in the true Temple of God, 
 to the believing gaze of the whole of that spiritual Israel, which 
 is gathered out of all nations, in order that they may receive 
 forgiveness of sins through His blood. As He is therefore the 
 sacrifice, so is He also the mercy-seat itself, because all contra- 
 dictions are harmonized in him; " God was in Christ reconciling 
 the world unto Himself (2 Cor. v. 19.) So God himself was 
 enthroned between the cherubim, above the sacred covering of 
 the Ark of the Covenant, and accepted the offering made for 
 the forgiveness of the sins of the people. (Lev. xvi. 2; Heb. 
 ix. 7, etc.) 
 
154 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 On the side of man faith alone is required {ha rrigrscag is not 
 to be connected with dinaio-j/ji^svoi dupsdv,' so as to stand parallel 
 
 witll dia rri? drroXvrpdjffeug, but with }Xa<sry}piov, only we are not to 
 consider this latter as dependent upon ^/cr/g, but must supply- 
 as follows, " which must be received through faith in His blood''); 
 but this faith is not by any means to be regarded as a human 
 work, but as the gift of God, and is indeed cr/or/g iv rOj avrou 
 cc'i'/j^ari. (ulffTtg h di/tiari is used according to the analogy of 
 mffng h Xpiffru), Galat. iii. 26; and several times in Ephes. i. 15; 
 in which phrases no interchange of prepositions is to be as- 
 sumed, for the indwelling of believers in Christ, and of Christ 
 in them, and their abiding with Him and His blood is indicated 
 by them.) But with respect to the usual assertion, that af/^a 
 denotes the bloody death of Christ, and that this represents the 
 collective sufferings of Christ, it is not indeed untrue, but still 
 does not exhaust the meaning. We 7iever find a cr/Vr/g sJg 
 Sdvarov spoken of,* it is the blood of Christ which is constantly 
 mentioned. (Acts xx. 28; Rom. v. 9; Ephes. i. 7, ii. 13; Col. 
 i. 14, 20; ] Pet. i. 18, 19; 1 John i. 7; Heb. ix. 12, 14, x. 19, 
 xiii. 12; Rev. i. 5, v. 9, vii. 14, xii. 11.) The constant use of 
 this language must be founded upon some inward reason, and 
 this Heb. ix. 22 plainly discovers to us, when it says, " without 
 shedding of blood there is no remission of sins."' (See Levit. 
 xvii. 11.) For, as we find it expressed in this latter passage, 
 *' the life of the body is in the blood." The phrase -r/tfr/g slg 
 ddmrov would therefore be much less suitable, inasmuch as in it 
 the idea of the forgiveness of sins and the expiatory sacrifice 
 does not come forward, and Mmro?, consequently, only denotes 
 death as such, the mere dying. But the death of Christ, which 
 is life itself (John i. 8), is the effusion or pouring forth of His 
 holy life, i. e.y of His blood, which He also communicates con- 
 stantly to His people in faith, and in the sacrament of the 
 Lord's supper. (John vi. 47, 54.) The formula 'rigri? h rip 
 a'/fMari is therefore in the highest degree important, in that it 
 declares, that the shedding of the blood and the death of Christ, 
 who is called the life itself, is the expiation of the sin of the 
 world, and not something dead, but the most living thing pos- 
 sible, so that in His death, death itself seems to be swallowed 
 
 * We find in Rom. v. 1 0, " we are reconciled to God by the death of His Son," 
 only because the opposition with ^uii required this expression. In Col. i. 22, 
 feivaroi 18 more exactly defined in ver. 20. 
 
CHAPTER III. 24, 25. 155 
 
 up of life. As therefore the vial of balsam, if it is to refresh 
 all those who are in the house by the odour of its contents, 
 must be opened and poured forth, so also did the Redeemer 
 breathe out into the dead world that fulness of life which was 
 contained in Him, by pouring forth His holy blood, the sup- 
 porter of His life,* and this voluntarily, since none could take 
 His life from Him. (John x. 18.) Thus did He, through the 
 Holy Spirit, oifer Himself as the most precious sacrifice to Grod, 
 that He might purge our consciences by the sprinkling of His 
 blood, to serve the living God. (Heb. ix. 14.) 
 
 As to the concluding words of ver. 25, d/xaiogvvri, in the con- 
 nexion dg svdei^iv rra bi'/iaiodvvni avrov, might no doubt be under- 
 stood of the goodness of God, which manifests itself as plainly 
 as His strict justice in the sacrifice of Christ; but the addition 
 of Bia TYiv Tupsm x. r. X., and ver. 31, demand here, in the first 
 place, the adoption of the latter signification. Those sins of 
 the world before Christ, which had hitherto been, as it were, 
 overlooked (Ps. Ixxviii. 88), rendered necessary the final mani- 
 festation of God's righteousness, and were punished by the 
 righteous God in Christ, the representative of the whole race, 
 who voluntarily gave Himself up for all. At the same time, as 
 is proved by the Tphg hbn^iv x. r. x. in ver. 26 (which is by no 
 means to be considered as a simple repetition of g/V hht^tv), 
 there is a constant allusion to that grace which manifests itself 
 in the work of redemption, and is particularly expressed in the 
 bi^aioZvra x. r. X. ; and, in fact, both these attributes, justice and 
 mercy, like the divine and human natures in Christ, can pro- 
 perly only be considered separate in abstracto in the work of 
 redemption, inasmuch as they are actually amalgamated into a 
 perfect unity therein. 
 
 Ildps(f/g does not occur in any other place in the Bible ; if it 
 had therefore been intended in St Paul's mind to be synony- 
 mous with a(ps(fig, as was grammatically possible, the Apostle 
 
 • No doubt a true and deep idea lies at the foundation of Ackermann's inge- 
 nious treatise " On the chemical feature in the Christian conception of sanctifica- 
 tion" (in Fichte's Zeitschrift ffir Philosophie and speculative Theologie. Bonn. 
 1837. 1 vol. 2d part, pp. 232, sqq.) ; this namely, that an analogy exists between 
 the operation of Christ and His blood (i. e., of His life) upon the sinful race of 
 man, and chemical agents and reagents ; that therefore God has formed Christ by 
 means of the development of His human life into a special source of healing and 
 principle of attraction. But this idea, when carried out into detail, easily gives 
 rise to dangerous errors, and tends to lower the whole process of restoration which 
 is revealed in Christianity into a mere physical one. 
 
 [The Tr-anslator has thought it expedient to omit the remainder of this note.] 
 
156 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 would doubtless have cliosen, in preference, the latter well- 
 known word. Exod. xxxii. 34, in connexion with Acts xvii. 
 80, is a sufficient explanation of this passage; IrrspibsTv^^y^, 
 
 there signifies "the overlooking/' or "letting alone." The 
 a^u^Kprrifiara vpoyeyovoru can, however, according to the following 
 sv ru) vxii xdipOj, only mean the sins of the world before Christ's 
 coming, in connexion, of course, with that original sin of 
 Adam's, which was the source of all subsequent transgressions. 
 In the 0. T. there was no real, but only a symbolical forgive- 
 ness of sins;* the former could not then exist (Heb. ix. 12, 13), 
 because it was only through their relation to Christ that the 
 sacrifices of the 0. T. received their power of forgiveness. 
 
 Finally, nothing can be more erroneous than, as Riickert and 
 Reiche have , recently proposed, to confine the redeeming and 
 forgiving power of Christ to those sins only which were com- 
 mitted in the time of ayvo/a, and to deny the possibility of any 
 forgiveness in the case of believers. This view, consistently 
 carried out, would entirely destroy the very essence of the gos- 
 pel, and convert it into glad tidings for the unbelieving only, 
 but for believers a new and even more hopeless law. The utter 
 fallacy of this opinion will, however, be demonstrated more at 
 length in the notes on vii. 14, etc. Much rather may we regard 
 the time of ayvoid as belonging not only to the whole race, and 
 to whole nations, but also to every individual, at the same time 
 that it must ever be regarded as a state which only gradually 
 disappears. We must, if I may be allowed thus to express my- 
 self, conceive of humanity as divided not merely according to 
 its breadth, but also according to its length ; and every indivi- 
 dual passes through, in his own case, the same stages of devel- 
 opment as the race. (The connexion of h rfj dvoxp ^oD ©eoD with 
 what follows is quite unsuitable; it must be construed with 
 <xdpi(sig, of which it discovers the inward ground.) 
 
 Ver. 26. As the Apostle had first exhibited the side of seve- 
 
 • The expression h a<pi(ns tZv /ifi-a^nuv or •ra^ei'jrrufiu.ruv (Eplies. i. 7,) must 
 not be confounded with oi(pi(ris afjt.K^T^fji,a.roi. The theocratical forgiveness of any 
 particular sin was possible even under the O. T., but the forgiveness of all sins, 
 actual sins as well as hereditary sin, can only proceed from Christ, and is a divine 
 act. It presupposes, namely, nothing less than the ci-eation of a new and holy 
 man, and the slaying of the old man, inasmuch as it is regeneration itself, on which 
 account the forgiveness of sins is at the same time life and salvation. This hap- 
 pens therefore also only once or twice, and is only confirmed from time to time to 
 the believer, as in the Eucharist ; the former, however, is frequently repeated. 
 (1 John ii. 1; Job xxxiii. 29.) 
 
CHAPTER III. 27 — 29. 157 
 
 rity, he now also brings forward that of grace, which no less 
 displays itself in the work of redemption. If to designate this 
 he likewise uses the expression hxaioabvyi, this arises no doubt 
 from his desire to accumulate expressions of the same kind. 
 As biKaiodxjvTt itself proceeds from Christ, as He produces nothing 
 but d/xa/Qv?, so also His work, in every form of its manifestation, 
 has the divine htxaichvn as its foundation. 
 
 To consider irpk hhi^tv as a mere repetition of the foregoing 
 etshbsi^tv is not quite suitable; to be sure, h rw vuv xaipSj might 
 seem to be in its favour; but at the same time, bizaiomra x. r. X. 
 is too much opposed to this construction, — In the words, sh rh 
 ihai ahrhv bixaiov is implied at the same time the idea of His 
 being recognised as such by men. — AtxaioZv can only be under- 
 stood as a manifestation of grace. 
 
 Ver. 27-29. After this explanation of the nature of the new 
 way of salvation, St Paul returns to that question, which he 
 had been treating in iii. 1, etc., whether, namely, there was any 
 advantage in the case of the Jews,* and answers, no! ('eh- 
 xXs/w, see Galat. iv. 1 7, means " to exclude, i. e., to make un- 
 availing, inadmissible.") For since in this place the question 
 is not concerning such works as the law could alone produce, 
 but concerning faith. Gentiles as well as Jews had access to 
 this grace, in case they believed. If the Jews had lived in true 
 love, they would have rejoiced on this account, but instead of 
 this, they were offended because God was so gracious. 
 
 No>o5 has here the more extensive signification of " divine 
 ordinance or institution.'' The gospel may therefore be called 
 the voij^og 'T/Vrewg, in SO far as it is that divine ordinance which 
 requires of men faith. And indeed faith alone (as Luther 
 rightly translates this passage in the sense of the Apostle), for 
 in it is contained every thing, as the collective fruit of the tree 
 in its germ, beyond and besides it there is nothing which belongs 
 to the same spiritual position. Since, however, Gentiles as 
 well as Jews are here spoken of, the gp/a vo/xou can only mean 
 the works of the moral law, which are derived from the will of 
 God, demanding man's obedience.'f- These can be, in the most 
 
 • In the conception of xoe.vx*io-is is implied that which belongs to self, as op- 
 posed to grace ; this iv. 2 shows with especial clearness. To i^iKkiia-h we must 
 supply vTo rov @iov. 
 
 f Glockler is quite mistaken in his view, that x^m^U i^ym vof/,ou is to be trans- 
 lated, "without the law of works," as the very collocation of the words show. 
 'I he law, according to St Paul, is only to be abolished in its old form, in which it 
 
lo8 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 favourable case, but the blossoms of the man's own life, and 
 are therefore transitory like this life itself, but the works of 
 faith partake of the eternal nature of that principle from which 
 they proceed. 
 
 Ver. 30-31. The one Grod stands in the same relation to all 
 His children, and His diiFerent modes of dealing do not contra- 
 dict one another,* but afford to one another mutual support. 
 
 'E-rs/Vsp quandoquidem, siquidem, is nowhere else found in 
 the N. T. On this account, also, it is not probable, that the 
 reading e'/'jrsp, which Lachman has admitted into his text from 
 A.C. and other MSS., etc.. of critical authority, is the original 
 one. — 'Ex, and d/u mgrsug do not stand parallel to one another, 
 as designations of the source and cause, as Reiche still supposes; 
 in this case sx rrig mcnug must also have been written ; rather 
 does hoL rng 'TT/greojc alone refer to the principal thought. 'Ek 
 Wiarsug has a special reference to the Jews, (see iv. 12), who 
 supposed that they were partakers of divine grace, not as be- 
 lievers, but simply as the children of Abraham after the flesh. 
 The gospel establishes the law, because it is the most sublime 
 manifestation of the holiness and strictness of God. Sin never 
 appears more fearful than at Golgotha, where, on account of it, 
 God spared not His own Son. 
 
 § 7. ABRAHAM JUSTIFIED BY FAITH. 
 (IV. 1—25.) 
 
 In order to demonstrate more exactly the connexion between 
 the N. T. and the law, and to vindicate the gospel from every 
 charge of introducing anything strange into religion, the Apostle 
 next proceeds to show, that even the saints of the 0. T., amongst 
 whom he mentions Abraham and David, had walked in the path 
 of righteousness by faith. In order rightly to comprehend this 
 whole argument, we must further remark, as was already ob- 
 
 appears as making requirements upon the man from without; in the economy of 
 grace, it presents itself again as an inwardly operative law. (See notes to Galat. 
 ii. 16, 18.) 
 
 • Calvin has this apt remark on the passage: "Ubi lex fidei opponitur, ex eo 
 statim quandam repugnantiae suspicionem caro ai'ripit, ac si alterura alteri adver- 
 saretur. Prsesertim vero facile obtinet falsa hsec imaginatio inter eos, qui prsepos- 
 terk legis intelligentid imbuti nihil aliud in ea quserunt quam operum justitiam, 
 promissionibus omissis." 
 
CHAPTER III. 27 — 29. 159 
 
 served on Matt. xi. 11, that the position of all the pious men in 
 the 0. T. was by no means similar. There were some amongst 
 them whose piety wore a purely legal expression, e. g,, Elijah ; 
 others, again, in whom, wliilst the legal form retired into the 
 background, the life of faith was predominant. To these last 
 belong, in an especial degree, Abraham and David, the develop- 
 ment of whose spiritual life bears in fact considerable resem- 
 blance to that of believing Christians. At the same time, with 
 all this similarity, we must not lose sight of the difference be- 
 tween them, for by so doing we should rob the gospel of its 
 specific character (John i. 17.) The faith of Abraham and 
 David had indeed, as well as the Christian's, the person of the 
 Redeemer for its object, but then it was directed to Him that 
 should come, not to Him who had appeared ; it was only after 
 the appearance of Christ and the accomplishment of His work 
 that real power could proceed from him. (John vii. 39. The 
 very regeneration of the 0. T., if we are willing to assume its 
 existence, (see notes on Matt. xi. 11), can therefore only be re- 
 garded as symbolical^ a character which the Apostle himself 
 seems to ascribe to it in ver. 23. 
 
 Ver. 1, 6. St Paul proves from the 0. T. itself, that the 
 righteousness of Abraham had not proceeded from his works.* 
 He names Abraham as being the natural progenitor of the Jew- 
 ish race, as one whose spiritual character formed the illustrious 
 example to which all Israelites looked. 
 
 The phrase rl ovv spov/Msv has here lost its ordinary form ; for 
 r/ must be connected with svprjxsvai. If we were to take r/ 
 spovfji.6v in the usual way, we should still be obliged to supply r/ 
 to ihprixsmi. See iEschyl. Eumenid. v. 154.) In fact, St Paul 
 does not wish to ask, what has Abraham found or obtained, but 
 how has he received that righteousness which we allow him 
 to have ? This thought is, however, intimated in the turn, what 
 has he obtained xara gdpTta.. The answer therefore is also not 
 completely carried out, but only negatively ; ver. 3 contains, on 
 the other hand, the positive side, though indirectly. The oZv in 
 ver. 1 connects this chapter with aXka, voi^ov krSjfAsv in the last 
 chapter ; "If then we establish the law by faith, so that the 
 two cannot contradict one another, what can Abraham have 
 obtained by works?'' — We can only connect xara capxa with 
 
 • That it is possible to take another view of the history of Abraham, is shown 
 by the epistle of St James, c. ii. 
 
r 
 
 160 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 iiprixsvat and not with ^arg^cc. According to the sense it==£j s^ym, 
 ver. 2. We may best understand (xa^g here of the outward in 
 general (Gral. iii. S), as contrasted with the -rvsv/jua, the inward 
 and life-giving. (See notes to James ii. 26.) — Ar/.ato\J<s&ai gl 
 i^yoiv •= 'i-xiiv dix,uio(fjvrjV sx, vofMov. — Kav^rifia denotes the act of 
 boasting and the object of the same, materia gloriandi. The 
 fourth verse discovers plainly the ideas which lie at the founda- 
 tion of this whole argument. Works give merit, merit justifies 
 a person in making demands or in boasting; no XH'^ can there- 
 fore consist with works, but only a relation of debt. But God 
 can never stand in the relation of a debtor to any creaturOj 
 therefore St Paul says aXk' oh -r^o? rh Qiov. For even where a 
 hx.ato6x)vri rou vofiou is in question, it is only by a gracious conde- 
 scension on God's part that this becomes possible ; it remains, 
 in fact, always only a righteousness in the sight of men. In 
 ver. 2, it sd/xa/oj&ri — £;^£/ xav^rifia is to be construed, " if he 
 namely (as is in fact the case), is justified by works, he has 
 indeed some glory, but not before God, only before men.'" St 
 Paul then says here the same as is found James ii. 21. (With 
 respect to £/' with the indicative, see Winer's Gram., p. 267. If 
 it meant, "if he had become righteous, he w^ould have glory," 
 we should find sJxsv civ. 
 
 Ver. 3-5. The Apostle then proves from Gen. xv. 6, a pas- 
 sage which he quotes from the LXX., that it was not by his 
 works that Abraham became righteous, but that his faith was 
 reckoned to him for righteousness. Works might have brought 
 him into the relation of a debtor or creditor, but faith brought 
 him into the relation of grace, since he relied upon a promise 
 flowing entirely from the divine mercy. This line of argument, 
 taken in connexion with chapter vii., in considering which we 
 shall return to it, is most admirably calculated to give us a clear 
 conception of St Paul's doctrine of justification. For it is not 
 dixaiouff&a,i itself, but Xoyi^sffdai sig dixaiogvvrjv, which corresponds to 
 the Hebrew nitijn''*) Tl^ll^ i^* ^^^ which forms the centre of 
 
 TV : : — 't T : 
 
 the Apostle's statement in this chapter. The two are, however, 
 by no means synonymous, but stand exactly in the same rela- 
 tion to one another as the [Roman] Catholic (so far at least as 
 it contains truth) and the Protestant doctrines of justification, 
 inasmuch as the former is implied in the bixaiousQai (to be made 
 a righteous person), the latter in the XoyiZ^zc&ai (to be accounted 
 as such.) Whatsoever is reckoned or imputed to a person, 
 
CHAPTER IV. 1,2. 1^1 
 
 that the person cannot himself possess (see Rom. ii. 26, axpo- 
 ^uGTioL s/V 'TTspiro/j^Yiv Xoy/t,irai), but he is looked upon and 
 treated as if he had it. This now is not predicated in the 
 present passage of Abraham only, who lived 2000 years 
 before the reconciliation eiFected in Christ, without which 
 the dixaioavvrjv rov Ssou cannot be conceived as existing, but also 
 of those who lived according to his example after Christ (vers. 
 11, 24), so that the formula Xoyi^sg&ui ug dixaiog6vriv appears as a 
 general designation of justification, in addition to dixaiouadai. In 
 order duly to understand the meaning of these expressions, and 
 to perceive their bearing upon the subject before us, we must 
 consider yet more closely than was done at iii. 21, the transition 
 from the legal standing-point to that of grace, a matter which 
 it is particularly difficult to represent. When the law has ac- 
 complished its purpose on the man, i. e., when tile iTr/yvw^r/g rrig 
 dfji>apT/ag (iii. 20) or true fisrdvoia is produced in him, he regards 
 d/Ka/o(ruvri (which he recognises as a reality, and in "recognising 
 which he becomes aware of the contrast of his own condition), 
 as something completely external to himself. But in the an- 
 nouncement of the Messiah the promise is made to him, that 
 this righteousness shall through His work become an inward 
 reality to himself; this announcement he embraces in faith, 
 and, although still sinful and far from dixa/offvvy}, yet his faith 
 in that which is outward and future is reckoned to him as 
 righteousness, i. e., he is treated as a righteous person, and 
 therefore as standing in a state of grace.* Now, the difficulty 
 in this view lies especially in the circumstance, that God from 
 His veracity cannot regard a person as that which he is not; if 
 the man is sinful, it seems plain that the True One must look 
 upon him and treat him as a sinner, until he ceases to be such; 
 and if he actually ceases to be such, he can then again only be 
 regarded as a righteous person and no longer as a sinner at all. 
 On this argument rests the opposition of the [Roman] Catholic 
 Church to the Protestant view, an argument which it seems at 
 first sight impossible to refute ; but yet on closer examination 
 it proves to be false, and calculated to lead men entirely astray 
 
 • Redemption makes the man in the progress of liis sanctification {reefrom sin ; 
 wifd sin no one can become blessed, as is indeed self-evident, for sin itself is the 
 only source whatsoever of misery. But it is quite true that redemption begins in 
 sin, that is to say, the man must begin as a sinner, must look upon himself in faith 
 as righteous yj^r ChrisCs sake, not on account of the somewhat improved condition 
 of his own soul. 
 
162 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 with respect to the way of salvation. In fact, according to the 
 [Roman] Catholic view, it is not the objective purpose of God 
 which forms the irrefragable foundation of man's faith, but the 
 shjfting condition of his own heart. If the man thinks that he 
 can discover this condition of righteousness wrought in him, he 
 assures himself of his state of grace, but if in times of tempta- 
 tion he cannot discover it in himself, he is doubtful of it, or de- 
 spairs of it. The purged eye of the regenerate man can detect 
 even in his best condition much in himself that still needs to be 
 cast out. (See notes on vii. 14.) The [Roman] Catholic Church 
 consequently maintains, and in perfect consistency with her 
 principles, that man in his earthly condition can never be cer^- 
 tain of his being in a state of grace, but must remain in constant 
 uncertainty; whilst the Protestant Church teaches the exact 
 contrary. The truth of the Protestant conception of this sub- 
 ject is seen most distinctly when we look more closely at that 
 principle on which the [Roman] Catholic doctrine is founded, 
 namely, that Grod cannot regard any one as different from what 
 he is. If we were to take this thought in its literal sense, since 
 without the work of Christ no forgiveness of sins and no sancti- 
 fication is conceivable, it would follow that before the accom- 
 plishment of Christ's atoning sacrifice no holy man could have 
 lived, which contradicts the whole of the doctrine of Scripture. 
 That notion must therefore be modified in the first place, in 
 accordance with that principle, which teaches, that in every 
 action of Grod all His attributes co-operate. God can therefore 
 no doubt account a man to be something which he is not at 
 present, whilst namely He looks to His own purpose, which is 
 to render the man that which he is to be. As unalterable, 
 therefore, as is this determination, so true also is God's con- 
 templation of that which is not yet as already existing (ver. 17). 
 But besides this, it belongs to the very nature of faith, as a 
 living condition, and not the mere assent of the understanding 
 to a thing as historically true, that it already contains within 
 itself the essence of the object of belief; it is an act of the man 
 by which he appropriates the Divine, which of course pre- 
 supposes that the inmost nature of man is akin to the Divine. 
 At the time of Abraham, indeed, Christ Himself and His whole 
 work were as yet future; of Abraham, therefore, nothing more 
 could be said, than that God counted to him his faitli for right- 
 eousness, inasmuch as He regarded this future work as already 
 
 J 
 
CHAPTER IV. o — 5. 163 
 
 accomplished in His omniscience, to which all things are present. 
 But in the case of all those who believe after the coming of 
 Christ, faith does already in itself contain the substance of this 
 righteousness, in that the Redeemer has once for all accom- 
 plished the whole work of justification, as well, indeed, as of 
 sanctification and glorification for all men (Rom. viii. 30). But 
 if faith turns itself away from its proper object, the Christ with- 
 out us and the objective purpose of Grod in man's redemption, 
 and directs itself to the Ghr^ist within us as the ground, not the 
 consequence of redemption, and if the man only considers him- 
 self the object of divine favour because he discovers Him in 
 himself, and only so long as this is the case; then faith alto- 
 gether loses its proper nature, and the man falls again under 
 the law, as was once the case with the Galatians. For man, 
 tlierefore, so long as he is in tliis world, the Xoylt^eadai g/V dixaio- 
 (fuvTjv must ever remain the way to true d/xa/offvvn itself; and if 
 he thinks that he no longer needs the former because he al- 
 ready possesses the latter, he has fallen from faith.* As therefore 
 the forgiveness of sins (that which is vouchsafed once, by which 
 man is translated into the state of grace, as well as that which 
 is daily needed) is not imparted to the old man, who must die, 
 neither to the new man, who cannot sin (1 John iii. 9), but to 
 the inmost personality itself, which is conscious of the old man 
 as well as of the new as belonging to it, and w^iich in the pro- 
 gress of regeneration must be gradually altogether transformed 
 into the new man; so also does it happen with respect to the Xoyi- 
 ^sffdai. Righteousness is not imputed to the old man, but to the 
 true personality, which perceives the presence of the old man as 
 its own, but with deep repentance and a lively longing to be 
 delivered from it. The substance of this true personality is, 
 however, nothing else but that scintilla of the divine likeness 
 which has remained in man since the fall, and without which 
 sin would form the very substance of the human being. Faith 
 attaches itself to this spark, and then, deriving nourishment 
 from the higher world, elicits once more from this spark the 
 flame of the divine life. 
 
 'Epyd^eadai = spy a. rroisTv, and that moreover as a means of at- 
 
 * We must not therefore frame the antithesis in this manner, either the man is 
 a sinner, or he is a regenerate and holy man; the latter also is still a sinner, inas- 
 much as he retains the old man until death. But in his case God does not look to 
 the old man, but to His own purpose of grace in Christ, and regards him for 
 Christ's sake as altogether righteous. 
 
164 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 taining to S/xa/otf-Jv?;. According to the divine J^^s talionis, man 
 is treated according to the position which he assumes ; the man 
 who has recourse to justice alone, is treated according to its 
 stern law, " Cursed is every one who continueth not in all that 
 is written in the law" (Gralat. iii. 10); but whosoever, on the 
 other hand, clings in faith to grace, is regarded according to its 
 over-ruling law. Xdpig, as the opposite to oipzi'kriu.a, has here 
 accordingly the sense of that which is undeserved, that which de- 
 pends on no merit. — In ver. 5 the epithet applied to God, bixaiuv 
 •rhv dffslSri, does not refer to Abraham alone, as Reich e still asserts, 
 nor yet to other men without him ; rather is it a general designa- 
 tion of God's relation to mankind. For to suppose that allusion 
 is here made to some particular sin of Abraham's, for instance 
 to his participation in the idolatry of his father Terah, as many 
 commentators on this passage have wished to assume, is quite 
 inadmissible ; the question is entirely about universal sinfulness. 
 And then we have in this way of understanding the passage an 
 important proof, that St Paul does not consider any one as ex- 
 cluded from the general sinfulness of the race; even Abraham 
 himself, that venerable and holy patriarch, is an das^rig. All 
 men in respect of God are in a state of dtrs/Ss/a, and unable by 
 their own powers to raise themselves into any other condition.* 
 God alone, therefore, is the author of 5/xa/o(rij)/»j, and proves Him- 
 self to be such to those who come forward to meet Him in -r/Vr/s-; 
 the endeavour to establish one's own righteousness is the surest 
 method of shutting one's self out from the biKaiosuvri (dioZ. (See 
 Rom. X. 3.) 
 
 Ver. 6-8. St Paul then corroborates the truth he has ad- 
 vanced by the example of David, from Ps. xxxii. 1, 2, a passage 
 which is likewise quoted according to the LXX. If we find here 
 expressly added x^^pig spyuv, it is yet plainly not the meaning of 
 the Apostle that 'ipya should be wanting; on the contrary, these 
 possess in faith, and in that imputation of righteousness of 
 
 • The degrees of sinfulness are not to be considered in regard of the life of fai.h 
 in and for themselves, but only the effect which is thei*eby produced upon the in- 
 most condition of the soul. A person in a deeply sunken state may stand quite 
 near to the kingdom of God, if sin has made him of a broken and contrite spirit 
 (Matt. xxi. 31 ; Luke xv. 30), and a strict observer of the law outwardly may be 
 far from this kingdom, if he has become through his striving hard-hearted, loveless^ 
 and arrogant. The most desii'able condition is, of course, one of earnest striving 
 and freedom from gross transgressions, combined with humility, a sense of need, 
 and faith. But every one who desires to come to Christ, must altogether, and in 
 everything, recognise himself as a sinner. 
 
CHAPTER IV. 9, 10. 165 
 
 which it is the means, their most plentiful source (Gal. v. 6) ; 
 but however richly and purely works may proceed from this 
 source, the foundation of final blessedness does not exist in 
 them, but in ihsit principle by which alone they become possible, 
 i. e., not in men but in God. As, therefore, it is to God alone 
 that thanks are due for the existence, and creation of man, so 
 also to Him alone for man's goodness; it is not as if there en- 
 tered into the latter two creative energies, first that of God, and 
 then that of man (such a Dualism makes all true goodness im- 
 possible, for this consists especially in the deliverance from all 
 that belongs to self); there is assuredly but one, namely that of 
 God, because all pure, good, true action on man's part, is the 
 act of God, the only true Good, in him, so that man has and can 
 regard nothing as his own, but sin, unfaithfulness, and unbelief. 
 (See notes ix. 1.) 
 
 In the passage, however, adduced by the Apostle, the ques- 
 tion appears to be not with regard to the positive imputation of 
 righteousness, but only the negative non-imputation of sin, 
 whilst at the same time nothing is expressed about faith; we 
 might therefore suppose that the passage did not apply to the 
 present subject; but forgiveness of sins is surely not a human 
 fancy, or a human action, in which a man says to himself, " I 
 have forgiveness of my sins," but a divine work, a living word 
 of God spoken into the heart, which faith alone can appropriate. 
 But the word and act of God is the most positive thing we can 
 conceive, it is heing itself; on which account Luther most rightly 
 terms the forgiveness of sins, *'life and blessedness," for it con- 
 tains within itself the imputation of the righteousness of God. 
 
 A(piimi and s'Tfixc/X-j'Trruv = ^^^ and ^^^'^^ In the first ex- 
 
 pression we perceive more of the New Testament aspect of the 
 forgiveness of sins, according to which it is the real taking away 
 of sin, even though this be but gradual; in the second, on the 
 other hand, as well as in the df/.apr/av oh XoyiZ^icQai, there is more 
 of the Old Testament view, according to which sin remains, 
 though under the forbearance of God (Rom. iii. 25), until the 
 completion of the work of Christ, in consequence of which the 
 actual forgiveness of sins was first imparted to those who lived 
 before Christ. Comp. Matt, xxvii. 53; 1 Pet. iii. 18. 
 
 Ver. 9, 10. Hereupon the Apostle returns to the considera- 
 tion of the relation between Jews and Gentiles, and proves that 
 this way of salvation by faith was designed, not merely for the 
 
166 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 Jews, but also for the Gentiles, since the occurrence in Gen. 
 XV. 6 took place before circumcision was instituted, at a time, 
 therefore, when Abraham stood on a level with the Gentiles. 
 
 In ver. 9, spx^'^f^' must be supplied. It were better to connect 
 Xsyofisv yap x. r. X. with ver. 10, for the sense is, "from the pas- 
 sage concerning David it is not so distinctly to be gathered, 
 whether or not the Gentiles are to be included amongst those 
 to whom faith is counted for righteousness, but this may very 
 well be done from that concerning Abraham, for,*' etc. In ver. 
 10 Tw£ is to be translated "under what circumstances." 
 
 Ver. 11, 12. Circumcision was not, therefore, the means of his 
 justification, but only the sign of that justification which had 
 before taken place; in the same way, also, that baptism does 
 not beget faith, but presupposes it. On this account also his 
 name, "the Father of the Faithful,"" does not relate merely to 
 those who are physically circumcised, but to all those, whether 
 Jews or Gentiles, who like him believe. 
 
 A. C. and other documents of critical authority read Tspiro/M^v 
 instead of 'rspiro/M/iv; the genitive is, however, to be preferred as 
 well on external as internal grounds. — "SyifisTov = pfy^, that 
 which points back to something else; 6(ppayig the impression of 
 a seal, by which something is confirmed (1 Cor. ix. 2; 2 Tim. ii. 
 19.) In the same sense is DHin "^^^^ ^^ Hebrew. — Ai%aio66vr, 
 
 T 
 
 irienu? (ver. 1 4), the righteousness imputed is treated as a true 
 righteousness. — E/'g rh thai is not, as Tholuck supposes, to be 
 understood merely of the consequence, but of the intention, as 
 ver. 1 6 proves. Abraham received the seal of circumcision first, 
 in order that he might be presented as the general Father of 
 believers. In the conception of Father the similarity which 
 exists between him and his children, is the point here insisted 
 on; believers are his true children, for the outward circumcision 
 is the unessential part (ii. 28, 29), and these alone receive also 
 the righteousness which he received. — In the words 'Trianvovreg 
 d/ dxpo^vffT/ag, dia is not to be understood causaliter, but as in ii. 
 27, " during, under such circumstances." — The transition from 
 the genitive to the dative (roTg) was perhaps occasioned by his 
 looking back to Xoyiff^rtvcti. — Itoi^su = <Tspi<7raTsc>j, comp. Gal. v. 
 25, vi. 16; Phil. iii. 16. To understand the Gentiles, again, by 
 the term croi^ovvrsg is inadmissible, and would oblige us to 
 assume that roTg ovx stands for ov roTg, an inversion which would 
 be too hard. 
 
CHAPTER IV. 13 — 15. 167 
 
 Ver. 1 3. This leads to the more explicit statement, that with 
 Abraham's case legal relations had nothing whatever to do, but, 
 as in the case of every promise, grace alone. It is remarkable, 
 that it is not merely said, the promise did not come by the law, 
 for of course, all that follows upon this must be regarded as 
 reward, but that there is added, it came through the righteous- 
 ness of faith. We might expect that it w^ould be said through 
 grace, for it seems natural that the promise should go before, 
 and then faith apprehend the same as an object, and not vice 
 versa. But this difficulty vanishes, if we consider that the 
 promises of God to Abraham form a climax, and that in this, 
 whilst the first promise preceded his faith, all the higher ones 
 followed it. In this place, as Tholuck rightly remarks, reference 
 is made to that promise, which succeeded Abraham's greatest 
 trial of faith (Gen. xxii. 16), and therefore his >tXrjpovofiia xUiiw 
 does not mean the mere possession of the land of Canaan, in 
 an outward or inward sense, but the incorporation in himself of 
 the whole race, so far as it is faithful, and the spiritual govern- 
 ment of the world by his influence proceeding therefrom. At 
 the same time, the idea reaches yet further, as even the Rab- 
 binical writers indicate in that saying, " possidet Abraham pater 
 noster, (et nos cum illo) mundum hunc et futurum. In its deep- 
 est sense it points to Christ's dominion over the world, which his 
 believing people shall share with him (Rom. viii. 17; Rev. iii. 2J), 
 and in which the inward powers of the spiritual world shall 
 manifest their energy outwardly. On this account, also, r^ 
 CTTspixari avrov is added,* by which expression, according to Gal. 
 iii. 16, St Paul considers Christ to be designated, and further, 
 in Christ as the second Adam, the collective body of believers. 
 (Gal. iii. 28, 29.) A similar promise is not to be found in so 
 many words in any passage of the 0. T., but it is given in 
 substance in Gen. xv. 7 (where Canaan is promised) and Gen. 
 xxii. 16. 
 
 Ver. 14, 15. If accordingly they which are of the law be heirs, 
 the promise would be of none effect, for they would be able to 
 demand all as reward. But since none could so keep the law, 
 as to be able to found any demands upon it, since it rather 
 
 • We must not overlook ^ tZ a-'ri^ju.uTi, instead of which only unimportant MSS. 
 read km) tm (r-ri^fzaTi. The H is to betaken as a nearer definition, in the sense " or 
 much rather," for it was in Christ that Abraham first became actually the heir 
 and lord of tlie world, and in Christ the human race. 
 
168 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 kindles God's anger against tliem, the whole assumption is in- 
 admissible. In ver. 14, o) Ix vo/nov are opposed to 0/ kx. mffrsug, 
 see Gal. iii. 9, 10. — Ksvouff&ut means to be converted into some- 
 thing, xsvov empty, powerless. — Between ver. 14 and ver. 15, we 
 must supply some such expression as, " But it is according to 
 the very nature of the law impossible, that it should make men 
 heirs of the world, for so far from conferring merit, it only 
 awakens indignation. — Ver. 15, opynv TiarspydyiTai; not by its na- 
 ture, for that is holy and good, but through its power in bring- 
 ing to light the depths of sin. (See more in the notes on vii. 
 10, etc.) The words ov yap ovx x. r. X., are an addition merely 
 intended to give a cursory explanation of opynv TianpyaZiaQai) it 
 is the law which makes men first appear in their worst condi- 
 tion; how then should it be able to make them the heirs of the 
 world. 
 
 Ver. 1 6. The promise, then, could only come through faith, 
 inasmuch as it thus only could remain a true promise, i. e., a 
 wholly gracious assurance; thus only, indeed, could it appear 
 assured to all, inasmuch as by its dependence upon the law the 
 promise of the faithful God would depend for its fulfilment up- 
 on unfaithful man, whom the law is intended only to exhibit as 
 exceeding sinful. The contrast intended in the words tOj sk tou 
 vofiov, and TU) U cr/cTrswg, is not therefore between Jews and Gen- 
 tiles, but only between men seeking to establish a righteousness 
 by the law, and believers whether amongst Jews or Gentiles. 
 The member of the theocratic nation has not merely as such a 
 share in the promise, if he is not also at the same time a be- 
 liever. But in these words the expression sig to uvai /Ss/Sa/av in- 
 troduces us to an idea, which is very important for the under- 
 standing of the connexion of St Paul's ideas as a whole. 
 Everything, namely, which depends upon the decision, faithful- 
 ness, and constancy of such an irresolute and wavering being as 
 man, is, in St Paul's view, extremely uncertain ; but that which 
 depends upon God, ''with whom is no variableness, neither 
 shadow of turning,'' is firmly established. On this account, the 
 divine promises afford an irrefragable certainty, because nothing 
 can annul them ; as God gives the promise, so also does he 
 raise up men to believe it, and thus accomplishes all His works. 
 But so great is the perversity of man, that he will not recognise 
 this most certain foundation of salvation; he wishes to have 
 God's unalterable promises and prophecies considered as depen- 
 
CHAPTER IV. 17. 1 69 
 
 dent upon liim for their execution, though in this way the ful- 
 filment of a prophecy would tend to the merit of man, and not 
 to the glory of Gfod, which were plainly a blasphemous asser- 
 tion. According to St Paul's way of looking at the matter, the 
 blessedness of the man is certain, only because God has promis- 
 ed it and firmly intends it, and he only who believes in this 
 decided will of God, has this salvation also wrought in him. 
 (With respect to the mode in which, notwithstanding, man's 
 freedom remains inviolate, and is in fact thus only truly 
 established, see the notes to chap. ix. 1, etc.) 
 
 Ver. 17. The citation of Gen. xvii. 5 (which passage is also 
 quoted exactly according to the LXX.), is intended to prove 
 still more decidedly Abraham's right to the title of Father of 
 of the Faithful, as a relation extending beyond the limits of 
 Israel, and embracing all nations. (Tidsmi = the Hebrew ^j-|s). 
 
 But with respect to the latter half of the verse, which presents 
 many difficulties, in the first place the reading Ixtffrsuaag, which 
 is given by F. G. and the Syriac version, by means of which the 
 following words are connected with the quotation, must be re- 
 jected as inadmissible, on account of the preponderance of critical 
 evidence in favour of the usual reading. The construction xarl- 
 vavrt ou s'TTignvffs ©seD must be explained as an attraction of an 
 unusual character certainly, since in this case a dative is 
 afiected by it. (See the treatise of Schmidt on this verse in 
 the Tiibinger Zeitschrift, 1831, part ii.; Bernhardy's Syntax, p. 
 299, etc.; and Winer's Gram., p. 155.) But with respect to the 
 sense of the words, it must be allowed that it is difficult to de- 
 termine it, on account of the jcarsmvn, whose usual signification 
 " against over against," does not seem to suit here. We may, 
 however, take it most simply as = ^^q^ or ^^^i^^^, so that we 
 obtain the following sense : " Abraham is before the eye of 
 God, i. e., before His omniscience, the father of us all, even be- 
 fore we existed." * To this sense the subsequent description 
 of God, the object of Abraham's faith, as the Creator, answers 
 
 * Amongst the many explanations from different sources to be found in Tholuck 
 and Reiche, that of the ancient Fathers, Chrysostom, Theodoret, and others, 
 deserves attention. They take xarsvavr; after Gen. ii. 18 = xetf ofioieufia so as to 
 get the sense, ''Abraham is the image of God, an image of the true Father, and 
 foundation of that relationship." The meaning is beautiful; but does not agree 
 with the context, because the following description of the creative agency of God, 
 if this interpretation were admitted, would bear an application to Abraham, which 
 is not the case. 
 
170 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 very well. The words Z^uo'jroieTv tous nxpov? and xaXttv ra (i^ ovTcc 
 
 wi ovra refer, in the first place, as the context shows, to the be- 
 getting of Isaac (ver. 19, 20) by his parents Abraham and 
 Sarah, when their bodies were "dead." The whole history of 
 Abraham is however here, as also elsewhere (Gral. iv.), treated as 
 a type, and thus Isaac, who was born through the power of Grod, 
 is considered as an image of the whole of the spiritual Israel, 
 and consequently Z^m'TeonTv and xaXeh as designations of spiritual 
 awakening and regeneration, (vi. ] 8.) Thus taken, the words 
 xaXsTv ra /xr} ovru ug ovra, become particularly significant. The ex- 
 pression ra iMr\ ovra is, namely, by no means to be understood of 
 that which is absolutely nothing (nihilum negativum), of which 
 nothing more can be said than that it is not ; but only of that 
 existence which is not yet fashioned into a concrete form, as it 
 is also to be taken in the language of Plato and Philo. (See 
 Philo de vita Mosis. p. 693. de creat. 728.) Thus, not only may 
 whole nations, in so far as they have not yet entered into ex- 
 istence, be called i^ri ovra, although they already exist in God's 
 sight, and already live potentially in their progenitors, but the 
 natural unregenerate man may also be called a iJ^n wv, inasmuch 
 as in him the true idea of man, the avdpumg 0eov, is not yet 
 realized, since this does not take place till his regeneration. 
 
 KaXsTv = ^•^p, is the creative call of the Almighty, by which 
 He, according to the analogy of the first act of creation (Gen. i. 
 8), calls forth the concrete formations out of the general stream 
 of life, 'fig is to be taken quite simply as a particle of compari- 
 son, " vocat ea, quae non (nondum) sunt, tamquam (jam) 
 adsint." What a powerful description of that God who beholds 
 all future things as really present ! 
 
 Ver. 18. The example of Abraham was of too much import- 
 ance to the Apostle for him to break off his contemplation of it 
 so soon. Everything, in fact, which is related of him, is a type 
 of the life of faith under the New Testament (ver. 23, 24). 
 As, therefore, Abraham, against all hope believed in hope, and 
 was, consequentl}'', obliged to wrestle in order to hold fast his 
 faith and hope against all the contradictions of the senses and 
 of nature ; so also does the fight of faith manifest itself in every 
 child of God.* 
 
 * We might accordingly say, that the farther faith stands from the objects of its 
 longing, or hope from its fulfilment, the more intense and powerful it must be, if it 
 
 J 
 
CHAPTER IV. 29-31. 171 
 
 Harder and more deeply agitating than all the struggles be- 
 tween the law and the selfish inclinations is the struggle of 
 faith aginst unbelief, which would rather have the tender con- 
 science believe anything than its own salvation. It was only 
 in appearance that Abraham's fight of faith referred to anything 
 else than his salvation ; for, in fact, Abraham's blessedness de- 
 pended just as much upon the birth of his promised son, from 
 whom the Messiah should in process of time descend, as the 
 blessedness of every believer upon the birth of the new man in 
 him. But faith itself is already this new man coming to the 
 birth, and, therefore, all depends upon its maintenance and 
 increase. 
 
 Chrysostom very justly observes toward the explanation of 
 this Oxymoron, It' sXmdi rfj rou ©soD. <7rcc^ sXcridcc tyjv avSpoj-rhi^v. — 
 'E/5 TO ysvh&ai must again be understood of the purpose, the ex- 
 ercises of Abraham's faith were appointed not only with the 
 design of perfecting him, but also of laying down in him the 
 germs of perfection for future believers ; his life was not merely 
 a fore-shadowing, but, if I may be allowed the expression, the 
 fore-reality, i. e., the true germ of what was to come. De Wette 
 supposes that, by this interpretation, a distinct intention must 
 be ascribed to Abraham in his believing. But we need not 
 surely assume that the patriarch was conscious of the purpose 
 of these dispensations ; the words refer only to God's designs. 
 The new quotation is from Gen. xv. 5, where ourus refers to the 
 stars, with v/hose multitude God compares Abraham's descen- 
 dants. 
 
 Ver. 1 9-22. As the object, with respect to which Abraham's 
 faith was especially exercised, the Apostle now names the birth 
 of Isaac. If we regard this event merely as securing to Abraham 
 legitimate issue, there appears indeed to exist an essential differ- 
 ence between Abraham's faith and that of the N. T. ; but this 
 mode of understanding it is one entirely opposed to St Paul's 
 view of the subject. From Gal. iv. 22, etc., it appears that the 
 significance of Isaac was no less than this, that he was a type of 
 Christ, who was to proceed from his descendants. St Paul, there- 
 asserts itself at all. Abraham's faith may therefore appear to be greater than that 
 of believing Christians, for they have their exercise of it rendered easier, by be- 
 holding the effects of that which they believe. At the same time, in considering 
 the degree of faith and its character, we must especially take into account the real 
 substance of the same, and in this respect the New Testament stands far above 
 the Old. 
 
172 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 fore (Gral. iii. 16), treats of the seed of Abraham, i. e., in the 
 first place, Isaac, as of Christ, and contemplates, moreover, in 
 Christ, as the second Adam, all His believing people. 
 
 Ver. 19. The usual reading ov xarsvoriffs is certainly preferable 
 to the w?, which no doubt arose from a mistake of the copyists 
 in writing ov, but must yield, as Reiche justly remarks, to the 
 simple Tcanvoriffs. For this just brings out the thought that 
 Abraham was well acquainted with all the unfavourable out- 
 ward circumstances, and yet believed. A. C. 67, as well as the 
 Syriac and Coptic versions, support jcarsvoriffs, but it is difficult to 
 understand how ov can have crept into the text. It is only with 
 the reading, xarsvdrias that the following ds (ver. 20) receives its 
 proper meaning. — The words vixpov^^at and vsxpojgi? refer here to 
 the deadness of the powers of generation. (Heb. xi. 1 2.) Con- 
 cerning Abraham's and Sarah's age, see Gen. xvii. 17. — TLov 
 without accent means, in the case of numbers, " about;'' this is 
 the only place in the N. T. where it is used in this sense; in 
 Heb. ii. 6, iv. 4, it means " anywhere." AiaytpmaQat means pro- 
 perly " to be divided, separated," and thereby " to lose one's 
 balance, to waver or stagger." In this way it is several times 
 used of unbelief, as inward spiritual unsteadiness (Matt. xxi. 21; 
 Mark xi. 23; John i. 6; Rom. xiv. 23.) This is contrasted 
 with the inward firmness and strength expressed in svdvva,u.ovffQai. 
 As opposed to '7rXy}po(popeT(j&ai, unbelief might also have been 
 designated by xsvugig ; for this expression, as well as the sub- 
 stantive '7rXrjpo(popia, represents faith as the replenishment of the 
 inward man with spiritual life (Rom. xiv. 5; Col. ii. 2; 1 Thess. 
 i. 5; 1 Tim. iv. 17). In the dovg do^av rSj 0sa is expressed the 
 practical recognition of the divine omnipotence, which accom- 
 plishes that which it promises. 
 
 Ver. 23, 24. After this detailed consideration of the life of 
 faith as manifested in Abraham, St Paul declares the principle 
 which justifies such a consideration. Abraham's history he does 
 not regard as something dead and past, but as the living history 
 of the believers of every age. This passage, in addition to 1 
 Cor. ix. 10, X. 6; Gal. iv. 24, etc., contains one of the most im- 
 portant hints as to the manner in which the Old Testament is 
 to be treated according to the doctrine of the apostles. It is not 
 the externals of its history, but that spirit which moves in them, 
 which is to be considered, and in this way it has its eternal truth 
 for tlie times of the New Testament also. To attribute the whole 
 
CHAPTER IV. 25. ] 73 
 
 mode of treatment, wliich St Paul applies to the Old Testament, 
 in this as well as in other places, to Jewish habits of thought, a 
 view Reiche in particular has once more defended, destroys not 
 only the apostolical character of St Paul, but also flie very 
 essence of the 0. T., which, as the eternal word of God, is, ac- 
 cording to our Lord's own words (Matt. v. 18), to abide when 
 heaven and earth have passed away. 
 
 The words iMXhn XoyiZ^ig^ai are to be regarded from the posi- 
 tion which Abraham and his generation occupied. But if in this 
 place not faith in Jesus, but faith in the Father who raised Him 
 up, is brought forward, it is accounted for by looking back to 
 the ^wovTo/g/i/ in ver. 1 7, which manifested itself most gloriously in 
 the resurrection of Christ. For the physical and spiritual in- 
 terpenetrate each other in the conception of Jwovro/g/i/, as in that 
 of Z,uiri (John vi.) God is the awakener of life in every form of 
 its manifestation. Besides this sys/ps/v presupposes a preceding 
 dvyi(r>is/v, so that a reference to the death of Christ is implied in 
 this verse, as well as distinctly expressed in that immediately 
 following 
 
 Ver. 25. Whilst, however, in iii. 25 d/x.aioffvvri is connected 
 simply with the blood-shedding of Christ, ^/xa/wtr/g in this verse 
 follows upon the resurrection. The older commentators have 
 found great difficulties in this mode of representation, but if we 
 understand it according to the tenor of v. 10, vi. 4, the thought 
 expressed in the passage is quite simple. For as resurrection 
 necessarily presupposes that death has gone before, so also upon 
 the death of Christ, who is the life, necessarily follows the re- 
 surrection, that is the victory over death. These, therefore, in 
 the life of our Lord stand related to each other as two necessary 
 complementary halves, which it is altogether impossible to con- 
 ceive as existing without each other. It is not the death of 
 Christ in itself which is important, but only that death which 
 was conquered by the resurrection. But in the same way that 
 the death and resurrection of Christ form an intimate unity, so 
 also in man the death of the old and the rising up of the new, 
 cannot be conceived as existing without each other. It is im- 
 possible, that in any individual sins can really be forgiven, and 
 the old man be crucified without the new man arising; and when 
 the new man begins to live, the death of the old man must take 
 place at the same time. In consequence, therefore, of the neces- 
 sary connexion between these two events, only one at a time is 
 
174 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 commonly mentioned, either negatively the forgiveness of sins, 
 or positively the communication of the new life. But in some 
 cases both are joined together, as in this place, and in ver. 10, 
 and then the negative side, the putting away of the old, is con- 
 nected with the death, and the positive side, the communication 
 of the new, is annexed to and founded upon the resurrection of 
 the Redeemer. In the term bixalwfftg in this passage, therefore, 
 we must hold fast the idea of that act, which makes righteous 
 and creates the new man, an act which is expressed in ver. 10, 
 by the word (rw^ijcr^a/; whilst the expression ha ra 'Trapa'TrrujiMarc/. 
 i]f/jc^v answers to the ytaruyXayri in ver. 10. For the irapwrrruifj,- 
 ara are the sins which separate man from God, and which need 
 first of all an dcpiffig, a xaraXkayT]^ on account of which the Son 
 of God was delivered up to death. In these two complementary 
 halves the whole work of God in the soul of man is complete, 
 and neither can be wanting where this work has truly begun, 
 although no doubt at different crises of the inward life of the 
 individual, now one, now the other side may predominate. 
 
 With respect to 'Trapahbovai, scil. g/'s &avarov, see Acts iii. 13, 
 Rom. viii. 32, Isaiah liii. 12. In the passage Ephes. v. 2, it is 
 said, 'irapibuxiv socurbv Tpot^ipopav xa/ hfflav. — In the life and work of 
 Christ everything happened for us, nothing for Himself for 
 He already possessed all things with His Father, before He be- 
 came man (2 Cor. viii. 9.) — A/^ca/wc/s is not here the same as 
 diKaiodvvr} ; for in the same way that diSc ra, Tapwrrui/j^ctTa ri/j,u/v 
 must be understood " in order that our transgressions might be 
 pardoned," dta rnv bixaiuaiv yhjjmv must also be explained " in 
 order that righteousness might be wrought in us.'' A/xa/wtf/?, 
 therefore, denotes the divine act of making righteous, as hot, roc, 
 cra^a^rw^ara, the divine act of forgiveness. 
 
 § 8. OF THE FRUITS OF FAITH. 
 (V.1-11.) 
 
 To this complete exposition of the doctrine of the new way of 
 salvation itself, according to its scriptural foundation, the Apostle 
 now annexes some intimation of the effects of the life of faith, by 
 which the excellence of this w^ay is first brought to view in all its 
 clearness. To be sure St Paul could not in this place do moro 
 
I 
 
 CHAPTER V. 1 , 2. 1 75 
 
 than cursorily allude to them, because many things needed to be 
 considered before he could enter into such a full description of 
 these effects as is found in the next chapters. It is not until 
 the eighth chapter that we find a complete account of the in- 
 finite consequences of redemption, as well for the individual as 
 for the whole creation. 
 
 Ver. 1. St Paul includes under one expression the whole ful- 
 ness of those blessings which accrue to the man who is justified 
 hy faith (as the receptive cause), through grace (as the creative 
 cause), i. e., under hprivTi 'xphg rhv @i6v. The conception of sJprivv) 
 = )y\'^\^ is here distinguished by the addition of 'rphg rhv 0e6v, 
 
 T 
 
 not merely from false peace, the sipyivr} Tphg rhv x.6(f/Mov, which is de- 
 stroyed by the operation of Christ (John xvi. 33), in that the 
 latter calls forth a struggle against sin (ver. 3, etc.) ; but also 
 from that higher degree of peace, that inward peace of soul, the 
 £/>'/ji/?5 'TTphg (TsauTov, which St Paul also calls sipTjvn Qsov (PhiL iv. 
 7; Col. iii. 15), and Christ in St John's gospel siprivr} s(/.ri. (John 
 xiv. 27.) The two stand, in fact, in the same relation to one 
 another as justification and sanctification; justification, or the 
 Xoy/^gc^a/ iig dtxatoffuvriv gives at once xaraXXayjj, and with it slprjvr] 
 'TTplz rhv ©gov, the consciousness of being in a state of grace, the 
 contrary to which is the 'ix^pa eJg @s6v. (See Rom. viii. 7.) No 
 doubt this state contains within itself sanctification in the germ, 
 but also only in the germ ; because the old man still lives inward 
 harmony of life is only at first partially restored. The complete- 
 ness of this harmony is only Si fruit of life in the Spirit (Rom. 
 viii. 6; Gal. v. 22), whilst the life of faith begins with ilprjvri rrpog 
 rhv 0SOV, because this flows at once from the first act of grace. 
 As the author of peace in every form, Grod Himself is moreover 
 called 6 es6s rrig sipyjvrig (Rom. XV. 33; 2 Cor. xiii. 11; 1 Thess. 
 V. 23; 2 Thess. iii. 16). The reading syut^iv, which Lachmann 
 and Scholz have adopted from A.C.D.I., must be regarded as 
 inferior to the reading g%o^gv from inward grounds, for it is a 
 strange idea to call upon men to have peace with God; for 
 peace with God is the gift of His grace. 
 
 Ver. 2. As the second blessed consequence of justification, the 
 Apostle, after a parenthesis, presents to us the exultation felt in 
 the hope of future glory. For the words bl o5 x. r. X. cannot be 
 understood to mean, that the itpacaytayi] is another result of the 
 dix.aiovff&ui sx rr/ffrsoog, for in that case in the first place the con- 
 
1 76 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 struction with xa/ would have been proceeded with, and then St 
 Paul would have avoided the introduction of the words g/V x^^p/v, 
 which necessarily suggest quite another thought. Tholuck, in- 
 deed, has proposed to place a stop after sff^y}>ia,/j!.sv, but this the 
 reading, rfj cr/Vrg/, will not permit. These words are no doubt 
 wanting in B.D.F.G., and other documents having critical autho- 
 rity, but it is plain that they have only been omitted to avoid 
 the connexion of 'Trpoffayuyy] with what follows. Besides this, even 
 if rfj 'ffiffrs/ were away, the placing a stop after sff^Tjxu/isv would 
 be inadmissible, because sJg rnv %a/>/i/ ravrrjv would have no right 
 connexion with what follows. And further, that St Paul else- 
 where (Ephes. ii. 18, iii. 12, the verb is found 1 Pet. iii. 18) uses 
 this word of that access to God which is opened for the soul, can 
 be no reason for giving it this sense in the present passage, since 
 here it is defined more exactly by the addition of s!g rriv yapiv 
 ravrriv. The whole sentence bl ol 2<rr^xa/xgv must therefore be 
 placed in a parenthesis, expressive of the fact, that the power 
 of the Redeemer not only produces peace at the same time with 
 justification, but even introduces the soul into the state of grace 
 itself before this, so that the x'^f^ "^''^ ^^ ^^^^ very bixaiocvvri Ik 
 ^/crgw? itself, to which not our own power, but Christ's grace 
 alone can conduct us. 
 
 The allusion to a rtpofsayoiyilic, who, so to speak, introduces the 
 soul to God, is, by the above remarks, proved to be unsuitable; 
 nor has it otherwise any scriptural foundation. The perfect 
 forms an opposition to the preceding present £%o/Agi/. St Paul 
 wishes to refer all to Christ, to make him appear as the Author 
 and Finisher of our renewal. The xa/ is therefore to be taken 
 emphatically, " by whom also already we have received access.'' 
 Uri liidTii may also be connected with g/V rriv xapiv^ yet it is better 
 to take g/V = itpdg, to connect it with ^Tr^oaayMyri, and to regard rfi 
 <7r/(TTsi = 'TTiffTsvovrsg, 'Effrr]'/,a/xtv does not denote the mere standing 
 in a certain relation, but leads us to think of the firmness and se- 
 curity of the state of grace, as opposed to all wavering. By the 
 do^a Qsov Reiche supposes the divine image in man to be meant; 
 this does not, however, suit the context, because sV Ix-r/^/ is added; 
 for the divine likeness is not merely restored to the regenerate man 
 in hope, but in reality. The expression rather denotes the hea- 
 venly existence of God, the participation in which constitutes the 
 highest blessedness of the creature. And in the connexion of xay- 
 
CHAPTER V. 3 — o. 177 
 
 ya.(s^ai with gX^/s is implied the irrefragable certainty of being 
 partaker of the glory of God. 
 
 Ver. 3, 4. The Apostle, by a bold contrast, places the sufferings 
 of the present in a parallel line with the glory of the future, and 
 considers that the former proceed just as necessarily from the 
 bix,aio<smr^ TTJg -^r/Vrswg, as does the siprivr} 'rph? rbv &s6v. (2 Tim. iii. 
 12.) For there resides in the believer a principle which re- 
 bukes the sin which is in the world, and by so doing excites it 
 against him, and which will not leave things in a state of indif- 
 ference with respect to itself, but either attracts or repels them. 
 In these very sufferings of the present, therefore, is contained 
 a source of exaltation* for the Christian, in that they are not 
 punishments to him, but the means of his perfection. (James 
 i. 2, etc.) The three stages of bitoiMovriy doKi/xTi, and sXm? are con- 
 sidered as proceeding from the sufferings; whilst the former 
 denotes the state of moral earnestness and of faithful endur- 
 ance, doxt/Mri relates to the state of approval as sterling proceed- 
 ing from it, which bears within it hope as its blossom.*f" 
 
 AoKi/xyj is the act of testing, but also that state of approval as 
 genuine which proceeds from trial. In the same way do'/.//xiov 
 unites both significations within itself (See James i. 3; 1 Pet. 
 i. 7.) Kara;(r;/jvw is to be taken actively, " hope maketh not 
 ashamed,'' not intransitively, " hope is not ashamed, i. e., is 
 well-founded. 
 
 Ver. 5. This hope, thus born in the midst of conflict, contains, 
 however, within itself, the assurance of obtaining the glory which 
 shall be revealed; for, as an earnest of the same, we have already 
 here below the love of God shed abroad in our hearts. The dyd'rr) 
 Tov &iou is considered therefore to be only, so to speak, the secret 
 presence of God himself in our souls, whilst in eternal blessed- 
 ness God gives Himself to His saints as the manifested One. 
 Accordingly, the love of God is not the inward life of man in a 
 
 Ruckert very pointedly remarks on this passage: " We must not pare away 
 anything from the conception contained in xal';^;«^^«/, unless we wish, at the same 
 time, to detract from the powerful character of the Apostle; he is not only un- 
 daunted, not only of good courage, but really joyful, really lifted up in mind, yea, 
 he reckons it as an honour to himself, that tribulation befals him, for this is to him a 
 pledge of future gloi-y." But what an advance manifests itself here when com- 
 pared with the Old Testament ! In the book of Job the doubts of the sufferer, on 
 account of his sufferings, wrestle anxiously with his still weak faith, here the be- 
 liever rejoices boldly in all affliction and even exults in it. 
 
 f On the subject of eXct/j see more in the notes to Rom. viii. 24. 
 
 M 
 
178 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 state of exaltation, the life of his feelings raised, so to speak, to 
 a higher power, but it is a higher principle which has been 
 grafted into the man, the Uvsufiot. dym; the latter words express 
 the substantial cause, ayd-Trvi the actual effect; but in reality 
 they are both identical, for the dydTr} &sov cannot be regarded 
 as separate from the essential being of God in its highest mani- 
 festation, i. e., the Holy Ghost. God's love is there only where 
 He Himself is, for He is love, and does not have love as some- 
 thing in or beside Himself. 
 
 Karaiffx^jvu = ^"^^L " ^^ make ashamed, to disappoint by want 
 of success.*' Rom. ix. 83, x. 11. In rj d's gX-r/? the article is not 
 to be taken = clvrn, for there is but one true hope, rather is this 
 sentence to be regarded as the fourth member in the sense, " but 
 hope works its own accomplishment, or has its fulfilment in it- 
 self,'' so that the colon must be placed after xaratGybm, The 
 words on. X. r. X. (ver. 5) are not in fact to be connected witli 
 %uraKS-)({jvsi alone, but with TLn^x'^l^^^^ (ver. 8), and indeed the 
 whole passage in vers. 8, 4. According to that Pelagian and 
 Rationalistic view, which is opposed to the doctrine of the 
 communication of the Spirit, dydi:r\ ©soD means the love of man 
 to God; in the Apostle's meaning it is the love of God to man, 
 which however awakens in him reciprocal love (1 John iv. 19), 
 not indeed proceeding from his own mere natural powers, but 
 from the higher powers of the Divine Spirit. Only when thus 
 taken can it be properly said, concerning love, that it is shed 
 abroad, for it is identical w^ith the element of the Spirit, and 
 only contained in His manifestation. The expression ixxiyvrai 
 is founded upon the image of a spiritual stream which spreads 
 itself out over men; no doubt an image, but in which there is 
 this reality, that a higher power takes possession of man's being. 
 (See John vii. 88, 89 ; Acts ii. 16; Is. xxxii. 15; Ezek. xxxvi. 
 25; Joel iii. 1.) The movement by which the Spirit is shed 
 abroad, is considered to be connected with the /xsvs/y of the same 
 in the inner man, therefore we find h not g/g. The xoiphia is, 
 moreover, regarded as the receptacle of the Spirit, as the centre 
 of the disposition and of the inclinations; for instance, voZ? could 
 not be used here. (See Olshausen opus, theol. p. 156 sqq.) 
 The addition of rou dodivrog ij/x/v is not pleonastic by the side of 
 cxx£;^uTa/, the relation of the two expressions may be thus 
 stated. The Spirit was given at the day of Pentecost once for 
 
CHAPTER V. 6. 179 
 
 all to mankind as a whole, but it is not therefore shed abroad 
 in every individual heart, for this the personal appropriation of 
 the work of Christ is first needed. The addition of rod do6evrog 
 tj/mTv is not therefore unnecessary, but expresses the possibility, 
 which is provided for every one, of receiving ;the Holy Spirit 
 poured forth into his heart. See John vii. 39, xvi. 7. 
 
 Ver. 6. The nature of divine love is then exhibited by the 
 Apostle, in the most illustrious proof which it could give of its 
 power, in the sacrifice of the Son of God. It manifests itself 
 therefore in the same self-sacrificing character in the hearts of 
 believers also, to whom it is imparted by that Holy Spirit 
 which Christ obtained for men by His death. (John vii. 89.) 
 The leading thought in this verse presents no difficulty, after 
 what has been said on iii. 25, but the different readings of the 
 text demand a more exact consideration. The sn at the com- 
 mencement of the verse has probably occasioned all the varia- 
 tions with which it abounds.* In the first place, for sV/ several 
 MSS. read g/'/s, others sJ ydp or il n. Semler, followed by 
 Usteri, concludes, therefore, that h is the right reading, and 
 supposes that in the original letter of the Apostle an anacolu- 
 thon existed, to avoid which, some transcribers wrote 'in. This 
 hypotheses has certainly something to recommend it at first 
 sight, but at the same time, the singular position of m affords 
 a sufficient explanation of the origin of the different readings ; 
 and then, if we carefully examine the passage, the reason for 
 which 'in was prefixed to it appears to have been the emphasis 
 which this particle gives, on which account the ardent soul of 
 the Apostle could not pronounce it too soon. But besides this, 
 several MSS. of considerable authority, A.B.C.D.F.Gr. and others, 
 repeat gV/ after agkmv. Griesbach has even admitted this read- 
 ing into the text ; but it was soon rejected by Knapp, and, in 
 fact, it appears only to have been adopted from those MSS. 
 which had erased 'in at the beginning of the verse, and were 
 determined by the parallel passage in ver. 8. If we retain the 
 
 • Compare on this point the critical essay of Professor Franz Ritter of Bonn, in 
 the*' Zeitschrift fUr Philosophie and Kathol. Theologie," Heft 19. (Cologne, 1836.) 
 p. 45, &c., who reckons this passage amongst the few in the N. T. to which conjectu- 
 ral criticism must be applied. In fact, according to Ritter, we should here read tTi 
 yccf) ovTuv riju,uv airhviov kktu, xenpov Hpitrros iiTtp xtTifiZv u.'^iSooii, according to the 
 analogy of ver. 8, in which the same collocation is found. But the exercise of con- 
 jecture where so many critical appliances present themselves, appears justly to most 
 modern critics to be altogether inadmissible. 
 
180 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 double gV/, we must explain the repetition by the strong feeling 
 under which St Paul wrote, just as in vii. 21. No doubt the 
 whole stress in this thought (as in iv. 5) is laid upon the fact, 
 that men did not amend themselves before, and do not now re- 
 ceive the blessings of Christ, as it were, for their reward, but 
 that He died for them, even whilst they were yet godless and 
 estranged from God, so that this highest act of love was the 
 very means of their transformation. The difficulty that God, 
 from His very holiness, cannot love the ungodly, so long as they 
 remain what they are, is obviated if we remember, that evil 
 does not surely manifest itself absolutely in any man, but 
 always in such a way as to attach itself to the remains of the 
 image of God in him. Inasmuch, therefore, as God loves the 
 proper substance of man, his true though now darkened and 
 oppressed self, He hates only that element of sin in or about 
 man which impedes his free development. — With respect to 
 the transposition of sV/, see Winer's Gram. p. 509. The term 
 ackvuv is not merely explained by d6s(3Qjv, but also in ver. 8, by 
 ufiapruXuVj and in ver. 10, by sx^poi At the same time, it is not 
 personal transgressions which are referred to, which are only 
 derived from something deeper, nor some few particularly sin- 
 ful men only (iv. 5), but the condition of moral weakness in 
 which all men are without exception. (See Galat. iv. 9, 13; 
 Heb. iv. 1 5, v. 2.) Kara jtaipov^svKaipug, at the time appointed 
 by God. (Galat. iv. 4; 1 Pet. i. 20; Heb. ix. 26.) On the 
 signification of v-rsp, when the subject is the death of Christ as 
 the representative of man, see Rom. v. 15. 
 
 Ver. 7, 8. In order to display in the fullest light the excel- 
 lency of the divine love, it is compared with the most noble 
 utterances of natural human love, which, however, remain far 
 below it. But in the communication of the love of God to men 
 through the Holy Spirit (ver. 5), is also given the possibility of 
 imitating Christ in the point of loving our enemies (Matth. v. 
 44, 45; 1 Pet. ii. 21). Particular difficulties have been dis- 
 covered, strange to say, in ver. 7, though, as Reiche justly re- 
 marks, the passage is quite simple. Semler even regarded vers. 
 7, 8, as interpolated ; Grotius wished to read adhou for dixa/ov, 
 and others asked, whether dixaiov and dyadov were substantives 
 or adjectives, masculines or neuters. Since the whole question 
 is about persons, in the first place both expressions must natu- 
 
CHAPTER V. 7 — 10. 181 
 
 rally be also referred to persons. And further, as regards the 
 terms dix-aiog and aya^Sg, the context plainly leads us to assume, 
 that dinawg designates the character of the righteous man, who 
 performs whatever can be required of him, ayaUg the character 
 of tlie benevolent man, who does more than others venture to 
 ask.* The first man we may esteem and respect, the second, 
 on the other hand, we can love, and even earthly love can lay 
 down its life for the object of its aifection ; but divine love dies 
 for its enemies. 
 
 Ver. 7. The first ya/> must be explained by a thought which 
 is to be supplied, " but this is something noble, something un- 
 heard of!" The word ra%a = 7<rws is only found again in the 
 N. T., Philem. v. 15. — The ToX/^Si/ serves to denote the highest 
 degree of self-sacrifice. — Suv/Vrai/a/, " to prove, announce/' See 
 iii. 5. 
 
 Ver. 9, 10. Just as in iv. 25, St Paul now again places paral- 
 lel with the first operation of Christ, the ^/xa/wc/s', which was 
 brought about by means of His death the other part of His work, 
 which is here designated as gurripla, and is referred to His life 
 as its source. These two, as already remarked upon the former 
 passage, are by no means to be separated, but at the same time, 
 in their very connexion they must also not be confounded. The 
 first is always absolute, for although the first forgiveness of sins, 
 by which man enters into a state of grace, is daily repeated, on 
 account of continual transgressions (1 John ii. 1), yet it is al- 
 ways vouchsafed total and entire, for a partial forgiveness is none 
 at all ; the second, on the other hand, is the subject of a gradual 
 development, and is only complete with the d'TroXurpuffi? (1 Cor. i. 
 SO ; Rom. viii. 23), in the more confined sense of that word. On 
 this very account, therefore, as has already been remarked, the 
 state of grace cannot have its foundation in the new life in man, 
 because this is never more than relative, and therefore can never 
 give peace (ver. 1) ; where this is notwithstanding done, as ac- 
 cording to the doctrine of the [Roman] Catholic Church, there 
 exists continual insecurity (t. e., an uncertainty as to one's being 
 in a state of grace), as its consequence, and this is a condition 
 which the doctrine of truth rejects, because no effort can be 
 
 * The same relation subsists in Latin between Justus and bonus. See Cicero de 
 offic. iii. 15. " Si vir bonus is est, qui prodest quibus potest, nocet nemini, recte 
 justum virum, bonum non facile reperiemus." 
 
182 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 successful, which does not proceed from a heart altogether re- 
 conciled, and living at peace with God. In this difference be- 
 tween forgiveness of sins and sanctification, according to their 
 inward nature, lies the Apostle's justification for having repre- 
 sented them as standing parallel to each other, and drawing 
 from one a conclusion with respect to the other. 
 
 Aixaiov(f&ai and jtaraXXdffffsa&ai are here used as quite sy- 
 nonymous; the proper substance of both is the a(psgis ruiv a/ji^ap- 
 riuiv, the negative side of the way of salvation, the removal of 
 the old, of the barrier. (With respect to xaraXXayrj, see the 
 notes to Rom. iii. 24, 25.) This transaction, an act of God, 
 occurs whilst man is yet in the condition of an enemy to God : 
 since then by means of this act the m.an becomes a pxh? ©soD, 
 and riyu'TrrifJi'Svoi (Ephes. i. 6), how much more easy is it to be 
 assured that the work He has begun He will also complete in 
 the <rwr?jp/a? Neither is this last, however, according to the 
 Apostle's view, a work of man, as if God began indeed the new 
 life in him, but the man himself is to continue it and complete 
 it (see notes to ix. 1); He who is the Author is Himself also 
 the Finisher of our faith (Heb. xii. 2), and indeed by means of 
 His t,Mri, i. e., His glorified life at the right hand of God. But it 
 is just this climax, indicated by the voXXm /naXXov, which is ex- 
 pressly repeated in ver. 10, which is peculiar to the present pas- 
 sage (compared with iv. 25.) The thought is not to be under- 
 stood objectively, as if Christ had more power in His exaltation 
 than in His humiliation, but only subjectively, according to the 
 way in which it is comprehended by man. The power of Christ 
 is equal in all stages of His life, but in His state of humiliation 
 He restrained Himself from the utterance of His power, and on 
 this account after His resurrection it presents itself to our hu- 
 man comprehension as an increasing power. We may therefore 
 realize to' ourselves the thought in this manner: if God has re- 
 generated the man, it is to be hoped that He will' maintain and 
 perfect him in his regenerate state, and the conceivableness of 
 a falling away gradually diminishes till it reaches a minimum. 
 The term gurripta here, as well as dmXvrpMgis in 1 Cor. i. 80, is to 
 be taken in the narrower sense ; in its wider signification this 
 word may also include that hixaiov66ai, in which lies the pledge 
 of the further development of the inward life. 'SwTrjpla, more- 
 over, stands commonly alone, as the mere contrary to uTooXita, 
 
 i 
 
CHAPTER V. 11. 183 
 
 but in this passage it appears in a connexion which we could 
 never have expected, and this shows us how careful we ought to 
 be in supplying words to complete the sense of Scripture. If dcri 
 Trig hpyrig had not stood here, certainly no one would have sup- 
 plied just these words, but probably some such as a-ro r^s ai^ap- 
 Ttag For it appears as if the dixaiovcfdat had already relieved us 
 from the wrath, and that therefore in the further development 
 of the life the only question could be about our entire deliver- 
 ance from the old man of sin. But however true this may be, 
 it is not less true that every, even the least sin, has the divine 
 opyri for its necessary accompaniment. We may therefore say of 
 the man who is duaiuhk or xaraXXa/g/V, on the one hand, that 
 he as such is already delivered from wrath, inasmuch as the 
 centre of his personal being is saved (John iii. 36), but, on the 
 other hand, that he remains yet under the opyy], inasmuch as the 
 totality of his being is not yet sanctified, and he needs continual 
 forgiveness; the latter mode of representation is that here chosen, 
 whilst the former is the more usual. 
 
 Ver. 11. However, with this cwr^j/j/a, which is only to be at- 
 tained hereafter, the Apostle once more contrasts, as in ver. 2, 
 that joy already present, which is to believers the earnest of the 
 divine glory (viii. 24). The present blessing of reconciliation 
 here below, with which is connected the gift of the Spirit (ver. 
 5), is to them so sure a pledge of their future inheritance, that 
 they feel as if they possessed it already. 
 
 To cfudriaofji^s&a is opposed xa^jyj^^zm sc. eV^asv (for which later 
 MSS. read na'oyfiiLiQa. and 7Lav')(oj[Miv). — The climax o5 (lovov — 
 aXka xal raises Ttdv-xaa^at above the preceding ffudri<f6fii6oc', the 
 latter contains in fact only the mere conception of g'X'r/g, whilst 
 xauxn<fis goes far beyond this. There is no reference here to a 
 new and higher object. Fritzsche and Winer wish to keep 
 strictly to the participle in xdMyfiiLzwi and co-ordinate it with 
 xaraXknyhn? SO that both participles may depend upon auQncor 
 /W/g^a, and the following sense arise, " not only reconciled, but 
 also rejoicing in God, we shall be saved.'' But the thought " we 
 shall be saved rejoicing" is not very suitable, either in itself, or 
 in relation to " we shall be saved being reconciled.'' We there- 
 fore prefer to take the participle as temp, fin., so that St Paul 
 proceeds from the subject of redemption to the new subject of 
 
 y(.ah')(r,6ig. 
 
184 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 SECTION III. 
 
 (V. 12— VII. 6.) 
 
 OF THE VICARIOUS OFFICE OF CHRIST. 
 
 After this description of the nature of the new way of salva- 
 tion, and its effects, Paul might at once have proceeded to set 
 forth how the individual man is developed upon it, which at 
 chap. vii. 7, &c., he does, but that a thought mediating this, 
 which then presented, as it does now, especial difficulties to men, 
 the vicarious office of Christy required a further deduction for 
 the foundation of the doctrine itself. Without the idea of His 
 vicarious office the whole w^ork of the Saviour would remain 
 something isolated, a beautiful act of self-sacrifice by an indi- 
 vidual, without any real power for the totality, a power which 
 first made it the object of a sermon to the world, and the turn- 
 ing-point of the world's history. The Apostle proves, therefore, 
 this important point most carefully, and does so, firstly, by 
 bringing Christ as the second Adam into parallel with the first, 
 and showing, that, as from the first sin, so from the second 
 grace issues, like streams from different well-springs (v. 12-21). 
 Secondly, Paul sets forth, how accordingly all that was done in 
 Christ was fulfilled in the faithful themselves, who are in Him 
 as they were in Adam (vi. 1-11.) And, lastly, he infers, that 
 no one, consequently, who is in Christ, can serve sin, for that by 
 his very being in Christ he has died to sin and become free, in 
 order to his entering a higher state (vi. 12 — vii. 6.) 
 
 § 9. PARALLEL BETWEEN ADAM AND CHRIST.* 
 (V. 12-21.) 
 
 According to the tenor of the epistle in the whole, the Apostle's 
 primary object here was nothing more than to set forth Christ as 
 
 • Compare upon this important section of the epistle Rothe's Monographie 
 (Leipzig, 1836), and the Essays of Finkh (Tubing. Zeitschrift 1830. H. 1.), and 
 Schmid (Ibid. H. 4.) 
 
CHAPTER V. 1 2 — 2 J . i 85 
 
 the representative of tlic whole race, and as the originator of 
 righteousness for all ; in order, however, to make this relation 
 perceptible, he sets out from the position of Adam to the human 
 race, which he presumes as acknowledged; and so gains occasion 
 to trace as well in its inward ground the fact of general sinful- 
 ness, which he had brought out in chapters i. and ii. Accord- 
 ingly the following weighty section forms the foundation for 
 two doctrines of truth equally important, and each supporting 
 the other; for the doctrine of original sin, that is, the proclivitas 
 peccandi, which diffuses itself over the race, in the way of gene- 
 ration from Adam, independently of the proper personal sin of 
 men, and for the doctrine of the vicarious office of Christ. As 
 Paul's exposition sets out from the former as a thing presumed, 
 we also take it first into consideration that the latter may follow 
 upon it. Meanwhile both rest upon a common basis, to which, 
 therefore, we must previously make reference. In a treatise I 
 mean, like that in which we are now engaged, it is quite impos- 
 sible to arrive at any satisfactory result, if w^e are divided in the 
 fundamental views. The hope of uniting all expositors in the 
 view of this passage must be entirely given up, for the very 
 reason that there is no prevailing unity upon its principles. 
 No one, however, with the best intention, can make any other 
 exposition, than such as shall comprehend the ideas of the holy 
 writer, with which he wishes himself to agree, in one harmony, 
 that is in accordance with his principles; but this process is 
 certainly far from producing a likeness of result. Of the truth 
 of this assertion with regard to this passage, every one may be 
 convinced by the treatise of Reiche (Comment, ad. loc. p. 409- 
 446.) This learned man treats the difficult and important pas- 
 sage with great industry, and certainly with unbiassed mind, 
 notwithstanding he arrives at results which are in direct con- 
 tradiction to the express words of the Apostle, and the sum of 
 scriptural doctrine; and this for no other reason than because 
 he sets out from an entirely different basis from that on which 
 Paul stands. From this his different station all the expressions 
 of the Apostle present themselves to him in a false light, so 
 that he must necessarily fail in comprehending the whole. The 
 dispute upon the differing conception of single parts is now an 
 endless one, and therefore most unsatisfactory and to no pur- 
 pose; yet something may surely be hoped for from a conference 
 
186 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 upon the common basis — to this, tlierefore, we chiefly apply, 
 and according to our plan shall touch only upon what is most 
 important in particulars. 
 
 Antiquity knew only two diiferent stations from which to 
 consider this passage, and although under altered names and 
 forms with shades of distinction and modifications, the same 
 have continued to the present essentially like what they were, 
 since the time when they were first keenly expressed; the 
 Augustinian and the Pelagian. The difierence between these 
 two carefully considered is not in some, but in all points, and 
 they deviate specifically upon all the great problems; any recon- 
 ciliation, therefore, between them is out of the question; they 
 run, like parallel lines, constantly beside, without getting nearer 
 to each other. For our purpose, the following observations 
 upon the interpretation of this passage result from these two 
 directions. The Pelagian (whether half or wliole, it makes no 
 difi*erence here) can never conceive of mankind otherwise than 
 as a sum of free, intellectual individuals, standing by one an- 
 other; in virtue, as in sin, every person stands and falls by him- 
 self.* The Augustinian can just as little conceive of mankind 
 otherwise, than as an united whole, in which the separate indi- 
 viduals are by no means disengaged substantial entireties, but 
 integrating parts of the totality. If now the expositor sets out 
 
 * Whether the fall of individuals be said to occur in this world, or, according to 
 Origen, in a former, is in the main all one; each individual ever stands or falls by 
 himself according to this theory. See thereon the admirable exposition in the 
 Phil, des Rechts by my honoured colleague, Prof. Stahl, vol. 2, part i. (Heidelberg, 
 1833), p. 99, &c., where he says, " Adam is the oriyinai matter, Christ is the 07i- 
 ginal idea in God, of mankind, both personally living. Mankind is one in them, 
 therefore Adam's sin became the sin of all, Christ's sacrifice the atonement for all. 
 Every leaf of a tree may be green or wither by itself, but each suffers by the dis- 
 ease of the root, and recovers by its healing. The shallower the man so much the 
 more isolated will everything appear to him, for upon the sui*face all lies apart. He 
 will see in mankind, in the nation, ay even in the family, mere individuals, where 
 the act of the one has no connexion with that of the other. The deeper the man 
 is, so much the more do these inward relations of unity proceeding from the very 
 centre force themselves on his notice. Yea, the love of our neighbour is itself 
 nothing but the deep feeling of this unity, for we love him only with whom we feel 
 and acknowledge ourselves to be one. What the Christian love of our neighbour 
 is for the heart, that unity of race is for the understanding. If sin be through one, 
 and redemption through one be not possible, the command to love our neighbour 
 is also unintelligible. The Christian ethics and the Christian faith are therefore of 
 a truth indissolubly united. Christianity effects in history an advance like that 
 from the animal kingdom to man, by its revealing the essential unity of men, the 
 consciousness of which in the ancient world had vanished when the nations wei*e 
 separated." Even so; man comes not truly to himself until he comes to God in 
 Christ; without Christ he remains in the element of animal life ! 
 
CHAPTER V. 12 — 21. 187 
 
 from the first station, he has only the choice between two ways; 
 either to take the words of the Apostle, in this place, to mean, 
 that the effect of Adam's sin and the effect of Christ's righteous- 
 ness are to be understood merely as the operation of doctrine 
 and example, but in no respect as really inwrought, which in- 
 deed, according to his principles, they cannot be, or to say, that 
 Paul doubtless proposes a different view, but that this view is 
 false. Whoever, on the other hand, interprets the words from 
 the second station, finds himself according to their nearest, 
 simplest meaning, in perfect harmony, not merely with the 
 Apostle Paul, but with the whole Scripture. That the advan- 
 tage, therefore, is on this side, needs no proof; yet that alone 
 certainly cannot determine any one to incline to it; but inde- 
 pendently of this, the deeper truth lies in the contemplation of 
 mankind as a comprehended unity, since the substantiality and 
 separateness of individuals is but a very relative one, and in 
 this relativeness is comprised that unity, just as the relative 
 substantiality of the members of a body is comprised by the 
 absolute unity of life of the whole animal organism. (Comp. 
 further at xi. 1.) However, this is, of course, not the place to 
 enter more particularly into this extensive inquiry; suffice it 
 here to notice, that the voice of the Scripture itself accords 
 with this conception by the images of the body (1 Cor. xii. 20), 
 of the vine (John xv. 1, etc.), and olive tree (Rom. xi. 17, etc.), 
 whereby it marks the unity of life of the whole. But in these 
 images, consecrated by scriptural use, the idea is expressed in 
 a singularly illustrative manner; as, namely, in a tree not every 
 little branch is of any essential importance to its whole growth, 
 but as many may be broken off, without causing any damage 
 to the entire tree, so also in the human race. But in two 
 respects the destruction even of the smallest twig brings all the 
 tree to nothing. First, at the sprouting of the seed, secondly, 
 at the grafting of the tree. By breaking off the apparently in- 
 significant sprout, or the feeble graft, the whole tree is de- 
 stroyed. Even so, mankind has two poles of life in its develop- 
 ment, the condition of which decides the state of the whole. 
 Firstly, Adam, the bud, out of whom the whole race was 
 developed; his death immediately after his creation would have 
 annulled mankind, the injuiy he suffered damaged all the coming 
 race, as a bruised bud makes the whole tree grow scant and 
 
188 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 crooked. Secondly^ Christ, whose relation to the race derived 
 from Adam is like that of the noble graft to the wild tree [Jer. 
 ii. 21] ;* could it be thought, that Christ had been taken away 
 before the completion of His work, mankind would then have 
 remained in their natural rudeness, just as a tree, whose graft 
 w^as destroyed, and which now puts forth mere water-shoots. 
 But if the noble graft abide, it makes the whole tree noble; all 
 juices, which are guided through it, change their nature, and 
 are no more wild. Men are wont to say, that parables prove 
 nothing; nevertheless, comparisons often teach by depth of 
 meaning infinitely more and better than all abstract arguments, 
 seeing they are derived from nature, the mirror of the glory of 
 the unseen God, living demonstrations, as it were, of the Most 
 High God Himself It follows of course, that, according to the 
 principles of these difierent views, the notions also, which pro- 
 perly fall under consideration here, respecting the origin of 
 soulSy^c must be modified. The Pelagian can only consistently 
 follow Creatianism, or what leads to the same isolating of men, 
 Prce-existe7itianism, for which Benecke has again attempted to 
 plead. But according to the Augustinian principle we are led 
 to Traducianism, which alone has any agreement with Scrip- 
 ture and experience, and kept clear of Materialism, is able to 
 satisfy all requisitions of the Christian consciousness. The 
 consequence, therefore, is, that, as the existence of this passage, 
 with its precise explanations, effected no more for the Pelagians 
 of all centuries, but their tr^ang by subtleties to evade its im- 
 port so opposite to their system ; so even if the passage were 
 not there, the Augustinians would be no further from their 
 principle, since it rests by no means merely on these words, 
 but upon the coherent doctrine of Scripture and its inward 
 necessity. 
 
 • As to how far it can be said that Chi'ist represents also the sinful tendency in 
 mankind, see the observations at Rom. viii. 3. 
 
 f The discussion of this subject at large we defer to Hebr. ix. 7, &c. I have 
 only now to remark, that it would not be very difficult to get rid of the objections, 
 lately made by Tholuck (lit. Anz. Jahrg. 1834. Num. 23), against the traducian 
 view, from the experience of bad children being often begotten of good parents, 
 and vice versa; since the old man still lives even in the best, and germs of nobler 
 life are resting in the worst; but individually we cannot trace, without prejudicing 
 in some degree the main view, by what law the one element or the other gains pre- 
 dominance in the moment of generation. The assertion, however, that every tra- 
 ducian view has materialism in it, is decidedly false, and will meet its refutation at 
 the passage referred to. 
 
 i 
 
CHAPTER V. 12 — 21. 189 
 
 A totally different position, however, regarding tlie questions 
 which come under consideration in this passage, from that occupied 
 by antiquity, has been adduced by the latest theology,* and from 
 this station Usteri (Paul Lehrbegr., 4th edit. p. 24, &c.) gives 
 his exposition. The latest theology is far from that mechanical 
 contemplation of the world, upon which the Pelagian method of 
 isolation rests ; on the contrary, in respect to the relation of the 
 individual to the whole, it takes entirely the side of the dynamio 
 view of the world, which forms the basis of the Augustinian 
 theory. But it deviates, nevertheless, in the result, because it 
 sets out from a different view of evil. As Schleiermacher's doc- 
 trine of predestination could not but be quite different from the 
 Augustinian, since he openly avowed the restoration ; so also 
 the doctrine of original sin could not but take a different form, 
 if evil, as he and the Hegel School assert, is to be held as mere 
 negation. Adam's fall could be no loss to him, for he had no- 
 thing to lose, but only the manifestation of that deficiency which 
 clave to him as creature ; the sinfulness of the race could not 
 proceed from Adam's act, because all bear in themselves the 
 same imperfection which made Adam's fall necessary, and they 
 just as much as Adam must have been brought into that oppo- 
 sition, of which it is no advantage not to know ; Christ, accord- 
 ingly, worked only so far in redeeming and atoning, as by His 
 divine fulness of life he made up the created deficiency in the 
 creature. Infinitely more full of spirit and depth of meaning, 
 however, as this doctrine of modern theology is, than the flat 
 Pelagian rationalism, we feel ourselves nevertheless unable to 
 make it our own, since evil, according to the Scripture, is by no 
 means represented as mere negation. It is not, indeed, like good 
 in its complete manifestation, substance, as Manichseism holds, 
 yet surely something real and positive \ it has, that is, without 
 substantiality its positive reality in the actually disturbed sym- 
 metry. As such real disharmony in the relations ordained by 
 God, Holy Scripture removes evil in its origin and its operative 
 
 * The mode in which Benecke has proposed the passage should be understood, 
 needs but a brief notice, since it proves itself at once to be untenable. He supposes, 
 namely, as Origen, that every man has sinned by himself, not however in this world, 
 but in a state of prce-existence. The Scripture, however, does not acknowledge any 
 personal prse-existence, it teaches rather mei*ely a prse-existent state of being in the 
 divine mind, since God beholds the future as present. (Comp. thereon Ephes. i. 4.) 
 The farther defence of prse- existence by Benecke in a letter to Lucke (Stud. 1832. 
 H. 3. p. 616, &.C.), brings forward no new matter. 
 
190 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 power into the spiritual world ; from hence it continues to dif- 
 fuse the effects of its disharmonious nature, until it finds its bar- 
 rier at the element of good. Therefore is the fall of Adam set 
 forth in the Bible as the opening of agate that leads to the spirit- 
 ual world, so that it is not his act, outward and isolate, which 
 is efficient, but that act in connexion with the frightful element 
 to which it conceded entrance. So that, as a spark thrown 
 into inflammable matter can enkindle a fire, to consume the 
 greatest wood, or one stone taken from a protecting dam causes 
 a whole stream to pour away ; so also Adam's sin which might 
 appear so trifling. Spark and stone, without touchwood and 
 stream, could do no essential harm, so without the existence of 
 a kingdom of darkness Adam's sin could not have caused such 
 hurt. In relation to this kingdom Adam stood, like the porter, 
 holding also as he did then in his hand the keys of the kingdom 
 of light; he opened that door and the lot was cast for ages. In 
 the same position we behold the Saviour. According to the 
 history of the temptation the key to the kingdom of this world's 
 prince was offered also to Him, but He refused it and opened for 
 mankind Paradise instead, whereby the stream of light then 
 breaking in had power to scare off the shades of former night 
 which ages had been gathering. Thus comprehended, Adam 
 and Christ alone appear in their complete central meaning, as 
 the Scripture sets them forth. They are the hinges, round which 
 the doors of the powers of the universe move ; the poles, from 
 which life and death, light and darkness stream, which reveal 
 themselves as well in the totality, as in every individual, in the 
 power which they exercise on the world. The life of the great 
 collective body, which we call mankind, oscillates between Adam 
 and Christ, ay the life of the whole universe, for Adam's fall and 
 Christ's resurrection are turning-points for the development of 
 it all. (Comp. at Rome. viii. 19, &c.) And even so the being 
 touched by the life-stream of Christ is for individuals greater 
 or less, for nations and men, the turning-point of their existence. 
 If, therefore, the latest theology and philosophy are to attain to 
 a complete appropriation of the substance of the gospel, which 
 they are trying for as a task of highest worth, a revision of the 
 doctrine of evil and a deeper foundation for it will be of urgent 
 necessity. (Comp. the observations at Matt. viii. 28.) 
 
CHAPTER V. 12. 191 
 
 Ver. 12. The apostle now clearly, while connecting by d/a rovro 
 the foregoing exposition of the efficacy both of the death and 
 life of Christ, presumes by the comparison with ufTTsp the rela- 
 tion of Adam to the sinfulness of the whole race as acknowledged. 
 The question however is, how far Paul could do this ? For we 
 certainly do not find among the Rabbins any common agreement 
 upon the doctrine of original sin. They term the general sin- 
 fulness ^^;^^p, that is, " confusion, desolation,"' or as original 
 sin ^*^n '^^'^' ^^^^^ ^Sj " *^^ imagining* of evil/' (Comp. Bux- 
 torf lex. talm. pag. 973 and 2041.) At onetime, however, they 
 refer the origin of sin in man to Adam's fall, at another they 
 represent it as created with man by God."|" Meanwhile Tholuck 
 observes justly, that the latter of these conceptions could pro- 
 ceed only from the theory of cabbalistic emanation, which makes 
 evil appear as mere negation ; now since no trace is to be found 
 among the Jews of the properly Pelagian view, that every one 
 is himself the originator of his own sinfulness by personal abuse 
 of free will, we may so much the more consider the doctrine of 
 Adam's sin, as the causa efficiens of the sinfulness of his race, 
 to have been the prevailing Jewish doctrine, for the cabbala 
 kept constantly in narrower circles and the Apocrypha clearly 
 shew, how much the doctrine of original sin at the time they 
 
 * [Sinnen. See note, where *i3i- is translated by " Concupiscentia;" its original 
 meaning is *' hWden, finger e, form." Gen. vi. 5. comp. Van Ess.] See also John 
 Smith's Select Discourses, 3d edit. pp. 317, 428, 430. 
 
 t Compare SchOttgen and Wetstein ad. loc. Tholuck and Reiche also have 
 given copious extracts in their commentaries; the views of the Bible Dogmatists 
 may be seen in Usteri, Paul. Lehrbegr. s. 25, note. Among the passages which 
 refer sin to the fall of Adam, besides the interpretations of later Rabbins, to which 
 certainly less is to be conceded, and the Targums on Eccles. vii. 29, Ruth. iv. 22. — 
 Jalkut Rubeni, fol. 18. 1, has considerable weight, whei'e it is said : "nisi Adam 
 peccaset, fuisset nudus et coitum exercuisset et concupiscentia prava neminem in- 
 duxisset; postquam vero peccavit et concupiscentia prava y*irT "iSi" adest, nemo nu- 
 dus incedere potest." The yin "nii" on the contrary appears as created by God in 
 Succa fol. 52, 2. " Quatuor sunt, quorum poenitet Deum, quod ilia createrit, nim- 
 irum captivitatem, Chaldseos, Israaelitas et concupiscentiam pravam." It may be 
 questioned notwithstanding, whether creare here, like plantare in Aben Ezra ad 
 Psalm, li. 7, ought not to be otherwise interpreted, namely, to be understood of the 
 negative operiition of God, permission. Nothing tells moi'e for the correct appre- 
 hension of the doctrine of the Rabbins than the circumstance that they had also 
 conceived coi'rectly the parallel between Adam and the Messiah as his antitype. So 
 in Neve Schalom, fol. 160, 2. " Quemadmodum homo primus (Adam) fuit THX 
 Nisns (that is, the first or rather only one in sin, the representative of the whole sin- 
 ning race of man) sic Messias erit ultimus ad auferendum peccatum penitus." The 
 doctrine of the Messiah alone, in the complete form in which the Jews already had 
 it, could not, indeed, consistently followed out, lead to any other view upon the 
 origin of the sinfulness of the race, than that the whole must have fallen in Adam 
 and thiovgh him. 
 
192 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 were composed was formed. (Comp. Wisd. Sol. ii. 23, xii. 10, 
 xiii. 1 ; Siracli xxv. 24.) Most decisive, however, is the collec- 
 tive import of the Old Testament with its doctrine of the Messiah 
 and His sacrifice, which, as the Epistle to the Hebrews proves 
 at large, necessarily presupposes the sinfulness of the whole race 
 through Adam. For were all men born with the same moral 
 powers as were created in Adam, and did they all sin by the 
 the mere abuse of their own free will ; neither regular expiatory 
 sacrifices could have been beforehand ordained for all, since every 
 moment some one might have proved himself to be quite pure, 
 and at all events children who died in infancy must have been 
 excepted, who nevertheless were just as unclean according to the 
 law as all the dead were, nor could so thorough an influence have 
 been derived from the appearing of One Person, as is connected 
 with the Messiah. As far as regards passages like Ezek. xviii. 
 1, &c., they are only apparently contradictory, for the doctrine 
 of original sin on no account excludes the responsibility for par- 
 ticular sins nor a faithful use of the proffered means of salvation 
 spoken of in that chapter. The doctrine of original sin does not 
 say, that any one must steal, commit adultery, or such like, on 
 the contrary man possesses even after the fall, according to the 
 doctrine of Scripture and the Symbolical Books, power enough 
 to perform opera civilia and to abstain from positive transgres- 
 sions of tne law; it only teaches, that man is unable by his own 
 power to get rid of the prava concupiscentia,* the evil desire that 
 swells up in the heart, and the prodivitas peccandi, into which 
 the mere possihilitas peccandi created by God in the first man 
 passed, when by the first sin he made room for the influence of 
 darkness. 
 
 Now, in what manner the Apostle could have put it, in order 
 more clearly and decidedly to express his doctrine of the sin of 
 Adam being causative of the sinfulness of his race, than by saying: 
 bi*hh? av&puiitou i] a/^j-a/r/a z'lg rov xoa/Mov g/V^X^g, cannot certainly be 
 
 conceived, notwithstanding artifice enough has been employed 
 upon his simple words. For instance, it is attempted to evade 
 the apostolic idea, by taking a/^a/jr/a to mean independently sin- 
 
 • Luther : "Original sin is not done like all other sins, but it is, it liveth and 
 doeth all other sins." — And in another place : " Thou canst do nothing but sin do 
 as thou wiliest, all which thou settest about is sin, and abideth sin, let it show as 
 fine as it may ; beginning, furthering, and finishing is all God's." 
 
CHAPTER V 12. 193 
 
 ful actions (peccata actualia), while it designates the sinful habit 
 (habitus peccandi), the expressions of which are termed a/ndp- 
 rr^iLOL^ crapacrrw^a, <7raf>d^a<ii?. So far as the sinful habit must be 
 necessarily presupposed from these expressions of it, aiMapria 
 may certainly denote the sinful act, but even the following ex- 
 position of the Apostle shows, that, where a sinful act is to be 
 expressly mentioned, he makes use of one of those words. Be- 
 sides, supposing that a^aapr/a might be so taken here, the bi hhg 
 dvdpui-TTou (which thus occurs again 1 Cor. xv. 21), would be suffi- 
 cient to forbid that the passage should be interpreted: "Adam 
 opened the line of sinful acts,'' whereby alone it can be brought 
 near to the Pelagian view. But the modern theory of sin being 
 create in man is contradicted not only by the 5/a but the g/V^X^g. 
 Sin existed already with and in Adam, it did not come first by 
 him. According to that theory Paul must have written, '' as 
 sin in the first man first also manifested itself." — The sTg avdpu- 
 Tog is moreover, as ver. 14 shows, Adam. If it is said, 1 Tim. 
 ii. 14, of Eve, that she, not Adam, was deceived, this form of 
 exposition refers merely to the relation of woman and man, the 
 former being certainly the half the more accessible to sin. But 
 where mention is made of the race collectively, and the relation 
 of man and woman is not brought forward, Adam is named as 
 the head of the first human pair, which is to be comprehended 
 as unity. As consequence of sin death only is made prominent, 
 in which as the head of all evil every other form of it is com- 
 prised. Here indeed ddvarog signifies principally the death of 
 the body, as also Gen. iii. 3, 4, but this had not been possible 
 without the spiritual death, which entered with sin itself.* For 
 it is the nature of death to disturb and separate that which 
 belongs together; in the first state indeed men had no more the 
 irnpossibilitas moriendi than the impossibilitas peccandif but 
 both the possibilitas non moriendi and non peccandi he had, and 
 this passed by sin into the necessitas moriendi and the proclivi- 
 tas peccandi. Thus, while the bodily death is the separation of 
 the soul from the body, the spiritual death is represented as the 
 
 • Corap. Augustine's treatise hereon, in the first chapter of the thirteenth book, 
 de civitate Dei; particulai'ly in cap. 5, upon the question: "Quod sicut iniqui 
 male utuntur lege, quae bona est, ita et justi bene utuntur morte, quae mala est." 
 Adam's life after his fall was even as a slow dying, that reached its completion in 
 his physical death: Christ's ^uo-roivcru of mankind is also gradual, the height of which 
 is in the glorification of the body. 
 
 K 
 
194 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 separation of the 5pm^ from the soul. This latter, however, 
 was not a total separation, as sin did not develop itself, as with 
 the fallen angels, in man himself, but was brought to him from 
 without, as in the temptation of Christ. The necessitas pec- 
 candi appears therefore first as the ^dvaro? dsvrspo?, as the high- 
 est point of sinful development. The reciprocal operation of 
 the spiritual and physical, which finds expression in this, is not 
 however limited according to the Pauline doctrine merely to 
 man, but its disturbance reacts also upon the xr/V/? generally, 
 as at Rom. viii. 17, &;c., will be further shown.* But no sooner 
 has the expression sJg x.6<r/xov ii^nXk been used of Adam's sin 
 (where %6(S{j.og does not signify the universe, for sin was already 
 in the spiritual world, but the world of man), than this sin is 
 set in death, as its bitter fruit, as a principle penetrating 
 through {btriXkv) the whole of the race, and, as is the course 
 viritli every development, increasing and terminating in itself. 
 (The o-jTug must be taken, therefore, ^' according to the connex- 
 ion of sin and death/') Although, therefore, Adam's act was 
 not the act of an isolated individual, but the act of the race, 
 since he is not to be considered as one man by the side of and 
 among many others, but as the man;^- yet the continuing pro- 
 gress of sin is not so denied by the sin of his posterity, but 
 most decidedly established with it. Only sin itself is ever to be 
 considered as punishment ofsin, so that the sinning of the descen- 
 dants became the very saddest consequence and punishment of 
 the first sin. Had it been possible for the nearest descendants 
 of Adam, for instance Abel or Seth, by perfect righteousness to 
 stop the stream of corruption that came breaking in, to stand 
 in the gap (Ezek. xxii. 30), Adam's act would then have been 
 of no greater importance than any other sin, and it would then 
 have been not merely fitting for the Apostle to mention any 
 other, in order to make the antitypical comparison with Christ's 
 act, but it would have answered even better, for instance, Cain's 
 
 •GlOckler (p, 84) says very appropriately: "Sin has the power of reproducing 
 itself in the next neighbour, and that to the full extent, with all its consequences, 
 unless it be subdued by the mightier power (derived from Chri.-t) of that neigh- 
 bour's life. Especially must this be the case with ihut neighbour, who owes his 
 ■whole existence to a living organism, which is penetrated throughout by the power 
 of sin. Hei-e, conception is already a conception in sins, the first germ of life re- 
 ceives already the whole shape of sin." 
 
 + Rightly says Augustine: " In Adamo omnes tunc peccaverunt, quando in ejus 
 natura adhuc omnes ille unus fuerunt." (De pecc. mer. et rem. iii. 7.) 
 
CHAPTER V. 12. 195 
 
 hilling would seemingly have formed a far stronger contrast 
 with Christ being killed. But every one feels that such a thing 
 would, according to St Paul's way of thinking, have been quite 
 untenable, for Adam's sin is to him the mother of all the rest, 
 and therefore, however insignificant in outward seeming, in its 
 essence the sin of all sins, because the greatness of the sin de- 
 pends on the situation which the sinner occupies, and no sinner 
 ever yet stood where eternal love had placed Adam. 
 
 After these observations, it is clear what ought to be thought 
 of the ordinary Pelagian-rationalistic view, that the addition i<f 
 u> irdvTsg i^fiaprov, signifies that the sinfulness of men is not 
 caused by Adam's act, but by their own sins. For it is evident 
 that the Apostle is thinking of that sinning of all as being the 
 consequence of Adam's sin, and makes this addition only in 
 order to show that if any one could have been supposed who 
 sinned not, as the case was afterwards with Christ, then indeed 
 a bound had been thereby set to death, provided that he occu- 
 pied as central a position as Adam and Christ. Excepting this, 
 it could only be said that the Apostle intends to intimate that 
 the unfaithfulness of men, in not resisting sin even to the extent 
 that they might have done, according to the moral powers still 
 left to them, diffused the common sinfulness more quickly and 
 generally than otherwise it would have been. Surely, there- 
 fore, if £(p' w is not to be translated with the vulgate in qiio* 
 and so this expression forms no proof m favour of the represen- 
 tation of the race by Adam ; still it forms no weapon against 
 this doctrine itself, which, in the connexion of the whole argu- 
 ment, is sufficiently established. Grammatically, 1^' u> can only 
 be taken as conjunction, as no antecedent can be fully traced, 
 to which the relative could be easily applied. "f* As such, s<p' w 
 answers to our " indem " (in that), = -^ti)^^,, and signifies the 
 
 being at the same time, or together. J with another. § As to 
 
 • How little 'iv M would be contrary to Paul's meaning, is shown by 1 Cor. xv. 
 22, where it is said: alff^ip Iv tw 'A^ct//. veivrts uTfo&vvitTKovffiv, ovtu kxi Iv tu 'X.^icTTtf 
 
 t Glockler and Scbmid (ad loc. p. 191, &c.) would refer e(p'J to 6a.vaT0Si ** even 
 unto which all sinned," that is, to make death the rixos of sin; but this has some- 
 thing extremely forced. 
 
 X [Zugleichseyn.] 
 
 § In passages like 2 Cor. v. 4, Phil. iii. 12, i<p'J is the conjunction also, not 
 merely Wi with the relative, but it cannot be admitted to be so here. According 
 to Rothe's explanation, who takes 'kp'm ~ i-r) toCtm ua-n, the sense would also be: 
 
19G EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 Tifiaprovj many are of opinion that Paul is thinking of actual sins 
 in using the word, sins which proceed from the proclivitas pec- 
 candi; but if the 'rdvrsg, as the representation of the whole 
 chapter requires, is to be understood in its properest sense of 
 the totality, and so to include children dying in unconsciousness, 
 this view naturally gets involved in extreme perplexity, and 
 can only fall back upon the assertion that Paul is only speaking 
 of individuals capable of sin ; an assertion, however, which as- 
 suredly draws on the difficult argument, where the capability 
 for sins begins.* How entirely untenable this view is, appears 
 by this its own principal support in the most glaring light! 
 Augustine's theory, on the contrary, although his translation 
 of s<p' uj by in quo is wrong, is here in thought impregnable. 
 For the 7) fiaprov signifies " being sinful," together with commit- 
 ting sin,"' and it is only casual in individuals that the latter 
 does not issue from the former, the being sinful remaining 
 nevertheless; the sense of the words therefore is: " in that (in 
 Adam) all (without any exception) sinned, and with the greater 
 number as consequence thereof the original sin expressed itself 
 besides in further sinful acts, therefore did death also, the 
 wages of sin, pierce through to all.'' Taken so the imputatio in 
 poenam et reatum of the sin of Adam has its truth; taken so the 
 efficiency of Christ, in w^hom all in fact rose again just as they 
 had in fact fallen in Adam, forms with that truth a true paral- 
 lel. The question how in Adam all who were not yet in exis- 
 tence could sin with him, has difficulty in it only so long as the 
 
 ** in such wise that, under the certainty tliat." But he assumes that all sinned 
 themselves. Now this was not so; death struck many without their having them- 
 selves sinned, e. g'., all infant children. But it is just on ^avn? that all the em- 
 phasis in the argument is laid. According to the Apostle's meaning, therefore, U 
 uhrou is doubtless to be supplied, and the passage to be taken thus: since they had 
 all (collectively) sinned, namely, in Adam. This sense, too, alone agrees with what 
 follows, where even the difference of the sinning, of those, for instance, who lived 
 before the Mosaic law, fr-om Adam's sinning, is set forth. Adam acted as person, 
 and transgressed a positive command of God, the collective body sinned only in 
 him; yet the punishment of death fell upon all together, as a proof, that even the 
 participation in the general sin is of itself sin before God, although certainly in 
 another sense ihan purely personal sin. (Upon the classical usage of i(p'cS in the 
 signification im tovtm dlerrt, comp. Matthise's Gr. § 479, p. 1063; Bernhardy's 
 Syntax, p. 268; Fritzsche ad loc. p. 299, &c. — Upon the use of the synonymous i* 
 *r, corap. at Rom. viii. 3.) 
 
 * The manner in which Meyer (in his comm. ad loc.) tries to solve the difficulty, 
 why children should die in infancy, if death is the consequence of actual sins only, 
 is too meagre; he supposes (p. 120): "Paul entirely forgot this necessary excep- 
 tion (!)" Elsewhere surely the memory of the great Apostle is not wont to fail 
 him in any respect. 
 
I 
 
 CHAPTER V. 12. 197 
 
 isolation of individuals is maintained. If this be given up, all 
 takes a simple form, and in Adam every one of his descendants 
 must have sinned with him, just as in the act of one man, all 
 his members and every drop of blood co-operate; and in an army 
 not the general only conquers or is defeated, but every warrior 
 of the host conquers or is conquered with him.* 
 
 As concerns the structure of the whole sentence Sisntzp has no 
 apodosis. To consider ver. 1 3 — 1 7 as parenthetic digression, in 
 favour of which Reiche, after Grotius, Wetstein, and Flatt, has 
 again pronounced, is harsh, because in this digression the sub- 
 stance of the thought proper to the conclusion is already «.nti- 
 cipated. It is better, therefore, to suppose an anacoluthon here 
 also, and to consider ver. 18 as recapitulating resumption of the 
 discourse of ver. 12. So Rothe explains it, as also Winer, 
 Riickert, and others. Besides this conception of the passage 
 as anacoluthon, De Wette's view is the only one which can 
 claim any attention, that the second member is introduced with 
 ciV'^g/?, and the first presupposed from what has been said before, 
 as w(rcr$/> occurs Matt. xxv. 14. But it is decidedly against this 
 interpretation, that in what has been said before the preceding 
 member has not been sufficiently expressed, to be immediately 
 understood by the words : 6/d ro\>ro ucmp. Moreover, with this 
 acceptation it seems as though the principal reflection intended 
 to be brought in view by the Apostle were, the connexion of 
 sinful man with Adam; but it is quite the reverse, for the chief 
 object with Paul is to set forth the connexion of the faithful 
 with Christ. Hence this principal idea must also be considered 
 as resting upon the by thought, f supposed to be taken for 
 granted, the sinfulness of men since Adam, and therefore an ourcag 
 follow the wCTsp. But as it was Paul's intention to show the 
 difference as well as the similarity between Adam and Christ, 
 and further to draw the attention to the relation of the law to 
 these two poles of the life of man, and the parallel resulted of 
 itself from the line of argument; he let go the conclusion, and 
 returned, ver. 18, to the leading thought. — In the Codd. D.E. 
 
 • RUckert's explanation of ver. 12 is quite correct. He says, p. 218, "Accord- 
 ing to this verse, therefore, Adam is the originator of human sinfulness, and so far 
 the first cause of death ; but men have withal by their own sinning deserved it." 
 Only the last part of the sentence is not quite strictly expressed, for Paul does not 
 intend to allege ttvo causes, the ginning of men rather is itself founded in Adam's 
 sin ; their unfaithfulness has only enhanced sin the higher. 
 
 t [Nebengedaiiken.] 
 
198 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 F.Gr.. and other critical authorities, 6 ddmrog is omitted before 
 biTiX&iv. Much may certainly be said, as well critically as exe- 
 getically, in favour of the omission; as &dvoLT6g for instance is 
 only subordinate,* it seems more fitting to refer biriXk to a(j.apria. 
 the principal idea, out of which the presence of ^avaro? follows 
 of course. But the reading 6 Qdvarbi biriXQiv appears the more 
 preferable on account of ver. 13 being connected with the 
 former by ydp, since the mention of a/^ctpr/a afterwards requires 
 &dvaToi to be immediately preceding, which as mere consequence 
 presupposes the cause, and as the head is named for all conse- 
 quences. 
 
 Ver. 13, 14. This general dominion of death, even in the 
 time before the promulgation of the positive Law of Moses, when 
 therefore men could not by personal transgression of the law 
 incur guilt as Adam did (vii. 7), proves the presence of sin in 
 mankind, through the influence of the first sin, for the righteous 
 God cannot suffer punishment (that is, Qdmrog here) to come, 
 where there is no guilt. These two verses are commonly 
 considered as a passing observation; but such is not the case, 
 according to the connexion of the subject, which has been in- 
 dicated. The Apostle uses them rather, immediately to corro- 
 borate the principal thought in ver. 12. That sin was in the 
 world after the law he presumes as a matter of course, but even 
 hefore it, he says, sin was there, as death proves, although it 
 might have been supposed, there was no sin, because there was 
 no commandment to transgress. Paul therefore clearly infers 
 the imputatio reatus from the imputatio poence peccati Adami- 
 tici. As far as regards the supposition of many of the most 
 distinguished expositors and dogmatists, as Origen, Augustine, 
 Thomas Aquinas, Melanthon, Beza, that the sinfulness of chil- 
 dren is intended here, this view, although inadmissible of itself, 
 has somewhat of truth, in that the period from Adam to Moses 
 is in fact the time of the childhood of mankind.. Adam himself 
 hefore the fall occupied indeed a higher station of consciousness, 
 but after it he sunk with his descendants to a childish consci- 
 ouslessness, in which not even a law could be given to men. 
 Every individual has a similar period in his own life, during the 
 
 * Rothe (p. 36) protests against Savaroi being subordinate, but the S/a rr,i afjiu^- 
 Ttus envctTos eleai'ly enough makes death to be conditioned by sin; it is subor- 
 dinate, therefore, although it becomes especially prominent afterwards. 
 
CHAPTER V. 13. 199 
 
 twilight consciousness of childhood (comp. at vii. 9, &c.); never- 
 theless man, like the race in the whole, ay the very child in the 
 cradle, is even during this period in sin, and suffers the punish- 
 ment for sin, even death; so that here it is perfectly clear how 
 the Apostle in the use of a/^a^r/a would not be understood to 
 mean sinful independent actions, but the state of inward dis- 
 harmony, from which outward disharmony, wdiose head is death, 
 takes rise. This state of disharmony is found also in the beast, 
 ay in the physical creation (Rom. viii. 17, «Sz;c.), but it is called 
 a/!MafTia only where the possibility of conscious development is 
 given, elsewhere (pdopd only. 
 
 Ver. 18. Paul does not mean any absolute absence of law, as 
 E,om. ii. 14, 15 shows; where, however, there is no outward law, 
 it is only by very indistinct warnings that the inward law gives 
 indication of itself, especially in the twilight life of childhood. 
 Personal imputation {iXXoysTcrOui) of personal acts (the unconsci- 
 ous one shares only the burden of the many's guilt), is there- 
 fore out of the question during such a state.* Yet a ^aciXiia. 
 davdrov found place (opposed to the kingdom established by 
 Christ, the (SatuXsia ^wJjs), even (xa/) over those who had not, 
 like Adam, transgressed a positive command ; death therefore 
 has naturally no less dominion over those who, arrived at a 
 state of consciousness, have by their own guilt increased the sin 
 which they inherited. — The f/.r] before d,ujapry)ffavrag is omitted 
 in some of the Fathers. But as all MSS. have it, and the con- 
 text properly understood requires it, the omission can only pro- 
 ceed from misinterpretation. — The Jt; t(Z o^u^oidj/jt^ari answ-ers to 
 n^^"T3 (Daniel x. 16.) With an entirely new thought: og hn 
 TVTog To\j fAiXXo^rog, Paul now passes to that statement to which 
 the representation of the efficacy of Adam's sin is intended 
 merely to be a foil. Christ and Adam bear the relation of 
 
 * The acceptation of iXXoyiTa-^ai proposed by Usteri (fourth edit, of the Paul. 
 Lehrbegr. p. 42) and Glockler (p. 82), instead of the explanation given here, and 
 correctly put forth by Ruckert also, is quite inadmissible. They would have it to 
 be understood not of the imputation of God, but of the self-imputation of men, so 
 that the sense should be: " Without law, man does not impute sin to himself, that 
 is, he is not conscious of it as such, heeds it not, therefore, and does not lake it duly 
 to heart." This, however, does not agree with the context, because it is not the 
 subjective judgment of man which is there treated of, but the judgment of God. 
 God indeed allows death admission to all men, because it is the consequence of the 
 collective guilt contracted through Adam, but the individual guilt of men is not 
 yet punished, as is shown by the instance of Cain and Lamech, the law being wanting. 
 (Comp. upon the 'ra^iins at Rom. iii. 25.) 
 
200 ^ EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 antitype to type, or as a Rabbin says : -^-^p ^*);-| q*^^ '^^ 
 
 T T 
 
 n''ttJ?!Dn — ^^^^ ^s- "tb© mystery of Adam is the mystery of the 
 Messiah." The elements of forgotten typology are becoming 
 more and more recognised, and cannot, consistently with truly 
 historical exposition, be overlooked in the New Testament. 
 The Old Testament is a [Mop(pu6ig rrig aXrikiag to all the writers of 
 the New Testament, and according to this principle Christ must 
 naturally appear as the second Adam (1 Cor. xv. 45), the whole 
 race being represented by him after a spiritual manner, just as 
 by Adam after an outward manner. Now the point of compari- 
 son between Adam and Christ here is manifestly the passing of 
 sin and of righteousness from them upon all. Accordingly this 
 passage must present great obstacles to Benecke's doctrine of 
 prse-existence; he is obliged, therefore, to have recourse to the 
 forced interpretation, that fiiXXovrog must be taken as neuter, 
 scil. ysvovs, so for Adam to be called a type of the race to come, 
 because all sinned like him. How arbitrary this construction is, 
 is evident. 
 
 Ver. 1 5. The relation between the efficacy of Adam and tliat 
 of Christ is however with all similarity still a different one; the 
 power which appears in Christ is one of incomparably greater 
 might.* But this preponderance is not, with Grotius and 
 Fritzsche, to be referred to a mere logical More of possibility 
 and certainty, but to the intensive power of grace. First of all 
 (ver. 15) it shows itself stronger, in that in Adam's sin the 
 principle of righteousness merely is manifested, but in Christ 
 the overflowing element of divine grace. Next (ver. 16) Adam 
 produced mere negative effect, but Christ positive, forgiving 
 the many sins by His sacrifice. Ay, not by forgiveness merely 
 does He operate, but also (ver. 17) by communicating a new 
 and higher life. Then follows, in ver. 18, 19, an antithetic 
 repetition of the whole thought. Here accordingly Paul asserts 
 the idea of the vicarious office of Christ, with which the doc- 
 trine of the satisfaction expressed Rom, iii. 24, 25, is so closely 
 united. For were Christ one man beside and among many others, 
 
 • The whole exposition given here may be used in favour of the doctrine of tlie 
 restoration. Since namely Adam's sin came in fact to all, its power would appear 
 greater than the power of Christ, if the wicked could resist the latter, and it pene- 
 trated all. That would, however, lead to the gratia irresistibilis, which Paul does not 
 teach, as will be shown at ch. ix.; we must, therefore, with regard to the greater 
 power of grace, lay emphasis only on those points which are brought forward. 
 
' CHAPTER V. 15. 20] 
 
 it were indeed inconceivable, how His doing and suffering could 
 have any essential influence upon collective humanity; He 
 could have worked only by doctrine and example ; but He is, 
 besides His divine nature, to be conceived of as the Man, that is, 
 as realising the absolute idea of mankind, and therefore potenti- 
 ally bearing mankind in Himself spiritually^ just as Adam did 
 corporeally. This character of the human nature of Christ is 
 designated in dogmatism by the term impersonalitas, and Philo, 
 anticipating the profound idea, described the Logos as rhv xar 
 ccX/jhiav av&pwTTov, that is, as the idea of man, the human ideal. 
 According to this His universal character, the Redeemer be- 
 comes in twofold respect vicarious ; * first, in that standing in 
 the stead of sinful men, by His own suffering he takes their 
 suffering on Himself, as sacrifice for the sins of the world; then, 
 in that He perfected in Himself absolute righteousness and 
 holiness, so that the believer does not generate them afresh, but 
 receives their seed in the Spirit of Christ. The former is the 
 ohedientia passiva, the latter the ohedientia activa. The latter 
 will be further treated of at ver. 19; of the former it is to be 
 remarked, that it is commonly said of Christ in the language of 
 the New Testament : v'rsp niMuv airUavs. Meanwhile it has been 
 already noticed at Matt. xx. 28, that crs^/ also, 5/a, and even 
 avri is used. The most of these prepositions certainly can signify 
 no more than " for, in behalf of,'' but in avri the signification 
 " in the place of, instead,'' is clearly prominent, which, accord- 
 ing to ver. 7, and 2 Cor. v. 20, Ocre^ also undoubtedly bears. But 
 according to the antithesis here carried through of Adam and 
 Christ, it becomes perfectly evident that the Apostle conceives 
 the life and death of our Lord as vicarious, so that what took 
 place in Him, in fact went on in all (2 Cor. v. 15.) Now the 
 reason for putting the expression ;)/a^/fl/Aa here (ver. 15) in oppo- 
 sition to 'Trapd'Trruiia (the sin of Adam), as also ver. 16 parallel 
 with du>pri/!ia is, in order that the circumstance of its having been 
 done once for all may be marked in the act of Christ's love, in 
 opposition to the sin committed once for all by Adam ; the effect 
 of the termination /^a being to denote this.-f* Long intervals 
 
 • In both relations the power of Christ in its transition into mankind is to be 
 compared with a movement proceeding from a centre, concentrically diffusing it- 
 self. Christ brings His death and resurrection to every individual, the former for 
 the old, the latter for the new man. 
 
 t Compare Buttman's large Gram. B, ii. p. 314. The syllable /^cos denotes the 
 
202 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 decide not on mankind's destinies, but moments ; even so also 
 in the life of individuals and nations there are precisely-limited 
 moments in which the determination to better or worse for long 
 periods is at stake, parting- ways which for long spaces condition 
 the development to come. 
 
 O/ croXXo/ (with the article) is equal to 'rdvrsg above ver. 12. 
 As Augustine cont. Jul., vi, 12 says : omnes revera sunt multi. 
 Without the article, indeed, a part only of the race could be 
 meant,* but with it the expression has regard to the preceding 
 
 xdpig is general, the love of God in its utterance towards sin- 
 ners, dupsd its special utterance in the mission and the work of 
 Christ. UspKfffsvM is not to be taken transitively, as Paul cer- 
 tainly uses the word (2 Cor. ix. 8; Eph. i. 8 ; 1 Thess. iii. 12), 
 but, as ordinarily, intransitive. The aorist is put, that grace in 
 its historical manifestation in the work of Christ may be set in 
 the balance against dTrs&avov, the operation of justice. 
 
 Ver. 16, 17. But there is a further distinction between Christ's 
 efficacy and that of Adam, in that it operates not merely nega- 
 tively but positively, justifying mankind from the infinitely many 
 transgressions, yea even imparting to them a new and higher life. 
 
 Ver. 16. The reading dfAaprrjfMarog is found instead of d/ji,apT^' 
 ffavrog, arising doubtless merely from the seeming incompleteness 
 of the antithetic member, a/ evh? dixalov must certainly have 
 been added to dwprjfjjoc, if the sentence were to have been filled 
 up. Kp/fia is the operation of the divine justice objectively con- 
 sidered, which could but show itself as xardxpi/Ma after Adam's 
 the first man's sin. According to the antithesis ex, 'ttoWu/v cra^a- 
 'TTTUf/jdruv, the only word that can be supplied after Jg hog is 'rrapa- 
 'TTuiajCtrog. In the sx 'ttoXXuv '^rocpocTrr/Mdruv, 'ttoXXuv is not to be 
 taken as masculine; the many sins rather are opposed to Adam's 
 one. The preposition, however, is not to be construed in either 
 case in the sense of " proceeding from," but it is to be under- 
 stood " on account of, in consequence of ; " so that the 
 sense is : *' in consequence of one sin the operation of 
 God's justice passed into condemnation, in consequence of 
 
 abstract, yt«« the concrete, fi,n fluctuates between both. This with reference to 
 Rothe's opinion, who thinks this conception of x'^^'^H-'^ and leo^rf^ec capricious. 
 
 * Glockler's observation is wrong, when he says that ^dvns could not be used, 
 because the one is taken out. For it is the same thing at vei'. 18, and yet ^dvrts 
 is used there. Besides the one continues to belong to the whole, nay he is the 
 >\ hole. 
 
CHAPTER IV. 12—19. 203 
 
 the many sins among mankind the operation of God's grace 
 passed into justification.'' * The use of 6/xa/w/Aa here and ver. 
 18 is peculiar, as was observed at Rom. iii. 21. Commonly it 
 signifies that which in a particular case is 5/xa/oi/, therefore " sta- 
 tute, ordinance, IvtoXtj." But here it is used, as dixaiuc/g ^w^j in 
 ver. 18 shows, like dixaiMdig = rh 6/xa/oDi/, p*^*7^n- ^^^^ deviation 
 from the common use in the passage before us is founded in the 
 structure of the whole sentence. The Apostle's point was, to 
 contrast the act of Christ's efficacy to the act of the fall ; now 
 hixaiMiMot, expressed the momentary better than dtxaiMgig, — Ver. 
 17. The dative Tapa'xrwfLari denotes the causa efficiens of death, 
 bia rou hog designates Adam as the organ, through whom the 
 cause became operative. So was God also through Christ the 
 causa efficiens of His work (2 Cor. v. 19). The hi^aioGhvri is that 
 which is worked in man by the d/xaiuffig = dtxaiujua of Christ. — 
 By an easy turn of the parallel, instead of putting ^w;^ itself as 
 the reigning power in opposition to the reigning ddvarog, the 
 ^uvrsg are represented with Christ as those who reign h rfi (Saai- 
 
 Xiia, roZ 0£oD. 
 
 Ver. 18, 19. Finally the Apostle once more comprises in these 
 verses this great contrast between Adam and Christ, and in so 
 doing not only lays the emphasis upon the efficacies being each 
 universal,-^ but indicates also, that the S/xa/ocui/jj and ^w^, which 
 he had just before treated abstractedly as separate moments, in 
 the concrete f^iU into each other, only with this distinction, that 
 the btxaiuidig constantly appears as absolute, no degrees being 
 conceivable in the forgiveness of sins, the ^w)j on the contrary is 
 represented as gradually growing perfect. — In ver. 19, the idea 
 which grounds this whole passage is expressed in altered terms, 
 and with a distinctness, which renders Paul's real meaning more 
 perceptible than all he has said before.J Not the personal 
 
 • If s| Ivof and £» -rokkav are to form an antithesis, it might be supposed whether 
 the many sins did not designate those merely which brought Christ to the cross ; 
 truly, but this was done not merely by the sins of those who lived at the time, but 
 of all men of all times, so that it comes to the same thing. The emphasis in this 
 verse, moreover, is laid on ^/xa/<w^a, God did not only forgive the sins, but he made 
 the sinnei's righteous. 
 
 t As oiToXXoi is said as well of Christ as of Adam, i. e., -reivris, it must be said, to 
 evade the restoration, that mention is made here of the divine purpose in the work 
 of the redemption, not of its result. (Comp. upon the restoration more particularly 
 at ix. 1, and xi. 25. 
 
 J Yet Usteri says (p. 27) even of this passage, that it says no more than: " that 
 in the sinfulness of Adam, which first made itself known as actual conscious sin in 
 
204 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 transgressions of individual men, but tlie disobedience of Adam 
 was alone the foundation of all being sinners; and just so the 
 reverse; the personal striving of individuals could not make 
 them righteous (for the very best effort of man's own powers 
 remains powerless and defiled without Christ's support), but the 
 obedience of Christ is the only effectual cause of the righteous- 
 ness of all. No expression can be imagined by which Paul could 
 have himself more distinctly defined vers. 12 and 15, and pro- 
 tected his meaning from erroneous conceptions; if notwith- 
 standing he has not succeeded in preventing them, the cause of 
 the failure can only at last be found in the heart's resistance to 
 this doctrine, bringing as it does to nothing all man's self-suffi- 
 ciency, a resistance w^hich even unconsciously asserts itself while 
 interpreting such passages. — The expression v'TrazoTj applied to 
 Christ deserves a closer consideration here, as the question re- 
 garding the obedientia activa and passiva is connected with it. 
 (Comp. Phil. ii. 8.) Now we must certainly allow, that the 
 doctrine of the obedientia activa cannot be proved from this 
 passage, for the nearest signification of u^axojj in contrast to 
 vapaxoT] (Adam's eating of the fruit) must be the obedient sur- 
 render of Christ to death, as the once done act of love, to which 
 Phil. ii. 8 also has reference. Nevertheless the doctrine of 
 the obedientia activa has foundation in the Scripture, only it 
 must be laid on other passages, for instance Rom. viii. 30. The 
 whole life of Christ as such is His work, and even His death, as 
 the summit, receives its significance only from its connexion with 
 the perfect life of our Lord. As death and resurrection, so are 
 even in this whole life the active and passive obedience of Christ 
 related, it being however borne in mind, that the distinction is 
 not an absolute one, since the highest passivity cannot be ima- 
 gined without activity, nor the latter without the former. 
 
 Ver. 18. apu ouv is, according to Bible use, placed at the be- 
 ginning of the sentence, which certainly is not conformable to 
 classic use. (Comp. Rothe ad loc. p. 1 36.) — In ver. 18 also, Kplf/na 
 and ^dpidfji^a 'ipy^ircii are to be supplied after ver. 1 6. As to xara- 
 cra&ri<sovrai in ver. 19, xaMsrac&ai certainly signifies "to be set 
 
 the transgression of a positive command, the sinfulness of the whole human nature 
 was brought to liyht." How the words lia rm Ta^axoi^i rev Was could be chosen to 
 express such a thought as this, the foundation of which is the false assumption that 
 sinfulness belongs to the character of the creature, is inconceivable. 
 
CHAPTER V. 20. 205 
 
 forth as somewhat, and by the setting forth to be pronounced to 
 be somewhat/' so that the expression is parallel with Xoyi^effdon 
 h? diKatodvYiv. But as the discourse relates to the operation of 
 God, it must be borne in mind, that God cannot pronounce any 
 one to be what he is not; so far xad/aTuffdai, like xaXsTaOat, Ivofid- 
 Z^isQai, coincides with ihai. 
 
 Ver. 20. The Apostle's readers must naturally after this ex- 
 position have felt it requisite to ascertain, in what relation then 
 the law, which is also a divine institution, stood to the principal 
 turning-points of the world's history.* Paul therefore briefly 
 touches upon this question, although in chap. vii. he discusses it 
 at large. His view is briefly this : the import of the law is in 
 its being a preparatory step of the life of faith, it comes in be- 
 tween Adam and Christ, to awaken the consciousness of sin, 
 and thereby to sharpen the longing for redemption. (Comp. at 
 iii. SO, and vii. 24, 25.) The chief object, therefore, in its being 
 given is not that it may be fulfilled, for no one exists, who could 
 keep it in its intrinsic meaning, as it is set out in the Sermon 
 on the Mount, and a half or improperly fulfilled law is before 
 God a law not kept at all (Gal. iii. 10), although the prevention 
 of gross sins is before man not unimportant (Gal. iii. 19) ; but it 
 is to be the 'n-aidaycoyhg itg xpKfrov (Gal. iii. 24). In so far, how- 
 ever, as it is of divine, eternal nature (vii. 12), it continues even 
 for the faithful the absolute rule of the development of life. 
 
 In the 'xapuffriXhv not only its coming in between is indicated, 
 but also that it w^as something beside, and not absolutely neces- 
 sary, for in the efficacy of Christ the law is given also ; its ante- 
 cedent promulgation by Moses was only to facilitate man's way 
 in getting to Christ. — The 'xapairrMfj^a is remarkable, for the law" 
 was certainly to enhance sin inwardly, but the outward bursts of 
 sin w^ere to be checked (Gal. iii. 19) and not increased by it; yet 
 rapaTTUfia cannot signify the sinful state.t Doubtless therefore 
 the expression here must be taken thus ; the law indeed is not 
 purposedly to multiply the outbreaks of sin, but they are not- 
 
 • The treatise, Gal. iii. 19, &c., is quite a parallel to this; the commentary upon 
 it may be compared here. 
 
 + Rothe's supposition must be considered faulty, according to which the -ra^a- 
 -rrufjt.a. is to mean Adam's -x-K^a.-rruf/.a. more and more developing itself, and diffusing 
 itself according to its effects. In treating of the operation of the law upon the 
 sinful state, the actual sins of siugle individuals only, but not the collective act of 
 Adam, can be intended. 
 
206 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 withstanding the inevitable consequences of it (vii. 8) : now, 
 inasmuch as the consciousness of sin is awakened by it, the 
 transgression itself may be also regarded as an object of the law. 
 It is inappropriate to take hct merely sxjSanxcijg, it is clearly con- 
 trary to the Apostle's meaning to consider it as mere conse- 
 quence, as chap. vii. 8, etc., will further show. He regards the 
 law as a beneficial medicine, which forces outwards a disease, 
 which is raging undiscerned in the noble parts within.* On 
 account of the aorists ou is taken better with Grotius and De 
 Wette in the signification "as,'' instead of "where:" the Apostle 
 is speaking of the regulations of God quite in their objective cha- 
 racter, the subjective conception of them does not come into play. 
 The aorist icrXeovatfg goes on, therefore, to the fact of the killing 
 of the Son of God, in which sin actually reached its summit, but 
 at the same time grace set forth her over-measure, in that the 
 salvation of the world was gained and made sure by the highest 
 sin. Rothe endeavours to explain the aorists from the circum- 
 stance, that the sentence, in his opinion to be taken as paren- 
 thesis (o5 — %a^/?), contains a thought expressed as an axiom or 
 proverb. But this is contradicted by the peculiar constitution 
 of the thought, which has its place entirely within the Pauline 
 theory, but has nothing at all of a proverbial character in it. — 
 'T'ffsp'TrspKfffsvu is to be taken like vXsovd'^u intransitively, in the 
 signification " being rich beyond." In the passages 2 Cor. vii. 
 4; 1 Tim. i. 14, the parallel O^g^crXsoi/a^w occurs. 
 
 Ver. 21 . The absolute reign of grace, therefore, to eternal life 
 (vi. 22, 23) is the final aim of redemption through Christ, w4iile 
 till then sin reigned to death. 
 
 The strict antithesis would have required g/V Odvarov or h t^c^fj, 
 but Jv denotes expressly, that sin itself is spiritual death, sig makes 
 the aim more prominent. — The biTtaioevvn is taken as the means 
 by which grace exercises her dominion. But at the very founda- 
 tion Christ Himself is considered as the holy Instrument, 
 
 * Augustine correctly expresses himself upon the relation of the law: " Data est 
 lex ad ostendendum, quantis quamque arctis vinculis peccatorum constricti tene- 
 rentur, qui de suis viribus ad implendam justitiam prsesumebant." Equally so 
 Calvin: " Erant quidem homines naufragi ante legem, quia tamen in suo intei-itu 
 sibi videbantur natare, in profundum demersi sunt, quo illustrior fieret liberatio, 
 quum inde prseter humanum sensum emergant, Neque vero absurdura fuit, legem 
 hac partim de causa ferri, ut homines semel damnatos bis damnet; quia nihil jus- 
 tius est, quam modis omnibus adduci homines, imo convictos trahi, ut mala sua 
 sentiant." 
 
CHAPTER VI. 1 VII. 6. 207 
 
 through which the reign of life is realised ; inasmuch namely as 
 the Father who sends the Son into the flesh, is acknowledged 
 as the First Cause of the decree of grace. 
 
 § 1 0. THE BELIEVER IS DEAD TO SIN. 
 
 (VI. 1— VII. 6.) 
 
 It is not likely that the passing notice of the law and its rela- 
 tion to grace (v. 20, 21), induced the Apostle Paul in what fol- 
 lows to proceed to refute the error, that we might continue in 
 sin that grace should abound. It answers far better to connect, 
 as Rothe does (p. 49), the subsequent words with the leading 
 thought of chap. v. in this manner: ""What shall we say, then, 
 in this state of things ? Namely, seeing that justification through 
 faith in the redemption by Christ according to its specific opera- 
 tion is essentially the sanctification of believers. Shall we, 
 therefore, yet think of continuing in sin?" The Apostle then 
 prosecutes the refutation of this error in such a manner, that 
 the principal idea of the section, the vicarious relation of Christ 
 to the collective whole, always continues in the foreground, and 
 forms the main of the argument. Although, however, accord- 
 ing to the tenor of the epistle in the whole, the treatise that 
 follows can form no more than an accessory part, it is notwith- 
 standing of the higliest importance for the practical application 
 of the Apostle's doctrine of justification by faith without the 
 works of the law; and this indeed not merely at that time, but 
 in every time, and especially in the present. For firstly, there 
 are never wanting persons who, in fact, misunderstaiid this holy 
 doctrine, and through misunderstanding misuse it. Whether it 
 be that stupidity, or which is perhaps more common, more or less 
 unconscious impurity is the cause, certain it is that many con- 
 strue the doctrine of justification as though they now had leave 
 to live on quietly in sin, as if Christ would make a man blessed 
 with sin, which is itself unblessedness, and not from sin. No 
 one has ever consciously taught such doctrine, because it is in 
 fact too absurd for the lowest grade of spiritual development 
 not to acknowledge the perverseness of it; but insincerity of 
 heart makes the consciences of many dull, and in such a state 
 
208 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 tliey apply the doctrine falsely, and turn grace to wantonness. 
 (Jude ver. 4.) But, secondly, this treatise is no less important, 
 because the opponents of the doctrine of justification regard this 
 abuse of it as one necessary to it, and essentially founded in it, 
 and think themselves obliged therefore to combat the doctrine 
 as an extremely dangerous one. In this error are found not 
 merely all thorough rationalistic-pelagian theologists, but others 
 also, who with no living experience of the nature of faith and of 
 justification, are animated by a kind of legal jealousy, and flatter 
 themselves that by their own effort they can soon attain, if they 
 do not already exhibit the type of absolute perfection. For every 
 one, however, who is willing to see, the apostolic doctrine may, 
 under the guidance of this section, with very little pains be 
 perfectly justified; on the other hand, indeed, no help is to be 
 found against impurity of heart, or against the conceit of self- 
 righteousness, unless grace itself reveals to hearts their secret 
 sins; at least the statement of the Apostle has not itself been 
 able to prevent the errors either of the former or of the latter. 
 Meanwhile the Scripture fulfils even by this inability one of its 
 purposes, that, namely, of becoming, like Christ himself, the fall 
 of many (Luke ii. 34), not to destroy them, but by revealing to 
 them their most secret sins of impurity, or of conceited self- 
 confidence, to save them. 
 
 Ver. 1, 2. Without noticing any particular party — such as 
 Jews or Jew-Christians only — the Apostle proposes the question 
 quite generally, as one proceeding from impurity of heart in 
 general, — whether according to what had been said the meaning 
 be, that sin could be continued in, in order to let grace have its 
 full power? He answers this question most decidedly in the 
 negative, by designating the faithful as those who are dead with 
 respect to sin, who cannot therefore live in it any more.* Tliis 
 idea of the faithful being dead, Paul carries through to ver. 11, 
 and that in such a manner as to regard the death of Christ not 
 merely as a symbol of the death of the faithful, but as a real 
 event in themselves, of which they are partakers, as they are 
 
 • So Calvin, when he justly observes: " Plusquam igitur prsepostera esset operis 
 Dei inversio, si occasione gratije, quae nobis in Christo offertur, peccatum vires col- 
 ligeret. Neque enim medicina morbi, quem extinguit, fomentum est." Yet man 
 can hardly believe in the power of Christ without law; hence Luther says well: 
 " The multitude will have a Moses with horns;" that is, the law with its frighten- 
 ing power. 
 
CHAPTER VI. 3, 4. 209 
 
 also of His resurrection through faith. Here then is man fest, 
 how keenly and with what thorough decision Paul conceives 
 and applies the vicarious office of Christ. He is mankind ; what 
 came to pass in Him, in fact went on in all, in Him are all dead, 
 have all suffered death for sin, in Him are all risen again and 
 have received the new life. The history of Jesus therefore is a 
 living continuing history, since it is livingly repeated in every 
 one. (1 Pet. ii. 24.) According to the Pelagian interpretation, 
 this passage is understood only of the resolve or the vow of ab- 
 staining from sin, which was entered into at baptism. But Paul 
 would clearly contradict himself by such a thought, for down to 
 iii. 20, he had shown at large that man is incapable, by mere 
 resolve, to renounce sin. According to such an acceptation, 
 moreover, even the bo^dZ^uv in the passage, Rom. viii. 30, could 
 not be conceived as a thing already past, but it is put in the 
 aorist, just as all the other moments are. The Pauline idea 
 doubtless is, that our Lord in those words upon the cross, " it is 
 finished,'^ declared the w^ork of atonement and redemption to be 
 accomplished not merely for himself, but also for all believers of 
 all times, so that whoever believes in Him as surely died with 
 him,* as with Him rose again. Such a postulate, too, is not 
 merely admissible or the like, but necessary [as a consequence] 
 from the idea of the vicarious office, that as in Adam all fell, so 
 must all die and rise again in Christ, for He was themselves. , 
 
 Griesbach is right in putting the reading s<7rifisvufMsv into the 
 text, and Lachmann also; while other codd. read lirifLsimiMiv^ sti- 
 fisvofMiv, s'7n//.svoufMsv. The last is the reading of the text, rec, and 
 has distinguished critical authorities also in its favour ; it must, 
 notwithstanding, be considered inferior to the first. " Amhrjaxnvy 
 like ^f]v rivi (ver. 10), is, even in profane authors, the usual figu- 
 rative mode of expression for " entertaining or breaking off con- 
 nexion with any one.'' But the following exposition shows, 
 that Paul does not merely mean the expression figuratively, but 
 conceives it inwardly indeed, yet quite really. Avrfj by itself 
 might have stood for Iv avrfj. 
 
 Ver. 3, 4. In proof of the affirmation above, Paul appeals to 
 
 * The old man is not to be gradually sanctified, but must die as sinner, as Luther 
 aptly says: " Flesh and blood abideth ever and ever unclean, until they fetch shovel 
 strokes upon it;" that is, until ii is dead and buried. And in another place; " We 
 must scourge the old man and strike him in the face, pain him with thorns, and 
 pierce him through with nails, until he bovveth his head and giveih up the ghost." 
 
 u 
 
210 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 the conscience of his readers with regard to their own experience. 
 They had gone through, he says, in baptism the death, nay, the 
 burial of Christ with Him, as also the awakening up unto a new 
 life.* In this place, also, we must by no means think of their 
 own resolutions only at baptism, or see no more in it than a 
 figure, as if by the one half of the ancient rite of baptism the suh- 
 mersion, the death and the burial of the old man — by the second 
 half, the emersion, the resurrection of the new man — were no 
 more than prefigured ; we must rather take baptism in its in- 
 ward meaning, as spiritual process in the soul. That which was 
 already objectively fulfilled on and in the person of Jesus, the 
 same is appropriated subjectively through him in faith to man; 
 he experiences the power as well of the sufferings and of the 
 death, as of the resurrection of the Lord (Phil. iii. 10). Ac- 
 cordingly this efficacy can only be ascribed to the baptism of 
 grown persons, and in their case it coincides with regeneration; 
 in the baptism of infants a spiritual influence certainly is al- 
 ready wrought upon the child, but the personal appropriatio7i 
 of the power of Christ does not take place before that later 
 awakening and conversion, the necessity of which confirmation 
 prefigures. 
 
 The ffuvsrdiprijtisv is only a stronger expression for ddvuTo?. The 
 burial withdraws the dead person entirely from view, and is 
 therefore, like annihilation. (Comp. Rom. viii. 17, Col. iii. 1, 
 2 Tim. ii. 11.) The ^a'Ttnc&nmi sJg xp/gTovf (comp. at Matt, 
 xxviii. 19), is only more clearly defined by the iSwrriffdrivai sig 
 rhv ddvccrov ccxjtou, as by the Ctivra^^va/ avrQj sIg rbv Qdvarov. The bap- 
 tized person vows himself to the whole Christ, and Christ him- 
 self wholly to him, consequently death and resurrection become 
 equally man's. The e/'g Qdvarov is not to be understood therefore 
 = ih vidTiv davdrov, but of death itself, the participation of which 
 surely is meditated by faith. The 3of a rov '^rarpog appears as the 
 awakening power, that is, the whole fulness and majesty of His 
 Being, for even in the creation of the world the divine proper- 
 ties show not such splendour, as in the redemption and raising 
 up of Christ. Usp/'n-arsTv means the abiding continuance and 
 
 • Rttckert's observation ad loc. is quite just; that the Apostle is not saying here 
 what Christians have done at their baptism, but what has been done to them in 
 baptism. 
 
 t Against Bindseil's observations upon this formula (Stud. 1822, p. 410, &c.), 
 comp. the striking refutation of Fritzsche ad h. 1. p. 359, not. 
 
 I 
 
r 
 
 GHAPTKR VI. 5 — 7. 211 
 
 living- in the xa/voVjjc ^w^g (2 Cor. v. 17, Gal. vi. 15, Eph. ii. 15, 
 iv. 23), which forms the contrast with the old, sinful state, which 
 is in itself properly a death, so that in the regeneration death, 
 which has in itself a positive power, is, in truth, itself killed, that 
 is, the life of pure spirit is born. 
 
 Ver. 5. Upon the necessary connexion of the one with the 
 other, the Apostle then grounds the proof, that where the death 
 of Christ shows itself effective. His awakening life must be also 
 powerful (comp. 2 Cor. iv. 14), for it is life only that kills the 
 old man, 
 
 2vfM(puTog is only found in this passage in the N. T.; in profane 
 authors it occurs, like <fvi^(pv^g, very often in the signification, 
 "grown to, grown together, thence united, bound together."' 
 This sense is perfectly suitable here; the faithful are considered 
 as grown together with Christ to one unity.* Instead of Christ 
 himself, first 6^o/c«^ar/ davdrou only (that is, o/xolus, or o/jjoiqi &avd- 
 rov), and afterwards dvagrdgsug is used, because, the efficacy of 
 Christ is represented by these two halves. It is inappropriate 
 to take the dative as instrumental here, and to found <i\)(jj(p\)rot 
 yiyovafiiv upon it. Tholuck asserts, that according to the ac- 
 ceptation proposed here the dvdaraai? must then be applied not 
 merely to the spiritual, but also to the bodily resurrection. But 
 we need not hesitate at that (comp. at Rom. viii. 11), since the 
 bodily dvd6Ta<si? is but the height of the expression of the ^w;j 
 of Christ in man (comp. at John vi. 89.) 'AXXa xa/ is not to 
 be taken as merely inferring, as Riickert and Reich e correctly 
 observe, but to be explained rather from an oh ij^ovov latitant in the 
 first part of the sentence, since the resurrection, as the life, is 
 more powerful than death (comp. at v. 10, 11.) The reading a/^a 
 xa/has arisen merely from a correction. 
 
 Ver. 6. 7. But at all events the service of sin must be out of 
 the question with one that is dead; for death, the sum of all 
 punishment, necessarily frees every one from sin, on account of 
 which it is suffered. 
 
 ToDro yivuxfKovn; = oux dyvoovvrecy " since WO know for certain/' 
 "Suvsgruvpudn, a stronger expression than Sdmros, which is partly 
 
 * Calvin observes rightly on the passage : ** Insitio non exempli tantum conformi- 
 tatem designat, sed areanam eonjunctionem, per quam cum ipso coaluimus, ita ut 
 nos spiritu suo vegetans ejus virtutem in nos transfundat. Ergo ut surculus com- 
 muneni habet vitse et mortis conditionem cum arbore, in quam insertus est, ita 
 vitae Christi non minus quam et mortis participes nos esse consentaueum est. 
 
212 BPISTLK TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 chosen to point at the death of Christ, partly to describe the death 
 of the old man as a painful and ignominious one. The 'raXaihg 
 eivdpwrog forms the contrast with the xatvog (Eph. iv. 24), answer- 
 ing to the n\inn b^*'*^^' ^J which the proselytes were desig- 
 
 T T — : T : • 
 
 nated. In consequence of the doctrine of regeneration this 
 name was assigned in a higher signification to the faithful. In 
 the passage Rom. vii. 21, &;c., the relation of the two will be 
 treated more at large, I only observe here, that this contrast 
 is by no means identical with the 6 sgw and 6 g<rw dv&pwrog (Rom. 
 vii. 22), for this latter has place as well in the natural man, but 
 the first only in the regenerate. KarapyiTeQat = trui/ra^^va/, to be 
 entirely done away, annulled in its efficacy. The opinion, that 
 here in the euiia rrig aiLapriag, the body as the seat of sin in and by 
 itself is intended, in favour of which De Wette has again deter- 
 mined, is sufficiently refuted by Reiche.* After the (fuvsgravpuidr} 
 the xarapyyjdfi cannot have any weaker meaning; according to 
 De Wette it is no more than "to make inactive.'^ In the 
 stronger and proper acceptation, the thought however is untrue, 
 for the body subject to sin is not to be annihilated in the pro- 
 cess of regeneration, but to be glorified. It were a forced ex- 
 pression to say, that in its very glorification the sinful body is 
 actually annihilated and absorbed by the spiritual body. Here, 
 therefore, perhaps the Hebrew usage of q^^^ or h*i;i might be com- 
 pared, by which the reality and substance of a thing is denoted. 
 Meanwhile it is simpler to interpret ffoj/ia by carrying out the 
 complete image of the crucifixion of sin, so that it is itself con- 
 sidered as embodied. Thus Theodoret, later Koppe, Flatt, 
 Benecke, Reiche. Ver. 16, &c., the service of sin is described 
 at length as dovXsia.f The whole of ver. 7 is wanting in some of 
 the Fathers, but it is without doubt genuine, and omitted only 
 as being merely explanatory; as such it cannot have reference 
 immediately to the spiritual, but to the physical death. The 
 latter, however, is certainly comprehended in its analogy with 
 
 * We shall express ourselves more at large at the close of the 7th chapter, as 
 to the relation which, according to the Pauliue conception, the bodily substance 
 bears to sin. 
 
 •f" At the words tov ^>;xst; dovkivsiy Calvin observes: " Unde sequitur, nos, quam- 
 diu sumus Adse filii ac nihil quam homines, peccato sic esse mancipatos, ut nihil 
 possimus aliud, quam peccare; Christo vei'o insitos a misera hac necessitate liberari; 
 rion quod statim desinamus in totum peccare, sed ut simus tandem in pugna su- 
 pei'iores." 
 
CHAPTER VI. 8, 9. 213 
 
 the spiritual death. In thinking of the physical death notwith- 
 standing, we are not so much to consider that the sinner is free 
 from sin, that is, that he cannot sin any more, for the expres- 
 sion dsdiTtaiurai has too decidedly a judicial relation. We are 
 to consider rather a sentence of punishment to which Christ's 
 death also leads; whoever died in consequence of this, he, even 
 although he returned to life, is acquitted from sin on account 
 of which he was condemned,* for he has expiated it. (Guilt 
 before men, I mean, is the only thing spoken of in this sentence, 
 and the satisfaction which is made to civil justice; not the divine 
 eternal justice.) So is man also dead in Christ, and as a dead 
 man, incapable of serving sin. So, therefore, justification stands 
 in no contradiction with the law. According to the law the 
 sinner must die, and even so he dies, who is justified through 
 Christ; only in the dying of the old man the new gets life. 
 Upon diKaiouffdai a-ro comp. Acts xiii. 39. 
 
 Ver. 8, 9. In the certainty, therefore, of death with Christ 
 lies the certainty also of life with Him, that is, of His life in us, 
 for in Him dwelleth the fulness of infinite, immortal life. En- 
 tirely the same train of thought is found 2 Cor. v. 14, &c., from 
 which repetition may be perceived what deep root it had in the 
 Apostle's mind. (When the believer in his immediate consci- 
 ousness is certain of his death with Christ, the living with Him 
 [cvt^v], although its germ is likewise present in him, is yet so 
 far something future, as its complete development extends into 
 the Z^uri aJufviog. But the firm ground which this faith has, is in 
 the unconquerable life of Christ, which he sheds without ceasing 
 on His own. — In the ovksti xvpnUi it is signified, that death cer- 
 tainly had dominion over Clirist,f in that he really died, but 
 not by the necessity of nature, but by freely giving up Himself 
 in love (John x. 18; Phil. ii. 7). Yet even in death life could 
 not be holden of death.) 
 
 Ver. 10. The relation wdiich Christ, the ^urj (John i. 4,) bore 
 to death, on which our hope of life rests, is yet more nearly de- 
 
 * In entirely the same sense the Talmud says: "Postquam mortuus est homo, 
 cessat a prseceptis. Schabb. fol. 151. 2 (eomp. Meuschen, N. T. e Talmude, illustr. 
 page 1 70. 
 
 t If theologians of the Reformation believed that death had dominion over Jesus 
 until the resurrection, their opinion rests upon a false conce[)tion of the descent to 
 hell and its import. (Comp, at 1 Pet. iii. 1 8. ' Our Lord appeared among the 
 dead as already conqueror over death; God is not a God of the dead, but of the 
 living, may also be said of Him. 
 
214 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 fined, namely, that His death, the once-suffered death, came 
 to pass only for our sins; but what* he liveth, he liveth to God. 
 There is no difficulty in the first half of the verse ; the idea of 
 xvpiiveiv (ver. 9,) leads the Apostle to a closer description of the 
 death of Christ. He died not for Himself, hut for men, that is, 
 for tlie doing away of their sins, not often and for ever, but 
 once. (Heb. ix. 12, 26, &c.; x. 10.) The greatness of His 
 saciifice outweighed by His dying once mankind's eternal 
 death. In the second half, however, the ^fj rJ ©sw causes a 
 difficulty, some antithesis being looked for to J^ci'rag, or at 
 least to afiapria, but to neither does the Z^ri tuj &scp seem to 
 afford any. Now the antithesis to Ifa-rag may lie in the pre- 
 sent tense by its expression of continuity. The rw ©gw is not 
 so easy. For if the words are to be construed: *'He liveth /or 
 God, with regard to God," this did Jesus even on earth, and 
 in His heavenly Being He lives again not less for men, than 
 on earth. The whole thought then appears somewhat irrele- 
 vant; diKaioffv]>ri might, as it seems, have been better opposed to 
 d/ji^apTia. The only tenable acceptation of the passage seems to 
 many to be that of the Fathers. Chrysostom, and after him 
 Theophylact, take tu> &s(p as h rfl dwdfisi rov ©soD, that is, through 
 God; taken so, the idea certainly of eternal and imperishable 
 life, which the context requires, comes clearly into view, for 
 God it is w^ho only hath immortality, (1 Tim. vi. 16.) But even 
 so, there arises no antithesis to afj^apria, and then, too, ver. 11 
 does not come right, where l^fiv r<Z ©gw is said of men, and where 
 notwithstanding it can have no other sense than ver. 10. Ac- 
 cordingly we can only say, that to live to God is the same as 
 " to live to righteousness,'' namely for the purpose of furthering 
 it among men, whereby this sense results: Christ died once for 
 sin, that is, to extirpate it, and lives eternally for God, that is, 
 to further righteousness. Death is then as at v. 10, 11, under- 
 stood as working forgiveness, and the resurrection, righteous- 
 ness. So in ver. 11 this is applied to the human standard, and 
 understood as a dying off from sin and a living for God. 
 
 The is best taken as accusative of the object in the sense, "in 
 as far as, in respect that," so that in the first member the adpt,., 
 in the other the 'xnvfj.a, is to be understood. Thus the passage 
 becomes quite parallel to 1 Peter iii. 18, damrukig iih eapxiy 
 
 * [Or in so far as, in respect that. Eng. V, " in that." B.] 
 
CHAPTER VI. H. 215 
 
 Z^miroiri^ili hi vvev/ian (comp., too, the parallel 2 Cor. xiii. 4). 
 Reiche takes it so only in the second member, but the anti- 
 tliesis requires the same in the first as well. To complete the 
 antithesis, some would construe rfj aij^apria also : " through sin" 
 (comp. upon the ablative use of the dative Winer's Gram. p. 
 194). But the parallel nupoi a/^a^r/a, ver. 11, forbids this, just as 
 we observe upon l^rlv ©sa, which cannot be to live through God. 
 Ver. 11. Hitherto Paul had conceived and set forth the rela- 
 tion of the faithful to sin quite in the abstract, and accordingly 
 said that what came to pass in Christ, in fact came to pass in 
 all believers. As Christ died and rose again, so are also all, who 
 are incorporate in him through the la ver of regeneration, really 
 dead in the old man, can therefore, as being dead, serve sin no 
 more, and live really in the new man. But the relation does 
 not so purely show itself in the concrete case. As doubtless the 
 kingdom of God, which has peace, righteousness, and happiness 
 in its train, exists on earth, yet peace, righteousness, and hap- 
 piness have not yet dominion upon earth ; so may also the new 
 man, Christ in us, truly live in an individual man, without having 
 yet the absolute dominion. Rather does the process of the dying 
 of the old man extend itself over the whole earthly life, as well 
 as that of the new man's growth in living ; each of them is the 
 condition to the other, and their consummation is reserved for 
 that life beyond, since without the glorification of the body (Rom. 
 viii. 11), it is impossible. Therefore the life of the believer ex- 
 hibits itself as an oscillating between two poles of life; its result, 
 the final completion of the new man, as well as the complete 
 death of the old, reaches beyond this present life. To this rela- 
 tion, as it appears in the concrete, the Apostle passes with the: 
 Xoyil^sffk savrovg vsTi^ovg. For even as iii. 21, etc., he had repre- 
 sented abstract dizaioauv/j, and then iv. 1, etc., in the Xoyileffdon sJg 
 dixaiogvvrjv considered it in its concrete growing in man, so it is 
 repeated here. This passage is therefore most highly important 
 to the comprehension of the Pauline doctrine of the old and new 
 man, which is especially treated of vii. 8, etc., in the description 
 of the course of development in the new man. The common 
 view already spoken of, vi. 2, that the Apostle is treating here 
 of purposes and vows merely, to forsake sin, and to practise 
 righteousness, as they were promised at baptism, has its ap- 
 parent support in the circumstance, that in what follows the 
 
216 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 discourse assumes an imperative form. Paul exhorts to forsake 
 sin and to serve righteousness (ver. 13, 18, 19), he presumes 
 consequently, it is said, that such is by no means the case yet, 
 but had only been promised in good purposes. Thence it is in- 
 ferred, that no real vicarious power is ascribed to the dying and 
 rising again of Christ, but that it has only the weight of an in- 
 fluential example. But the conception of the true relation be- 
 tween the old and the new man, gives a perfect insight into St 
 Paul's mode of expression. Where by regeneration an av&^carrog 
 xamg is bom, there the man is certainly no more sub lege (ver. 
 14), though yet by no means in lege, since even the new man 
 needs for this a full development, in which he first gets absolute 
 dominion ; he must rather walk constantly cum lege, and by no 
 means suffer his own will to loose him from the law, for against 
 this, vii. 1, etc., he is warned, as against a spiritual adultery. 
 Just as little, however, may he fall back again into a legal state, 
 which is the Apostle's censure among the Galatians, for so fear 
 rules him instead of love, and his works do not flow forth of 
 thankful love for love, but are the means to him to merit 
 blessedness. Yet the aspect of the old man still mighty in him 
 tempts him continually to such relapse into the state under the 
 law; therefore the Apostle gives here that wise precept, pre- 
 venting equally both stray paths, so continually in faith to re- 
 gard ourselves, as being absolutely dead to sin, that is, in other 
 words, constantly to appropriate Christ in faith, as Him who 
 makes sin dead, and gives the new man life. By this continual 
 action of faith the new man is constantly nourished by powers 
 from above, and the I* is engaged in a continual Exodus from 
 the Babel of sin. This considering ourselves as dead for sin, 
 however, is no comforting self deceit, but it is a spiritual opera- 
 tion fully true, answering throughout the aim of Christ, witli- 
 out which altogether no real sanctification, that gaining above 
 all of thorough humility and divesture of all selfishness, is pos- 
 sible. For it has its truth in this — that the germ of the new 
 man created in regeneration in fact is absolutely pure (1 John 
 iii. 9), and salvation is not to be considered as depending on its 
 development, but the degree of glorification only. (Comp. more 
 particularly thereon at 1 Cor. iii. 11, etc.) Therefore may the 
 believer, although he knows that he is capable of a greater de- 
 
 • * IDas Ich, re iy<y.] 
 
CHAPTER VI. 12— 14. 217 
 
 velopment of the new man, look towards death without anxiety 
 for his salvation, because this depends not upon the degree of in- 
 dividual development, but upon the faithful laying hold of God's 
 objective decree of grace, which can neither be increased nor 
 diminished, but abides unchangeable as God himself. This Xo//- 
 t^iff&s &ocvTovg vsjc^oug rp a/j^a^Tlcf, ^ojvrag ds ru) 0sw is besides SO much 
 the more an urgent admonition for all, as it is in the very life 
 of the most advanced that often times of heavy combating set 
 in, in which their new life in God is quite hidden from them- 
 selves, and they seem left with sin. These are the sifting times 
 to hold up and keep the victory, through that faith, that does 
 not see, that against hope believes in hope, (iv. 18). 
 
 The addition rOj xv^iuj rj/xuv is wanting in the oldest and best 
 Codd. Perhaps the words have found way into the passage from 
 liturgical use. Whether the stop be placed after v/MsTg or after 
 sotvroug makes no diiFerence to the thought ; after vfj^eT? is the 
 more simple as to grammar. 
 
 Ver. 12-14.* Sin, therefore (with retrospect upon ver. 1), is 
 no more to have dominion over him, who does not live under 
 the law, but under grace, than death over Christ (ver. 9) ; for 
 him there is access to the higher power of life in Christ, which 
 is stronger than sin (v. J 5.) But the Apostle purposely chooses 
 the words l3affiXsv?iv, xu^nusiv here, to signify the relation of the 
 believer to sin. For the Imv is able to check gross outward 
 transgression of it (spy a, Tovripd), and in it a man, even without 
 grace, can perform opera externa and civilia; but even under 
 grace a man may not entirely avoid and check finer expressions 
 of sin, hastinesses in words and deeds, sinful desires and impulses, 
 since the old man at times represses the new, and checks him 
 in his efficacy. Hence there is need of the constant cleansing 
 and ever renewed intercession of Christ (1 John ii. 1), of daily 
 repentance and forgiveness, as they are expressed in the Lord's 
 Prayer, and symbolically represented by the washing of the feet. 
 (Comp. at John xiii. 11, etc.) From this state, however, the 
 dominion of sin must be distinguished, that is, its free unre- 
 sisted sway in the life of the man; this in the regenerate is 
 
 * From ver. 12 the principal ideas of sin, unrighteousness and righteousness 
 have assumed almost personal forms ; in order that this personification may be 
 distinguished, Fritzsche has had them not unsuitably printed with capital initial 
 letters. [As Fritzsche wrote in Latin, the capitals would have a significance in his 
 work, which they have not in German. B.] 
 
218 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 utterly inconceivable. (Comp. at vii. 25.) The whole repre- 
 sentation in this passage (as in the following 1 6-21) is so man- 
 aged that the man never appears as absolutely independent as the 
 natural man is disposed to consider his state, but as constantly 
 governed by an element. As any one, who is swimming in a 
 powerful stream, notwithstanding his wilful exertions, finds him- 
 self compelled to follow the course of the current; even such is 
 the condition of the unregenerate man in this world's sinful 
 stream ; he receives his course from the aVx^" ^^D xoV^oy to^jtouj 
 and is incapable of freeing himself out of this stream, however 
 he may be able, by applying his powers in true practice of law 
 (which affords him the attainment of Sijustitia civilis), to pre- 
 vent his sinking deeper and deeper into the mud. But if the 
 liigher and redeeming power of Christ has drawn him from this 
 sinful stream (vii. 24), he stands not then, as it were, absolutely 
 isolate and independent; but a new stream receives him, though 
 a holy, blessed stream of divine light, by which it is the highest 
 freedom to let himself be governed and swayed. In service, 
 therefore, man is always; and there is no middle state between 
 the service of sin and the service of God. Man has eiihcr justi- 
 fication, or forgiveness of sins (and with it life and salvation), 
 entirely, or he has it 7iot at all* Sanctification only, which 
 springs from living faith, as fruit of love returned, has its de- 
 grees, may be pursued more earnestly and lukewarmly; but this 
 does not determine, as was observed before, the state of grace, 
 salvation, but only the degree of glory in salvation, (1 Cor. iii. 
 12-1.5). This is the apostolic and evangelic doctrine, which 
 no force and no prudence can protect from misunderstanding 
 (whether it come undesignedly from ignorance, or designedly 
 from insincerity of heart), but which nevertheless remains the 
 way which alone leads to God, and upon which the sincere and 
 humble cannot err. The erring of the insincere upon it, as well 
 as the offence which the proud take at this way of God, is most 
 properly, as was observed before, one among the aims which the 
 Lord pursues in having this word of reconciliation preached (2 
 > Cor. V. 18, etc.), for Christ is to be as well the rock on which 
 the proud are shattered, as on which the humble stay them- 
 
 * Rightly says Luther : " Where this article is gone, the church is gone, and no 
 error can be withstood. If we stand to it, we have the true, heavenly sun, but if 
 \se let it go, we have then nothing but hellisli darkness." 
 
k 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 12 — 14. 219 
 
 selves. The key, however, to this mystery, that the doctrine 
 of reconciliation, without exacting works, begets in the mind 
 the purest works, lies here ; that love awakens love again and 
 strong desire for holiness. Thereby the striving of the man 
 leaves oif being a heavy, bitter toil ; * he no more struggles that 
 he may be saved and please God, but because he is become, 
 without deserving, saved, and acceptable to Grod in the Beloved 
 (Ephes. i. 6), he works for love as if the matter were his own. 
 So there are but two states of the man (ver. 14); he is either iito 
 voiMov, or i/cri x^P'^' Under the scourge of the law he deals in 
 works, and serves for hire (iv. 4), but according to the strict 
 right of retribution he fares by it but very badly; if he is 
 tempted he falls, and sin has rule, even though the better con- 
 quers now and then. On the other hand, under grace, the man 
 indeed is tempted, but he conquers, even if now and then sin for 
 once tells upon him. 
 
 As regards the expression h rZ dv^irSj hfiuv trw.aar/, dv^rh euiMot, is 
 used entirely = ca^g (vii. 18), or m /asXtj (vii. 2.S-25). But this 
 is by no means to say that, according to Paul's view, sin is to be 
 sought for in the body, and its sensual impulses alone; it is in- 
 tended rather to be signified only, that it commonly makes it- 
 self known in the body by the excited sensuality. (Comp. more 
 particularly thereon at Rom. vii. 17.) By the cufia, however, 
 the character of mortality is put forward in order to contrast the 
 sinful body, and, as sinful, especially exposed to all temptations, 
 with the sanctified organ of the glorified one (viii. 11). The 
 words must not therefore be construed, " let not sin reign in your 
 body,'" as though the body were distinguished as the place 
 where it should not reign, for in vii. 25 the body is described as 
 still subjected to sin, even in the regenerate ; but they are to be 
 connected thus : "let not the sin revealing itself in your mortal 
 body reign, so that ye yield to it, but oppose strong resistance 
 to it from the spirit." 'Ei/ rOj hririp bfiuv ffdi/jiari may therefore be 
 supplied by ouca or o/xoDca. At the close of ver. 12, the Codd, 
 vary much. Some have only avrfj, others only raTg em^v/niais 
 avTov, others both together. One dative only can be received, 
 for the blending of the two in the teoot. rec. by an additional h 
 is certainly inadmissible. Goschen has declared for the recep- 
 
 • ISchaarwerken, — a word which we cannot profess to translate, except conjectur- 
 ally.— B. Perhaps " Taskwork." See Adelung.] 
 
220 EPISTLE TO THE ROxMANS. 
 
 tion of ra/g I'jrihjMiaii avrou ; notwithstanding, the addition of a 
 dative might be more easy of explanation than its omission, as 
 the mere infinitive seems somewhat bare. UoipiffTdvaif to pre- 
 sent or exhibit one's self forth, that is, to give up or offer for 
 disposal. The choice of the word 6VXa proceeds from the image 
 of a contest, which lay at the foundation of the Apostle's ex- 
 position. (Comp. Eph. vi. 12, &c.) The addition ug Ix vsxpuv 
 ^uvTotg refers to the fact that the service of sin is only possible 
 in spiritual death; where life is, there is its longing for the 
 fountain of life. 
 
 Ver. 15-16. After this statement, the Apostle expressly re- 
 sumes the question from ver. 1, only with this modification, that 
 he draws the Christian's relation to the law more decidedly, 
 with regard to the last-mentioned contrast of vvo v6/tMov and vTb 
 Xoi'piv into consideration. For as the decree of God in Christ is so 
 hard to be comprehended, not merely to the Jew, but to the man 
 generally, since he does not easily get rid of the conceit that 
 righteousness and salvation must be ^is work, not God's act; so 
 also does the opposite Antinomian error lie very near him, that 
 if then man is not saved by the law, but out of grace, sin is 
 something indifi*erent, the law something useless. To this error 
 the Apostle, in what follows, opposes the reasoning, that if the 
 man be no more vTh v6/j,ov, he on no account lives without the law, 
 or above the law, but in and with it. The man's state is under 
 the law, when it meets him, like a strange thing, from without, 
 and, by its rigid commandment, checks and confines the life 
 that resists it; this is not in itself a false, though a subordinate 
 state, which is to bring on the higher one of the life in and with 
 the law. For in this state, the law establishes itself as the in- 
 ward principle of life itself; it appears as written on the tables 
 of the heart, and as one with the will of the man. Without law, 
 or altogether above the law, the man can never be, for the law 
 is the expression of the divine essence itself Upon this deeper 
 conception of the nature of the law, Paul also founds his argu- 
 ment, in which, although he does not use the terms h v6fi(fj, <fvv 
 vofiuj, he, in fact, expresses the idea which they denote. He re- 
 futes, namely, the question, whether we shall sin, because we are 
 not under the law, but under grace ? by saying, we are in the 
 very state of grace made free from sin, and become servants to 
 God {douXwd'syng ©ew, vcr. 22), and therefore can serve it no more. 
 
CHAPTER IV. 1 5, 1 6. 221 
 
 This thought of the service of Ood, or, which is the same thing, 
 of righteousness, must not, however, be again understood as an - 
 outward relation of a servant towards God, as under the 
 dominion of the haw, for this is jiist what grace has overcome 
 (viii. 15); but as an inward one. The soul of him who is living 
 in the state of grace serves God, inasmuch as He makes abode 
 in it by His Spirit, which is His own Being (John xiv. 23; Rom. 
 V. 5), and so becomes the determining principle of its life. 
 Now, as the divine Being has the law not in itself or beside it- 
 self,* but, being divine, is the law itself, so also the regenerate 
 man has the law itself essentially in himself, in the indwelling 
 of the divine Spirit, as the moving, governing power within him 
 (Rom. viii. 14), and cannot, as such, act otherwise than perfectly 
 (1 John iii. 9). But this state, indeed, appears, as such, in no one 
 here on earth ; for as in every regenerate man the old man is 
 living still, so also moments occur in the life of every one in 
 which it pushes back the new (1 John ii. 1). The service of 
 God in Christ still appears to the old man as a yoke (Matt. xi. 
 30), because he feels that it leads him into death ; yet if he is 
 loosed from the divine law, he feels his state undisciplined. So 
 understood, the whole of the following passage gains the strictest 
 consistency with itself, and with what precedes it ; to the false 
 eXsudspta, (Gal. V. 13; 1 Pet. ii. 16) is opposed the true, which is 
 the very dependence upon God himself 
 
 The reading afMaprrjgu/xsv has certainly weighty authorities; 
 for instance, the Codd. A.C.D.E. and others. Notwithstanding 
 it is probably only a correction of a/ji^aprrjffo/jjsv, because the future 
 seemed unusually applied here. But it is to be understood here 
 of the possibility or admissibility of being ignorant f of the law. 
 The conjunctive of the future, besides, is not found in the N. T. 
 except in various readings. (Comp. "Winer's Gr. p. 69.) The 
 first half of ver. 1 6 seems pleonastic, but the dovXoi hen w Ifra- 
 xoUre is to be understood as the consequence of 'jrapierdvai, so that 
 the sense is : "to whom ye yield yourselves to obey, to him ye 
 must then pay obedience." Thus the dependence of man as 
 creature is held to view; he serves always, if not God, then 
 sin and its prince. (John viii. 44.) He cannot, however, at any 
 moment he would, release himself from his service, to whom he 
 
 * [An sich oder vehen sich.] 
 
 + Jgnonren — rather, perhaps, a shutting one's eijes against it. — B.] 
 
222 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 once yielded himself; but the power of that element, to which he 
 gave in, either of good or evil, binds him. If the sinner feels the 
 heavy yoke of sin, often would he be quit of it; but as he hates 
 only the evil consequences, and not sin itself, he continues 
 bound, and sin becomes punishment of sin. If the Christian 
 feels the bitterness of the Cross and of the world's contempt, 
 which befalls him, the wish may at the same time rise within 
 him, Could'st thou be again as thou wast before ! but the power 
 of grace holds him to his good, and so becomes its own reward. 
 
 Ver. 16. the antitheses afMapria. and \>rra%ori, ddvaro? and S/xa/oo-js/??, 
 
 are not strictly chosen. However, as it is clear, according to v. 
 19, that the very nature of atj^apTia is 'Trapaxor) (comp 1 Sam. xv. 
 23. Rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft), its contrast may be 
 v'7rax,07}. And to 6dvarog, as spiritual and bodily death, as con- 
 summated fruit of sin (ver. 21) not less aptly is opposed diKuio- 
 ciivrj = hUam sJvai, the essential internal state of righteousness, 
 as in germ identical with the t!,m aiojms (ver. 22), which is not 
 merely to be hoped for hereafter, but begins already here. — The 
 omission of elg &dvarov in D.E, and other authorities may doubt- 
 less be accounted for by ddmrog not appearing to the copyists to 
 form an antithesis to diKaioffvvn. — The ^Vo/ is = ^', the earlier 
 writers usually put riroi once only, the later also use it twice, 
 
 Ver. 17. This salutary turn, then, Paul continues, has, God be 
 thanked (vii. 24), taken place with his readers, they have felt 
 the service of sin, and are become obedient to the truth. The 
 same holds good of all the truly converted ; the old is passed 
 away, and a new life is begun. In the passage vii. 24, 25, this 
 transition will be more particularly represented in its peculiar 
 character. 
 
 In the yjrs dovXoi the preterite has its full force, so that the for- 
 mer state is understood as past ; for even if sin is not thoroughly 
 removed from the believer, yet it has no dominion, but is under 
 dominion to the man. — The vTaxovsn is = dovXog mat rod ©sou ; 
 in order, however, to distinguish it from a mere show of life in 
 faith, the Apostle adds Ix xapblag (= ^^^ ^33^ Deut. vi. 5), 
 where by the entrance of the whole being, with the centre of 
 the personality, into the gospel, is intended to be marked. — The 
 expression rWo? biha-x/ig is peculiar for shayysXiov. The significa- 
 tion *'form, type," namely, does not suit the verb b'xaTioUiv, it 
 should have been said seemingly: "Ye have shaped yourselves 
 
CHAPTER IV. 18—20. 223 
 
 to the form of doctrine/' But in the u'TraxoUiv this idea, in fact, 
 is latitant, for as the servant of sin accepts its image in himself, 
 so also does he who obeys the truth receive her form within him. 
 Commonly, indeed, the 0. T. is called rvTog, as type of the New 
 (1 Cor. X. 6; Heb. viii. 5), but the N. T. itself may also be called 
 rvirog, inasmuch as the life of the faithful is formed after it. — As 
 to the construction, vt&xousiv is never construed in the N. T. with 
 dg, but always with the dative; it is more appropriate, therefore, 
 to connect s/g with vupsdodnrs, which has an equal signification 
 with hg 'xapiUdn itg hfia? or i//a7v, SO that by 'xapabibo6&ai the guid- 
 ance of divine grace, which leads men to the gospel, becomes 
 marked. This certainly uncustomary use of 'rrapabiboG&ai has 
 induced Van Hengel, drawing his analogy from Rom. i. 24, 26, 
 28, to think of a being-given-over to errors, which however can- 
 not possibly be meant by rv'jtog didaxn?- The accusative rv'i-ov 
 stands according to the proposed solution of the construction by 
 attraction for tv-ttm. 
 
 Ver. 18-20. To the false freedom, which the natural man is 
 wont to find without the restraint of the law, the Apostle op- 
 poses the true, which consists in the deliverance from the yoke 
 of sin and in the service of God and of righteousness, which His 
 Spirit creates in man. This conception of dixaioffvvr} as a new 
 dovXsia, Paul justifies by the necessary condescension to the 
 standard of his readers. The notion of IXsukpia (John viii. 36) 
 might have been conceived by them as absolute and unbounded 
 licentiousness, therefore he describes it as a new and nobler 
 bondage,* as the Redeemer also Himself (Matt. xi. 29, 30) re- 
 presents it as the taking on of a yoke, of a burden. The earthly 
 life of the believer, since the real sXiukpla. never comes com- 
 pletely to view, is represented with perfect truth as the going 
 under a Z,\jyog or (pofrm, only it is easier than that of the 0. T. 
 For although God's commandments are not grievous to the new 
 man who lives in love (1 John v. 3), yet the I f continues still 
 bound up with the old man, and so far is sensible of a douXs/a 
 of d/jcaioffvvTj. Not until with the impossibility of sin the absolute 
 perfection comes, and God in Man is become all in all, does the 
 sXev&spia tti? ho^n? r. 0. (Rom. viii. 21) appear. Yet there is not- 
 withstanding even in the earthly life of the believer a specific 
 difference from the natural state to be observed; in the latter, 
 • [Gebundenheit.] f [Das Ich.] 
 
224 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 although with some good, the man expressly and unresistingly 
 served sin; in the state of grace, although he sometimes fall,* 
 he serves as expresslyf righteousness to his becoming perfect. 
 
 The parenthesis: dv^f^dj-Trmv Xsyw x,. r. X. has reference not 
 merely to the figure generally, but also to the constitution of 
 the figure, as Riickert rightly observes. The dvdpu'ffivov therefore 
 can only be = xar dvdpwrov (comp. iii. 5), but on no account sig- 
 nify, as Origen, Chrysostom, Wetstein, Semler propose, "what 
 is to be performed by man, possible for man,'' for Paul requires, 
 what no man can perform, absolute righteousness. — The dff^sv&ioi. 
 TYi? tfapxog, however, cannot be understood with Reiche of mere 
 weakness of intellect, which we have no warrant whatever for 
 attributing to the Christians of Rome; there is intelligence, 
 indeed, treated of here, but the circumstance to which it refers, 
 is of that kind, that the comprehending of it is hard even to 
 men of strong intellect, if they are wanting in the inward ex- 
 perience, and easy to those of weak intellect, if they possess it. 
 2a/>g, therefore, is the whole sinful nature of man, whereon more 
 particularly at vii. 18. Paul again calls the (j^iXri asver. 12 the 
 (rSytta, in order to denote the coming of the evil desire into act, 
 in which sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death (James i. 
 15). — "Axa^apcid and dvo[Lia signify the more passive and active 
 side of sin, where enjoyment or violence prevails. In the ilg 
 rriv dvofLiav the idea of ai/o/A/'a is extended and becomes the entire 
 contrast to dyia<s[j.6gy so that thereby the nature of sin is desig- 
 nated as that of opposition to law.:|: But the Apostle with pro- 
 found perception makes this as the bloom to be born of sin 
 itself, for sin continually brings forth sin, only she produces 
 figures ever more frightful from her teeming womb. Even so 
 does btxaiosuvri also generate by degrees more gloriously, until 
 she becomes dyiaaiMog. (Comp. upon dytdZziv at John xiii. 31,32.) 
 This expression denotes here, as 1 Thess. iv. 3, 4, 7, the state 
 of being holy, which arises in the holy God's communication of 
 His holiness to man (1 Pet. i. 16); but so far as the being holy 
 
 • [Ps. xxxvii. 24, P. B. vers.] 
 
 + Excellent are the words of Anselm, ad loc, wliich Tholuck quotes : " Sicut ad 
 peccandum vos nullus cogebat timor, sed ipsius libido voluptasque peccali, sic ad 
 juste vivenduni non vos supplicii metus urgeat, sed ducat delectatio justitiee. Si- 
 cut ergo ille iniquissimus, quera ne poense quidem teniporales deterrent ab immun- 
 dis operibus, ita justissinius ille, qui ne poenarura quidem teniporalium timore 
 revocatur a Sanctis operibus." 
 
 X [Gesetzwidrigkeit.] 
 
CHAPTER VI. 21, 22. 225 
 
 proceeds from a gradual development of the new man, ayiaaiio? 
 is used also for the becoming holy (2 Thess. ii. 13; 1 Cor. i. 30; 
 1 Pet. i. 2). AoDXog is only found here in the N. T. used as an 
 adjective. 
 
 Ver. 2 J , 22. In order that the difference of the two stations under 
 the law and under grace may be brought still more decidedly 
 forward, the Apostle points, in conclusion, to the final result of 
 their development. He designates it as fruit, according to the 
 image pervading the whole Scripture, according to which man 
 in his moral constitution is compared with good or bad trees, 
 (Ps. i. 3; Is. Ixi. 3; Matt. xii. 33; John xv. 1, etc.; Rom. xi. 16, 
 etc.; Jude 12.) This image, therefore, is most highly signi- 
 ficant; because it comes most powerfully in opposition to the 
 Pelagianism so convenient to fallen human nature. The na- 
 tural man, without knowledge of himself, of God and of sin, 
 fancies that he will by his own power and able exertion produce 
 a virtue, which shall be able to stand before God's judgment; 
 he knows not, that necessarily and naturally he can bear no 
 other than evil fruit, as the wild tree can only bring forth woody, 
 bitter fruits. For, if he succeeds most perfectly in his striving 
 after virtue, it brings in its train lovelessness and conceited pre- 
 sumption, and so has just as much death for its reward, as if 
 fleshly transgressions defiled his life. The beginning of that 
 truth, — whose fruit is holiness, and, being no less conformable 
 to nature, proceeds from inward organic necessity, with which 
 true freedom is one, — is for man ever the confession, that the 
 principle of death rules in him, and that life must first be 
 brought into him. (vii. 24.) 
 
 Tors and org, ver. 20, answer to the h-jrh vofMov as v\Jv does to the 
 i^i x"'P'^ ^^^^'' ^^^ does not name the fruit of sin itself, as no 
 expression parallel to a/zao/AoV presented itself to him; hence 
 arises the inexact connexion by e^' clg, which is retrospective to 
 y.apm? taken collectively, and so refers to the 'ipyoi. '^rovrjpdy the 
 consciousness of which fills the better part in man with shame.* 
 The note of interrogation, therefore, is without doubt better 
 placed after tots, than after tTaiffx^vsffh. TsXog is by no means to 
 be taken in the same signification with xap'^rog, but to be under- 
 
 • From deep experience Calvin says : " Sola est lux Domini, quae potest oculos 
 nostros aperire, ut prospieere queaiit latentem in carne nostra foeditatem. llle 
 igitur deuiuin Christianae philosophise priraordiis imbutus est, qui sibi serio displi- 
 ceii ac suae miserioe vex'ecundia bene confundi didicerit." 
 
226 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 stood as denoting the final use of tlie fruit which proceeds from 
 its nature. Death therefore signifies here the being rejected as 
 of no use and worthless; eternal life the being acknowledged 
 as useful, essentially answering its end. This is naturally not 
 to be understood as if Qamrog and Z^uir, aJwuog had other significa- 
 tions here than elsewhere, but only that by the image made use 
 of, and from which these expressions properly issue, they ac- 
 quire a modified relation. The acceptation of xap':r6s in the 
 signification " advantage, gain," does not, as Reiche has well 
 proved, suit so well here; especially as vii. 4, 5, xap'!ro(poprioai rf 
 6avdruj is spoken of. In the s^siv x.ap':rh iig ayiucfjjov^ however, 
 holiness is again taken to mean as vi. 19, the result of the life 
 of faith gradually proceeding from its development. 
 
 Ver. 23. In the closing verse it is not so much that a new- 
 thought is expressed, as that the thought stated in ver. 21, 22, 
 is only more closely defined. Although, namely, both courses 
 of life bring their fruit, and their difi'erent disposition decides 
 their final event, yet their respective circumstances are by no 
 means exactly alike. Sin is altogether man's; Death, therefore, 
 the wages of it, must also devolve upon him according to the 
 law of strict justice; but righteousness and holiness is altogether 
 not of man, but the work of God in him (Eph. ii. 8-10); he 
 cannot, therefore, as holy, demand, and, according to the law 
 of justice, receive, anything; but the mercy of God adds to the 
 gracious gift of forgiveness of sins and sanctification the new 
 gift of eternal life beside, so that the lost one must confess, that 
 through himself he has lost all, the saved one that through 
 himself he has gained nothing, to the glory of the justice and 
 grace of the Lord. Thus did Augustine rightly comprehend the 
 passage (Epist. 105), while he writes: "Adversus elationis pestem 
 vigilantissime militans, stipendium, inquit, peccati mors. Recte 
 stipendium quia debetur, quia digne retribuitur, quia meritum 
 redditur; deinde, ne justitia de humane se extolleret bono 
 merito, sicut humanum malum non dubitatur esse peccatum, 
 gratia, inquit, Dei vita aeterna.'" 
 
 'o-vj^wj/zoi/ properly signifies provisions, then pay of soldiers 
 (Luke iii. 14 ; ] Cor. ix. 7; 1 Mace. iii. 28, xiv. 82), finally me- 
 rited, earned wages (2 Cor. xi. 8). So here, equal to [j.ic§6g, con- 
 trast to )(aii(i(ia, comp. iv. 4. How Reiche in such passages as 
 2 Cor. iv. 17, V. 10 ; 2 Tim. i. 12, iv. 8, 18 (Phil. iv. 5 is wrongly 
 
CHAPTER VII. 1 — 3. 227 
 
 cited), can find to the contrary, namely, tliat eternal life is me- 
 rited reward, not the gift of grace, is to me inconceivable. 
 
 Chap vii. 1-3. Now although the question which (vi. 1) was 
 brought on as to the relation in which one living under the gos- 
 pel stood with regard to sin, might appear sufficiently discussed 
 by the exposition hitherto made, the Apostle Paul notwithstand- 
 ing thinks fit once more concisely to demonstrate his thoughts 
 in a fresh similitude, in order that no uncertainty may remain 
 with regard to this important and difficult point. This simili- 
 tude is taken from marriage, by the laws of which the wife is 
 bound to the husband until he dies. His death allows her the 
 freedom to form another connexion ; and she would not on that 
 account be considered as an adulteress. This relation of the wife 
 to the husband is one generally human, any predominant bear- 
 ing, therefore, to Jews or proselytes is here inadmissible. Even 
 with nations, among whom polygamy prevails, the wife is the 
 property of the husband, and is not free of him until he dies. 
 Riickert, therefore, is right in observing that neither the ad- 
 dress ahXfoi relates to Jew-Christians, nor the addition : y/vw- 
 tfxouc/ yap vdfLov XccXu. Baur, therefore, seeks here in vain a sup- 
 port for his opinion, that the Christians of Rome had a Judaising 
 tendency. For as the article is used neither with yimcytoxxst nor 
 with i/o>ov, no contrast can be found here, to others, who do not 
 know the law (and such indeed could hardly be supposed),* 
 but this addition is to be taken like the av^pu^'Ttmy Xsyu^ vi. 19. 
 No/Aoj signifies here the regulation existing among all nations, 
 that the wife is bound to the husband, not the Mosaic law. The 
 Apostle reasons from premises com.mon to mankind ; in writing, 
 therefore, to his first readers, he writes for all intelligent men 
 without exception. The way of applying this parable, however, 
 to the relation of man to sin, has its difficulties. The figure of 
 marriage, as significant of the relation of the soul to God, is 
 certainly not unusual either in the Old (Isa, liv. 5; Hos. ii. 16, 
 etc.) or in the New Testament (John iii. 29 ; Eph. v. 22, etc.) ; 
 but here a second marriage is spoken of, which is entered into, 
 the first being considered as dissolved by the death of the hus- 
 band. Now unless it be said that we are not to press the dying 
 
 * GlOckler would have those understood, who will not know the law, that is, the 
 unruly; however, if this contrast had been intended to appear, another expression 
 would probably have been chosen for yivue-Kdv. 
 
228 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 of the husband, which of course cannot be admitted, inasmuch 
 as it is on this very point that the whole argument turns, the 
 question then is, who is to be considered as the dying husband? 
 Riickert, indeed, asserts that no comparison at all is to be seen 
 here, but a mere example ; that the Apostle could not have 
 found any instance, in which the party in subjection should die, 
 and therefore, notwithstanding the inconvenience, chose this one 
 of marriage, in which the ruling party should die. Paul, how- 
 ever, might only have reversed the same similitude, to say that 
 by the death of the wife the husband is free of her, if that had 
 served his purpose better. But taken so he could have made no 
 use at all of the comparison of marriage to make his thoughts 
 perceptible. De Wette dispenses entirely with the solution of 
 the difficulty by asserting, that the Apostle has not chosen his 
 example accurately, and in this, instead of bringing in the death 
 of the party bound to the law (ver. ] ), has brought in the death 
 of the one to whom the law binds, and has continued this mis- 
 take in the application (ver. 4). As we may safely assume that 
 Paul knew how to choose his instances with exactness and pre- 
 cision, we must ascertain with more carefulness who the dying 
 husband is. Two opinions prevail upon this ; according to oiie, 
 which Origen, Chrysostom, Ambrose, and Hilary proposed, and 
 afterwards Calvin and Bucer defended, as lately Tholuck also 
 has done, the law is the dying husband. But first of all it is 
 manifestly unfit to consider the law, holy, just, and good (vii. 
 12), as abolished; it is in fact not abolished for the believer 
 (Matt. V. 1 7), but only gains a diff'erent position towards him; 
 he is no more under the law, but lives in it. In the next place, 
 according to this view, a leap into another similitude must be 
 assumed at ver. 4, for there it is said, " ye are dead ;'' such a 
 change, however, has at all events something extremely awk- 
 ward in it, and could only be assumed in extreme necessity. 
 The other opinion is proposed by Augustine, and afterwards 
 especially defended by Beza. According to this, the lust of sin 
 is at first the husband, and the old man, the wife; but in the 
 second marriage, the new man is the wife, and Christ, the prin- 
 ciple of righteousness, the husband. Against this there is 
 less weight in Tholuck's objection, — " that in what follows (ver. 
 7, etc.), it is not the relation to lust, but to the moral law, 
 that is treated of;" for the law excites (according to ver. IJ) 
 
CHAPTER VII. 1 — 3. 229 
 
 even lust (vii. 8, etc.) — than that then a second wife seems to 
 be supposed, while, according to the comparison, the wife con- 
 tinues the same. This difficulty will only be radically removed 
 by the following conception of the passage. As in Christ him- 
 self, without prejudice to the unity of his personality, the mortal 
 is distinguished from the immortal Christ (comp. ver. 4, with 1 
 Pet. iii. 18), so in man also the old man is distinguished from 
 the new, without prejudice to the unity of his personality, which 
 Paul subsequently (ver. 20) signifies by J/w. This true person- 
 ality, the proper self of man, is the wife, who in the natural 
 state, appears in marriage with the old man, and in intercourse 
 with him, generates sins, the end of which is death (vi. 21, 22.) 
 But in the death of the mortal Christ, this old man is dead with 
 him; and, as the individual man is grafted by faith into Christ, 
 his old man dies, by whose life he was holden under the law. 
 As, however, with the death of Christ, the immortal Saviour of 
 the world also arose, even so with the death of the old man, 
 the new man becomes living; and with this, the Christ in us, 
 the I* enters upon a new marriage, from which the fruits of the 
 spirit are born. But here it might be asked, whether such a 
 distinction of the I from the old and new man has warrant from 
 other passages of Scripture ? I refer with regard to this question 
 besides the explanation already given at Matt. x. 40, to the fol- 
 lowing illustration of Rom. vii. 7, etc., for the distinction lies at 
 the foundation of this passage throughout ; and I have only to 
 remind further of the forgiveness of sins, the nature of which 
 necessarily leads to this diiference; for sin cannot be forgiven 
 to the old man, that must die, not to the new, for this is sinless, 
 but certainly to the I,* who is the bearer, as well of the old 
 as of the new man, and by whom the man can speak of his old 
 and his new man. There is o;nly one more seeming inexactness 
 in the Apostle's statement, with reference, namely, to the v6[Mog\ 
 but this indeed is inseparable from the use of similitudes, since 
 the thing compared can never be even with the object to which 
 it refers. In ver. 2 and 3, which contains the similitude itself 
 (ver. 1 expressing the thought which forms its general basis), 
 the vo^oi is only the marriage law, or the precept, that the 
 woman may only be the wife of one man, to whom she belongs. 
 But in the three following verses (ver. 4-6) v6(/^og is the law 
 
 • [Das Jch throughout the passage.] 
 
230 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 generally, and indeed not merely the ceremonial law, but the 
 law in every expression of it, and therefore the moral law also ; 
 wherefore Paul's statement possesses its truth for all times and 
 every state of things, because the moral law is given with the 
 essence of man itself. 
 
 Ver. 1. Comp. upon 5j dymTrs the passage vi. 3. The • v6/ioi 
 xv^isvsi rov avd^u'Trov expresses the general thought, from which, 
 ver. 2, the special case of marriage and the precepts relating to 
 it is deduced. The thought exactly answers to the passage, vi. 
 7. Hence av&^wTrog must not be explained of the wife, for the 
 same thing holds good of the husband; as it does also with the 
 slave. Death makes every one free from every law. — Ver. 2. 
 v'Travd^o? signifies subject to the power of the husband, according 
 to Numb. V. 29, ntZJ'^b^ Htlil Htl^b^ (comp. Eccles. ix. 9, xli. 
 21). — The construction Karripyrirai aifh v6[mo-o is peculiar. The verb 
 xarapyi7(s&cx,i commonly refers to things, especially to law, but 
 not to persons. Besides this passage it is found vii. 6, and Gal. 
 V. 4, used in the same way, = sXsv6spov(f6ai. The Chald. ^tDSL 
 Vf2 Ezra iv. 21, 23, v. 5, vi. 8, is used in exactly the same man- 
 ner, for which the LXX. have always jtarapysTv, though without 
 the following dcro. — No/otog dvdphi not the law, which the husband 
 gives, the imperium domesticum, but which protects the husband 
 in his right over the wife, and determines it. Upon xP^f^^' 
 r/^w in the meaning ** to be, to be called/' comp. at Acts xi. 
 26. — T/vsffdtci dvbpt Wspu) = -^nt^ U5^b^^ TVT\i Deut. xxiv. 2. 
 
 Ver. 4. The Apostle now applies this comparison by represent- 
 ing the faithful themselves as dead in their old man, and thereby 
 freed from the yoke of the law (Acts xv. 20), so that the freedom 
 is acquired for them to devote themselves to another husband, 
 even Christ (2 Cor. xi. 2). But the death of the faithful in the 
 old man is again, as vi. 2, 4, 6, connected with the death of the 
 Redeemer, so that his death was their death, and did not merely 
 prefigure it; for no one by his own power or resolution can die 
 in the old man, because no one can generate the new man, by 
 whose birth the death of the old man is conditioned. Christ is 
 therefore the living type both of the old and new man; of the 
 old, according to the dekviia rris mpxog (2 Cor. xiii. 4, 1 Pet. iii. 
 18), which was in him, and because he bore the sin of the 
 world; of the new, according to the power of the Eternal Spirit, 
 
 I 
 
CHAPTER VII. 4. 231 
 
 which filled him. From this spiritual union, then, spring spiri- 
 tual fruits (Gal. vi. 22), begotten to the honour of God. Ac- 
 cording to this representation, it is clear that the liberation from 
 the law must not be an act of self-will. As little as the wife 
 may wantonly separate from her husband, since his death is 
 requisite for her liberation; so little may the I free itself from 
 the law, as long as the old man is living. If this is done, there- 
 fore, as is always the case where a mere seeming faith prevails, 
 it is a spiritual adultery, the lust after false freedom, that is, 
 licentiousness, lawlessness. The liberation from the law rightly 
 takes place only where the new man arose in the stead of the 
 old, where therefore Christ is truly living in the man. There 
 is no licentiousness, for Christ brings with him the strictest law 
 wheresoever he works; but the yoke of the law is removed by 
 that love, which is shed into the hearts. This love urges to do 
 more than the law requires, and to fulfil every act with purer 
 intention than the most threatening law can demand. For love 
 is insatiable, she never satisfies herself and the Beloved; she 
 burns on, till with her fire she glows through the whole heart 
 and being, and has sacrificed her all to the Beloved. After this 
 manner works the gospel all in man without law (iii. 21) 
 although it exacts nothing from him, but only promises and 
 gives to him. But because it gives all of grace, and even loves 
 and blesses enemies, it wins the inmost self of man, and there- 
 fore all his powers. As on the one side, however, there is the 
 danger lest a man should liberate himself from the law, and 
 persuade himself that he has faith and is regenerate, a way that 
 seduces to false freedom; so, on the other side, there threatens 
 a danger equally great, which leads into new, and indeed still 
 more galling slavery, than the former was.* A false zeal for 
 sanctification, proceeding from vanity, and striving only to see 
 itself perfect as soon as possible in an image of its own design, 
 often fancies, that the long, but certain way of sanctifying grace 
 in Christ does not lead quick enough to the goal, and so draws 
 back, when the life in grace has scarce begun, under the law 
 again. What God in man has begun, the man himself (in con- 
 tradiction to Phil. i. 6, Heb. xii. 2) would complete; he will not 
 become blessed through Christ, but with and beside him through 
 
 • [The author here quotes, in a note, a forcible saying of Luther (Leipz. edit, 
 vo'. xi. p. 83).] 
 
232 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 himself, but so destroys the delicate tracery of the new man in 
 him. This is, then, not merely to wake up the old dead man 
 again, but even to despise the new true husband, to rate his power 
 low, yea, to count the blood of the covenant unholy, and to do 
 despite unto the Spirit of Grace. (Heb. x. 29.) Hence it is, 
 that Paul so emphatically warns the Galatians, who had entered 
 on it, from this dangerous byeway. (Gal. ii. 16, etc., iii. S, etc.) 
 And yet it is so tempting, andjusttothe more earnest, zealous 
 men, to fall into this error, that even the Apostle Peter, Bar- 
 nabas, and others, could be for a moment seduced from the way 
 of grace ! (Gal. ii. 1 2, etc.) Ay, the sectarian history shows 
 that most of the founders of sects made use of a self-willed 
 striving after sanctification as their motive, to collect their fol- 
 lowers, and, with the guidance of that striving, to exercise an 
 often frightful spiritual tyranny. Therefore does the Apostle 
 Paul teach the true middle way, which just as little suffers a 
 man of his own will to loose himself from the law, as that he 
 should bring himself under it again, since Christ continues to 
 him both the Beginner and Finisher of Faith. (Heb. xii. 2.)* 
 This completion, however, Christ, of course, does not perfect out 
 of and without the man, but in the very depth of his own self, 
 since he takes in full possession the noblest thing the man 
 possesses, even his love, and fills it with the powers of his 
 higher love, which makes him mighty enough for all, even the 
 weightiest requirement. If he sees, therefore, that the old man 
 still is stirring, he draws in faith unceasingly fresh power 
 from Christ's fountain, and so is more than conqueror in him 
 who loved us. 
 
 "ngrs is here particle of inference, "accordingly;'' comp. 
 Winer's Gr. p. 277. The expression dia rou edj/m^arog rou xpicroZ 
 can of course only form the antithesis to the hyipkk sx, nxpQjv. 
 lufia. is distinguished here, as 1 Pet. iii. 18, the capg, in order to 
 signify the mortal side of the Redeemer, to which the immortal, 
 the 'ffvsvfia, of the risen Christ, is opposed. 
 
 Ver. 5, 6. That he may once more offer to his readers a dis- 
 
 • Of the contrast between true and false righteousness, Luther speaks profoundly 
 in his exposition of the 38th Psalm: " It is a wondrous thing; whoso hath no sin 
 (because of faith) he [it is who] feeleth and hath it (in true penitence and hvunility); 
 and whoso hath sin, he [it is who] feeleth it not, and hath none " (after the con- 
 ceited blindness of his heart). And at the 143d Psalm: "Satan is such a 
 dexterous master [Meister], that he can make even the very best works (by admix- 
 ture of conceit) the very biggest sins." 
 
CHAPTER VII. 5, 6. ■ 233 
 
 tinct perception of the difference between the two states, Paul 
 sets them out in their principles side by side. In the legal state, 
 the sinful impulses (m 'iradrifiara Tuv afiapriuvj the individual 
 utterances of the spiritual members of the old man) work with 
 absolute sway in the whole nature of man, even to the periphery 
 of the physical life, so that they become act. In the state of 
 grace, the old man dies with all his sinful impulses, and the , 
 man can then, free from the fetter of the law, which could only 
 bind the old man, serve God in spirit and in truth. The dying 
 of the old, and the rising of the new man, however, are, of 
 course, not completed in him all at once, but through the earthly 
 life they continue beside each other in the believer, (comp. more 
 particularly at vii. 25), although the former is to be constantly 
 decreasing, the latter ever growing. Therefore the problem is, 
 because the old man still continues to exist, and may become 
 strong again, never to be secure, yet for the sake of the ever- 
 efScacious and accessible grace never to despond, but to fight 
 most zealously against all doubts of God's grace and power 
 against sin.* 
 
 2a/3g can only signify the old man here, as viii. 8, 9 ; it forms 
 indeed the antithesis to the wvi, x. r. X. (ver. 6.) Theodoret, 
 Grotius, and others, would have it to be understood of the 0. T., 
 which in and by itself might certainly be admissible, but still 
 only where the contrast of the TvgD//,a clearly stands out. Ta d/a 
 Tov vo^oy can only be supplied, according to ver. 11, with xmv- 
 /Asva, it is intended, namely, to be signified that the law is the 
 inducing, provoking cause of sin. It altogether misleads to take 
 IvTipyiTro passively, for the ^sX?} = cc^fia, appear then to be the 
 
 * The observation of Melanthon, ad loc. is very pertinent: •* Hie locus diligenter 
 observandus est, ut discamus dubitationes de gratia Dei esse peccatum, ut repugnemus 
 et erigaraus nos evangelic et sciaraus, esse cuUum Dei in illis teirorihus repugnar^ 
 duhitationi et diffidentioe. Surely the beloved man of God says right, that it is not 
 permitted only, but a duty, ay, holiest sei'tice of Qod, to contend to the utmost 
 against all doubts of God and of his grace, for those never spring from a good source. 
 Yet, on the contrary, it is very wrong to smother the doubts of himself and his own 
 xirtue, which God's Spirit of grace calls forth, in order to convert the man; it is to 
 contend against God, and hinder regeneration. The [Roman] Catholic Church, 
 however, with which all sects that proceed from Pelagian principles agree, detera 
 from the certainty of the state of grace, and desires uncertainty towards God. 
 Such uncertainty of hearts is then a convenient means to keep men in the leading- 
 strings of the priesthood or ambitious founders of sects; for since they are not 
 allowed to have any certainty themselves respecting their relation to God, they can 
 only rest upon the judgments of their leaders about it, who thus rule souls with 
 absolute dominion; the true evangelic doctrine makes free from such slavery to 
 man. 
 
234 EPISTLE TO THE ROiflNS. 
 
 proper seat of sin, whereas it really manifests itself outwardly 
 from within. To be sure its blossom is in this manifestation 
 upon the periphery of life, for a repressing power of the spirit 
 must be presumed, if at least the outward eruptions of sin are 
 hindered, sdvarog appears again as the tsXo? (vi. 23), inasmuch 
 as the sins collectively work, as it were, for him and his king- 
 dom. In ver. 6, a variety of readings are found. For the 
 dTo&avovrog of the text, rec, A.C., and many other Codd., and the 
 Greek Fathers as well, have dTodavovnsj while D.E.F.Gr. and the 
 Latin Fathers read rov &avdrov. This latter reading, however, 
 looks very like a correction of the copyists, in their not under- 
 standing how the Apostle could speak of a dissolution of the 
 law itself. The genitive of the singular proceeded from that 
 conception of the passage, according to which the law is con- 
 sidered as the dying husband, but the ISamrudriTSj ver. 4, speaks 
 against this. ' A<7ro&av6vrs5, therefore, is certainly the only correct 
 reading, for which Lachmann also has decided. In the xare- 
 Xi(5^ot.i^ the binding, compulsory power of the law is signified. 
 The h c5 refers to ))oih(i<i, and is on no account to be taken, " in as 
 far, in as much as.^^ Ka/voV^j^ 'XVixjiJ^arog is = Ttamrrig Z,m? in the 
 passage vi. 4. The wBvfjLa is considered as the principle from 
 which the new life issues. The old, therefore, is a spiritless, 
 merely physical life (1 Cor. ii. 14). The substantive -raXa/oV^j? 
 is found in the N. T. only in this passage. Tpa.fj.fia forms here, 
 as ii. 29, an antithesis with 'xvivfia, as cdp^ elsewhere, to denote 
 the outside, as the form in which the life manifests itself. The 
 choice of just this expression is founded in this passage upon 
 the reference to the law, which, in its most complete form, the 
 law of Moses, appears to be compassed in the letter, but in this 
 form is for the sinful man a heavy, killing yoke. (2 Cor. 
 iii. 6, 7). 
 
CHAPTER VII. 7. — VIII. 39. 235 
 
 SECTION IV. -^ 
 
 (VII. 7.- VIII. 39). 
 
 OF THE STAGES OF THE DEVELOPMENT AS WELL OF INDIVIDUALS 
 AS OF THE UNIVERSE. 
 
 The properly dogmatical exposition has at length completely 
 finished the foundation of the new way of salvation upon the 
 vicarious character of Christ and the indication of its relation to 
 the law. The Apostle forthwith most fitly proceeds to indicate 
 all the stages of development, as they are exhibited themselves 
 immediately in individual men, whereby all he has said before 
 gains first its proper light. He' shows namely, first of all (vii. 
 7-24), how the man rises from the state of undeveloped childish- 
 ness into that of the life under the law, in which the sin that 
 awakes by the resistance of the law calls up that inward conflict, 
 by which he first becomes truly conscious of the contradiction in 
 himself and how he is held bound by sin. The result of this con- 
 flict is the need of redemption, out of which the faith in the re- 
 demption brought to pass in Christ develops itself; and in the 
 power of this faith the believer is enabled, what of his own effort 
 he could never do, to serve the divine law in spirit, albeit the 
 old man in him remains still subjected to the law of sin. Then 
 follows (vii. 25 — viii. 17) a descriptionof the development of the 
 new life itself received through Christ. This penetrates not 
 merely the inward man, but sanctifies and glorifies by degrees 
 the bodily substance also, so that the whole man becomes like 
 to Christ, and thereby heir of God and co-heir of the glory of 
 Christ. But since man is a member, the most essential member 
 of the creation, his life must react upon the universe for glorifi- 
 cation no less than his death has acted upon it for destruction. 
 The participation of the totality in the perfecting of humanity 
 in Christ, Paul treats of lastly (viii. 18 — 39), and this contem- 
 plation of the endless power, which lies in Christ, as the germ 
 of the whole great, glorified creation, gains such hold on the 
 Apostle, that he closes with a bold song of triumph, in which he 
 utters with glad assurance the unconquerableness of the life of 
 Christ in all His faithful. 
 
236 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 § 11. OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE INDIVIDUAL UNTIL HIS 
 EXPERIENCE OF REDEMPTION. 
 
 (VII. 7-24.) 
 
 Before we treat of the particulars of this remarkable, and, both 
 theoretically and practically, so highly important section, some 
 general questions are to be taken into consideration, upon the 
 answer to which its illustration in great measure depends. Is 
 Paul speaking in this section of his own state or not? and are the 
 experiences of the regenerate or unregenerate its subject matter? 
 As regards the first question, it is clear, that the Apostle could 
 not possibly have chosen to carry through this representation in 
 the first person, if no analogy at all for his description had been 
 discoverable in his own life, if he had intended himself to be 
 considered as expressly excepted. On the other hand it is 
 equally clear, that Paul cannot be so speaking of himself, as if 
 the subject related to him alone, for his desire is, to enlighten 
 his readers upon their own necessities; in his experiences those 
 of the generality must the rather be reflected. Hence it can 
 only be said that the Apostle is certainly speaking of himself, 
 but simply according to the experience he had in common with 
 mankind, not according to his own individually. Little, how- 
 ever, is gained by this, unless it be determined in what period 
 of his life the experiences of which the Apostle speaks were 
 felt. This determination coincides with the other highly 
 important question, whether the description given by the 
 Apostle has reference to the state of the regenerate or unre- 
 generate. The passage 7-13, indeed, according to the opinion 
 oiall expositors, applies to the state before regeneration, as the 
 Apostle also sufficiently indicates by the aorist that the state 
 described is gone by; but whether ver. 14-24 is likewise to be 
 considered as before regeneration, seems very uncertain, since 
 in this section Paul makes use of the present only, while viii. 2, 
 etc., the aorist again appears. It is in fact difficult to answer 
 this question, as in the^irs^ place the events treated of are purely 
 internal, and require thoroughly analogous experiences and a 
 definite consciousness of these experiences, in order to be rightly 
 
CHAPTER VII. 7 — 24. 287 
 
 estimated; in the next place, the influence of many false tendencies 
 has confused the inquiry. Pelagian blindness as to moral states, 
 as well as Donatist rigorousness, must have found it easy to 
 assert, that ver. 14-24 could not have reference to the regener- 
 ate, for that sins in these must be henceforth quite out of the 
 question. Moral laxity or hypocrisy again have found it very 
 convenient to say, that Paul is describing the state of the regen- 
 erate, fancying so, that they might, notwithstanding their moral 
 degradation, consider themselves as regenerate. But beside 
 these decidedly false tendencies, even the most faithful and 
 learned members of the church have held different conceptions 
 of the passage, according as they were accustomed to consider 
 the sinfulness of man to be greater or less, and so to rate differ- 
 ently the effect of regeneration. Accordingly we are not 
 surprised to find the easterns always inclining to Pelagianism, 
 as Origen, Chrysostom, Theodoret, on the side of those who 
 refer the passage to the state before regeneration. Even 
 Augustine followed them at first; as he carried out his system, 
 however, he was induced to defend the opposite view, that Paul 
 is describing the state of the regenerate themselves. He was 
 followed not merely in the middle ages by the most esteemed 
 theologians, especially Anselm and Thomas Aquinas, but the 
 reformers also, Luther, Melancthon, Calvin, Beza, interpreted 
 the passage as Augustine did. After Spener, Franke, Bengel, 
 Gottfried Arnold, Zinzendorf, the words of the Apostle were 
 again begun to be explained of the state before regeneration, 
 and Stier, Tholuck, Riickert, De Wette, Meyer, follow them in 
 their interpretation. These learned men nevertheless quite 
 rightly acknowledge, that the Augustinian representation has 
 also something true in it, since that in the life of the regener- 
 ate moments occur, in which they must speak entirely as Paul 
 expresses himself here ; and, moreover, as it is only by degrees 
 that the transforming power of the gospel penetrates the difier- 
 ent tendencies of the inward life, congenial phenomena extend 
 through the whole life of the believer; and this leads to the 
 thought, that the two views might admit of being united in a 
 higher one. For it is little probable beforehand, that men like 
 Augustine and the reformers should have entirely erred in the 
 conception of so important a passage. It may perhaps become 
 perceptible from the following mode of laying out the context, 
 
238 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 how sucli a difference of views could be formed in the interpre- 
 tation of the passage, and what in such difference is right and 
 what erroneous. 
 
 First of all, it is evident that the Apostle's purpose is, to 
 sketch a description of the inward process of development from 
 its first beginnings to the highest perfection. He sets out, (vii. 
 9), from a state in which the man is living entirely without law, 
 and closes, (viii. 11), with the glorification of the bodily substance. 
 The question occurs here, how many stages of development are 
 properly distinguished? Four clearly present themselves. Firsts 
 a life without law, in which sin is dead; next, a life under the 
 law, in which sin becomes alive and has dominion; further , a 
 state in which, by the power of Christ, the spirit has dominion, 
 and sin is mastered; finally, the state of the entire separation 
 of sin by the glorification of the bodily substance. If by regen- 
 eration all is to be understood from the first stirrings of grace, 
 the whole of the Apostle's description may then be applied to 
 the regenerate, because the very heedfulness of the law is called 
 forth by grace. But it is surely more correct and scriptural to 
 call regeneration that inward process only, by which, after the 
 need of redemption is awakened, the power of Christ becomes 
 mighty in the mind; so that a new, spiritual man enters into 
 being, and exercises his ruling power. According to this accep- 
 tation, the state under the law cannot co-exist with regener- 
 ation, and without question therefore — as vii. 24 is to express 
 the awakened need of redemption, and ver. 25, the experience 
 of redemption itself — vers. 14-24 is to be referred to a position 
 before regeneration, and to be understood as a description of 
 the conflict within an awakened person. As, however, the 
 Apostle makes use of the present for this section, while before 
 and afterwards he applies the aorist, we are led to the idea, that 
 he does not intend to have this state of conflict regarded as con- 
 cluded with the experience of redemption. In the description, 
 vers. 14-24 itself too, as will afterwards be more particularly 
 shown, an advance in the conflict with sin is clearly observable, 
 the better I stands out in the man more and more, and the 
 pleasure in God's law grows gradually in him. To this, ver. 1 7 
 speaks, especially the wvl bi ovKsn, and ver. 20, outisti which indi- 
 cates a bygone state. In a far higher degree, as ver. 25 ex- 
 presses, is this the case after the experience of the redeeming 
 
CHAPTER VII. 7 — 24. 289 
 
 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 conflict remains still, even after the experience of regenera- 
 tion ; and that even the regenerate man does not always hold it 
 victoriously, that even for him times of temptation, of very hard 
 temptation, come on, the Scripture sanctions in express decla- 
 rations (comp. at 1 John ii. 1), and in communications upon the 
 life of the Apostles, even as the experience of all saints of all 
 times sanctions it. If we add to this consideration, that in 
 proportion with the true advance in the life of faith, the spiri- 
 tual glance into the stirrings of sin sharpens, the conscience 
 refines and censures strictly even the smaller deviations, which 
 had else on lower standards remained unnoticed; it is clearly 
 right that Augustine and the great doctors of the church who 
 followed him, should have declared, that even the regenerate 
 man can and must say of himself all that the Apostle, ver. 1 4- 
 24, utters. The best manner, therefore, in which we can ex- 
 press ourselves upon the question, whether Paul is here treating 
 of the regenerate, is, that in the passage, ver. 14-24, he im- 
 mediately describes the state of the man before regeneration, 
 since his purpose is, to set forth coherently the whole course of 
 development; in the consciousness, however, that phenomena 
 entirely similar present themselves within the regenerate man, 
 he makes the description applicable to the regenerate also. The 
 opinion, therefore, on the one side, that the Apostle iminedi- 
 ately and directly intends the regenerate, is as absolutely wrong, 
 as on the other side the assertion, that in the regenerate man 
 nothing like w^hat is described, ver. 14-24, can or ought to be 
 found. The distinction between the conflict and the fall of the 
 unregenerate and the conflict and the fall of the regenerate 
 remains, notwithstanding the subjective feeling of their near 
 aflSnity, objectively so great (as at vii. 24, 25 will be proved), 
 that the anxiety, lest by the view proposed, regeneration should 
 be robbed of its essential character, must appear to be quite 
 unfounded.* If we now look back again to the first question, 
 of which period of his life the Apostle could say such things as 
 
 • Reiche has strikingly failed in his acceptation of this passage; he holds that 
 the Jewish humanity, comprehended in the Apostle's person, is speaking here. The 
 one-sided reference of the vef/,os merely to the Jewish ceremonial law, is the im- 
 mediate cause of this clearly false acceptation; that one-sided reference itself, how- 
 ever, is founded in the dogmatic principles of this learned man. . 
 
240 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 lie utters, ver. 14-24, it is clear that lie cannot be immediately 
 describing the state of his soul after the Lord's appearing to 
 him by Damascus, but that he is speaking of his inward con- 
 flicts under the yoke of the law; but the transition into the 
 present certainly indicates, that even in his state at the time 
 he wrote, sensations were still sounding, which made him ex- 
 claim with perfect truth, although with incomparably finer 
 application to more delicate circumstances than in his former 
 state (comp. at vii. 24, 25): What I would, I do not, and what I 
 would not, that I do; wretched man that I am, who shall deliver 
 me from the body of this death ! (Comp. at 2 Cor. xii. 7, etc.) 
 Ver. 7, 8. The two first verses of this section contain the 
 general fundamental thought briefly expressed, which ver. 9, 
 etc., further carries out. The Apostle namely pronounces in 
 these the relation which sin bears to the law, and describes the 
 latter as the power* which brings sin to sight. Sin is in human 
 nature, even without regard to the law, but by the law only it 
 comes to the sight and so to the conscience of man. Hence 
 also, notwithstanding this provocation of sin by the law, the 
 law itself is no sinful formation, but rather is it holy, just, and 
 good (ver. 12), as the expression of the holy will of God, of 
 whose eternal, unalterable nature it even therefore partakes 
 (comp. Ps. cxix. 96), and is to lead to life; only sin misuses it 
 to death. (Ver. 10 and the observations at John xii. 50, com- 
 pared with Lev. xviii. 5, Deut. v. 16, 33.) What the Apostle 
 pronounces here, therefore, holds also, not by any means merely 
 of the Mosaic ceremonial law, but of the moral law generally, 
 in all forms of its manifestation among heathens, Jews, and 
 Christians. It is the entirely universal character of the law, 
 that sin breaks and swells up against it (comp. at ver. 13), 
 since it checks the stream of sinful desire in a concrete case by 
 a positive command (IvroXri), and by this check urges to a trans- 
 gression of the commandment, whereby his inward state then be- 
 comes perceptible to the man. The relation in which Paul places 
 the a/ji^apTia and the I'xi&ufiia is peculiar in these verses. At first 
 sight namely, it seems as though Paul considered the I'Tndvfiia 
 as the first, the ujtiuprla as derived from it. In the sinful act 
 the two are really so related, the evil desire is the mother of 
 the evil deed (James i. 15); but a/iapT/a denotes here the sinful 
 state generally, which comes to sight in the concrete case only, 
 
 * [Moment] 
 
r 
 
 CHAPTEM VII. 9, 10. 241 
 
 and for this relation the position is exactly reversed. The 
 sm&vfiia.^ prava concupiscentia, issues from the general, sinful 
 nature of man, as its first utterance, and then the act follows. 
 Upon nearer consideration of the Apostle's words, however, it 
 becomes evident, that he intends the relation of a/^a^r/a to sm^u- 
 fiicc to be exactly so understood here. Sinfulness causes the evil 
 desire in all its forms (t a c a v Jcr/^u/x/ai'), to rise up against the law 
 in the inward man {xarnpydcaro h kiioi); and the divine com- 
 mandment against the desire reveals now to man his corruption. 
 A permission of the desire to proceed into act is not at all in ques- 
 tion. The desire itself is sinful, and forbidden in the law, and 
 the man may become conscious of his sinfulness, even by the 
 greatness of the lust, although it should not break forth into out- 
 ward evil deeds, which indeed is commonly the case. Hence, 
 too, the ohx. k<7:iQuiMri(S2i? (Exod. XX. 14; Deut. v. 8) is not to be 
 taken, according to Tholuck, with an " and so forth,'' as though 
 Paul put forward one only of the many commandments; but it 
 is to be understood as the comprisal of the whole law. Posi- 
 tively, all laws say : love Grod above everything ; negatively, 
 they all say: suffer not thyself to covet; that is, cleave not 
 with thy love to any created thing, not even to thyself, but to 
 the Eternal only.* The nature of sV/^y/A/a is not the desire of 
 itself, the joy at this or that, for the perfect man might have 
 the highest, purest pleasure in all creatures of God ; but the 
 desire, when it is separate from Grod, the selfish love, estranged 
 from God. The command oux sTti&vfLriaug, therefore, is nothing 
 less than that the man has to give himself up with all his own 
 desire and joy; this giving-up, however, is not possible without 
 regeneration, therefore the man can never, as the following 
 discourse demonstrates, arrive at peace by the law; he is in 
 need of a Redeemer from himself (ver. 24.) (Ver. 8, the bia 
 TTi? ivroXrig, as afterwards ver. 11, is better connected with d(pop- 
 lj.7\v Xa^ouffa than with the following words, because the peculiar 
 operation of the law is thus most decidedly marked.) 
 
 • The Apostle takes no notice of the circumstance which is the rarer case, that 
 even the fright, the terror of sin, may hurl into sin, if the shield of faith is wanting. 
 Evil thoughts, that fill the heart with horror, may hy this vei-y terror, which takes 
 away the presence of mind, draw men down into sin. The histories of criminals 
 often afford proof of this. Notwithstanding, in order to explain such cases, we 
 might assume, perhaps without exception, either previous moral coi'ruption, or 
 spiritual weakness as well as disease. 
 
 Q 
 
242 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 Ver. 9, 10. The Apostle now, after having expressed the 
 general thought, proceeds in the description of the course of 
 development in the man from its first beginnings; he describes 
 a state in which sin is as yet deady and the man is living with- 
 out law. Tliis state of childish unconsciousness is disturbed by 
 the law with its commandment in the case in question. There 
 is a question, however, how we have to suppose such a state of 
 life without law, for the Apostle cannot mean the state of pro- 
 per infantia; yet, except this, there is no time in the life of 
 man, of which it may in the proper sense be said that the man 
 is in it without law, and sin without motion.* To explain this 
 difficulty, it may be of essential service to remark, that the 
 Apostle, during his whole exposition, is not supposing crimes 
 and such like outbreaks of sin, which even the magistracy re- 
 sents, and which draw after them the contempt of the world ; 
 for the law surely is able to repress sins of this kind, and the 
 man can by the guidance of the law fulfil of his own power so- 
 called opera civilia or justitice externce. But in such a state of 
 legal action all laws and ordinances appear to the man Sispoliti- 
 calj or at least as merely human statutes, and his whole effort 
 is without reference to God; he avoids the sins, not for God's 
 sake, but for the sake of their disagreeable external conse- 
 quences, which to be sure is better than that impudence which 
 does not even shun the consequences, yet it does not satisfy 
 absolute righteousness; with such a spiritual standard, the 
 Apostle has nothing at all to do here. He is speaking rather 
 of that moment, when the man becomes conscious of his re- 
 lation to God. not as mere proposition, but in essence and 
 power, and he learns to regard all the commandments and 
 ordinances of the law as divine, that is, as absolute command- 
 ments. The whole time before this moment he calls the life 
 without law, when sin was dead.'f With this acceptation results 
 
 • Usteri (in the Paul. Lehrbegr. 4th edit. p. 39) supposes this state to be like 
 that of Adam before the fall, which is surely against the Apostle's meaning, who 
 considers this state of the deadness of sin itself as a consequence of the fall. 
 
 + The n u.fjt.a.g'ria, kviZ^ntriv (ver. 9), is not, as RUckert still holds, to be constru- 
 ed " sin revived," as though it had once been alive (from which conception the 
 reading £^»?<r£v, which must certainly be set aside, proceeded); a.\a.Xciu is rather "to 
 come to life," (aufleben), as avitrrYifAi (in its intransitive tenses) is " to arise 
 (aufstehen), stand up." The coming to life, however, presupposes no antecedent 
 living of that which comes to life, but a slumbering only of the life in it. Thus the 
 slumbering germ of a grain of seed comes to life, which had not as yet indcpeud- 
 
 ( 
 
t 
 
 CHAPTER VII. 9, 10. 243 
 
 also, what is to be equally remarked upon all subsequent stages 
 of development, that we are not to suppose this first stage as 
 instantaneously got over. Certain it is that with most men 
 the discernment of the law, as being the will of the absolutely 
 holy God, takes place in a moment, and the former and after 
 life may be clearly distinguished; but it is only by degrees that 
 the risen light diffuses itself into the different regions of the in- 
 ward life, and even those who have made progress may have 
 still to experience on isolated departments, that they were 
 living there without law, since the necessity of applying the 
 divine law in this or that individual case had been a long time 
 in becoming to them a matter of living consciousness. Thus it 
 may be perceived, what is meant by the expression xi^^U v6[iou 
 ccfLapria nyt^d. The deadness of sin is not to imply that it has 
 no motion at all, for it is the very disordered life^ and must 
 constantly utter itself as such, even though often negatively 
 only by deficiency in fear and love of God; but it is so far dead 
 without law, as it is not at first discerned in its nature and in 
 its whole magnitude, without the light of the law to enlighten 
 its darkness. With that knowledge, however, the sin itself in- 
 creases; first, because from the insight a resistance now unfolds 
 itself, by which the wild power of the natural life rises (ver. 13); 
 next, because the sin, which has got so far into the conscious- 
 ness, is like a germ awakened from slumber, that strives to de- 
 velop itself more and more. The self-will of the man rears 
 against being broken, the lust of knowledge perverted to curi- 
 osity burns for eagerness to taste the forbidden thing, and so by 
 the law sin finishes itself in itself by the increasing of the 
 desire; supposing that it does not also, which however will 
 always rarely be the case, break forth into openly criminal 
 actions. This phenomenon is so consonant to experience that 
 it is acknowledged before in the 0. T., Prov. ix. 17, and even by 
 profane authors. Comp. the noted passage in Ovid. Amor. iii. 
 4, "Nitimur in vetitum semper cupimusque negata." To the 
 quickening of sin the Apostle immediately attaches the dying 
 of the /, the better self; * it seems, therefore, as though the 
 
 ently lived. The expression, " to come to life again," or, " for the second time," 
 is here quite inappropriate. 
 
 * I believe it may be said, that the development of the conflict assumes in many 
 men a different shape. Sin is with many alive from the beginning, and the better 
 
214 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 latter had been alive before tlie moment of the law's coming in, 
 that is, that the better I had prevailed, and that accordingly this 
 moment would not appear to be the foundation of any advance 
 to the better, but of a retreat to the worse. And indeed this is 
 Paul's meaning, as ver. 18 clearly shows; but the retreat is but 
 a seeming one, like the full, open coming-out of a disease 
 hitherto lurking in secret. As no cure is possible without this, 
 so unless sin be thus forced to show itself, there is no deliver- 
 ance from it. The relatively better state of a kind of good- 
 nature and freedom from violent desires is also but a seeming 
 one, that has no true foundation, and therefore vanishes as soon 
 as the hour of temptation approaches. The coming forth of sin, 
 however, is not, as was before noticed, to be understood of out- 
 rage and crime, which man on any standard can and must by 
 his own power leave, but of those inward motions of sin and its 
 finer utterances, which are beyond the cognizance of human 
 judgment. Meantime it is certainly possible, even for the gross 
 offender, w^hen the law becomes alive in him, forthwith, by 
 penitence and faith, to enter into redemption, only he may not 
 misuse this passage for the purpose of exculpating himself. 
 The actual thief or adulterer may not appeal to the sinfulness, 
 in consequence of which [as he might pretend], he must have 
 sinned so; he could very well have omitted the deed; but the 
 inward lust no man can of his own power do awa}^; and it is of 
 the overpowering of this that the Apostle immediately treats 
 here. 
 
 Ver. 11-13. Paul lingers awhile by these thoughts,* and 
 brings forward the holiness of the law, as expressing the will of 
 
 I seems to sleep. The course of conversion with such persons then takes another 
 shape, the conflict is first developed, when the I awakes from its deep slumber in 
 the inner man, and opposes itself to the unresisted dominion of the sinful element. 
 The Apostle's description, therefore, is not to be understood, as t/wufjh evm/ course 
 of coTiTersion must necessarily assume the shape which he describes; experience indeed 
 shows, that in the life of many converted persons, e. g.^ Spener's and Zinzendorf's, 
 no such decisive moment occurred, as Paul describes in the passage, vii. 24. But 
 such as theirs naturally are only to be supposed in the church ; with heathens and 
 Jews, as those of whom Paul was immediately thinking, the conversion must 
 necessarily have shown itself, as Paul represents it; because with them any abiding 
 in the grace of baptism is out of the question, and consequently in them conversion 
 must reveal itself as a sudden change, namely, as entrance into the communion of 
 the faithful. 
 
 ■ The delineation of the state under the law begins fundamentally at ver. 9 with 
 the 'ixSovtrm ^i 'r^s ivToXiis, the description itself does not properly follow until ver. 
 14, while ver. 10-13 regard more immediately the moment of transition. 
 
I 
 
 cnAPTERVii.il — 13. 245 
 
 the holy God, so that it is indeed sin itself which is the cause of 
 its effect in increasing sin. The law is but the innocent occasion, 
 the conditio sine qua non ; the causa efflciens is the sinfulness of 
 man. The latter therefore appears as something in itself fo- 
 reign to the man, deceiving himself, as a glance at the narrative 
 Gen. iii. shows. This relation of the l/co to aiMapria is of the 
 highest importance for understanding what follows, and for the 
 scriptural anthropology generally. Sin is not the nature, the 
 substance of m.an himself (as evil generally is nothing substan- 
 tial, but disharmony only, the disturbance of the relations ori- 
 ginally ordained by God), rather has the germ of the divine 
 image remained even in fallen man, on which grace founds 
 her work of bringing back to God. (Comp. at Rom. ii. 14, 15.) 
 This better germ of life, however, appears in the natural state, 
 when sin has quickened, as suppressed by a foreign power, 
 troubled and obscured in its nature, and hence the operation 
 of grace finds expression in striving to draw it upwards, and to 
 make it prevail. Sin therefore is not to be considered as a 
 sum of evil actions standing separate, any more than good as a 
 sum of good deeds standing separate, but both, good and evil, 
 are elements of life; wherefore, where good or evil has place 
 in one person, the one or the other element, light or darkness, the 
 Lord of the kingdom of light, or the prince of darkness, exercises 
 his dominion. Therefore it is said also, 1 John iii. 8, 6 cro/wi/ rnv 
 a[xapriav Ik tov diu^oXov IffT/v. But the dominion of sin, when it 
 is allowed, takes the form of aTar^, because the I fancies it will 
 find in sin true joy and abiding satisfaction, in which, however, 
 it deceives itself. Sin, as disharmony, is never able to* still 
 that thirst for eternal joy which is planted in every being, for 
 she brings ever in her train the loathing of herself The law 
 fulfils, then, one of its important aims in bringing this deceit 
 home to the conscience of the man; it manifests the secret 
 hidden nature of evil (/Va (pavfi a/>tapr/a), it increases it in its 
 nature, in order the more surely to awaken the disgust at it, 
 and to convert all the desire and love of the man to that go(5d, 
 which, as the internal harmony, stills the longing for eternity. 
 The words i'vcc ysvT^rcci xad* vTrsp^oXriv d/iiapruXhs i) diMapria, there- 
 fore, are not to be refined on ; they are intended to state, ac- 
 cording to their simple sense, that the commandment increases 
 sin. As a rapidly flowing stream rolls calmly on, so long as no 
 
246 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 object checks it, but foams and roars so soon as any hindrance 
 stops it, just as calmly does the sinful element hold its course 
 through the man, so long as he does not stem it ; but if he 
 would realize the divine commandment, he begins to feel the 
 force of the element, of whose dominion he had as yet no 
 boding. 
 
 The construction of the sentence is not without difficulty. 
 To 'AXXoi V} ccfiapr/a the words 6>o/ yeyovs ddvarog are evidently to be 
 supplied from the preceding, but the following '/m (pavfj a//.ap- 
 Tia seems to stand unconnectedly, and some expositors would 
 therefore have bracketed it as parenthesis, which however is 
 without doubt wrong. It is better to draw from hoc the idea of 
 the divine purpose, and consequently to supply: "whereby 
 (namely that sin becomes the cause of death to men) God pur- 
 poses that."" Kad' v'7rspl3oXr]v=v'!rsp^uXX6vrMg is frequently used 
 by Paul. (Comp. 1 Cor. xii. 31 ; 2 Cor. i. 8, iv. 17 ; Gal. i. 13). 
 The formula is found also in later profane writers. The second 
 I'm is to be taken as standing quite parallel to the first ; the 
 second clause only illustrates and enhances the thought of the 
 first. 
 
 Ver. 14. The carnal state of man is now opposed to the 
 purely objective divine nature of the law (the 'ffvsv/Marijcos is to 
 be interpreted as emanation of God, of the cri/gD/Aa, John iv. 24.) 
 Spirit and flesh lust against each other. (Gal. v. 7.) Therefore, 
 the I also and the law are against each other, the I would be 
 autonomous. There is certainly no break to be made here at 
 ver. 1 4, the Apostle does not pass to any new representation ; 
 but -the alteration of the tenses — the present keeping on so 
 constantly to the end of the chapter," and preterites having 
 been hitherto used — cannot, as has already been observed, be 
 overlooked. We find a generalization of the relations signified 
 in this; Paul regards in what follows the man in himself, upon 
 all stages of development, in conflict with the law, and in as 
 far as the old man remains even after regeneration, so far the 
 following description as has been shown above, has its truth 
 also for the regenerate man himself. But the question occurs, 
 what conception are we to form of ca^g, and its derivative 
 (fapKixos ? Schleusner counted no less than sixteen significations 
 of (Tcc^g, which Bretschneider and Wahl have, to be sure, reduced 
 to seven ; notwithstanding even the exposition of these learned 
 
CHAPTER VII. 14. 247 
 
 men is not calculated to make it perceptible, how one of these 
 meanings proceeds from the other. The following observations 
 may perhaps aiford an easy survey of the course of the for- 
 mation of the different meanings which the word takes in. Sa^g, 
 -^^3^, immediately signifies the substance of the flesh, as far 
 as it belongs to the living organism ; as dead, it is called xpsag. 
 In this meaning, as substance of the cw/^-a, flesh and bones 
 are often connected {e. g., Luke xxiv. 39 ; Ephes. v. 30), 
 in order to mark as strongly as possible the material. This 
 nearest meaning, founded on the perception of the senses, is 
 then applied in holy writ to spiritual things in two ways. 
 First, the flesh is understood as the visible veil of the Spirit, 
 and so far ca^g appears in equal signification with 7^a>/Aa, the 
 veil of the Spirit in the Scripture, or with <pavsp6v in contrast to 
 npuTTov (Rom. ii. 28, 29; Col. ii. 1, 5; Heb. ix. 10), and denotes 
 the outward, the outside, the form in contrast to the essence ; 
 next, tfa/?g signifies the decaying, perishable part of man, in 
 contrast to the eternal, imperishable spirit dwelling in him. 
 This sense appears especially in the forms gap^ xai aJ/xa, (Matt, 
 xvi. 17; 1 Cor. xv. 50; Ephes. vi. 12) and craca ca^g (Luke iii. 
 6; John iii. 6; 1 Pet. i. 24) as signifying the decaying, perish- 
 able race of man generally. The notion of sinfulness is, then, 
 necessarily given with that of decay, for the former is the cause 
 of the latter; death penetrated into mankind with sin; and 
 decay is but that death gradually diifusing itself. Accordingly, 
 sinfulness itself is also, especially in the Epistles to the Romans 
 and Galatians, directly called (ra/?|, and svidv/niui (fapxog (Ephes. 
 ii. 3; 1 John ii. 16; 2 Pet. ii. 18), a vovg aapxog (Col. ii. 18), 
 Gufia Gapxo? (Col. ii. 11, compared wdth Eccles. xxiii. 16), and 
 such like are spoken of Yet this usage is not to be under- 
 stood as though the writers of the Bible considered sin to be 
 grounded merely in the bodily impulses, as preponderating 
 sensuality. The ca^g is rather to be understood as embracing 
 the whole psychical life with all its will and mind ; for with- 
 out the animating -^\)xn, the same being distinguished from 
 crvgD^a, the trapg alone cannot so much as commit sin. It is 
 certainly correct, however, that <ra^g can only be used to denote 
 human sin, the sin of the world of evil spirits having quite a 
 different character. In this it is of a spiritual nature, and 
 tlierefore incurable ; in the natural man sin has only pene- 
 
248 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 trated the nature of soul and body ; the spirit, by being op- 
 pressed or troubled by sin, may be defiled, but it has no sin in 
 its nature. "When in man sin occupies the spirit itself, and pro- 
 ceeds from it, he is then on his way to the sin against the Holy 
 Ghost.* The use of the adjectives <sap%i%oc. and capnm^ may 
 now be easily explained. The latter (2 Cor. iii. 8, is the only 
 place where it is quite ascertained) answers to the German 
 fleischern, or *' fleischig,'' fleshy ; the former is our fleischlichf 
 carnal. In the later Greek, the two adjective forms were con- 
 founded, and hence many variations are found in the read- 
 ings ; in the N. T., however, excepting the passage adduced, 
 ffapK/xog might be everywhere read. This form, then, designates 
 as well the merely outward (Rom. xv. 27; 1 Cor. ix. 11), as 
 the perishable, and, therefore, sinful, which latter meaning 
 prevails in the passage before us. The syjj, namely, is so far 
 called (fapxtKos, as it is governed by sin ; not, in as far as it has 
 sin essentially in itself, for in the course of the following expo- 
 sition of the Apostle, it appears as again freed from tliat foreign 
 dominion, as it was relatively free from it before sin became 
 alive (ver. 9.) The expression 'n-s'TrpocfMsvos 1^0 rriv a/xapr/av also 
 points to the same relation ; the image of one sold for a slave, 
 who is in need of being ransomed, is the foundation of it. For 
 
 * Compare more particularly hereon at the important passage, 2 Cor. vii, 1. 
 "Very striking observations upon this subject are to be found in Vitringa obs. sacr. 
 (Jenee 1733) page 560, seqq. Comp. also my opusc. theol. (Berol. 1833) page 
 156, seqq. Miiller, in his excellent work upon sin (Breslau, 1839, B. i. s. 182), 
 thinks my illustration of the notion of <ra^| more satisfactory in the treatise upon the 
 Trichotomy than here. I am not aware, however, that I have expressed myself 
 otherwise in the commentary than in that treatise, only I have here developed my 
 view more fully. The scriptural explanation which Miiller himself gives of «ra^| 
 I certainly cannot acknowledge to be the right one, and it is impossible for it to 
 gain credit. Miiller, namely, is of opinion that the expression «ra^| does not sig- 
 nify the sinful part in man, but "a// that is merely human — the human as denuded 
 of its relation to God, and in contrast to this relation " (p. 184.) That TviZfzce, in 
 opposition to <ra^|, is not thn human but the divine spirit; that vovs or o 'iaai 
 civ^^u'Tos is used in contrast to <ra^^. But vovs is acknowledged to be a function 
 only of the frvtZfia, and how the sVw HvS^cwros is to be otherwise understood than of 
 the <Tviu/Ltit, is not to be conceived. But even setting aside this identity of the 
 rrviUfAx with both the notions which Miiller recognises as opposite to <r«^^, the as- 
 sumption of such contrast itself contradicts the notion of o-a^^ which he has pro- 
 posed. As Paul states here a conflict in the man between the o-a^| and the vous, it 
 cannot be that all which is merely human is called ffd^^, for that includes the vevs 
 itself. 2a^| is the human nature, sojitr as it is separated from God, and becomes 
 subject to the power of darkness, that is, a-M/u-a and -^v^^; in the Tvtvf/,a,on the 
 contrary, or, taken as faculty, in the vayj, the light has remained to him, a light 
 still in his darkness ; the good impulses proceed from it, as from the <r«f| the evil 
 ones. 
 
CHAPTER VII. 15 — 20. 249 
 
 tlie free man only can come into bondage, and becomes free 
 again with his liberation from it. Surely, however, he cannot 
 loose himself from it, but needs a ransomer, and to this point 
 the deduction of the Apostle leads (ver. 24). Therefore, even 
 the regenerate man may say the ca^x/xb's g/>i of himself, in that 
 he, albeit for nioments only, has yet to experience the domi- 
 nion of sin. 
 
 The reading o'ibaijjiv is without hesitation to be preferred to 
 the other olha f^h, as the latter has no manuscript authority at all, 
 and has evidently proceeded merely from the observation, that 
 the singular stands elsewhere in the whole passage. But for 
 the very purpose of indicating that the Apostle is not expressing 
 merely individual experiences, but such as are at the same time 
 experiences of the generality, -the employment of the plural was 
 necessary here at the turning-point of the whole disquisition. 
 
 Ver. 1 5 — 20. The thought just now generally put syoi) (rocpTc/ao? 
 ilfMi, the Apostle carries out experimentally in the following 
 verses, and describes in the most vivid manner the fluctuation 
 of desires and thoughts both tempting and fighting against the 
 temptation. The repetition of the same words (ver. 15 comes 
 in ver. 19, and ver. AQ in ver. 20, word for word again) gives in 
 the most touching manner the impression of a dreary unifor- 
 mity of this inward struggle, before a higher power of peace has 
 revealed itself in the mind. Meanwhile, however, this repetition 
 is by no means to be considered as entirely without purpose, it 
 is intended rather to lead to even stronger consciousness of the 
 sinful state, and thereby to ever livelier longing for redemption. 
 In the course of the conflict, too, more conscious separation of 
 the better I from sin bespeaks that progress, which the Apostle 
 afterwards indicates not merely by the stronger expression, 
 which marks in the advance (ver, 23) the joy in the divine law, 
 but also by the even more perceptible parting of the old man 
 ffom the new man who is in process of formation, and of the 
 law of sin from the law of the spirit. It is yet to be observed, 
 that here again the Apostle's representation is not to be applied 
 to such offences, as human authority punishes, that no mur- 
 derer therefore, or adulterer, or any one who commits anything 
 else, which is generally considered as a criminal act, can say, I 
 do what I would not, but I cannot help it. Such an one the 
 Apostle would answer: thou hypocrite, thou canst well forbear 
 
250 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 committing the act, if thou only appliest the natural powers 
 which God has bestowed upon thee. The whole representation 
 regards the inner man, and finer transgressions of the divine 
 commandment, e.g., by an overhasty word. Hence, it has also 
 its perfect truth for the regenerate man,* who is open to im- 
 pressions from the more subtile temptations only. But the 
 conscience being also more acute in him, his situation is /or his 
 feeling quite similar to that represented here, and he is as much 
 in need of daily repentance and renewed forgiveness of sins, as 
 the unregenerate is of the first repentance. Some consideration 
 is now requisite in this passage of the relation of the one and 
 the other I, of whicli respectively Paul speaks, to the unity of 
 the personality. The one I would the good, gives assent to the 
 law (ver. 1 6, (fufimfn rffl vo/xw), nay has its pleasure in it (ver. 22, 
 cuvrjdo/Mat rui vo/aw) ; the other notwithstanding does sin, that is, 
 nourishes desire, the evil concupiscence, albeit the other I can 
 withhold it from breaking out into act,-|- In quite a similar 
 manner our Lord also speaks (Matt. x. 89) of a twofold -^uyri, 
 one of which must die, if the other is to be kept. According to 
 the ordinary notion of the soul, as being a thing of itself closed 
 in itself, that breeds of itself at pleasure good as well as evil, 
 this mode of expression is hard to be explained; but, as has 
 been already observed at Matt. x. 39, it becomes quite intel- 
 ligible, when the soul is considered as receptive nature, pene- 
 trated by the powers of light and darkness, that contend in it 
 for the mastery. In the better I, light gets predominant, in the 
 sinful one, darkness, and the man thus perceives in the unity of 
 his life the duplicity of the fighting elements, that reflect their 
 nature in him; he has not two souls, but the oneness becomes 
 twofold by the powers that are operative in it. By total sur- 
 render to the one or the other of these elements, he passes 
 
 • The boundary, how and wherein a regenerate person can still sin, and how 
 and wherein not, is to be defined by men upon the extremities only. We may say, 
 a regenerate pereon, who should commit a premeditated murder or the like, was 
 entirely fallen from faith ; but if a believer should be faulty in a word or a simi- 
 lar small matter, it would naturally not be considered as in itself apostacy. Not- 
 withstanding even one word may in the divine judgment be a very heavy sin, if, 
 e.g.f it is intended to wound a neighbour deeply; and circumstances, which often 
 God only knows, may exceedingly mitigate a seemingly very heavy sin. TJie 
 greatness of the temptation, the degree of coubciousness and the like, which are 
 beyond human judgment, are instances in point. 
 
 + Bengel says very aptly upon this: "Assensus hominis legi contra semet ipsum 
 praestitus, illustris character est religionis, magtmm testimonium de Deo." 
 
CHAPTER VII. 15, 20. 251 
 
 entirely into their nature. Even before Christ experience led 
 rightly to such a duplicity in the inner man. Besides the well 
 known : " video meliora proboque, deteriora sequor*' of Ovid 
 (Metam. vii. 19), and beside the expression of Epictetus : 6 a/^ap- 
 rdvuv fj^h dsXet oh TmsT, acci o fin ^eXs/ ^o/g/'(Enchir. ii. 26), the pas- 
 sage of Xenophon (Cyrop, vi. 1, 21) is remarkable, in which two 
 souls are expressly distinguished, with the entirely correct re- 
 mark, that the phenomenon of the inward conflict, and of the 
 attraction to good as well as to evil, cannot be satisfied by the 
 explanation, that the same soul addresses itself at one time to 
 the good, at another to the bad, for that in the choice of the 
 one, the bent towards the other manifests itself at the same 
 time.* Naturally, however, the willing of good before regener- 
 ation can only be considered as the free will gradually develop- 
 ing itself, as disposition to true freedom, as mere velleitas. For 
 this SeXsiv can only express itself negatively, in as far as it 
 checks the outbreak of sin into the gross act ; but as soon as 
 the man becomes conscious that the evil desire as such is sin, 
 he feels that mere willing is not sufficient to remove it, even as 
 it is incapable of calling forth in the heart holy motions and 
 desire for holiness. 
 
 The Qu y/vwtfxw, ver. 15, is not to be construed with Augustine 
 and Grotius, " I approve not,"" as Reiche still maintains. For 
 although the conceptions " know," and " approve,'' or *' be in- 
 clined towards," pass into each other, the context forbids the 
 application of the meaning " be inclined to, like," here, because 
 a tautology thereby arises, diXsiv expressing tlije same thing. 
 One is led to construe the expression so, only because the 
 speaker seems to know well what he does, as at ver. 18, too, it 
 is said: oJda yap x. r. X. But then it is overlooked, that although 
 the Apostle does know well the fact of the inward conflict, he 
 does not comprehend the cause of this phenomenon, or at least, 
 in the described moment of inward development, he pictures 
 the speaking subject as perplexed in his view of it. Like, as it 
 is said, John iii. 8, of the regenerating Spirit, " a man hears 
 and feels its sound indeed, but knows not whence it cometh 
 
 * Reiche, in a strange manner, explains these words of the Apostle, expressing 
 so profoundly the general experience of all raoi-e earnest men, of the ideal and real 
 Jew. The conformity of profane writers with the Apostle's expression might 
 surely have taught him better! 
 
252 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 and whither it goetW — Ver. 16. G-jfx(pr!fii is weaker than the 
 following (rvvr}do/jt,ai, ver. 22 ; this is to be distinguished from 
 h<priho[iai, by whicli mischievous joy is designated. The two ex- 
 pressions are only found here in the N. T. Vers. 17 and 20, 
 the vuvi hi olxsTi is important ; Paul indicates therein, as has 
 been remarked above, a progress ; he is supposing that the 
 man at first himself performs the evil, till theparting of thesV/^i^/A/a 
 and the vovg is completed in him, and the evil afterwards stands 
 opposed to him as a strange thing, molesting his true I. Nui/; 
 is not to be understood of time, but to be construed as inferring 
 only. The temporal progress is indicated only in the ovxiri. 
 Ver. 18. Upon the oituT h rfj aapx,/ [lou ri aiijapTia, and the QiXnv 
 Tapdxurai [loi, comp. at 21, 22. Ver. 18. A. B.C. and several 
 critical authorities leave out sbpicfxco, and read only : to ds xanp- 
 yaZic&cLi^ i-j. The emission of the verb might be more difficult 
 to explain than its addition, and therefore I prefer the shorter 
 reading. Ver. 20. The most important authorities, namely, 
 the Codd. B.C.D.E.G., omit the first lydo, while the second re- 
 mains quite undisputed ; the omission seems certainly very 
 proper, for the following l/w together with a/napHa, goes back 
 ,to dsXu and '3-o/w; there was, therefore, no ground for putting 
 eyw at the beginning of the verse ; notwithstanding the very 
 reason for the omission might have been, that the so putting it 
 was unaccountable. 
 
 Ver. 21-23. That duplicity within the man, already notified 
 in the foregoing verses, is now more closely described.* Paul, 
 namely, distinguishes the Uu avdpMvog (Eph. iii. 16), from the 
 ggw av0pM'7ro? (2 Cor. iv. 16); parallel with the first expression he 
 uses vovg,-\- with the second tra/jg or ^sX^j. Considered in and by 
 themselves, these expressions are not of equal signification with 
 xaivdg av&pw^rog (Eph. ii. 15, iv. 24), or xaivr) Kridtg (Gal. vi. 15; 2 
 Cor. V. 17), and 'ira'kaihg av&pMTog (Rom. vi. 6; Eph. iv. 22; Col. 
 iii. 9). For the three latter formulae refer only and solely to 
 the birth of the new man in regeneration (John i. 13); whereas 
 every natural man has an inward man, a T^sD/^a or vovg^ or as 
 Peter says (1 Pet. iii. 4), a x^wrrog civd^umg rr,? xa^biag. But as 
 
 * Compare hereon, and upon the connexion of ch. vii. and viii., Knapp's treatise 
 in the scriptis var. arg., p. 42fl sqq. 
 
 + In 2 Cor. iv. 16, however, there is reference also in 'icru avfi^uvos to the glori- 
 fied body. 
 
CHAPTER VII. 21 — 23. 253 
 
 far as the transformation in regeneration begins in the rrvevfjba or 
 voug of the natural man, and the inner man is the condition, we 
 may say the mother of the new man, so far the meanings reach 
 one another, and although, therefore, in the passage before us 
 the state of the regenerate is not immediately the subject of 
 discourse, yet the description, with the modifications above 
 directed, has its truth for this state also. The relation, how- 
 ever, of TvgD/Aft, or vovg to ffagg or fisXr} will be only properly under- 
 stood from that trichotomy of human nature which serves as 
 basis to the Apostle's representation.* According to the 
 acuteness of the contrast, in which Paul places the two above- 
 mentioned parts of man, his unity would be entirely annulled, 
 if we might not, upon the authority of other passages of Scrip- 
 ture (especially 1 Thess. v. 23, and Heb. iv. 1 2), supply the 
 -^^vx^ as the third part, and indeed as that part in which the 
 man becomes conscious both of the vovs and of the tra^g, as his, 
 and which therefore must be considered as the proper centre of 
 his personality. In the 'Trvsu/j^a (which is only comprehended in 
 the vovs as ability, as capacity) the connexion of the -^vx^ with 
 the higher world of the spirit is represented, in the tfa^g the con- 
 nexion of it with the creature. In the natural state certainly, 
 the spiritual potency of the vovg is dimmed (2 Cor. vii. 1); the vovg 
 of itself is in fMaruioTrig, having no power or capacity to conquer 
 (Eph. iv. 18), as even the conscience may be defiled (Tit. i, 15); 
 wherefore the man is in need of the msv/na ay lov, of the absolute, 
 pure, the highest Spirit, for his perfection ; meantime, however, 
 the vovg, even although obscured, forms for the natural man an 
 inward light, that gives him a sort of insight. This light is 
 never quite extinct but by a continued resistance to it, and 
 then all spiritual power vanishes. (Matt. vi. 23 ; Jude ver. 19). 
 Accordingly the Apostle speaks of a v6/j,og rov voog, that is, of a 
 law coming to the consciousness of man by the vovg. This law, 
 which the man feels himself unable to satisfy, is not, however, 
 given to him autonomously, but God gives it him by the vovg, as 
 the organ susceptible of the divine operations. The two laws, 
 therefore, are not to be held apart, as Tholuck still holds them; 
 they are thoroughly identical, only regarded according to their 
 nearer or farther sources. So for the vo^og rrig aiioL^rta?, or voi^o? 
 
 * Corap. hereon my treatise : de trichotomia hutnanee naturse N. T. scriptoribus 
 recepta, which is printed in my opusc. theol. p. 143 sqq. 
 
254 KPLSTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 rris mpxos, vofiog rou 5/a^o>.ou might be put, since the ultimate cause 
 of the expressions of sin in man cannot be supposed without 
 incitement from the kingdom of darkness and its prince. 
 When, however, a law is assigned to sin itself, which is in its 
 nature opposed to law, it is with a view to indicate, that in the 
 sinful development, no less than in good, there is a constant 
 advance, an incessant urging and assertion of itself. It may 
 be said, that in the department of sin the law of good is re- 
 versed; as in good the constant law of attraction upwards re- 
 veals itself, so in evil a constant law of the attraction down- 
 wards. Nothing, as has already been remarked on another 
 passage, is more dangerous and erroneous than the opinion that 
 one evil deed can stand isolate — that a man can commit one or 
 another, and then stop. Rather does all evil hang like a chain 
 together, and every sin multiplies the weight of the indwelling 
 evil in frightful progression, until, quicker than the man for- 
 bodes, it turns him dizzy and drags him into the deep. But 
 even so the good grows also in itself, and every little victory 
 furthers its elasticity, which has its impulse upwards. These 
 two potencies, therefore, fight against each other in the -^uyji, 
 as their arena. The I has the insight into the better, has the 
 GsXiiv even, a sort of velleitas to do it, but the xurspyd^iffdui is 
 wanting (ver. 18); thus the inward power of action in the man, 
 that which proceeds from the mevfia, is crippled. Sin makes a 
 prisoner of the I (ver. 23), it is a slave in its own house. 
 
 No emphasis is to be laid on the expressions ^ ccfiapria o/x.sT, H 
 GsXtiv 'TTapujisirai (ver. 18, 20, 21), as though oIx&Tv were to express 
 the' constant inhering, •ra^axg/b'^a/ the more distant attachment, 
 for ver. 21, TapaxsTffdai is used likewise of evil. The expression 
 olxsTh Ifioi dfia^r/a (ver. 1 7), is more nearly defined, ver. 18, by oux 
 gJksTsv rfi (sa^xl (io\) dycc&ov. The olx ayaUv=xcc7t6v, ver. 19, answers 
 to dfioLprioL considered as a state; sin is removed out of the 
 nobler, higher potency of the man, the wZq, into the lower, the 
 -^vxn aocpxixT], or the eScp^ -^yx'^ri- (Comp. at ver. 14). The 
 lower potency defiles the higher also, and presses back its opera- 
 tion ; but the latter has not in itself the law of disharmony; 
 this is the case with the evil spirits only, and with men, when 
 they have, by continued personal sin, killed the spirit itself 
 KaXov is used entirely as the hellenic xaXlv xd,yaUv in a moral- 
 sesthetic meaning. ^-fQ-r is similarly used in a moral view, Eccl. 
 
CHAPTER Til. 24. 255 
 
 iii. 11. Ver. 21. Touching the difficult construction of tlie 
 verse, it is not entirely cleared by any of the attempts to solve 
 it (Reiche's comm. ad. loc. may be referred to for them) ; it 
 seems that an anacoluthon must be assumed in it. With this 
 supposition one must be guided by the leading notion i/o>o^, 
 which must then in ver. 21 be understood as in ver. 22, 28, and 
 therefore of the law of God. With regard to the grammatical 
 construction, rhv vSfiov might be annexed to ^ronTv. But in this 
 way of taking the passage, especially maintained by Knapp, 
 not only is the to xaXo'i/* harsh, for which Knapp would impro- 
 perly read rhv xaXov, but also the repetition of s/noi. If it be 
 further considered that Paul never^f* uses the form v6/mov itquTv ; 
 it is only found Gal. v. 3 ; that, in fine, an 'inpog vofiog is spoken 
 of in ver. 23, which is explained as vo/mo? a/Mupr/ag ; the simplest 
 mode seems to be, to take rhv v6f/.ov as accusative of the object in 
 the sense ; "I find then, the law, that evil is present with [or 
 besets] me, while I am yet wishing to do good.'' The placing 
 rhv voMv before, suits this sense very well. "Ver. 23, a/;^aXwr/^w, 
 as well as alyjiu'kurixjui (2 Tim. iii. 6) belongs only to the later 
 Greek, and especially to the Alexandrine dialect. Comp. Phry- 
 nichus by Lobeck, s. 442. 
 
 Ver. 24. So, then, Paul had arrived at the proper turning- 
 point in the interior of the spiritual life, to the complete deve- 
 lopment of the need of redemption, to the parting of law and 
 gospel. The law has fulfilled its work, when it has awakened 
 repentance, and the despair in a man's own power to set forth 
 true holiness within and without him (Rom. iii. 20), and is thus 
 become the rronhaycayk ih Xpff/Tov (Gal. iii. 24). It seems sur- 
 prising only, that he who in the deepest longing cries for re- 
 demption, longs for this redemption not from sin, or from the 
 law of sin, but from the aufia rov davdrov = cw/^a &vr}T6v.i All 
 
 • The TO xkXov can only be taken as redundant, unless with Homberg, va^av, or 
 with Hemsterhuis kxXov is to be struck out, but for which there are no critical 
 authorities. (Comp. Knapp, scr. v. arg. p. 437.) 
 
 + [This seeming contradiction is the author's.] 
 
 J If a moment could be pointed out earlier, which might be considered as the 
 experience of the redemption of Christ in the spirit, and could this whole section 
 be explained immediately of the regenerate, one might believe that ver. 24 might 
 be taken thus : " Would that I might, now that I am spiritually redeemed, be 
 glorified in body also !" But so the redemption would appear totally done with 
 spiritually, and only remain to be completed corporally ; while according to scrip- 
 tural representation, it needs, as well for the spirit as for the whole man, constantly 
 renewed repetition. 
 
256 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 explanations of this expression, which abstract from corporeity,* 
 must necessarily founder on the two decided declarations of the 
 Apostle in the preceding part of the discourse, which constantly 
 speaks of the capg, nay of the fj^iXri (comp. vi. 12, vii. 18, 23, 
 25.) Paul is not, however, supposing (as w^as remarked at ver. 
 14) in a Manichsean manner, the ca^g or the <yoD/xa to be in and 
 of itself sinful; the Apostle says rather, that as far as the cwA^a 
 is necessarily connected with the psychical life of man, and as a 
 member of the material world is exposed to its wild powers, so 
 far jj d(iapria o/ksT sv rf) dapxi He Welshes, therefore, to be re- 
 deemed, not from the body in itself (he longs rather to be clothed 
 upon wdth the true heavenly body, 2 Cor. v.), but only so to be 
 redeemed from the mortal body, that is, the body subject to 
 corruption, that the Spirit may give it life. (Comp. at Rom. 
 viii. 11.) Accordingly, it may clearly be perceived from this 
 passage also, that Paul, as we already intimated, teaches the 
 sinfulness of man's nature, and recognises in himf the remains 
 of the divine image, which restoring grace knits on to. Man 
 is become by original sin no crvsu/^ta dzd&aprov, such as the evil 
 spirits are ; but from the disobedient will of the -^^x^y man's 
 corporeity is immediately become subject to the mere natural 
 life and its rude powers,}: hence by a reaction the 'rvsvfji.a also 
 is become grieved and hindered ; howbeit the -rvsD/^a has retained 
 a certain light and grade of beneficial influences, whereby even 
 in the heathen world phenomena relatively noble are bred. 
 (Comp. at Rom. ii, 14, 15.) Meantime the natural life suffices 
 not, the natural power of the will to boot, to do away wnth sin 
 and rear true inward holiness, as the divine law requires ; man 
 needs a Redeemer, therefore, through whom his spirit may re- 
 ceive again the wdiole fulness of its original power, which here- 
 upon first sanctifies the -^^vx^ and glorifies at last the (fufia also. 
 As, therefore, the lusts of the flesh war from beneath against the 
 
 * [Leiblichkeit.] 
 
 + [In ihm. There is no masculine word in the sentence to which iJim can relate. 
 Perhaps it may be a misprint for ihr, i. e., der menschlichen natur; or the author may 
 have put ihm to agree with dun menschen, forgetting that this was not the expres- 
 sion which he had used. B.] 
 
 Ij: Only, Holy Scripture certainly knows nothing of the heathen view of the body, 
 as a prison of the soul ; it is rather a necessary organ to her of herself, wherefore, 
 even upon the highest stage of perfection, the body again appears, only in glorified 
 form. Without body, the state of the soul is an imperfect one. (Comp. upon the 
 relation of the body to the soul, Seneca [epist. 65] who expresses himsell thereon 
 in a manner nearly approaching the Christian doctrine. 
 
CHAPTER VII. 25 — VIII. 17. 257 
 
 ■^vxv; so does the impulse of the spirit sanctify it from above ; 
 hence sanctification must, before all things, be directed to the 
 crucifying of the flesh (Gral. v. 24; 1 Cor. ix. 27), because the 
 spirit comes to have dominion, when the predominance of the 
 flesh is suppressed. But if sin were founded immediately in 
 the 'Trvsv/na, or voug, SO that Paul might have said: afiapr/a oixtTb 
 tCj '^rvsv/j.ari^ atonement could then have been as little spoken of 
 for men, as it is in the case of the evil spirits, for there had been 
 no connecting point for grace in the inner man. Since then, 
 even with the regenerate man, the body of death and the old 
 man is living still, he also has occasion to exclaim: raXui'Trupoi 
 syu av^pu-ro?; more in a partial sense, however, the exclamation 
 being here intended in its full compass, as liberation from the 
 whole former state, and longing for a thoroughly new life, whose 
 property the subsequent representation describes. The expres- 
 sion raXa/Tupo?, from rXdu, to sufler, and tw^os, a rock, a heavy 
 stone, is very suitable for describing the hard pressure under 
 which the man is sufiering during the dominion of sin. It is 
 found besides at Rev. iii. 17. The choice of the word guoyo-a/ ••is 
 also very significant ;* tliat powerful, energetic, pulling-out lies in 
 its meaning, which is looked for not from any circumstance, but 
 from a person only spiritually superior in might, therefore, ris fAs 
 ^Usrai. That in the ^v^srai, moreover, not merely the communi- 
 cation of a new principle of life, but the forgiveness of sins, 
 atonement is intended, the expression xaruKpifiu ovdh roTg Iv 
 XpiCfruj testifies. In the words, Ik tou edj/xarog rov &avdrov rovrouy 
 the pronoun belongs to cw/^caros, since it is placed according to 
 the known Hebrew use where two substantives are connected, 
 after.f) 
 
 • The whole expression : rls ^e pua-ircct, expresses, moreover, not merely the 
 thought : who will at last sometime deliver me out of this cheerless state of conflict, 
 but also the thought : who can. The feeling finds vent, that no human help avails 
 anything here. 
 
 t The Hypallage with pronouns in Greek is certainly unusual (comp. Winer's 
 Gr. p. 519, and Meyer ad loc) ; but the context speaks decidedly here for the 
 adoption of a Hebrew idiom. (Comp. Gesenius Gr. p. 741. For the thought, 
 •' body of this hitherto described death," does not suit the context, since Sa.va.roi 
 last occurred at ver. 13, and the following description from ver. 14, contains 
 no point at all, which could lead to the notion of death in a physical sense. 
 The putting <r&;^« 6u.tu.rou together, however, suggests immediately the physical 
 death, as the final expression of the corruption which has dominion of the whole 
 man. lufAo. rod 6a.ta.rou cannot certainly be : body, which is the cause of 6a.ta.roiy 
 but it may be : body which bears in itself the nature of death = <rufjt.a. 6tnr'ot [viii. 
 10.] The meaning "mass, whole," according to the analogy of 1^13 is quite inap- 
 plicable here. 
 
 R 
 
258 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 § 12. OF THE EXPERIENCE OF REDEMPTION UNTIL THE PERFECTION 
 OF THE INDIVIDUAL LIFE. 
 
 (VII. 25— VIII. 17.) 
 
 To the question uttered in ver. 24: who shall redeem me? 
 the Apostle answers by a deep but eloquent silence. He points, 
 namely, by it to that invisible and unspeakable act of regenera- 
 tion, when the man sees heaven open, and perceives the 
 whisper of the Spirit, and therein the presence of God (1 Kings 
 xix. 12), without knowing whence the breathing cometh and 
 whither it goeth (John iii. 8). To signify, however, that here 
 the experience of redemption in his own heart is to be con- 
 sidered as attained, he utters his thanksgiving for this grace 
 to the originator of the work of redemption, God the Father, 
 through Christ, whom he can now from his heart call his Lord.* 
 With this experience an entirely altered state commences 
 within the man, the nature of which the Apostle proceeds to 
 describe, unto entire perfection, even of the body (viii. 11). 
 While, namely, in the former state the divine law reflected itself 
 indeed in the voug and the wish was stirring in the inner man, that 
 he might be able to keep it, nay, his joy in it notified itself, yet 
 the main thing still was wanting, the xanpydt^sffdai (vii. 1 8). The 
 vovg could not in freedom serve the law of God,-|- the very inner 
 man was taken prisoner by the resisting law of sin. But by 
 experience of the redeeming power of Christ, whereby the vovg 
 is strengthened, the man sees himself enabled, at least with the 
 highest and noblest potency of his being, to serve the divine 
 law, and thus we find no more in him the dsXsiv merely, but the 
 xarspyd^sffdai also. Meantime the head only, as it were, is as yet 
 lifted up from the raging sea, there is but the dmXvrpuffig rov 
 
 • Should the act of regeneration be supposed to have come to pass earlier, it 
 would appear strange, that from ver. 9 to 25 the name (if Christ should not occur ; 
 this just entirely agrees with our acceptation. 
 
 + Stier erroneously understands this of a mere delight in the divine law in the 
 thought of man, of equal signification with trvvrtBiffSeti above ; it is, however, more 
 than that, it is the doing of the law according to its inward sense, for in its coarser 
 exterior the man may keep it even without grace. Such doing only can rightly be 
 called ^ovXiviiv vofii-aieiou, the lovXtvuv vo/ticfi icfiocpTixs which happens merely with the 
 *•«$!, is no doing of sin, but a mere remaining exposed to the motions of the sinful 
 flesh. (Comp. Gal. v. 17.) 
 
J 
 
 CHAPTER VII. 25 — VIII. 17- 2.59 
 
 wibfAfiTOi or vaocj to which afterwards, viii. 23, the a'lroXuTpi^aig roO 
 cu)(Laro<; must join ; the <ra^5, and the -^v^n necessarily to be 
 considered as united with it, the whole inferior region of life 
 therefore, remains yet subject to the law of sin. Hence even 
 in the regenerate the conflict lasts on, but it has lost it cheer- 
 less uniformity; in the power of Christ he knows he shall 
 usually conquer in this battle, and if he sometime fall (in lesser 
 things), he knows he shall soon get up again (1 John ii. 2) ; so 
 that iipn^n governs now in that higher sphere of human being, 
 where once the contest was most violent, because there the op- 
 position to sin revealed itself most determinedly. Accordingly, 
 they who belong to Christ are quit of the condemning con- 
 science, since the living spirit of Christ has made them free from 
 sin and death (viii. 1, 2). This new principle of life, however, 
 is gradually to diffuse itself through the being of the man, until 
 the -^v^n, nay the tfcD/^oa, is glorified by it, and Christ becomes 
 the ^W3j for the whole man, that he may raise him up at the last 
 day. (Comp. Rom. viii. 11, with John vi. 44, &c. At both 
 passages my commentary may be consulted.) 
 
 Notwithstanding that a most simple consistency results from 
 this conception of the passage, it has been mistaken by almost 
 all the older and later expositors,* nay, Reiche would have the 
 whole of ver. 25, which is so essential a member in the Apostle's 
 description, considered as a gloss. Most of the others refer 
 the a^cc oh to the whole description of vii. 14-24, — so that ver. 
 25 is to represent the same state which that section describes, 
 — and the apa, orv (viii. 1), either to ch. v., or even as Tholuck 
 would, to ch. iii. If no other acceptation of the passage could 
 be made good, I would rather with Reiche strike out the verse, 
 than determine upon so forced an interpretation. Perhaps the 
 false division of the chapters may have prevented the right 
 sense of the words from being found, for it is indeed as impro- 
 per as it can be. The seventh chapter ought surely to close 
 wath ver. 24, and all would then go on in connexion; the strict 
 particle of inference apa and the yap following at viii. 2, 3, on no 
 account allows the thread of the discourse to be broken here. 
 But what can have induced the expositors so with one voice to 
 find the same thing in ver. 25, as is expressed vii. 14-24, w^hile 
 
 • GlOckler only seems to have conceived it inghtly; he is, however, too brief in 
 his explanation of the important words for his view to be clearly perceived. 
 
260 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 the words are so palpably a declaration of something quite 
 different ? It was believed that because the vofj^oc, rod @iov was 
 spoken of above also (ver. 23), that the vof dovXsvoj i/6/aw 0sov was 
 identical with the cmrihofiai tOj v6^u) tov @iov (ver. 22), and again 
 the dovXsuu ffapKi vofj^u) aii^upriag identical with the before (ver. 15, 
 18, 23) described dominion of the vom? a[j.aprlag. But that is 
 clearly not the Apostle's meaning.* In the state of which first 
 the need of redemption was a result, the whole man, the voDj 
 therefore with him, was unable to serve the law of God, the 
 better I itself was taken captive by the law of sin. But here 
 the voxjg appears as freed, and in this freedom serving the law of 
 God, and only the lower sphere of life remains subjected to the 
 law of sin. The voZg, however, being the ruling principle in the 
 whole man, the law of God rules in it, and by it also in 
 the whole man, albeit something indeed remains still to be got 
 the better of and brought under, namely, the flesh itself yet 
 captive in the sinful element."}* 
 
 For su^a^Kfru) rSj Qsoj the reading %af/s tGj &iSj is found, which 
 must, however, yield to the usual one, as having less critical 
 foundation. The dia 'lyjcov xpisrou is not to be taken elliptically, 
 with sffojdriv for instance supplied, but to be connected with gu;)^a- 
 ^/<rrw. The thanksgiving oifered to God through Christ testifies 
 
 * It might be said, it is not: v <ra^| ^ovXtvu vofiu a,fAa,^ria,s, but tyu r? ffec^Ki 
 ^ovXivu V. a., and therefore the I, just as from ver. 14-24, might be supposed as 
 serving sin. But iyu in ver. 25 is not, as ver. 9 in the 'tyu ctviictvov, to be under- 
 stood as denoting the better part in man, for this is signified by the vo:/?, which is 
 distinguished from it, and which can now serve the law of God; but as denoting 
 the personaUty in general. Now, in the regenerate man the flesh is not the flesh of 
 another, but his own flesh, his old man, consequently he also remains, the flesh 
 merely considered, still as regenerate subjected to the law of sin. Gal. v. 17 is 
 especially important for understanding the whole passage, and there principally the 
 words: J'va fjiM S. civ 6iXyiri, TocvTo, -^oir,ri. So also here Paul supposes in the be- 
 liever that possibility of Ka,ri^ya.Z,s.tr6oe,t, which is wanting in the merely awakened. 
 
 t Meyer makes the following objections to my acceptation: 1. " If Paul had in- 
 tended to express the thought in this signification, he must have reversed the sen- 
 tence: a^a, oiiv ocvtos lyct/ t^ (a\v ca^xi ^ovXiuat vo/jLoi dfia^TiBts, tco di vo'i vof^u Siov." 
 
 By no means; it was necessary that after the thanksgiving the progress should be 
 immediately brought forward, of being now able with the vous to serve the law of 
 God; the suffering in arrear ought only to be mentioned afterwards. 2. " Accord- 
 ing to viii. 2, 3, the redeemed is entirely freed from the law of sin; " that is not so; 
 the regenerate conquers in the conflict with sin, he has dominion over it, but he is 
 not rid of it; this entire riddance is not eftected until the glorification of the mortal 
 body. 3. *' If the redeemed still with the <ra^| remained subject to the law of sin, 
 Paul could not say, viii. 1, ovTiv oi^ce. vvv xarax^/^a." Answer; Paul can say so 
 with full right, because the man is not free from condemnation, on account of his 
 subjective condition, but for the sake of the objective work of Christ, which he lays 
 hold of in faith. 
 
 I 
 
CHAPTER VIII. 1 . 261 
 
 tlie redemption wrought by God through Christ. The avrhg iyu 
 is not to be construed '' I myself/' but ego idem, " I, the one 
 and the same, have in me a twofold element/' To be sure aurog 
 in this signification commonly has the article, but the J/w sup- 
 plies it here. 
 
 Chap. viii. 1. As the apa ovv, according to the acceptation 
 given above, is closely connected with the thanksgiving for the 
 experienced redemption, so again is the cUpa vvv with the descrip- 
 tion of the state of the regenerate, in whom the conflict indeed 
 has not altogether ceased, but is become a victorious one. Those 
 who have experienced redemption are now in Christ (o/ Iv x^/c- 
 rQj 'i73<rou); that is, by real spiritual communion, by the indwell- 
 ing of the Spirit of Christ, they are become spiritually united 
 with him, members of His body, and as such they are freed 
 from the xatdxpiixa, from the sentence of God's justice that re- 
 jects sinners. And this, too, not merely in subjective feeling, 
 so that they x\qw feel the peace of God instead of the curse, but 
 objectively also, so that their relation to God, and God's posi- 
 tion towards them, is become another. The righteousness of 
 Christ is imputed to the believer, so that he is regarded as 
 though he were Christ; he is precious to God for the Beloved's 
 sake, to whom he belongs, and whose life dwells in him. In 
 thorough misconception of the passage, De Wette remarks, " The 
 doctrines of satisfaction and justification are not to be intermix- 
 ed here; " as if an exposition of the Christian religious develop- 
 ment were possible, unless those doctrines formed the turning- 
 points in it ! 
 
 It only seems to strike one here, that this alteration commenc- 
 ing with the experience of redemption {yiiv) is derived in this 
 passage from the state of the sinner, not from the objective act 
 of Christ's redemption and atonement, as it was, iii. 25. But this 
 difference of representation is easily explained from the difierent 
 points of view taken here and there by Paul for his descriptions. 
 There he was viewing the relation quite objectively, here he 
 contemplates the subjective appropriation of that objective pro- 
 cess. It is not, therefore, in any way his meaning, that forgive- 
 ness of sins and deliverance from condemnation is effected by 
 the state of the man ; rather that comes to pass by the 
 sacrifice of the death of Christ alone ; he would only say, that 
 the subjective appropriation of this act of Christ is now first 
 
262 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 acknowledged and ensues with the actual experience of His re- 
 deeming power. The cause (Christ's death) and the effect (the 
 regeneration of man) are, therefore, in the life necessarily to- 
 gether, they can only be separated and conceived in their 
 different relations when they are considered abstractedly. Should 
 it, however, be said, that a xa^rdxpifia remains still even for the 
 regenerate, since their crapg (and the -^vx^i united with it) is 
 still subject to the law of sin (vii. 25) ; it is assuredly right, 
 that where sin is, condemnation is, and that even the regene- 
 rate, therefore, is in need of constant repetition of forgiveness 
 of sins when transgressions occur, be they in the eyes of men 
 of ever so little importance. (1 John ii. 1.)* But as a tree 
 once grafted is called a noble one, although it may yet shoot 
 water-sprouts below the graft, and although it may as yet be 
 little developed; so is the regenerate man called perfect, pure, 
 holy, without sin, free from all condemnation, for the sake of 
 the divinely pure nature of the new element that is come into 
 him, although this element, whose new course of development 
 is in itself, •[• may as yet be taken up with the first beginnings 
 of this development (1 John ii. 13, 14), and at times be re- 
 pressed by the stirring powers of the capg. Thus the seeming- 
 contradiction is reconciled, that whosoever is born of God doth 
 not commit sin, because he can not sin, and yet sin still exists 
 in the old man of the regenerate, which sin, because the old man 
 is his J must be called his sin also. Nay, even if a regenerate man 
 falls away from faith, the regenerate man, as such, has not 
 sinned, but the old man, again grown mighty by that man's 
 
 * Upon the sins of the regenerate, Luther thus aptly expresses himself : " If 
 the regenerate had no sin, he would not come so well off. For if I felt not sin, the 
 evil life and conscience, 1 should never relish so the power of the divine Word." 
 Sin itself must therefore be the means, for evermore urgently seeking the power 
 of Christ. It may be said that this is a dangerous doctrine, for so a man might 
 make light of siu and abuse grace! It is certainly possible ; but upon this possibility 
 it has nevertheless seemed good to God to free the faithful from the yoke of sin. 
 Such knavery of sin, that makes an abuse of the holiest gift of God, must surely 
 come to light. The truly regenerate, if he trace any sound of it in himself, will 
 only so much the more zealously abhor sin ; if he did not so, he would be in pro- 
 cess of apostacy from faith. The man who only in self-deceit holds himself as re- 
 generate, will, if uprightness be in him, thereby be frightened out ot his error. 
 The insincere hypocrite, however, who can calmly carry on such a wanton abuse, 
 fancies indeed he can deceive God and man, bnt is properly only deceiving himself, 
 and has his reward that way. 
 
 + [Or — "which contains in itself his {i. e., the man's) new course of develop- 
 ment." B.J 
 
CHAPTER VIII. 2. 263 
 
 fault, has again thrust out the germ of the new man from his 
 nature. That the new man, however, the Christ in us, is not 
 even in the most advanced development of the regenerate, the 
 ground of favour, but the token of it only, must ever be main- 
 tained, as he withdraws himself at times entirely from the 
 man ; the ground of acceptance to favour with God is and re- 
 mains the Christ for us. (As to the state of the text of viii. 1 , 
 the mistaken interpretation of vii. 25 could alone have sug- 
 gested the alteration of the important vZv into olv. It is the 
 very note of the new state of regeneration, and is entirely ne- 
 cessary here. On the contrary, the addition: [/.ri xard (ra^xa 
 7rg^/'7rarou(f/i?, aXka xara Trn\jf/.ci, [the first half of which only is 
 found in some critical authorities], is wanting in the best Codd., 
 B.C.D.F.Gr., and betrays itself, moreover, so evidently as a gloss 
 borrowed from ver. 4, in order to guard against a misconcep- 
 tion of the ohbh xardxpifMoc, that it is at all events to be struck 
 out. The words are intended namely to attach a condition, and 
 are to be translated : if so be they walk according to the Spirit, 
 etc. For if they were merely to signify the character of the 
 regenerate, they would run: roTg ou xara aapxa TipirroLrougiv x. r. X. 
 Ver. 2. The following representation then describes, as is 
 generally acknowledged, the way and manner of the formation 
 of the regenerate state. The man draws not himself, but a Power 
 that makes free, that looses the bond, draws him from the a/;)^^a- 
 Xwtr/a of sin (comp. vii. 23), namely 6 vojui^og rou 'rvgu^aros rtjg X^mig. 
 As (John viii. 36) the Son appears as the only one who indeed 
 makes free, so here also it is said: 6 wi^ag rov 'Trvsufji^aros h xpigTuj 
 'iriffov rjXsv&spojffs /as. It is only that the contrast with the law of 
 sin and of death proceeding from sin may stand more clearly to 
 view, that Christ is here comprehended in the law of the spirit 
 of life founded by Him. For in the aorist riXevdipugs is signified 
 here not the once-done act of Christ, but as De Wette rightly 
 observes, the laying hold of the work of Christ's redemption 
 in faith. The possibility of this laying hold is, then, ver. 3, 
 grounded on the act of Christ. Both life and death, however, 
 are comprehended in their absoluteness, as Christ himself is 
 called the Life and the Resurrection, being the conqueror of 
 death. If, further, the name of a v6/Ji^og is assigned to the Ti^sD/Aa 
 rris ^mg, this is with regard to vii. 22, where the vSfio? rod 
 eeou was spoken of, and in contrast with the vof^og rra afioLpriotg. 
 
264 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 The expression has its inward truth; the divine is in itself the 
 legal,* only it so represents itself in Christ to man, that it brings 
 with it the power to satisfy the very claims which it establishes. 
 That the faithful, therefore, fulfil the law, is not their own work, 
 (and consequently gives no merit), but God's work in them 
 Ephes. ii. 8-10) by His Spirit that giveth life. Whether, more- 
 over, the expression 6 vofj^og toD 'Trvsv^ujarog rrig ^w% is construed 
 like 'TmvfMarog Ttal rr,z ^w^$, or as itvivfiarog ^wo'To/oDfrog is essentially 
 the same thing as far as regards the thought. For the Spirit 
 is the true life, and, therefore, alone capable of imparting it, of 
 animating death itself. 
 
 Ver. 8. The incapacity of the law (as a divine institution for 
 salvation) to deliver man from sin, made, as Paul had set forth 
 at large in the beginning of the Epistle, the other way neces- 
 sary, namely, the sending of the Son of God in the flesh, to 
 attack sin in its root. 
 
 To atlmrov is to be taken as absolute accusative, " touching the 
 incapability of the law/' — 'Ei/ a!= *^tjj^^ *' in that, in as far as,'' 
 of like signification with h<p' c5, comp. at v. 12 (used also classi- 
 cally, comp. Bernhardy's Syntax, p. 211). Thus Iv w is found, 
 Heb. vi. 17, but not, as De Wette thinks, Heb. ii. 18, 1 Pet. ii. 
 12, nor John xvi. 80;t in these passages it is the relative with 
 the preposition. — The law might perhaps avail somewhat with 
 the perfect, but the sinfulness of human nature hinders its effi- 
 cacy. (Comp. at vii. 12, IS.) 
 
 In the description of the sending of the Son of God, all stress 
 is laid upon the identity of the human nature, in which he ap- 
 peared, wdth ours. The incapacity of the law, to bring forth 
 true holiness, lay not in itself (vii. 12), but in corrupted human 
 nature, which robbed the divine law of its strength {riGQi- 
 vii).X Hence this sinful nature was to be in Christ's person 
 destroyed in the divine judgment (xarex^/vs rnv aiMaprtdv Iv rfj 
 (fdpxi). It seems remarkable, however, that the Apostle uses 
 
 • [Das Gesetzmdssige, that which is according to law.] The law, the inward im- 
 pulse of the Spirit, is to be holy and to make holy; the law of the flesh is, to be 
 unholy and to make unholy. Both lust constantly against each other (Gal. v. 17). 
 Comp. at iii. 27, v«/ttos rrn 'rlffnus. 
 
 + [A wrong reference.] 
 
 X When Heb. vii. 1 8, an ctirhns kdc) avu(ptXis of the law is spoken of, the expres- 
 sion is not to be understood of the nature of the law but of its working, which is 
 powerless on account of the sin of men. Therefore Paul calls it, Gal. iii. 21, jk^ 
 
CHAPTER VIII. 3. 265 
 
 here the expression, rrsfM-^ag riv locvrov v/hv (vio? is used in its 
 strictly proper sense of the eternal, divine nature of the Son, 
 and the greatness of God's love is intended to be set forth by 
 the saurou), h o//«o/w//-ar/ (Sctp%hg afiapriag, for by this the human 
 nature of Christ himself seems to be described as sinful. But 
 had Paul meant to say, that Christ's human nature (for o-a^g 
 signifies here, as Rom. i. 4, by synecdoche the whole humanity 
 of spirit, soul, and body) was sinful, as fallen human nature is; 
 he must then have written sv accpxi a/^a^r/ag, not h ofLonj^iMccTt 
 6ap>tos ayu,a^r/ag. Adam's nature, too, before the fall, was the 6/moiu- 
 ^a of man's nature now ; he became not by the fall specifically 
 another, the same man merely became corrupt. Here it lay in 
 the Apostle's course, to bring forward more immediately the 
 affinity of Christ's nature with ours ; he is silent, therefore, 
 upon the _ difference between them. This diiference, however, 
 must be so conceived, that the Redeemer, certainly before the 
 resurrection, wore no coj/m^a r^s 86^ni, but a cw/xa raTrs/vwrfgw? 
 (Phil. iii. 21), that was affected with an d<j&sveia rng aa^xog (2 
 Cor. xiii. 4); but his humanity, notwithstanding, v^di^ free from 
 positive sinfulness, as begotten of the Holy Ghost. That ac^g- 
 nia has then the aim, to mediate the possibility . of temptation 
 (comp. at Matt. iv. 1, etc.), which our Lord had to sufi*er, in 
 order to become the conqueror over evil (Heb. ii. 14, 17, 18, 
 iv. 15). Thus the two equally necessary moments were united 
 in Christ; connexion with mankind unto one true unity of life, 
 and the exaltation above mankind, that he might lift them out 
 of their misery. 
 
 'O,aoi6rng is properly, analogously as ay/orns, the being like, 
 and 6/Moiu//.a, the made like, an image. Paul uses it, however, 
 also like ofMo/orrig. So Rom. i. 23, v. 14, vi. 5, and, besides, Phil, 
 ii, 7. James iii. 9, o/Molugig is found. So also in the LXX., Gen. 
 i. 26. Now, if the sinfulness of human nature were nothing but 
 a mere deficiency, the filling of mankind with the life of the 
 Son of God would have sufficed to scare it away. But since, 
 beside this deficiency in spiritual life, there is a real disturbance 
 of the harmony in the inner and outer man, more than the mere 
 incarnation was requisite, namely, the extirpation of the guilt 
 and the restitution of the disturbed order by the founding of a 
 centre, from which harmony might pour forth through all the 
 spheres of life, even as from Adam disharmony had been dif- 
 
266 KPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 fused (comp. at Rom. v. 12, etc.) This thought, however, is not 
 to be pressed upon the xai mpl afiapr/as, which words are rather 
 to be connected with the preceding in the simple sense, " on ac- 
 count of sin,"' "by reason of sin,"' as ground for the sending of the 
 
 Son of God; but it lies in the Jtursxp/vz r'^v afMapr/av h rf) (Sapxi* 
 
 There is no foundation whatever for finding in the crsp; atJ^dpriag 
 a reference to the sacrifice of Christ's death, so that d/Aa^r/a = 
 Q^^ should mean sin-offering (comp. at 2 Cor. v. 21). The 
 
 T T ^ 
 
 closing words of the verse, on the contrary, express most decid- 
 edly the vicarious and atoning death of the Saviour. For the 
 KOLTiKpivi evidently has retrospect to the ohbh xardxpnia (viii. 1), 
 so that the sense of the words is this : no xaraKpi/j^a falls on 
 theMj because He took it on Him; He stands, therefore, in the 
 stead of mankind, bears what should fall on them, and so effects 
 all which the law could not effect, which all comprises in itself 
 the reconciliation of God. As, therefore, in the sending of the 
 Son the love of God expressed itself, so in the giving of Him up 
 His righteousness did, while the Son represents compassion, in 
 that of His own accord He let Himself be sent and given up 
 to death. Thus is the divine righteousness, as its nature re- 
 quires, thoroughly satisfied, and at the same time a sinful w^orld 
 is saved by love. For the sin condemned in the death of Christ 
 is not the sin of some, but the sin of the world, which the Lord 
 bore in His flesh (i v r fj ca^x/ scil. ocvrov), so that the words 
 are equal to the saying of Peter (1 Pet. ii. 24): ras af^a^Has 
 
 ri/Muv ahrbg avfjvsyjisv £ V r oj <iuj[x,ari avrov It! to ^-jXov. How 
 Christ's suffering and Christ's death can be the suffering and 
 death of the collective whole (so far as they are one with him in 
 faith), became perceptible to us by the idea of the representa- 
 tion (comp. at V. 12, etc.), according to which Christ is not a 
 man, but the man, the real comprisal of the totality. It is diffi- 
 cult, however, to suppose the sin of the collective race in the 
 Holy One, so that they could be condemned in Him ; for it may 
 be conceived, how the Redeemer could be the representative of 
 the holy part of mankind, but it is not so clear, how He was able 
 to represent the unholy also, which nevertheless seems to follow 
 
 * Neander (apost. Zeitalt. B. ii. s. 544, note), explains the Kurix^ivi rh dfia^- 
 r'tetv by: "he took away sin, broke its power," and appeals to John xii. 31, xvi. 
 11, where, however, x^lvnv is quite properly "to condemn." Neander chooses this 
 explanation, because he thinks that he must refer a^vvarov toZ vofjcev to the xarax^/- 
 »{<v r>»v a/xit^Tiecv, which is by no means necessary. 
 
CHAPTER VIII. 3. 267 
 
 from that sentence. As this consideration was not entered into 
 at the passage v. 12, etc., the following notice may perhaps help 
 to remove the difficulty in making such relation perceptible. As 
 there is but one personality in the regenerate man, and yet this 
 one person distinguishes in itself the old and new man, and at 
 the same time acknowledges both as its own, so Christ repre- 
 sented in the divine and human unity of His person the collec- 
 tive members of a race that form one whole. In this race the 
 oppositions of the old and of the new man are set forth as ten- 
 dencies of the good and of the evil, and so far then as Christ 
 represents the inseparable and indivisible sum. He represents also 
 in Himself the tendency of sin. Spiritually, indeed. His holy 
 Being was totally separate from sin, and even bodily he was 
 connected with the world of sin but loosely, since the indwelling 
 Spirit was ever raising even His (roD/^a, while yet his earthly so- 
 journ lasted, from the ramhuffig of the natural life to the do^a of 
 the divine ; but loose as this His bond with the sinful world was 
 in itself, so intimate did it become through that love that fills 
 the being foreign to it with its own being.* And in the power of 
 this love the Lord identified Himself essentially with sinful men, 
 His relation being to them as their new man to the old. As, 
 therefore, the new man in the regenerate thrusts not from him 
 the I, that still bears in it the old man, but even identifies him- 
 self essentially with it, and bears all which the old man brings 
 dragging after it; neither did the Saviour in His sojourn upon 
 earth thrust mankind from Him, for having in it still its old 
 man, the evil tendency; but He penetrated even its inmost 
 centre, identified Himself entirely with it, and though, indeed, 
 
 he bore the whole pressure of the world's sin and all its conse- 
 
 « 
 
 • The mystery of love, which allows a transition into a foreign being, and be- 
 comes like it, without giving up its own nature, is treated of at large by the Apostle 
 Paul under the figure of marriage, especially Ephes. v. 25, etc. By the power of 
 love Christ became entirely as the sinful world, so that He, as Luther's expres- 
 sion is, could say with truth, '* poor sinner that I am," and remained notwithstand- 
 ing, by his nature, specifically separate from sin. He only changed with mankind, 
 took their sin upon Himself, and gave them His righteousness and holiness. The 
 possibility of such an exchange becomes perceptible from the nature of evil. Chiist 
 could not love sinful humanity as His bride, if it were substantially sin ; but as sin 
 only cleaves to it, he loves the germ of the divine left in it. If now sin were a mere /t»j 
 ov, it could not well be seen how the essential union with this divine germ of life 
 could prepare suffering and death for Christ; but if sin is taken to be real disturb- 
 ance of the original harmony of life, such an union must necessarily have had as ■* 
 its consequence, that the Redeemer was smitten by the whole violence of that dis- 
 harmony which sin had generated upon earth. 
 
268 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 quences, even thereby He won His very adversaries, and so con- 
 verted the whole into Himself. Whilst He then first became like 
 mankind, afterwards mankind became like Him ! Accordingly 
 neither the taking upon himself the sin of the world on the part 
 of the Son, nor the laying of the sin upon the Son (as the Lamb 
 of Sacrifice) on the part of the Father, is, consistently with this 
 representation, to be considered as a mere act of the will, which 
 must always retain something arbitrary in it; but as something 
 given with the incarnation itself Then has this event its an- 
 alogy in every act of compassionate love. Whoever would help 
 another panting under a heavy burden, must go under it and 
 bear its whole pressure himself; or, to give an example from 
 spiritual things, whoever would bring the salvation in Christ to 
 the Negroes or any other rude people, must enter into their 
 condition, must bear all the burden of their corrupted sinful 
 nature, must, as it were, first become like them, to form them 
 like himself Thus also does the Lord from heaven lower Him- 
 self into sinful humanity, and bears essentially its sin, with all 
 its consequences, of which death is the heaviest. 
 
 The reference of ver. 8 to the active obedience of Christ can 
 forcibly only be traced in the words. The connexion, namely, 
 is simply this — what the law could not do, Christ can. The 
 law was not able to take away the TtaruKpiiMa, it served rather 
 only to increase it; but Christ takes it away, in that He takes 
 it upon Himself; this comes to pass by the vicarious, atoning 
 sacrifice of His death. It certainly implies as well, that Christ 
 founded absolute righteousness, else the TiardxptfMci would ever again 
 have generated in man ; but that is not the chief thought here^ 
 it is in ver. 4 that the active obedience decidedly appears. The 
 most that can be said is, that as it must constantly be affirmed 
 of the life of Christ, that passive and active obedience every 
 moment penetrate each other in Him, so even here His sur- 
 render into death presupposes the highest activity. There is 
 no necessity for supplying ahrou exactly at b rfj mpxi, but cer- 
 tainly ruv av&pui'jrcav olsav ought not to be supplied. The expres- 
 sion embraces rather the flesh of Christ and of men together. 
 He represented the totality; what, therefore, came to pass in 
 Him was essentially done also to all. However, the pre- 
 vailing idea requires that the sentence should immediately be 
 
 understood as completed thus : (diog xaTexpm rriv d/Mapr/av dv- 
 6pu)rrm h cap\} XpiffroZ. 
 
I 
 
 CHAPTER VIII. 5, 6. 269 
 
 Ver. 4. Now immediately next in order to tlie description 
 of the way of God in sending Christ, follows the delineation of 
 tlie efficacy of Christ; what the law could not, the gospel is 
 able to do, in that it condemns sin, namely, to call forth in man 
 the state of true holiness. Evidently, then, it is not according 
 to the context the Apostle's meaning, that this state is the 
 condition of partaking in Christ's work, but the consequence. 
 He presupposes already the 'rsp/Ta-rsTv xara -Tri/sD^a, and this again 
 the experience of the redeeming power of Christ (vii. 25). But 
 so surely as the Roman Catholic doctrine is wrong, as surely is the 
 exaggeration of the Evangelical interpretation to be rejected, 
 according to which sanctification is considered as quite parted 
 from the forgiveness of sins. According to the genuine doc- 
 trine of the reformers, which rests upon this apostolic passage, 
 sanctification of life necessarily (although at first in germ only) 
 comes with the appropriation of Christ's work, not, however, as 
 stated condition, but rather as consequence of the forgiveness 
 imparted in free grace without condition. 
 
 The 'TrXripw^fi h yumTv distinctly indicates, that sanctification of 
 life is none of man's own work, but that God in Christ perfects 
 it in man; hence 5/ uhrov only need be supplied. We do not 
 fulfil the law, but the work of Christ is our work; by his Spirit 
 He imparts His righteousness and holiness unto us. The per- 
 fection of every individual, therefore, in Christ's life is to be 
 considered as already completed, entirely according to viii. 30 ; 
 as in His death the sin of every individual appears condemned. 
 The expression ^/xa/w^a rod i/o>oy comprises all, which the law 
 can in any respect whatever require; it is the absolute dijcawavvyj 
 considered as command of God. The addition roTg /xri tcutu aapxa 
 X. r. X. is to define the TjfLsTg more distinctly, so that the sense is : 
 the effect of Christ's appearing applies to those only who walk 
 after the Spirit, have therefore experienced in themselves, vii. 
 25. Christ's work indeed is reckoned for all, but it first reveals 
 itself in its sanctifying efficacy, when the man appropriates it 
 personally. 
 
 Ver. 5, 6. This state of xard msu/Ma 'TrspiTureTv Paul now de- 
 scribes more nearly by its contrast. It is that, namely, in which 
 the believer tarries* here below, until his bodily glorification 
 (viii. 11), for if the state be capable of a heightening in itself, 
 yet man can never get beyond it in this earthly life. Its pro- 
 
 " [Ps. XX vii, 15, 16, Prayer-book version] 
 
270 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 per character, however, is best perceived by the xara tra/jxa inpt- 
 '}ra,Ti7y=^ru TTJg (fcc^x.hs <p§ovs7'v^=<p^6vr)fia r^g <fa^jt6g,=iv 6a^yJ that (ver. 
 9), aiid=xard (fa^xa Zr\v (ver. 12). All this is consequent on 
 xara cd^xa ihai, which expression is of like signification with /g- 
 y&vvri[j.ivov |jt rrig dap^og (John iii. 6). The Apostle, certainly, would 
 have no life of vice to be understood by this; but the very state 
 described vii. 14-24, in which the vovg is taken captive by the 
 law of sin in the ca^f . To this the ohb\ ya^ dvmrai (viii. 7), in con- 
 nexion with the ddvvarov rou vofiov (viii. 8), most distinctly points. 
 But then the 'Trs^tTarsTv xara <7rvtv[ija=<p^oviTv ra rov <7rvsv/^aTog=iX>p6- 
 vvjficc rou 'n'vsv/M<x,Tog=iv 'Ttnlifj.ccri sJmi (ver. 9), a,nd='7rvsu/iiaTt ciysadai 
 (ver. 14), (all this is consequent on xara Tviv/xa ihai, which expres- 
 sion is of like signification with yiymniJ^svov U rov Tvsvfiaros, John 
 iii. 6), is the very state described vii. 25, in which the very vovs 
 can serve the divine law, and the ed^^ only remains subjected to 
 the law of sin. The walking after the Spirit does not, therefore, 
 exclude attacks on the part of sin, temptations of the flesh, 
 even single smaller transgressions are not thereby denied (1 
 John ii. 1); but the direction of the whole inner man to God 
 and the victory over sin essentially and in the whole is thereby 
 asserted. The advance in the new man, the development in 
 the walking in the Spirit, is altogether not to be considered as 
 a gradual transition of the old man into the new, or as a con- 
 stantly progressing conversion of the former into the latter ; 
 but as in the sum of mankind, the tares are developed beside 
 the wheat, and good and evil come to their full in parellel rows, 
 so does the old man continue to the last beside the new man ; 
 and it may not be that, the further the spiritual development 
 advances, so much the nearer an approximation takes place 
 between them, but the reverse ; as spirit and flesh lust continu- 
 ally against each other, so must the Christ in us lust more and 
 more against the old Adam. The right conception of this relation 
 is, therefore, of the highest importance, because, according to 
 the light in which the regenerate man beholds it in himself, 
 his whole effort at sanctification is formed. If he seeks gradu- 
 ally to improve the old man in him, and to wash it clean, he 
 not only undertakes a labour utterly in vain, but he is also in 
 constant danger of falling back under the law, as it happened 
 to the Galatians ; nay, this very striving is properly the retreat 
 already beginning. The old man cannot be sanctified, but he 
 
CHAPTER VIII. 5 — 9. 271 
 
 must be crucified, that is, be given unto death in self-denial.^ 
 From the Spirit, therefore, a constant war must be kept up 
 against the fiesh and its lusts. This conflict, however, is but 
 the negative side in the life of the regenerate; the positive 
 activity that furthers his new life in the constant keeping up 
 of intercourse with the originator and the abiding well-spring 
 of this new life. Thereby he receives on and on the msv,(/.a 
 from above, and the man born of grace lives and grows, too, on 
 and on, in grace and by grace. So the man shares rightly law 
 and gospel ; the new man lives in the gospel, the sharpest law 
 is given to the old man by the new, and the man is not without 
 law by not being under the law, but is living with the law of 
 God, of which, certainly, the old man only is in need, for the new 
 man has it in his very nature, he can not sin (1 John iii. 9), as 
 little as the sun can darken. Regarded from a human point of 
 view, moreover, the possibility of apostacy remains still for 
 every regenerate man upon every standard of development, 
 even upon the highest, that is, that the new man may be 
 thrust aside by the old ; but just as decidedly, we must say, 
 that, regarded from the divine point of view, it is impossible for 
 the elect of God to be overpowered by sin. Were it possible, 
 namely, with one, it would be so with all, and then God's plans 
 would be dependent upon man's fidelity ; it might happen that 
 the whole world fell away. This is, of course, inconceivable, 
 and impossible (Matt. xxiv. 24) ! Hence, as in Christ's temp- 
 tation, freedom and necessity penetrate each other in the re- 
 generate ; their relation will be treated more at large at chap. 
 ix. and xi. 
 
 In the (ppovuv, (ppovrif/^a, the constant direction of the whole inward 
 being towards something is expressed; this alone determines 
 the true constitution of the man. (Comp. my opusc. theol. p. 
 159.) At viii. 6, comp. the parallel, vi. 23, where ^w^ stands 
 alone, while here g/>)jvjj is united with it. 
 
 Ver. 6-8. The reason why carnal-mindedness works death, is 
 no other than this; because this disposition separates from God 
 (the Fountain of Life). That which is akin to Him alone can 
 please the Holy One, but the carnal mind is unable to generate 
 
 • In this spiritual death of the old man the law of the Old Testament keeps its 
 full right, when it requires the death of the sinner. But the gracious and righte. 
 ous God so fulfils His strict justice, that He makes life itself the killer, so that he 
 who dies in the old man first finds in this very death the true life. 
 
272 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 anything well-pleasing to God; even its good works aie an 
 abomination to Him, because they come from impure, selfish 
 motives. No one, however, can set himself free from himself, 
 a higher love must come, that attracts him more than his own 
 I. The notion of 'ix^pa must not be softened. The carnal man 
 hates God, for he sees in Him the robber only of his lust; and 
 God hates him according to His holiness; the two are tho- 
 roughly and irreconcilably against each other. But so God 
 hates not man as such. He loves him rather, but He hates the 
 sin in him. This holy hatred passes to the regenerate; he hates 
 in himself and others sin and carnal-mindedness, without hating 
 men. 
 
 The inability in the vovg to submit to the divine law (viii. 8), 
 is the cause of the conflict (vii. 23), and so of the want of peace. 
 The ability to fulfil the law (viii. 4) God is well pleased in, as 
 His own work, and it gives the soul the taste of peace with 
 God. Ver. 8, bs forms no antithesis, but only carries on the same 
 thought. 
 
 Ver. 9. Here, then, the Apostle makes the transition to address 
 his readers, whom he naturally treats as regenerate, who walk 
 after the Spirit. For if h'mp seems to express a doubt, it is only 
 seeming, as it is not to be construed here like si modo, but as 
 siquidem, as sure and certain presupposition. (Comp. thereon 
 Hartung s Partikellehre, part i. p. 827, etc., 844, etc., where the 
 relation of rsg to ys in its fundamental meaning is excellently 
 brought out.) The Being of the Spirit in the believer is conceived 
 as an oixsTv of Him, like vii. 1 8, where the oUcTu of sin in the flesh 
 was spoken of The divine Spirit dwells, of course, in that part 
 of human nature most kindred to Him, in the cri/gD/xa or voug. The 
 o/xg/v, however, is opposed to that fleeting passage and breathing- 
 through of the Spirit, as it appears in the 0. T. in the prophets, 
 for which the word <psp£(fdai is used (2 Pet. i. 21), as contrast to 
 the ayiG^ai of the N. T. (ver. 14, Gal. v. 18), by which the 
 constant, unbroken operation of the indwelling Spirit is signi- 
 fied, the life of Christ in us, Gal. ii. 20. The o/xs/v is there- 
 fore like the ^asve/v of John (comp. at John i. 33, in the comm.) 
 and the 'iyjiv 'TtviZfija, which occurs in the verse before us. In the 
 latter expression, the man appears as though he were the pos- 
 sessor and governor of the Spirit, that yet, however, possesses 
 him, and governs his inmost being, by which idea the Unv 
 
CHAPTER VIII. 10, n. 273 
 
 auroy at the end of the verse is to be explained ; to be Christ's^ 
 namely, is to be a member of Him, to be governed, guided by 
 Him. The opposite would be ihai dia(36Xov, comp. at John viii. 
 44. But in fact the man also possesses the Spirit within him 
 (as the husband indeed is the lord of the wife, but yet the wife 
 also possesses the husband), in so far, namely, as he may 
 drive Him away by unfaithfulness, nay, in so far as he has the 
 privilege of conducting this Spirit, according to the intended 
 aim (1 Cor. xiv. 82). The words s/ ds ng ^vsD/Aa Xpterou ovx 'iyzt 
 point to this possibility of apostacy, for the question here can- 
 not be of entire unbelievers; either, therefore, the recreant must 
 be meant, or at least those who are in conflict indeed against 
 sin, but have not yet experienced the redeeming power of 
 Christ (vii. 25). At all events the words are to contain the 
 warning, that the benefits of Christ are then only to be appro- 
 priated when a man is conscious by faith, and the Spirit 
 received in faith, of being a member in the body of Christ. The 
 possession of this Spirit of Christ, however, is naturally not to 
 be measured according to the vcievQ feeling (the agreeable sensa- 
 tion of the nearness of God, of comfort, of spiritual joy), for 
 this is too fleeting, and the state of grace may be entirely un- 
 impaired, even in great barrenness and dryness,* nay, in the 
 progress of the inward life, the sweet sensations of the first 
 young love are almost ever disappearing, but according to its 
 real effects snidfr-uits. If the man observes not these in him- 
 self, and temptations at the same time increase and strengthen, 
 then at all events he is in a suspicious, assaulted state. 
 
 It is to be observed that the Apostle, from ver. 8-1 1, uses ds 
 six times one after the other. The expressions ^vsD/Aa Qsov and 
 XpigTov alternate (comp., besides, ver. 11, 14); vnvfia aytov might 
 have been said (comp. ver. 1 6). For Father, Son, and Spirit 
 are 0/?e,+ although not One Person ;% " I am in the Father and 
 the Father is in me," saith the Lord. (Comp. the Commentary 
 at John X. 30, xiv. 10). The background of the whole repre- 
 sentation before the soul of the Apostle is, that whosoever is 
 not Christ's belongs to the kingdom of darkness. Independent 
 man cannot be, according to his whole constitution; he cannot 
 stand between light and darkness ; he must ever incline to the 
 one or the other. (Comp. at John viii. 44.) 
 
 * [Ps. Ixiii. 2, P. B. version.] f [Bins, i'l/] % [Einer, Js-"] 
 
 S 
 
274 EPISTLE TO THE llOMANS. 
 
 Ver. 10, 11. The Apostle, in a conclusion, points at last to 
 the highest stage of the perfection of the individual life, to the 
 glorification of the body. As it was said in Paradise, " if thou 
 eatest of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt 
 surely die,'' so does the enjoyment of the true tree of life, of 
 Christ, bring again to perfect life, even of the body.* This 
 passage has its commentary in John vi., where Christ represents 
 himself as the ^u^ in all respects, even of the body. Whatever, 
 therefore, at the transition into the state of regeneration (vii. 
 25) was left behind, the dovXsusiv rfj crapKi vo/lluj dfj^apua?, is here 
 likewise considered as overcome; even the body has experience 
 of redemption (viii. 23). As ffu/^a stands here instead of the 
 former (rdp^, it is clear that the Apostle means decidedly the 
 material side of human existence, of course, however, in union 
 with the whole psychical life, without which there is neither 
 cu/jLu nor <rdp^, but x^sas". But if the cuj/j^a is here called vsxpov, it 
 is self-evident that this expression is not to signify absolute 
 deadness, for it is intended to describe the very living body in 
 its natural constitution; it is to be taken rather as d/Mapria vsxpd, 
 vii. 8. The d/jbapria is called dead, because it does not yet express 
 and make itself known in its true nature, so neither does the 
 body, which, according to its original destination, is something 
 far more glorious than it now appears. Hence it cannot be said 
 that vsK^og is &vrir6s; the latter expression is used in its proper 
 physical sense, according to which the living can only be mortal; 
 but the former is used in a figurative sense. Therefore the 
 passage would be entirely perverted, if, instead of vixpov, hvirov 
 should be put. For this sinful state certainly the deadness of 
 the body is so far good, as it lessens the susceptibility for the 
 disturbing and painful impressions of the outward world (where- 
 fore the nobler bodily nature of Christ must have enhanced His 
 suffering), but it remains still a most imperfect state, which 
 must be overcome. A sure pledge, then, for the glorification of a 
 man's own body is given by the consciousness of that awakening 
 
 * [Leiblichkeit.] De Wette's remark ad loc. is pertinent: "An inward hodily- 
 spirituol process is here spoken of, not an e"vent occurring from without, as the re- 
 surrection is usually understood." Even so; without this conception the scriptural 
 docti'ine of the bodily glorification, which is constantly represented as going on 
 already here below (comp. especially at 2 Cor. iv. 10, 1 1), would be thoroughly un- 
 intelligible. But this life of bodily glorification forming itself in gradual process, 
 comes in many as if by a flash of lightning, at once into appearance (1 Cor. xv. 
 52), and so is the resurrection of the dtad represented. 
 
CHAPTER VIII. 10, 11. 275 
 
 power dwelling in the Spirit of God, which has verified itself in 
 the waking of Christ from the dead. It may yet be remarked, 
 that the Apostle represents the resurrection as though it were 
 merely something imparted to the holy, as though there were 
 no resurrection of the wicked. It might certainly be said here, 
 that Paul is treating only of the course of the development of the 
 faithful, that the wicked are out of the question; but by the 
 similar representation, 1 Cor. xv. 22, where the glance of the 
 Apostle seems to comprehend all men, and by the circumstance, 
 that he never makes mention of the resurrection of the wicked, 
 and once only of eternal damnation (2 Thess. i. 9), the matter 
 becomes more difficult. The difficulty, however, must be reserved 
 for further discussion at the passage adduced from the Epistle 
 to the Corinthians. 
 
 Upon the doctrine of the glorified body comp. more particularly 
 at 1 Cor. XV., 2 Cor. v. It was preliminarily spoken of at John 
 vi., and at the history of the resurrection. By the readings ^wi/, 
 ^fi, the contrast to vsKpov is intended to be more distinctly shewn; 
 for that very reason, however, ^w^ is surely the original reading. 
 A/* ufMapTia? and 5/d 5/xa/o<n>i/»jg might have been said; but the 
 accusative brings forward not so much the means as the pre- 
 sence, " on account of the sin present in the body, on account 
 of the righteousness communicated by the vovg/' — A/xaioavvv} is 
 here also the state of dlKuiov sJmi, the diKaiud/jvoti. — ZmvonTv is used 
 of the bodily awakening according to 1 Cor. xv. 22. At the 
 close of ver. 11, also the text rec. has the lighter reading of did 
 c. genit. D.E.F.G., however, several translations, and many of 
 the Fathers, have the accusative. Lachmann has decided for the 
 usual reading, and so Knapp has; Griesbach, Koppe, Riickert, 
 Reiche, on the other hand decide for the accusative. This I 
 too hold as more appropriate, but not so much because I con- 
 sider, as Reiche does, that the genitive has arisen from dogmatic 
 principles (in order to represent the Holy Ghost as operating 
 more independently), but simply for the sake of the context, in 
 connexion with the stronger critical authorities, and because by 
 taking the genitive the sense appears lightened. The accusa- 
 tive represents the indwelling of the Spirit as pledge of the glori- 
 fication which shall be of the body; and that enters best into 
 the train of PauVs ideas. 'Evo/xsw is found besides at 2 Cor. vi. 
 16, Col. iii. 16, of the spiritual penetrating of the human spirit 
 
276 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 by the divine. All the material is here naturally to be excluded, 
 but the real nevertheless to be maintained; such expressions are 
 not to be reduced to mere Oriental phrases, since they have life 
 and being. As surely as the spirit is immaterial, yet really 
 dwells in the material body, so surely does the Divine Spirit 
 penetrate and unite with the human, without annulling His es- 
 sence, or confounding His inward law^s; for the human spirit is 
 the very organ for the divine, and that is a perverse state (sin) 
 if He is not working in it. We have too little knowledge of the 
 substance of the spirit to get a clear insight into such penetra- 
 tion of spirit by Spirit, meanwhile nature oiFers analogies not to 
 be rejected in the material, for instance, the penetration of electric 
 or magnetic streams. 
 
 . Ver. 12, 13. These verses seem to interrupt the chain of the 
 discourse, which proceeds again, in strict connexion with the 
 foregoing part, at ver. 14. They give the impression of an onset 
 to a parsenesis, which is not completely carried out. A very 
 strict connexion, however, might result if the /j.sX'ksrs dmdvrigxsiv 
 and t^riffsffh w^ere only definitely referred to the glorification of 
 the body, so that the sense would be formed as follows: "Since 
 such glory (of bodily glorification) awaits us, we are so much the 
 more obliged to live according to the spirit, that we may not 
 lose such glorification, but receive it.'' Then " the mortifying 
 the deeds of the body'' would very fitly denote the advancing 
 bodily sanctification, which is considered as means to bodily 
 glorification. And in the dying and living, not merely the gene- 
 ral states of misery and happiness would be indicated (which, 
 according to the special glorification of the body, would be 
 something very feeble), but the obtaining and losing this grace 
 of bodily glorification be made prominent. Now that ^fjv should 
 signify glorification, can make no difficulty, for this is in fact the 
 summit oflife^ and therefore, at John vi. 40, and frequently tun)) 
 a/wv/ov 'ixiiv is used in equal signification with the capacity of 
 being raised up at the last day. It might, however, appear more 
 difficult, that (j/iKkin airodvritsxitv should be: "Ye will not obtain 
 the resurrection." Notwithstanding if it be considered, that at 
 John vi. 50 /aj^ acro^avs/t/ also is used in equal signification with 
 the avdcraaig h rfj hy^drri ri/nspcc, consequently, that dying is taken 
 equal to not attaining to the resurrection, and that, further, the 
 Apostle supposed the time of our Lord's coming again to be 
 
I 
 
 I 
 
 CHAPTER VIII. 14, 15. 277 
 
 near, and was hoping still to be while in the body clothed upon 
 (2 Cor. V. 2, etc.); then the bodily dying of the carnal may, 
 without hesitation, be taken synonymously with the loss of 
 bodily glorification, and it cannot here be conceived otherwise, 
 if a strict connexion is to unite this verse with what precedes 
 and follows. The mere general observation, that those who 
 walk after the flesh die, would be, according to the special 
 thoughts immediately preceding and following, altogether too 
 feeble, and nothing but a repetition of what was said at viii. 6, etc. 
 
 Comp. upon (xpuXirri? at i. 1 4. The condition of debtors has 
 reference to the union entered into with Christ. (Comp. vi. 
 18.) The cr^d^si? denotes here the individual sinful tendencies 
 of the old man, his members, as it were, which must be crucified 
 (Gral. V. 24). The life of the regenerate, therefore, as already 
 observed, is to be a gradual crucifying of the old man, not a bet- 
 tering of it ; the holy, but granted life, is in the new man only. 
 So the man becomes perfect, and yet continues poor in humility, 
 for what he has is G-od's work, not his property. The reading 
 ffa^Ttog is seemingly more conformable to usage than (fdjf^arog, but 
 on that very account it is certainly a mere correction. Paul 
 uses ffufji^a. also in such combinations; comp. vii. 24. 
 
 Ver. 14, 15. Most unconstrainedly now, after the proposed 
 acceptation of the words of the preceding verse, the subject con- 
 tinues. The mortifying of the deeds of the flesh is a being led 
 by the Spirit, and therefore not (like the former striving de- 
 scribed vii. ] 4-24) an anxious task of law, but a working in 
 joyous spirit, as if owning the cause, as the sons of the house 
 work for themselves in their Father's business. We do not deny 
 ourselves, in order to be saved thereby, but because we are saved 
 in hope by grace. The communion in the pains of the Son of 
 Grod xar Igo^jjy, secures then, too, the communion in His glory, 
 that is, in the entire perfection, the glorification even of the 
 body (viii. 17-23). Those who are born of the flesh are flesh, 
 those born of the Spirit are spirit (John iii. 6). All 'n-vsvfJt'arixo/ 
 therefore, in the true sense of the word, are children of God, of 
 the absolute tvsu/hoi. (John iv. 24). Thus Paul arrives quite con- 
 sistently at the idea of vki &sou, which he maintains as the thread 
 of his argum.ent until ver. 1 7, and still pursues in the following 
 weighty section (from viii. 1 8). The ciysffdai 'irnhfLan Qiov, ac- 
 cordingly, is not to be understood of the influence of a foreign 
 
278 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 power, giving as it were its impulse from without, but it is to 
 be considered as the element of life, as deciding the tone of 
 character and being, so that the Spirit of God generates also, 
 where He works, a higher, heavenly consciousness, a man of 
 God, a son of God.* This sonship of God, however, men receive 
 merely as one derived from the original Son, the Logos, the (movo- 
 yzvYji and TpMToroMg (viii. 29). The difference of ayic&ai (Gal. v. 
 18) and (pspsedat (2 Pet. i. 21) was spoken of above at ver. 9. 
 But here Paul is not contrasting the abiding of the Spirit's 
 operation in the N. T. to its alternation in the Old, but bondage 
 to freedom or sonship. In the 0. T., namely, God meets man 
 as the holy, righteous principle, foreign to the sinner, living 
 outward to mankind, opposing to him His strict requirements 
 and awakening the (pojSos rou @sou, the beginning of Wisdom (Ps. 
 cxi. 10); in the N. T., on the contrary, God appears in Christ 
 most intimately connected and allied with mankind, awakening 
 therefore that love, which in its perfection drives away all fear 
 (1 John iv. 18), and not only requires, but gives also what it 
 requires. But God gives nothing of less value than His own 
 being and nature, because nothing is enough for Him, but Him- 
 self; therefore is the state of freedom in love identical with son- 
 ship. As spirit born of Spirit, therefore, the faithful of the N. 
 T. are greater than the greatest that are born of women (Matt, 
 xi. 11), children, namely, of the heavenly mother, the Jerusalem 
 above (Gal. iv. 26). 
 
 Upon v'/hg 0£ov comp. the observations at Luke i. S5. The 
 phrase differs from t&jcvov 0. (v. 16, 21) only by expressing more 
 exactly the developed consciousness of being a son, while rsxvov 
 denotes only the origin itself. The latter name, therefore, does 
 not occur as applied to Christ. The poor reduction of the state 
 of being God's children to the favourable inclination of God to- 
 wards the faithful is thoroughl}'- untenable; such inclination is 
 to be considered as mere consequence of the essential transforma- 
 tion, the birth from the Spirit ; God loves the faithful, because 
 He has made them accepted in the Beloved (Ephes. i. 6). E/'j 
 ayaTTjv should be contrasted to s/V ^63ov, but the saying Abba is 
 to be construed as the very expression of love. The reading dst- 
 X/as came perhaps into the text merely from the parallel of 2 
 
 • Comp. as parallel the expression of Olympiodor (Comm. in Plat. Alcib. p. 123, 
 edit. Creuzer): K^ttTTtv r» fiiifiv uyirftxi ^ v^' tavrov. 
 
I 
 
 I 
 
 CHAPTER VIII. 16. 279 
 
 Tim. i. 7, where mtu/jjcc detX/as is opposed to the '7rvsv,(iu dwdfieui 
 xai ayd'Trrtg. liuXiv is to be connected with elg ipo^ov, the omission 
 of the word in some unimportant Codd. arises perhaps from the 
 false application of it to sXd(3sTt^ which must have made oraX/y 
 appear strange, because no actual communication of the Spirit 
 is spoken of in the 0. T. The word vkkcia is used only by Paul 
 (Rom. viii. 23, ix. 4; Gal. iv. 5; Ephes. i. 5). It signifies ac- 
 ceptance to the state of children, and presupposes, therefore, 
 that those accepted had not been children. Hence it is clear 
 that the expression has no reference to physical existence, by 
 which all natural men also are children of God, but to the in- 
 ward life only. In reference to this, natural men are without 
 God in the world, strangers and enemies to Him (Ephes. ii. 
 12); in Christ they are first ordained to the state of children 
 (Ephes. i. 5). The expression of a child's consciousness is 
 the cry of Abba, which naturally is only to be understood 
 of the true expression of the inward life. 'A/3/3a, ^^Ib^j Chald. 
 
 T — 
 
 form of ^^, The o •rar^^ is the Hebrew vocative, wherefore the 
 conjecture, « -rar^^, is untenable. The choice of the Chaldaic 
 word is not to be referred to the prayer of Christ (Mark xiv. 36), 
 as Reiciie thinks, nor with Winer (at Gal. iv. 6), to be explained 
 from the circumstance that well-known prayers of the Jews 
 began so ; but to be derived from the form of the word. Abba, 
 like papa, can be spoken by the mouth even of the babbling 
 child, and properly, therefore, characterizes genuine child-like 
 disposition and manner. 
 
 Ver. 16. In this state of being children, then, the witness of 
 our own spirit with that of the divine Spirit penetrate each other 
 in a peculiar manner. The one that properly gives witness in 
 this testimonium spiritus is the divine Spirit; the human spirit 
 is more the receiver of the witness from Him, as it is said : Spirit 
 witnesseth that Spirit is truth (1 John v. 6); that is, the Spirit 
 needs no witness but Himself for His truth. He has it wholly in 
 Himself ; as the light is not and cannot be testified by ought 
 but by itself. But as the physical light needs an eye, a faculty 
 of receptivity, in order to be perceived, and as this is itself light, 
 so is the spiritual light, the vov? (the human <7rnZfia) the eye for 
 the divine Spirit. It was observed before (at ver. 9) that this 
 witness of the Spirit is not to be placed merely in the feeling 
 (1 John iii. 19), but His whole inward and outward efficacy must 
 
280 EPISTLE TO THE KOMANS. 
 
 be taken together; for instance, His comfort, His incitement to 
 prayer. His censure of sin, His impulse to works of love, to wit- 
 ness before the world, and such like more. Upon the founda- 
 tion of this immediate testimony of the Holy Spirit, all the 
 regenerate man's conviction of Christ and His work finally rests. 
 For the faith in the Scripture itself has its basis upon this 
 experience of the divinity of the principle which it promises, 
 and which flows into the believer while he is occupied with it. 
 This passage is, besides, important as one of the most striking 
 in which the human spirit is represented as not in and hy itself 
 identical with the Divine.* We cannot certainly conceive the 
 difference as a specific one; as image of God, man must be in his 
 spirit kindred to the Divine (Acts xvii. 28, 29). But the human 
 spirit may be defiled by sin (2 Cor. vii. 1), the Divine not; He 
 may be grieved only (Ephes. iv. 30), or driven away ; but as the 
 absolute principle of holiness. He is himself incapable of spot. 
 By communication of this highest principle of all life, man 
 therefore first becomes one spirit with the Lord Himself, as it 
 is said 1 Cor. vi. 17. (sy/^/Aa^rugg/i/ here, as at ii. 15, is not of the 
 same import with the simple verb; a twofold witness rather is 
 here spoken of, that actually indeed blends again to one, wherein, 
 however, a positive and a negative side may be distinguished.) 
 Moreover, the expresssions 'rrvsufia dovXslaSj -rvgD/^a utohffiag are not 
 to be taken as though the Apostle assumed a double 'jrnvficc, or 
 a twofold form of the operation of the spirit, one of which effects 
 a servile, the other a filial mind ; nor is 'xviZfia to be taken sub- 
 jectively in the meaning " mindedness ;" the idea is rather to 
 be understood thus : We have received the One true Spirit, this 
 Spirit leaves us not in a state of bondage, nor calls forth such a 
 state again, but He begets a filial consciousness. For the state of 
 bondage and fear is, not that of castaways, but subordinate only 
 to that of children ; the utterly dead man alone is without fear 
 and without the feeling of bondage (vii. 9); with the awakening 
 (vii. 10-24), fear begins ; with the regeneration (vii. 25, etc.), 
 love. 
 
 Ver. 17. The idea of the state of children leads the Apostle, 
 in conclusion, to the conception of 5oga as an inheritance, the 
 
 * The assertion of the identity of the human and divine spirit would lead to the 
 consciousness of God in man being the consciousness of God of Himself, which is 
 thoroughly unscriptural. Christ himself prays to the God without him, to the 
 Father in Heaven! 
 
CHAPTER VIII. 18—39. 281 
 
 proper possessor of which, indeed, the Only-begotten is, but in 
 which His brethren (ver. 29) are to have share. All that glory, 
 therefore, which the Lord from eternity had with the Father, 
 and which he took possession of again after his return to the 
 Father (John xvii. 22) is imparted to the faithful also (Rev. iii. 
 21). The condition, however, presupposed as known and acknow- 
 ledged, of participation in the glory of Christ, is the previous par- 
 ticipation in His sufferings, that is, in the conflict with sin in 
 ourselves and in the world, whereby alone the new man attains 
 to the full growth in God. Even so are sufferings represented 
 as the condition of participation in glory, in the passages Col, 
 iii. 4; 2 Tim. ii. 12; 1 Pet. iv. 13 ; not as though for the extra- 
 ordinary glory something extraordinary also must be endured, 
 as equivalent, but in so far as the old man must be crucified 
 with Christ, since the new man only is and can be capable of 
 the reception and the thankful enjoyment of the glory to come. 
 (Comp. 1 Pet. iv. 1.) Upon the idea of KXrjpovofLog, comp. more 
 particularly at Gal. iv. 1, etc. 
 
 E/Vgf» has the signification 5z modo, "provided that;" comp. at 
 ver. 9 and at 2 Cor. v. 3. ^vfji.'?rdff^u is found besides at I Cor. 
 xii. 26. ^vvdo^d^effdat does not occur again in the N. T. 
 
 § 13. OF THE PERFECTION OF THE WHOLE CREATION WITH THE 
 CHILDREN OF GOD. 
 
 (VIII. 18-39.) 
 
 With a very free and beautiful turn, the Apostle leads over 
 from the idea of the suffering of the faithful with Christ to a de- 
 scription of the glory which awaits them. The peculiar character 
 of this glory is in its being a perfection of the individual together 
 with the whole. Thus the following statement gives the reason 
 why the individual cannot alone attain to bodily glorification ; 
 every individual, namely, is only part and member of the whole, 
 and as one member of the body cannot, without disturbance in 
 its harmony, be completed alone, neither can the individual 
 believer without the totality. Here below, therefore, the life of 
 the believer is a constant walking in hope; to behold what is 
 hoped for is not for this world. Only the Lord himself was 
 excepted from this law, because He was Himself the whole, in 
 
282 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 that He essentially included in Himself the totality of the life 
 which unfolded from Him, as the germ does the whole tree to be 
 developed from it. Sufferings appear therefore here (albeit they 
 remain still consequent on sin, without which every develop- 
 ment might have gone on without disturbances and distractions) 
 as a blessing, as a means to perfection; and it is naturally to be 
 understood that this is not meant of self-made sufferings — for 
 instance, of false ascetic exercises and denials of a man's own 
 choosing — but of such only as the Lord himself sees good to lay 
 upon him. If now the perfection of the individual were at- 
 tached in the passage before us merely to the perfection of the 
 whole Church, or even of the whole human race, doubtless far 
 fewer difficulties would have been found in it; but the Apostle 
 extends his look over the whole creation, and this has not un- 
 frequently been thought too bold an idea. It has been attempted, 
 therefore, to say nothing of the utterly unfit conceptions which 
 at one time have suggested angels, at another animals, at 
 another the dead (corap. thereon Reiche's excellent observations 
 in his comm. B. ii,, S. 215, etc.), gradually to narrow the mighty 
 compass of the Pauline contemplation, according as the [ex- 
 positor's] particular view was more or less stinted. Now Kriaig 
 was to mean Christians merely, then only a part at most of 
 Christendom, and that either Jew or Heathen-Christians; then 
 again the expression was to apply to the people Israel, or to the 
 Heathen magistracy; then it was extended to the whole Heathen 
 world, or to the whole of ma^ikind. The wider the reference is 
 made, the nearer naturally it comes to the truth, notwithstand- 
 ing the most comprehensive of the explanations adduced, that 
 of the whole of mankind, is not sufficient, since the Apostle spans 
 with one mighty glance the whole cy^eation in all its parts. That 
 even the inanimate creation was not excluded from his thought, 
 has been set forth so with one consent, and with such striking 
 reasons, by the latest interpreters, (by Tholuck, Stier, Riickert, 
 Reiche, Usteri, Sclmeckenburger,* Kollner), that I feel excused 
 from the repetition of those reasons, with leave to refer to the 
 well-known writings of these learned men, (especially to Reich e's 
 copious discussion upon this passage, compared with his two 
 
 ■ Comp. Schneckenburger's Beitr. S. 118, etc., and Ullman's and Umbreit's 
 Studien Jahrg. 1832. H. 4, S 835, etc. Of Usteri the 4th Edit, of the Paul. Lehr- 
 begr. appendix II. In the three first edilions he explains ktiitk of mankind. 
 
CHAPTER VIII. 18 — 39. 283 
 
 Festprograms of 1830 and 1832.) Meanwhile, this remarkable 
 and important idea of glorification to be looked for of the whole 
 creation, demands still a somewhat more exact consideration, to 
 which we hope to contribute by the following reflections.* The 
 question then is, first of all, how far the Apostle, if he would 
 speak of inanimate and unconscious nature, can ascribe to it a 
 waiting, yearning, and groaning for the revelation of the chil- 
 dren of Grod? Just because this did not seem probable, even 
 men, who were not averse from the idea of a glorification of 
 nature in itself, have believed themselves forbidden to find it 
 here; and, therefore, explained the xrian of the heathen world, 
 or of all men apart from Christianity, who are longing yet to 
 become partakers of the salvation in Christ. Or, in referring 
 the TtriGigio inanimate nature, its representation as of a waiting, 
 yearning creature, has been conceived merely as allegory, for 
 which even Reiche still decides; but in no way can we accede to 
 this latter view. Holy Scripture throughout conceives nature, 
 in its relation to the world of spirits, like the human body in its 
 relation to the soul and spirit, as filled and borne by their living 
 breath. As, therefore, in the individual, the spiritual life 
 operates either with a distracting or glorifying effect upon the 
 bodily substance, so does the life of the regenerate, considered 
 as a whole, upon the totality of the creation. The conscious life 
 in man is but the bloom of the life that sways in the sum of the 
 creation. If we observe, then, the unconscious creation more 
 narrowly, we must acknowledge that an impulse to glorification, 
 a yearning for perfection, appears in it also.-|* The whole bent of 
 the plant urges it to bring all its powers to perfection in the blos- 
 som and the fruit, and if checked by circumstances in its develop- 
 
 * The Greek fathers explained the passage, almost without exception, of the 
 creation. Augustine's Polemics against the Manichees, for whose hylozoistic view 
 of the world this passage must naturally have been very welcome, induced him to 
 consider it merely of the extra-Christian part of mankind, and his influence in the 
 middle ages decided many to follow this view. The reformers first unanimously 
 returned to the reference of the kt'io-h to the whole creation, for which even Grotius, 
 too, determined. The Socinians and Arminians again adduced other acceptations, 
 which, since the last century, many Protestants followed. The latest commentators 
 upon the epistle since Tholuck have returned, notwithstanding, to the ancient ex- 
 planation; only many of them, even Tholuck, Reiche, Meyer, de Wette, err from the 
 truth in this respect, that they would altogether capriciously have the extra-Chris- 
 tian men excluded from the Krlffn. Kollner has given quite the right interpretation, 
 as also Krabbe has. (Of Sin, p . 11 5, 1 84.) 
 
 t Beautifully, says Schubert (Handb. der Kosmol. Niirnberg. 1823. p. 5): 
 *' Even in the things of the material world which surrounds us, there is an element 
 
284 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 ment — for instance, by want of light — an effort of all its powers 
 may be perceived to surpass the hindrances, and outset the default; 
 so that a plant often presses through narrow clefts to get at the 
 element of life, and produce its bloom. The same impulse for glo- 
 rification shows itself also in the animal. In this impulse of life 
 that creates life again, the life enclosed in the animal would 
 press as if beyond itself, but naturally can produce nothing 
 better than what itself contains. Inasmuch, however, as the 
 animal sensibly suffers from the sin of men, the yearning and 
 waiting for redemption is expressed far more distinctly and 
 perceptibly in it ; * the eye of a suffering or dying animal 
 speaks a language to which every feeling mind is sensible; it 
 sighs and yearns for redemption, or rather the general life in it 
 yearns to get free from its confinement. The waiting and 
 yearning of the creature, therefore, cannot possibly be admitted 
 to be mere allegory, neither is there any obvious reason, after 
 what has been said, to think it applicable only to men living 
 out of the Christian principle. These certainly are not to be 
 considered as excluded, for, as the children of God (ver. 19) 
 can only be those regenerate by the Spirit of Christ, there 
 would be a total silence (if the xr/V/g were to signify the inani- 
 mate creation exclusive of men) upon the ultimate bringing in 
 of the extra-christian world, nay, it would be almost denied, 
 which in every respect is untenable. It is also entirely indemon- 
 strable, that xri6t? signifies the creation without man. The child- 
 ren of God, on the contrary, may be considered as separated from 
 the general creation, and are here expressly distinguished by the 
 Apostle, because they form, as it were, a new creation different 
 from the old. If it should be said, however, that the Apostle 
 does mean by these children of God all mankind, so far, namely, 
 as it is destined to be received into the community of Christ ; 
 then the men who lived before Christ would still be omitted; or 
 supposing them to be included as children of God, (but which 
 
 of life, a yearning of what is bound, which, like that of the Memnon-statiie, uncon- 
 sciously sends forth symphony, when the ray touches it from above." The Genevese 
 philosopher, Bonnet, represents the striving of nature after a more perfect state in 
 his palingenesie philosophique. 
 
 • Gdthe's correspondence with a child affords proof of how a spirited contem- 
 plation of nature still leads to this apostolic idea. Bettina writes (B. i. S. 38): 
 " When I stand all alone at night in open nature, I feel as though it were a spirit 
 and begged redemption of me. Often have I had the sensation as if nature, in 
 VA ailing sadness, entreated something of me, so that, not to understand what she 
 longed for, cut through my vex'y heart." 
 
CHAPTER viri. 18 — 39. 285 
 
 ver. 23 decidedly contradicts, since tlie first fruits of the Spirit 
 cannot possibly be ascribed to them), then thus much, at least, 
 must be allowed, that men, as much and as far as they yet be- 
 long to the old life, are also reckoned as xr/c/g, for, ver. 23, the 
 same yearning is mentioned of the children of God, as ver. 19 is 
 ascribed to the creature. The separation, therefore, does not 
 admit of being so much outwardly as inwardly effected; the 
 xria/g is everywhere, even in man, in the regenerate himself, so 
 far as the transforming Spirit of Christ has not yet wrought his 
 change; but, at all events, mankind out of Christianity cannot 
 be considered as excluded from the xrlatg* It would be much 
 easier, and far more natural, if the xrlgig were to be understood 
 only of men, who are still ever the nearest object of redemp- 
 tion, exclusive of the inanimate world; an acceptation of the 
 passage, which, on the whole, is the only one that can have a 
 place in our consideration, beside the explanation proposed by 
 us. But 1, it is against this that all men cannot be meant by 
 xT/ffig here, since the regenerate as such (ver. 19) are expressly 
 excepted from it, but in no way are they treated as part of the 
 xr/V/sr. Then 2, the simple thought, that there is a yearning for 
 redemption in the men, who are yet far from the covenants of 
 the divine promise, would clearly have been expressed quite 
 differently from the tone of this passage. Lastly, 3, the idea 
 of a glorification of the universe does not at all belong to the 
 Apostle alone, but it pervades the whole scripture ; it is, there- 
 fore, in thorough keeping with the connexion of the whole 
 passage, which advances from the individual to the whole, for 
 Paul to demonstrate, how, with the perfecting of the Church of 
 Christ, the world itself will receive its perfection.-]- Accord- 
 
 * For the acceptation that Paul, in this passage, would have merely unconscious 
 nature, excluding unconverted men, to be understood by the expression xria-is, the 
 passage, ver. 21, Ka) a,vTvt h xrtffti seems to speak. The Apostle has most cer- 
 tainly conceived the life of nature in its extreme form, as unconscious, nay, as life- 
 less nature; but it does not follow that he did not conceive the natural men the ^jj 
 ovTis (Rom. iv. 17), from whom true men are yet to be boi'n, as grown with the 
 most remote formations of the natural -life. The -reitrcc fi Kriim, ver. 22, speaks 
 decidedly for this, and the manner in which the ktio-h is described as willing and 
 longing, for which the supposition of a mere personification is not sufficient. 
 
 f Rosencranz, in his Dissertatio de corrupto naturae statu, (Regiom. 1834), de- 
 nies altogether the (Haturbance of the harmony of life in unconscious nature ; but 
 to say nothing at all of the clear declarations of Holy Scripture thereon, this ac- 
 ceptation, since the actually apparent monstrous disharmonies in nature cannot be 
 denied, would lead, consistently carried out, to Lucretian doubts in God's love and 
 wisdom. Comp. Lucret. de natur. ser. v. 196, etc., where it is said: "Ausimcon- 
 firmare, nequaquara nobis divinitus esse paratam naturara i*erum, tanta stat prae- 
 dita culpa.'* 
 
286 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 ingly, then, we must say, that Paul contrasts Christ, and the 
 new creation called forth by Him, to all the old creation, to- 
 gether with the unregenerate men, as the flower of this creation. 
 The whole of this old creation has one life in itself, and this 
 is yearning for redemption from the bonds which hold it 
 and hinder its glorification ; this one yearning has forms dif- 
 ferent only upon the difierent degrees of life, and is naturally 
 purer and stronger in unregenerate men than in plants and 
 animals; in them the creation has, as it were, its mouth, 
 by which it can give vent to its collective feeling. Yet the 
 most of these men hnow not what the yearning and seeking in 
 them properly mean ; they understand not the language of the 
 spirit in them ; nay, they suppress it often, though it is, mean- 
 while, audible in their heart, and what they do not understand 
 themselves, God understands, who listens even to prayers not 
 understood.* So decided, notwithstanding, as the contrast is 
 between the old and new creation, yet they may not be con- 
 sidered as separated 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. at ver. 28), that bears a new world in her womb 
 — a life which is not herself, which 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). 
 As then there is a regeneration of the individual, there is a 
 regenerationf also of the universe (Matt. xix. 28), and as the 
 former is completed gradually, so is the latter also. For as 
 Paradise at first vanished from the earth with sin (Glen. iii. 18), 
 
 • Accordingly, Luther quite justly says : "Albeit the creature hath not such 
 speech as we have, it hath a language still, which God and the Holy Spirit heareth 
 and understandeth, how it groaueth for the wrong it must endure from the un- 
 godly, who misuse it so." 
 
 + Acts iii. 21, a.TOK«.ra,irTtt,ffti tkvtuv has a like signification, answering the 
 Rabbinical obiy inin, renovatio mundi. Luther naively designates this glorifica- 
 tion of nature as the putting on of God's Easter robe, instead of the present work- 
 aday dress ; the foundation of which expression is the comparison of the course of 
 the world with the week of the creation Gen. i.), upon which a new Sabbath is 
 still to follow, (Comp. Tholuck's fifth appendix to his Treatise on Sin and the 
 Atoner, whei'e the universality of the longing for a paradisiacal time is proved. 
 
CHAPTER VIII. 18—30. 287 
 
 and in man's inward being the voug was subjected to sin, so does 
 the restoration through Christ begin first with the liberation of 
 the vbvg (Rom. vii. 25), and in the creation with the restoring 
 of Paradise at the resurrection of the just, the representatives 
 of the vov? for the totality (Rev. xx. 4, etc) To this time the 
 prophecies of the prophets point, that the deserts shall blossom 
 again (Is. xxxv. 1, etc.), the lamb and the lion shall feed to- 
 gether (Is. xi. 6, etc., xxxv. 9, Ixv. 25). As, however, in the 
 individual even after the experience of redemption, the flesh 
 remains still subjected to the law of sin (comp. at vii. 25), so 
 with the restoration of Paradise in the kingdom of God upon 
 earth, the animal life in nature, ay, even in man (Rev. xx. 7, 
 8), is not yet quite overpowered; hence, as the individual needs 
 the bodily glorification, so does the whole creation need a total 
 transformation — the passing away of the old heaven and the 
 old earth (2 Peter iii.), and the birth of a new heaven and a 
 new earth (Is. Ixv. 17; Rev. xx. 11, etc., xxi. 22), at the ge- 
 neral resurrection. Here the animal life, that adverse middle 
 step between matter and spirit-conscious life, is quite overcome, 
 and the glorified matter become the pure bearer of the spirit. 
 So then it is clear, also, that by the xt/c/?, not merely our earth 
 or our solar system, but the totality of all creation, {ohpavh? Ttal 
 y7i=^'y^-^ D"^?^t2^r7j t^^® spiritual and material world), must be 
 understood. Whether the ancient world had such a perception 
 of the greatness of the universe as the telescopes give us, does 
 not signify in this respect ; the Spirit of God in the Apostles 
 understood explicitly what they themselves took implicitly only ; 
 even if they thought the universe smaller than we are accus- 
 tomed to consider it, they, nevertheless, meant the universe as 
 well as ourselves in every expression that denotes the totality ; 
 just as a drop of water is meant by every one who utters the 
 word, whether he know or not, that it contains a world of an'- 
 malcula. Just as little can the smallness of the earth, in rela- 
 tion to the universe, and the many vast globes in it, withhold 
 from this acceptation; for either it may be said that, as in the 
 human organism, little members (the eye, for instance) are 
 more important than great ones, the legs, for instance — so in the 
 whole system of the worlds (to us, indeed, yet quite unknown) 
 the earth occupies a far more important place than the largest 
 fixed stars; or, the diminutiveness of the earth might be ad- 
 
288 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS 
 
 mitted with the remark, that it is the very method of the Lord 
 to choose the little, and to make something out of that which 
 is nothing.* At all events, the earth never appears in holy 
 Scripture as a pitiful speck of rust on the great clockwork of 
 the creation, but as the point where the great conflict between 
 light and darkness is most decidedly carried on ; therefore, it 
 is, that what is going on upon the earth may have the most 
 thorough effect upon the universe. 
 
 Ver. 18. The Apostle passes from the foregoing part of his 
 discourse to the glory awaiting the faithful, by bringing the 
 sufferings in this temporal state of the world into immediate 
 parallel with it. The \oyit(i^ai yd^ namely, is so connected with 
 the g/Vg^ (sufjjirdeyjbf/.iv, that the mediating thought : " which 
 we easily may,'' is to be supplied, Ver. 18, then, contains 
 an indirect encouragement not to withdraw from these suf- 
 ferings. 
 
 *o vZv xnf^6g=a}uv ovrog. Comp. in the comm. part i. at Matt, 
 xii. 82. "Ag/o? has here its closest meaning, that which draws 
 down the scale, outweighs anything. The vadrifiara are not 
 merely physical sufferings, but the spiritual sufferings also, 
 which proceed from the sins of others; the consequences of 
 men's own sins, known and express, are naturally to be ex- 
 cluded. Even, therefore, the do^a, also is the comprisal of all 
 that which inwardly and outwardly blesses and glorifies the 
 man. The principle of blessedness and glory is operative in- 
 deed in man already here below (Col. iii. 8; 1 Cor. xii. 12), but 
 only in a manner hidden and ever in conflict with the sin in 
 the old man; hence its dTOKaXv^is is something future. 
 
 Ver. 19. How very incapable the sufferings of this time are 
 of being compared with the glory to come, Paul proves by this, 
 that the children of God and their glorification are an object of 
 yearning for the universe. In this thought mankind is raised 
 to a height which as much surpasses all poor human conjec- 
 tures upon its development, as the humiliations wdiich the 
 
 * Beautiful as this thought, which does not however belong to me, appears, it 
 must, notwithstanding, on nearer consideration, yield perhaps to the other alter- 
 native; God, namely, chooses indeed for his most sublime purposes, what is little 
 and despised in the eyes of men, because they look to the form, and not to the sub- 
 stance, but still not what is in and of itself little and contemptible. God beholds 
 the things according to their true essence, and accordingly uses them also: what is 
 little, for little purposes; what is great, for great ones. 
 
CHAPTER VIII. 19. 289 
 
 Scripture awards to the natural man, to the unenlightened 
 seem little suitable. The Word of God measures out depth 
 and height to the very uttermost, and shocking as it is, when 
 human pride would make itself great, as adorable is the mercy 
 of God, by which he, who first was lowered beneath all, is ex- 
 alted over all, after he has been made humble. In this sensef, as 
 the centre, round which the purposes of God conduct their move- 
 ments, Paul calls the faithful " a spectacle to the world, toar%el% ^ P^h 
 and to men." (1 Cor. iv. 9, comp. also thereon at 1 Cor. vi. 2.) A^* ^.' 
 ver. 18, the dS^a, so here now the vhi rou ©sou are considered aUs^V^'J-j, 
 present, already existing, but not become perceptible as being 
 what they are.* It follows, of course, that no such members of 
 the Church are meant, as only outwardly belong to her, but 
 those who, as truly regenerate, bear Christ's life in them. Hence 
 it is ever properly Christ alone that is glorified, rules and 
 governs in the faithful; and for this very cause alone the least 
 in the kingdom of God, as born of God, is greater than the 
 greatest born of women, because Christ is his life (Gal. ii. 20). 
 As, however, Christ's glory was first revealed at the resurrec- 
 tion, so too the glory of the regenerate at their resurrection. 
 This revelation, then, the waiting creature yearns for, in the feel- 
 ing that it is to share the glory of it. 
 
 ' AmKapadoxioc, which is found once more in the N. T. at Phil. 
 i. 20, from arroxapadoKsu, Kapadoxsu, signifies exserto capite pro- 
 spicere, as the Etynwl. magn. says : r^ 7ii(pa'kr\ '7rpol3Xs'?rsiv. Hence 
 " urgently to long for something, to wait for. (Comp. Eurip. 
 Rhes. 144, Diod. Sic. xiv. 60.) The connexion with the syno- 
 nymous d7rexdsx,s(^dai enhances the idea in this passage. 
 
 But as regards the principal idea xr/V/?, the prevailing signi- 
 fication of the expression (as was observed at i. 20), in the N. 
 T. is, what is created (==x.TigfMa), in i. 20 only it extends to 
 the act of creating. Hence it frequently signifies (usually in 
 connexion with oX?j or -raffa, but without this addition also, 
 though not without the article-f-) the universe, the whole world. 
 
 • The difference of the inward life of the faithful from their exterior, which ia 
 not different from the world, is incomparably represented by the well known song: 
 — " Es glanzet der Christen inwendiges Leben." — (" All glorious within is the life 
 of believers.")— [Comp. Ps. xlv. 14.] 
 
 f Yet compare Mark x. 6, xiii. 19; 2 Pet. iii. 4, where the formula a^' i^x^f 
 Krifftus occurs; in this formula, however, the idea of the beginning already leads 
 necessarily to the totality, which, therefore, does not requii-e to be further especi- 
 ally marked by the article. 
 
 T 
 
290 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 (So v^. 22, Mark xvi. 15, Col. i. 15. Further Wisd. xix. 6, 
 Judith xvi. 14.) Doubtless now Ttrieig might figuratively, as with 
 most nations similar expressions are so used, {e. g., XV'yiL ^J *^^® 
 Rabbins), signify men only ; but it does not so occur in the N. T. 
 The passages Mark xvi. 15 (which Reiche still maintains), Col. i. 
 23 are to be taken otherwise; in the former xrieig is mankind 
 only so far as it is regarded as the flower of the creation in 
 general, as appears from the use of rraca also with it ; in the 
 latter xrieig is taken locally of the extent of earth, equal to Koe/^og. 
 Krieig, howevor, occurs in the N. T. of single created things, as 
 Rom. i. 25, viii. 89, Heb. iv. 13, and therefore it cannot still be 
 denied that it is possible it might mean mankind. Only this 
 must be denied in the passage before us, because, to say nothing 
 of the reasons already adduced above, 'rraga ri Ttriatg occurs ver. 
 22, which cannot possibly signify a part of the creation, and 
 xr/<r/g, ver. 19, cannot be taken in a sense difforent from that 
 in ver. 22. The rabbinical usage, however, (on which compare 
 the remarks at Mark xvi. 15), according to which j-i^'i'^^ signi- 
 fies the heathen, cannot be (jf any assistance here, because surely 
 not the heathen only are longing for the revelation of the sons 
 of God, but the Jews also. Accordingly the xr/V/j, as has been 
 deduced already, can only signify here the totality of the uni- 
 verse, as the first creation, in contrast to the new one in Christ, 
 and that not without men, but with ewen the extra-Christian men. 
 When Reiche (B. ii. S. 191), mentions, in opposition to this view, 
 that judgment awaits those who are without Christ, that they 
 therefore cannot long for the revelation of the children of God ; 
 this is true only of those who, having become acquainted with 
 the life in Christ, have rejected it; but all those, to whom it has 
 not come at all, who could not therefore refuse it, are naturally 
 to be considered as the members of mankind before the birth of 
 Christ, The same longing, therefore, is to be supposed in them, 
 which constitutes the character of this race before Christ. Of 
 the circumstance, however, that there are men who refuse the 
 salvation in Christ, the Apostle could so much the less take 
 notice here, as an unconscious longing for well-being is still even 
 in them, and they are only deceiving themselves, if they hope to 
 find it out of Christ. (Upon the particular use of xr/V/g in Heb. 
 ix. 11, 1 Pet. ii. 13, we shall treat when we come to the ex- 
 planation of these passages.) 
 
CHAPTER VIII. 20, 21. 291 
 
 Ver. 20, 21. As ground for this expectation of the creature 
 tlie Apostle assigns first of all its subjection to perishableness, 
 but then at the same time observes that this is not nor is to be 
 absolute, but that the creature itself must become free from it, 
 as the children of God are already (in hope, v. 24) become free 
 from it. In these verses the (Laraiorng (or (p&opoi) and the S&'ga, 
 which is to be considered as a^^aptf/a, — the h'xorayTi (or dovXela) 
 and the sXevhpia, form antitheses. Both parallel members stand 
 in necessary connexion ; the bondage is as little to be supposed 
 without perishableness, as the freedom without glory ; nay, the 
 one is, necessarily and of itself, the other also ; wherefore too 
 at the close of ver. 21 freedom and glory could be blended to 
 the one conception of sXsvdspia, rng ^o^n?. Now the aorist (b'Xirdyn) 
 leads in a manner not to be mistaken to an historical event ; 
 originally the creature too was free, but it ceased to be so. That 
 here the fall of man and the curse attaching to it is alluded to 
 (Gen. iii. 17, etc.,) cannot be doubted; we have accordingly in 
 these verses a highly significant commentary upon the Old 
 Testament hieroglyphics. We perceive from it, that the trans- 
 ition of the curse from the conscious creature to the un- 
 conscious is no arbitrary one, but one of internal necessity. 
 The Apostle, namely, connects the two here, the conscious and 
 unconscious life of the creation, in such a manner with each 
 other, as to predicate the same event equally of both. The ol^ 
 ixou(fa leads principally to the conscious or at least animated 
 creation, whilst the zai alrri ri KrUig immediately refers to the 
 extreme points of the creature in its unconscious existence, 
 whose participation in the great process of liberation in the re- 
 demption is wont to be the latest perceived. But, as was before 
 observed, there is the same relation between the conscious and 
 unconscious life of the creature in the whole, as that between 
 soul and body in the individual ; mankind is the bearer of the 
 consciousness of the world in the creation, as the children of 
 God are the bearers of the consciousness of God, and are even 
 therefore, as xa/vii itriaig, taken from the old. Accordingly, as 
 the fall even of the creature began with man, so does the re- 
 storation of that creature begin also witli him. The notion of 
 being subjected to (/.aratorn? or (pkpn presupposes however 
 naturally a germ of better life, which, bound only by alien 
 power, is held in SouXs/a. This alien power is no other than that 
 
292 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 of the prince of tliis world, of tlie kingdom of darkness. As the 
 light is the life of the world (John i. 4), so is the darkness the 
 death, the disturbing element; but death is only the head of 
 (pdopd. The words of the Apostle consequently are not to be 
 limited to any special corruption, such as the abuse of the 
 creature for idolatry, but they mean this together with all other 
 consequences of sin. In as far, however, as there is left in 
 every creature a germ of nobler life, which forms the fount of 
 yearning for redemption, so far also a constant combat of nature 
 against the ^aara/orTj? and (f)dopd, and the point they come to, 
 Gumrog, may be observed. This is signified by the ov^, ixoDtfa 
 v-TrsTdyri. Every natural man, ay, every animal, every plant 
 struggles to get beyond itself, to realise an idea, in the realisa- 
 tion of which it has its sXsvdspioc, that is the being perfectly an- 
 swering the divine harmony ; but the nothingness (^2n> Ps. 
 xxxix. 6, Eccl. i. 2, 14), pervading its nature, that is, the life 
 failing in its fulness, and the transitoriness grounded therein, 
 and death its end, lets no created thing attain its aim ; every indi- 
 vidual of the species rather begins the circle of its course again, 
 and struggles cheerlessly against the impossibility of perfect- 
 ing itself. And even the history of mankind would be nothing 
 more than such a cheerless beginning over again were not the 
 element of hope in it, and that the hope on Him who is to 
 bring back all that is lost. Through this fount of life alone the 
 life of man receives being by Him, who has that power of end- 
 less life (Heb. vii. 1 6), which gives all nature being also. For 
 this whole u-roray^j under the bondage of death is indeed for 
 punishment of sin, but it is at the same time a blessing too and 
 a means for God to complete His works ; therefore the Apostle 
 says, uTSTdyrj did rov u'Trord^avra. That the iirord^ag can Only be 
 God, not the devil, nor Adam, nor Nero (as Semler thought, 
 who understood xr/ffi? of the Jews whose conversion Nero 
 hindered), needs no proof; Gen. iii. 1 7, etc., where God pro- 
 nounces the curse, is decisive for it. But the ordinary accepta- 
 tion of the did in the meaning " by or through " is not so cer- 
 tain. A/a c. ace. may doubtless be used of means (comp. at 
 John vi. 57, and Winer's Gr. p. 378), and this acceptation might 
 here be thought preferable, because ixoDca precedes it, so that 
 the sense should be : "not by its ow7i will, but by God's will." 
 But the observation, that God is the originator of this v^rorayTj, 
 
CHAPTER VIII. 22, 23. 293 
 
 and not man, is something too idle to have any place in this 
 grand development. God is acknowledged to work all, and man 
 nothing but by God. There is signified, however, besides 
 in BTcovtroc not the mere will, but the willingness (1 Cor. ix. 17) ;* 
 the xr/tf/r subjected itself with resistance (only repentance and 
 faith eiFect in man the willingness to subject himself to this 
 order), because it did not perceive the purpose of thi^ divine 
 management; but this purpose was no other than the fulfil- 
 ment of the divine plans of the world, which after the entrance 
 of sin could only be completed by surrender of the creature to 
 death, wherefore Christ's death took away again all conse- 
 quences of the fall. The dia rhv v-Trord^avru is intended to express 
 this reference to the plans of the divine government of the 
 world ; for God's sake, to His honour and final glory even this 
 seeming destruction of His creation served. On this account 
 the only begotten Son of God also subjected Himself to it, and 
 all His saints with Him share this subjection to the (phpd and 
 the ddvaros, for as man fell by willing to be high, he rises again 
 by the love to lowliness, for God dwells only with the lowly. 
 
 Ver. 22, 23. Into the more general idea of the yearning of the 
 xrlffig (ver. 19), that of pain is admitted now, which since the eat- 
 ing of the fruit of the tree of knowledge is the inheritance of the 
 creation. In the vvv of Christ's appearance there is, beside the 
 fountain of pain, an inexhaustible fountain of joy first opened 
 also, which the world before Christ looked for in hope, whereby 
 its pain was hindered from turning to despair, but which to the 
 faithful of the New Testament already vouchsafes enjoyment; 
 
 * The conception of the ovp(^ iKovtret as contrast, not to the children of God, but 
 to the natural man, who with and by his will became subject to vanity, which is 
 not the case with the unconscious creature, is quite untenable. It was in man's 
 first sin by no means his will to become subject to vanity; probably indeed he sub- 
 jected himself wi7/j inward repugnance to this curse, which becomes a blessing so soon 
 as the resistance ceases. Hence all divine preaching begins with repentance, for this 
 deadens the resistance and makes the cross to be willingly borne. But that, if this 
 be the sense of the words, the creature cannot be meant without man, is clear. 
 Should the conception of the «v;^; Uew^ra, which we have disputed, be tenable, the 
 {/■pToTu^ets must then be man, which the context does not admit of. Calvin under- 
 stood the words quite properly, in saying : " Invita et repugnante natura vim 
 patitur, quidquid detinetur sub corruptione." Life has a natural horror of death, 
 which can only be overcome by a higher power, that of love. (The words are not 
 with Griesbach to be enclosed in brackets, but to be connected thus: *i xriirn 
 vTiTayn elx iKavtrx, ocXXa, ^ta. rov i/TOToi^avTa. i-r^ iXvi^r 'AXXa namely forms no 
 antithesis to ol/x 'ncovo'a, but with bt* iX-ri^i the antithesis to the entire half of ver, 
 20. *• With i-epugnance was the creature subjected to vanity, but not for ever." 
 
294 BPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 albeit only a partial enjoyment. The awudmi defines still more 
 nearly the nature of the pain; it is compared to that anxious, wo- 
 ful pain of a woman in travail, which is peculiar, in that those who 
 are in labour feel together with the pain the secret joy of giving 
 existence to a new being. The Apostle ascribes this character 
 also to the conflicts and sorrows of mankind, and of the whole 
 creature in her travail of thousands of years. The avmbUu there- 
 fore indicates indeed on the one hand the greatest height of 
 pain, but on the other it contains the intimation also, that it 
 brings with it the secret cheer of not being purposeless. The 
 birth-pangs of the creature give life to a new and fairer world ! 
 (The rabbinical expression n^^^^H ^^IH ^^^ denoting the great 
 conflicts before the Lord's coming again, is to be taken from the 
 same profound image ; comp. thereon at Matt. xxiv. 6, etc.) In 
 this general struggle for a perfect state the children of God them- 
 selves, so long as they sojourn here on earth, still take share; 
 for in their cdp^ they carry the aricig still, and in it even they 
 still remain subjected to (p&opd. As, therefore, the regenerate has 
 a conflict similar to that of the merely awakened (comp. at vii. 
 14, etc.), he also has the groaning and waiting of the creature, 
 but with this difference that in his vovg he has the consciousness 
 of God already present, and his (rw/^a only tarries still for the 
 d-roXur^wfl'/?, which comes to pass so soon (according to ver. 11) as 
 the mortal body is made living.* 
 
 Ver. 22, the cycrgi/a^s/, evmb'mi is not to be referred to the 
 children of God; the transition oh fiovov 8s, aXXa, does not admit 
 of this. I would not, however, regard the cvv as mere strength- 
 ening of the simple form. It is best without doubt to resolve 
 the xr/tf/g into the totality of the individual formations, which 
 constitute it, and then to take the sense of the words to be that 
 every thing in nature yearns one with another for the freedom 
 of the children of God. The axpi rou vvv applies to the time of 
 the completion of the work of Christ, and the birth of the chil- 
 dren of God connected with it, to which the yearning of the 
 creature looked. Ver. 23. Many different readings are found in 
 the words aXXa xai ahrol x.. r. X., which however have no influence 
 on the thought. The reading proposed by Griesbach is very 
 natural, but it is just on that account questionable, whether it is 
 
 * Upon the ecvaXvreutrif rov trui/.ctroi comp. more pai'ticularly at 1 Cor. xv. and 
 2 Cor. V. The latter passage has especial affinity with the one before us. 
 
CHAPTER VIII. 24, 25. 295 
 
 the original one. Lachmann would read ttai alrol merely, and 
 encloses i][iiTg in brackets. But perhaps Paul wrote ^j/Ag?? ahroi 
 twice, without its being at all necessary to suppose an enhancing 
 at the second, such as any special reference to Paul or the 
 Apostles. The (srivdZ^nv h savroTg is to be considered as opposed 
 to something like crgva^g/v sv ciXXo/g, and applies to the groaning 
 for their own perfection, which does not exclude a sympathy 
 praying for the perfection of others and of the whole. The 
 expression u'TroXurpucig rov <rw,aarog is only found here : it gives the 
 redemption in its absolute completion (1 Cor. i. SO), while the 
 expression used elsewhere without the addition ffdo/Murog denotes 
 the beginning of the redeeming operation of Christ. Applied to 
 the body, the formula contains at the same time the indication, 
 that there is a nobler germ, a body of light as it were, dwelling 
 in it, which being bound at present, shall some time be free 
 through Christ. 
 
 The description of the proper character of the vioi or rejtm rou 
 0goD is remarkable. They have the 'Trvsvfia viokciag (ver. 15), 
 but yet are longing for the vtokala itself The Spirit namely is 
 only the principle, which both begets that uhkg/a. and at the 
 same time grants the pledge for it. The vkkala is not perfect 
 until the bodily glorification, for it is the state of absolute per- 
 fection, in which the man as microcosm is a pure image of the 
 fj^axpoKodfiosj the cratra xrlcig. Without bodily glorification, how- 
 ever, the being of man is imperfect, therefore even the souls 
 under the altar long for bodily perfection (Rev. vi. 9). As pos- 
 sessors of the Spirit, the faithful, from whom there is no ground 
 at all for separating the Apostles or Paul alone, are said to be 
 T71V a'^TOLpy^Ti^ 7(iZ irviliMaTog 'iyjiMTig. Upon the idea already touched 
 upon, that the regenerate is called a possessor of the Spirit, so 
 that the Spirit seems to be subject to him, comp. more par- 
 ticularly at 1 Cor. xiv. 32. The expression a'xapx'h ( = H^'tpt^")* 
 Levit. xxiii. 10, Deut. xxvi. 2) refers to the figure of a great 
 harvest of the Spirit, which awaits mankind, and whose first 
 fruits were allotted to the Apostolic church in all their glory. 
 The ideas both of the early ripe, and of the excellent, are 
 equally to be maintained therein, and on this account those are 
 by no means to be understood here, according to the supposition 
 which has been again maintained by Gliickler, who are just come 
 into Christianity, and the Apostles to be contrasted with them 
 
296 - EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 by the second hfisTg. This expression, however, naturally leads 
 to an inferiority of the Old Testament life, in which all, as well 
 regeneration as communication of the Spirit, existed as type 
 only, not as substance. 
 
 Ver. 24, 25. By this participation of the regenerate in the 
 groaning of the creature, the Apostle would not have the reality 
 of the redemption denied or limited; this is rather objectively 
 fulfilled (huidnfisv), though not in perceptible possession of it, but 
 in hope. This passage is especially important to determine the 
 notion of gX<r/g. First of all it is opposed to (SKsmiv ( = dia s'Idovs 
 ^rg/j/crars/v, 2 Cor. V. 7), to the being able to behold as outwardly 
 existing ; but next it forms as strong a contrast to the complete 
 absence and separateness of the object; it is rather identical 
 with the inward possession of the thing hoped for, so far namely 
 as it is spiritual goods. Man can only believe and hope for 
 eternal things, so far as they are inwardly present to him, and 
 on this account the Christian hope stands so high ; she is the 
 daughter of eocperience (Rom. v. 4), and as such maketh not 
 asliamed, and sister of faith and love (1 Cor. xiii. 13). Good 
 wishes, desire, longing, all this therefore is not 'iXm?, for there 
 is wanting therein the inward essential possession of the thing 
 longed for. 
 
 Ver. 24. Lachmann leaves out the xa/, which too is more 
 burdensome than advantageous to the sense. Hermann's re- 
 mark upon the use of xai (ad Vigor, p. 837) is not applicable 
 here, as r/ is not " what,"' but " why ;*' xai therefore, if it is not 
 to be rejected from the text, could only be translated here 
 " also, besides." 
 
 Ver. 26, 27. As we thus have what we do not see (says Paul 
 in the name of the faithful), so are we able in that groaning in 
 us (ver. 23), to pray for what we do not know, namely by the 
 spirit that guides us. Even in the creation it is alone the uni- 
 versal spirit filling it, that is yearning for the eternal magnet ; 
 in the faithful it is that higher spirit that makes them children 
 (ver. 16). This spirit upholds the human weakness, and leads 
 it aright in the gloom of its longing, which suiFers it not to 
 bring before God the necessities it feels in the frame of definite 
 prayers. The crsi/ay^o/ aXaX»jro/ are therefore (with reference to 
 ver. 23), stirred by the Spirit himself ; they are called aXaX>jro/,* 
 
 * 'AXeiXrjTos 18 not to be distinguislied from oivtK>.eix*]rof (1 Pet. i. 8), or «yixJ/»j 
 
CHAPTER VIII. 26, 27. 297 
 
 inasmuch as the man can only speak out what he knows and 
 apprehends, but in this instance he only knows that he wants 
 something, but not what he wants. The knowing ^e7?era% that 
 the amXvTpuffig adofiarog is wanting, is of course not enough ; the 
 Apostle means that the special need in every moment (which is 
 signified by the xado dsT) and the way that it can be appeased, is 
 hidden from the believer; only an unutterable secret yearning 
 thrills through his being, a draught to his eternal origin, that 
 finds its vent in sighs. The Apostle's words are gathered from 
 such deep experience, that they make good their truth in every 
 heart that ever felt this yearning ; it makes itself known, how- 
 ever, there especially, where that sweet feeling, companion to 
 the first love, has disappeared, and now the conflict with the 
 wicked one (1 John ii. 13) begins. Then the soul often feels 
 anxiety, without being conscious of any decided sin, and in her 
 anxiety groans for redemption.* 
 
 In the GwavriXoL/j^lSdveffdai (comp. Luke xviii. 40), the cuv is not 
 to be understood of the co-operation of the divine Spirit with 
 the human; the Spirit of God does not work beside the human 
 spirit, but on and through it. Still, however, not so as to annul 
 it, but by sanctifying and glorifying it. The word is used for 
 the simple avriXaf/^^avsedai in the meaning adjuvare, opem ferre. 
 The reading dffkvslcc is marked partly by the Codd. A.B.C.D., 
 and many other critical authorities, partly by its intrinsic worth 
 as the preferable one. Lachmann has also, according to his 
 principles properly received it into the text. In the rh yap ri 
 X. r. X, the TO applies to the whole sentence. 'Evrvyxf^vs/v brep 
 rms is to intercede for any one, xara Tms (xi. 2) to work, pray 
 against any one. The verb in its immediate sense is, " to meet 
 with any one,"" so Acts xxv. 24 only. The composition with 
 vTip, as the passage before us has it, does not occur again. The 
 formula with vvip rmg is used also of the Son, Rom. viii. 34, 
 Heb. vii. 25. Now the intercession of the Son is naturally as 
 distinct from that of the Spirit, as the efficacy of the Son and 
 the Spirit in general differ. The former is atoning, the latter 
 
 yviros (2 Cor. ix. 15) : it signifies the unuttered, because it is (for the time or for 
 ever) unutterable. 
 
 * Meyer has remarkably misconceived this passage ; he thinks namely, that it is 
 not the groaning of men that is spoken of, which the Spirit incites, but the groaning 
 of the Spirit itself. As if groaning could be a predicate of God, and unutterable 
 groans might in any sense whatever be spoken of as to God. 
 
298 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 sanctifying and perfecting. Tlie words of the Apostle are to 
 be understood accordingly, that the Spirit, what he teaches to 
 pray for also Himself fulfils and creates. The Spirit's inter- 
 cession is not merely, as De Wette holds, " He teaches us to pray 
 aright ;'' the thought is rather implied that nothing human as 
 such holds good before God; only God Himself can satisfy God; 
 so the Son in the work of redemption; as the Holy Ghost in 
 the work of sanctification. As the divine principle He naturally 
 ever works in accordance with God's will (xam ©gov), who as 
 knowing the depths of the heart can perceive the most secret 
 wishes of men. In this relation of the Spirit to God entirely the 
 the same thing appears, which we observed in the relation of 
 the Son to the Father, and the prayer which the former suggests 
 (John xvi. 23, etc.) All true emotions of life in man, and there- 
 fore prayers among the number, have their foundation in God 
 Himself, and this alone gives them their fulfilment; * whether 
 the incitation shall be referred to the Son or the Spirit, depends 
 upon its relations to the work of the one or the other. In the 
 exj^ression (p^ovrifia rou rvivfiaros, the rrvsvfia is not to be understood 
 
 * Quite justly Augustine says (Tract, ri. in Joan): " Non Spiritus S. in semet 
 ipso apud semetipsum in ilia trinitate geniit, sed in nobis gemit, quia gemere nos 
 fecit." This observation, which makes itself known in the experience of every one 
 of the regenerate, even the extra Christian world expresses in its more profound 
 members, as the excellent passages of Dschelaleddin show, which Tholuck has ad- 
 duced here; in one of them it is said: — 
 
 Sagst du: Herrkomm! selberheisst das: hiemein Kind! 
 
 Deine Gluth und Seufzer Gottes Boten sind. 
 Sayst thou: Lord come! that says: come child, to me ! 
 Thy glowing sighs God's message bring to thee. 
 
 [Is. Iviii. 9, Ixv. 24.] The following anonymous lines from an English mind 
 composed undesignedly within the last fifteen years, may contribute something to 
 the reflections upon this beautiful subject; at least may bear some testimony to that 
 great master's hand, who, amidst His whole creation, wakens the deep music of the 
 human heart. — Acts xvii. 26. 
 
 • * To me they seem, 
 
 Those far, sad streaks that reach along the West, 
 Like strains of long, full yearning from the chords 
 Of nature's orchestra. Weary, yet still 
 She sinks with longing to her winter sleep, 
 Dreams ever of that birth, for whose bright dawn 
 The whole creation groans. Fair, sad companion! 
 I join my sigh with thine; yet none can be 
 , Our sigh's interpreter, but that great Good, 
 Who breathes eternal wisdom; made, redeemed, 
 O, loves us both : and ever moves as erst 
 
 On thy dark waters' face. 
 
 • ■ • ■ 
 
 N«veiiber. 
 
CHAPTER VIII. 28. 299 
 
 of the divine or Holy Spirit, but of the human ; ^ffov?j/Aa can only 
 be said of man, never of God. But then either the divine Spirit 
 is to be supplied at hrvyx"'^^'} or> which seems more suitable, we 
 say, Paul does not clearly distinguish here the divine and human 
 spirit, since they have most intimately penetrated and wedded 
 each other. 
 
 Ver. 28, 29. The waiting for the redemption of the body 
 (ver. 23), as well as all sufferings (ver. 18), so little, however, keep 
 back the perfection of the children of God, that with the elect, 
 who as such love God, they are the direct means of perfecting 
 them, for this their perfection and assimilation to the image of 
 Christ, is the very predestination of God, and therefore immut- 
 ably firm. 
 
 Ver. 28. 'rrdvra applies especially to the sufferings; these em- 
 bitter or deter all who do not love God, but further all who love 
 Him. The e/V dyocdov denotes just this inward ripening. The 
 conception of 6vvipyiTv in the sense that several co-operate in the 
 work of sanctification, is entirely contradictory to the Pauline 
 doctrine: 1, God; 2, man himself; 8, sufferings and all circum- 
 stances in general. According to Paul, man effects nothing^ 
 God everything, and that too by circumstances. The cwspysT is 
 therefore, as ffv(freva(ii above (ver. 22), to be taken as resolving 
 the idea of -ravra : " for furthering the perfection of man all must, 
 according to the will of God, co-operate one thing with another, 
 but so, that He is tlie fundamental cause of all these effects.'' 
 Paul does not found the certainty of perfection upon good pur- 
 poses, or upon fidelity, but upon the election of God's grace, 
 which itself first transforms the bent of the man's mind from 
 faithlessness to truth. Christ, the prototype of holiness, is in 
 this the model, to which God assimilates the faithful. 2v/ji,fji.op(pos 
 occurs again Phil. iii. 21 , and there certainly of the body only, 
 which neither here (according to ver. 23) is to be considered as 
 excluded. The will of the decree of love is to unite the regen- 
 erate mankind to one great family of God, in which Christ is 
 the TpuTOToxos. Rev. i. 6, Christ is called the Tpuroroxos ruv 
 vBxpCDv, as first become alive from the dead; so too Col. i. 18. 
 But the resurrection is not immediately and expressly the sub- 
 ject here; the expression therefore is to be taken in a wider 
 sense, namely, like •^'^^^, as the first perfected, and at the same 
 time pre-eminent in every sense. So it occurs too Col. i. 1 5 ; 
 
oOO EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 Heb. i. 6. upuroroxog, hgwever, is by no means of the same 
 signification with /Aovoysv^?, it does not, I mean, refer, like fioi/o- 
 yevrjgj to the divine nature of the Redeemer only, but to the 
 whole historical Christ, with whom therefore men even may be 
 compared. The name of honor, " Brethren,"" Christ himself 
 moreover gives to His own. Matt. xii. 50 ; Mark iii. 35 ; John 
 XX. 17. Comp. also Heb. ii. 11, 12; Ps. xxii. 23. Theexpres- 
 sions in these verses, which refer to the doctrine of election by 
 grace, as xocru Tpodscftv kXtitoi, Tpoyivdjaxs/Vf Tpoo^'i^siv will be further 
 explained at Rom. ix. I observe here, by way of preliminary 
 merely, that, according to Pauline doctrine, a prcedestinatio 
 sanctorum, in the proper sense of the words, exists; that is, 
 God does not know beforehand that they will, by their own 
 decision, be holy, but He creates this very decision in them. 
 In the 'TpoyivuxfTisiv the property of the divine knowledge only, in 
 'TTpoopiZ^iiv that of the will alone is marked, both of which appear 
 combined in the 'xpokcig. Nevertheless there seems to be no 
 diiference here between 'rposyvM and 'jrpoojpiffs, while, too, Acts. ii. 
 23, 1 Pet. i. 2, Rom. xi. 2, 'rpoyvugt? is used directly for the divine 
 will. In the verse before us it is only ffv/^/iopoous rng sJxovog x.r. X. 
 that forms the advance in the thought. 
 
 Ver. 30. The attention was drawn to the importance of this 
 passage for the doctrine of the obedientia Christi activa, at v. 
 19.* The circumstance that ©go's is here the subject and not 
 Christ, does not influence it at all; the wliole work of Christ is 
 God's work through the Son, and what is said here of God, 
 therefore, holds just as good of Christ, because God has fulfilled 
 it through Him. The essential moment in the doctrine of the 
 obedientia activa is however this, that the efiicacy of Christ is not 
 merely a negative, but just as much a positive efiicacy also. 
 Christ does not merely root out the sins of men, and then leave 
 it to them to produce holiness themselves, but he has likewise 
 brought this forth for Himself and all His own by His holy 
 life, so that in the work of regeneration both the annulling of 
 the old, and the creation of the new, are equally the work of 
 Christ, and both were fulfilled already in His life on earth; 
 wherefore they are immediately only imputed to individual be- 
 lievers, and then gradually communicated. It is just this 
 
 ■ Comp. here the important parallel, 2 Cor. v. 1 4, etc , in which likewise all is 
 conceived as already finished once for all in Christ. 
 
I 
 
 CHAPTER VIII. SO. 801 
 
 which, in tlie passage before us, is most decidedly expressed by 
 the IbiKaiuci Ttai sdo^affi. In the former expression the real com- 
 munication of the dixaiocvvyi Xp/grou lies already indicated (comp. 
 at Rom iii. 21) ; but in the sdo^aas even that entire sanctification 
 and completion of the diKaioff'jvri is expressed, which Paul had above 
 (ver. 28) denied of himself and his brethren, namely as being 
 yet to be found in their actual possession. Accordingly, as in 
 Adam the whole natural race of man rested, and all history is 
 but a development of that which is set forth* in him, so is 
 Christ the real bearer of the whole Church, of the new creation, 
 the sanctified mankind, in that, as by His atoning power he an- 
 nuls the old, He just as much creates the new, and deposits His 
 holy image in every faithful soul. After this acceptation it first 
 becomes clear, how faith is the one and all in the Christian 
 life; the Christian has neither before nor after his conversion to 
 generate an independent sanctification of his own, but he has 
 only constantly to receive the stream of the influential powers 
 of Christ's life upon him, and this receiving is faith itself. Just 
 so the tree, when the development of its germ is begun, has only 
 to suck in water, air, and light, in order to unfold itself from 
 within, and all the drawing of a stupid gardener at the branches, 
 all his working at the buds, to coax forth blossoms, can only 
 disturb, but never further its development. And yet this pas- 
 sivity is at the same time the utmost activity, since Christ does 
 not work out of the man, but in the very innermost depth of his 
 most secret self, and then pours the stream of His whole active 
 power through the will. But the believer remains ever con- 
 scious of this active power as of one given him, and can so pre- 
 serve the deepest humility with the highest perfection ; he does 
 not work, but Christ liveth and w^orketh in him (Gal. ii. 20). 
 After this it is sufficiently evident also, how in the passage be- 
 fore us the aorists are chosen to convey its essential meaning, 
 wherefore every attempt to alter them must be thoroughly 
 set aside.-(* They are not to be Futures, for with the word : 
 '' it is finished ! " the Lord had negatively and positively com- 
 pleted His w^hole Church, together with the xr/V/?for all diuvs?. 
 No mortal could add to it even the very least; all which presents 
 
 • [Gegehen, seemingly given as the terms of a proposition are. B.] 
 • f [The pecuhar power of the aorist seems to be. that it is an indefinite past 
 formed from the future, and comning or involving it : a prophetic past.] 
 
302 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 itself in the individual members of the Church, after the course of 
 centuries, is mere development of that already given* in Him ; the 
 Church, and every individual in her, together with the Kriffig, 
 which necessarily forms her basis, are '' God's workmanship 
 created in Christ Jesus" (Eph. ii. 10); the redemption is a new 
 glorified creation, and the prerogative of creation is and continues 
 Grod's alone. The context leads imperatively to this reflection, 
 for it is the very certainty of salvation, w^hich nothing earthly 
 can disturb, that Paul intends to shew. But the divine act 
 only has any true certainty. Salvation would be the most un- 
 certain of all uncertain things, if it rested not on the objective 
 act of God in Christ, but on the wavering subjectivity of man. 
 Only by this its objectivity is the gospel a true glad tidings, 
 which nothing can remove ; even unbelief can merely refuse it. 
 (Comp. upon 3oga^£/i/, the remarks at John xvii 4.) 
 
 Ver. 81-34. This profound and colossal thought, which indeed 
 divine power alone could generate and reveal to men, inspires 
 the Apostle to a dithyrambic of faith, which even in a purely 
 formal consideration, must be acknowledged to equal any of the 
 most sublime creations of human language ; wherefore even 
 Longinus, it may be too principally for the sake of this passage, 
 ranks the Apostle with the greatest orators.-|* The absolute 
 power of God makes every thing earthly vanish : " if God be 
 for man, what can be against him V But the greatest possible 
 act of God's love is the giving up of His Son ; in that all else 
 which can be thought and wished for lies enclosed. 
 
 Ver. 32."i3/o; has reference to the merely adopted children of 
 God (viii. 19). The olx. s(piiauro is chosen with regard to Gen. 
 xxii. 12, the history of Isaac being typically conceived. For ra 
 'Trdvra D.F.G. read 'xdvroc only, which I rather prefer; it compre- 
 hends the idea more absolutely, while rd Tdvra. has respect to 
 ver. 30. Inasmuch, however, as in the moments there enumerated, 
 especially in the do^d^stv, all is absolutely included, it comes 
 back to the same thought. Ver. 33, etc., I prefer, with Augus- 
 tine, the interrogative form throughout ; the vividness of the 
 language gains much by it. — "E/xaXew = Karnyopsuy comp. 
 Acts xix. 38, xxiii. 28, xxvi. 2. — Upon hXsxrog comp. at Rom. 
 ix. — Upon sJmi h ds^icx. comp. in the Comm. Part ii. p. 488, 
 
 • [Gegeben, as before.] 
 
 t Erasmus observes of this passage quite justly : " quid usquain Cicero dixit 
 grandiloquentius!" 
 
b 
 
 CHAPTER VIII. 36. 30.3 
 
 3d Edit. — Upon hrvj^t? comp. at ver. 26. Used of Christ inter- 
 cession signifies the continuing communication of His atoning 
 and redeeming power to men ; it is, like all which proceeds 
 from Christ, to be understood not verbally merely, but really. 
 Comp. more particularly at Heb. vii. 25 ; ix. 24. 
 
 Ver. 35-39. As God and Christ can neither contradict them- 
 selves in their efficacy, nor alter, but as they are throughout and 
 constantly ybr Christians, so neither can anything earthly draw 
 the faithful away from them. Man only has the sad preroga- 
 tive of being able to draw himself away from the eternal Pitier* 
 by unbelief, the mother of all sins. (Comp. at John xvi. 9.) 
 The whole world, indeed, with all its powers, its enticements, 
 and its threatenings, is against the believer ; but what is the 
 world against God, who does what He will with its powers in 
 heaven and on earth ! 
 
 Ver. 36. The parenthetic citation describes the Christian's 
 constant danger of life; it is taken from Ps. xliv. 23. The ex- 
 pression 7rp6(3ara tr^ayjjs describes the adversaries' contempt, 
 who regarded the Christians as devoted to death. — Ver. 37. v^ip- 
 v/xav is found only here in the N. T. The preposition strengthens 
 the meaning; Josephus uses •j-7rspaya<rKv, v'zepia^Uiv, and similar 
 expressions in like manner, as corroborations of the simplicia. — 
 The reading dia rhv ayaitricmra has important authorities, espe- 
 cially D.E.F.G., notwithstanding the genitive evidently gives an 
 apter thought, since the power is thereby more decidedly referred 
 to God, as the origin of it. — The farthest contrasts are placed to- 
 gether, in order rhetorically to mark the idea of allness. That 
 which is common to all is the idea of the created (the xr/c/s, ver. 
 39), which is opposed to the divine as the eternal. No creature 
 can do anything else than what God wills, for He liolds them 
 all in his hand; now it is not God's will to destroy the saints by 
 suiferings, but to perfect them, consequently every creature 
 must serve to bring the saints to their object. 
 
 As to the text, in some Codd. s^ovff/at is added, in others, 
 which the text rec. follows, dwd^sig is placed before hsaruira and 
 iMiXKovra. The latter reading is evidently founded merely in the 
 desire to rank the dwd/Mis immediately with the ayyeXoi and 
 dpxo^ij from which they seem to be separated by ivsarura, and 
 fieXXovra. The addition of Ifouer/a/, however, may be derived 
 
 • [Ps. ciii. 13.] 
 
304 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 from the passages 1 Cor. xv. 24; Eph. vi. 12; Col. ii. 15. (At 
 these passages comp. more particularly upon the diiFerent de- 
 grees of angels.) It is by no means entirely necessary by 
 angels to suppose evil ones, because unless they were so they 
 could not wish to draw away from the gospel, for Gal. i. 8, 
 Paul puts the case even that an angel from heaven may preach 
 another gospel. All the terms are to be taken here in their 
 most general sense, and do not need any closer definition, as 
 life and death, height and depth; the indefinite expressions are 
 to denote all that can be thought of, and are only a rhetorical 
 paraphrase of the conception of allness. — 'Eviffrura = 'Trdpovra., 
 "what is present," occurs also Gal, i. 4; 1 Cor. vii. 26. 
 
 SECTION V. 
 
 (IX. 1— XI. S6.) 
 
 THE RELATION OF ISRAEL, AND OF THE GENTILE WORLD, TO THE NEW 
 WAY OF SALVATION. 
 
 After this explicit exposition of the new way of salvation, 
 (ch. iii. 6), and after the portraiture of the manner in which 
 the development both of the individual and of the whole (ch. 
 vii. 7) is conditioned by the same, the Apostle Paul might 
 naturally have brought the doctrinal part of his Epistle to an 
 end. But, in the meanwhile, the song of triumph with whicli 
 he terminated that exposition, awakened powerfully his feelings 
 for his own nation, for whom all glory in Jesus Christ had more 
 immediately been promised and designed. For this very peo- 
 ple, to which he belonged, the Israel of God, had forfeited the 
 divine promises the moment they were fulfilled, and they were 
 entrusted to the heathen. This unexpected issue, this peculiar 
 relation of the two great portions of mankind to God's new way 
 of salvation, reversing, as it did, their positions with regard to 
 the covenants of God, Japhet coming to dwell in the tents of 
 Shem (Gen. ix. 27), held back the pen of the Apostle, and be- 
 fore St Paul attains the close of the Epistle, he expresses him- 
 self in words full of mystery upon God's election by grace (ix. 
 
CHAPTER IX. 1-20. ' 805 
 
 1-29); with a view of evincing, not that God had proved un- 
 faithful to his promises, but, rather, that the Jews had, wil- 
 fully, maintained the righteousness which is by the law, while 
 they rejected the righteousness by faith which God had revealed 
 unto them (ix. 30 — x. 21). Before, however, he concludes, he 
 points to a time when the remnant of holy seed remaining in 
 the nation of Israel shall again be grafted into the olive tree, 
 and so all Israel shall be saved ; and this gives him an occasion 
 of terminating with praises of the love, the wisdom, and the 
 knowledge of God. 
 
 § 14. OF THE ELECTION OF GRACE. 
 
 (IX. 1-29.) 
 
 The ninth chapter of our Epistle belongs to those passages of 
 Holy Writ in which the unfathomable nature of its contents, 
 and the colossal character of its ideas, are exhibited in a more 
 than usually conspicuous light.* On this account, it has ever 
 been, since the time of Augustine, a hinge around which the 
 prevailing tendencies within the Church have moved, and such 
 is it even now. The [Roman] Catholic Church, in striking up- 
 on this rock, fell under the dominion of a Pelagianizing view, 
 and daily experienced all the injurious consequences which are 
 wont to accompany this tendency; while, on the other hand, in 
 the Protestantf Church, at the present moment, in their en- 
 deavour to master the import of this chapter, men have either 
 fallen down the precipice of the absolute praedestination of the 
 evil to evil, or have been betrayed into the gulf of an universal 
 
 • Luther very truly says, on the reading of this section, " Who hath not known 
 passion, cross, and travail of death, cannot treat of foi'eknowledge (Election of 
 Grace) without injury and inward enmity towards God. On this account must 
 Adam be first fairly dead, before he may bear this thing, and drink this strong 
 wine. Wherefore, take heed that thou drink not wine, while thou art yet a suck- 
 ing babe. Each several doctrine hath its own season and measure and age." A 
 noble instance of the wisdom of the great reformer. On the subject of the follow- 
 ing investigation, see the treatise upon Rom. ix. by Steudel, in the Tubingen Jour- 
 nal, 1836, No. 1, p. 1-95, and by Haustedt in Pelt's Theol. Mitarb., No. 3. In 
 the same work will also be found an essay by Meyer, upon the line of thought in 
 Rom. ix.-xi. Ruckert, in addition to his commentary, gives a separate treatise 
 upon the doctrine contained in Rom. ix., in the first number of his Exegetic Maga- 
 zine. In this section, Ruckert discovers the x'igid doctrine of Praedestination. 
 
 f Evangelisch. 
 
 U 
 
306 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 restoration ;* of which errors, the former leads at one time to 
 desperation, at another to security, while the latter, as the 
 Scripture plainly declares, must have moral indiiference for its 
 inevitable result. In the meanwhile, the symbolical books of 
 the Lutheran Church, especially the Formula of Concord, as 
 well as the "Confessio Marchica''i- among tl\e i;eformed confes- 
 sions, have already, in all essential points, delivered the true 
 scriptural definition; and many of their commentators have, in 
 the main point, adhered to them. J The causes which have, 
 notwithstanding, led men so frequently, and on different sides, 
 to depart from it, were probably, first, the inward one, of the 
 want of a real experience of grace, and, in the next place, the 
 outwai'd one, of taking up with insulated passages, without 
 having regard to their connexion with others, and with the 
 general teaching of Scripture. The want of experience leads 
 to Pelagianism; the upholders of the absolute predestination of 
 the evil to evil take the ninth chapter of our epistle apart from 
 the eleventh ; the defenders of universal restoration take the 
 eleventh without the ninth. In order to avoid this one-sided- 
 ness, let it be our first endeavour to make ourselves acquainted 
 with the connexion which this momentous chapter has with 
 itself, and with the whole of the Epistle, and teaching of Holy 
 Scripture, before we examine more closely the particular points 
 in it. 
 
 The fifth section (ch. ix.-xi.) of the dogmatical portion of our 
 epistle exactly corresponds with the first section of it (ch. i. 18 — 
 iii. 20). In this first section, the Apostle had considered the 
 
 • Schleiermacher's doctrine upon the subject of the Election of Grace (in the 
 journal conducted by himself with De Wette and LUcke, No. 2) is an entirely anti- 
 Calvinistic one, since he maintains the restitution of all things. Glockler, Benecke, 
 and Hbllner, also adopt the Apocatastasis. Reiche altogether questions the ob- 
 jective truth of the Apostle's statements. 
 
 + Compare Augusti's " Corpus libi'. symb." (Elberfeldi, 1 827), page 382 and 
 following. 
 
 X Especially, among more recent commentators, Flatt, and Beck, in his " Pneu- 
 matico-Hermeneutical development of the ninth chapter of the Epistle to the 
 Romans, Stuttgart, 1833." Only Beck's paper, which contains so much that is 
 excellent, would have been greatly improved, if, in connexion with this chapter, he 
 had at the same time elucidated chapters x. and xi. Tholuck (whom my respect- 
 ed colleague. Professor Hofling, in his " Beleuchtung des Dauraerischen Send- 
 schreibens," Nuremberg, 1832, follows in essential points) takes the middle course, 
 and explains some insulated passages very well, but he has neither delivered him- 
 self with sufficient pi'ecision upon the remarkable passages, ch. xi. 25-32, nor has 
 treated chap. Ix. enough in conuexion with chap. x. and xi,, to give entii-e satisfuc- 
 
CHAPTER IX. 1-29. 307 
 
 relation in which both Jews and Gentiles stood to the first way 
 of salvation, the law ; in the fifth, he considers the relation of 
 the Jews and the Gentiles to the new way of salvation, the 
 gospel. We are not, however, by any means to look upon the 
 ninth chapter as a resumption of the same subject which was 
 treated ch. i. 18 — iii.- 20; the Apostle is speaking, on the con- 
 trary, of a very different matter ; at the same time the contents 
 of either section have a close affinity one to the other, since the 
 relation of the Jews and of the Gentiles to both of God's dis- 
 pensations were very similar. For, with regard to the law, their 
 situation was this. By far the greater number of the Gentiles 
 had transgressed it in the grossest manner, and so were sunken 
 in an abyss of misery ; while some few among them really ful- 
 filled it, according to their relative measure of knowledge. In 
 consequence of these opposite conditions, both divisions of them 
 were fitly disposed for the reception of the gospel, the new way 
 of salvation. For those gross transgressors had experienced the 
 dreadful consequences of sin which in them had become exceed- 
 ing sinful, and so grace was able in them to be all powerful; 
 while the more virtuous heathen had likewise attained, by their 
 noble endeavours, to the true blessing of the law, the conviction 
 of sin (Rom. iii. 20) ; and, on that account, they also were led 
 to embrace the gospel as a remedy. And with regard to the 
 Jews, although a small portion of them might be in the last 
 mentioned condition, yet the relation of the greater number of 
 them to the law was such that they gave it an outward obedi- 
 ence, but inwardly transgressed it — a case which might occur 
 with individuals among the Gentiles also, though it was a very 
 rare one. And so arose the melancholy consequence, that the 
 law was unable to work its blessing on Israel, that is, it could 
 not effect any conviction of sin; they confidently looked upon 
 themselves as righteous, and yet were no less sinful than the 
 most degraded among the heathen, if not in the outward, yet 
 in the inward man ; and this relation of the two parties to the 
 law would naturally regulate their respective attitudes, with 
 regard to the new way of salvation in the gospel. The great 
 mass of the Jews who were inaccessible to the faith, were sure 
 to reject it, only those few availed themselves of the proffered 
 w^ay of salvation ; while with the heathen, on the contrary, it 
 was precisely the great mass of them who were disposed to re- 
 
308 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 ceive salvation in Christ ; and so the truth of the word (Rev. 
 iii. 15, 16), " I would thou wast either hot or cold, so then, be- 
 cause thou art lukewarm, I will spew thee out of my mouth,"' 
 was established both in the Jew and in the Gentile. The Gen- 
 tiles, viewed as grievous transgressors of the law, were cold, as 
 sincerely fulfilling the law they were warm, and so, in both 
 capacities, they were susceptible of grace, whereas the great 
 mass of the Jews came between these two conditions. Tliey 
 strove in an hypocritical manner after the fulfilling of the law, 
 but they had no inward hatred against sin, nor any fire of true 
 and divine love. And so fell Israel from his vocation, and the 
 heathen world stepped into his place. 
 
 By this means was brought about a strange complication. 
 Mankind had the appearance of being morg powerful than God, 
 since they w^ere able, through their sins, to make void what 
 God had promised. To show, however, that this is not the case, 
 but that God observes justice in all His ways, this is the great 
 object of the Apostle in the present section; on which account 
 also, xi. S3, he exclaims, " Oh, the depth of the riches, both of 
 the wisdom and knowledge of God!'' He proves, I say, that, 
 from the beginning, the promise of God was spoken not to the 
 Israel after the flesh, but only to that which was after the 
 Spirit (comp. ix. 7 with ii. 28);* but, among these last, the 
 promise had already found its fulfilment, namely, among the 
 Israel of God, whether they w^ere Jews or Gentiles. The con- 
 tradiction, therefore, was only an apparent one (ix. 30), when 
 the Gentiles, who sought not after righteousness, attained to it, 
 while the righteousness-seeking Jews received it not, because 
 the endeavour of the Jew after righteousness had been one that 
 appeared so only in the sight of men, but in tlie eye of God had 
 been a real transgression of the law; and, on the other hand, 
 what, in the case of many a Gentile, w^ould appear to human 
 eyes, a non-seeking after righteousness, had, in fact, been an 
 inward fulfilment of the law. And thus there had been in 
 God's dealings a strict consistency, which manifested itself no 
 less in the adoption of the true spiritual children of Abraham, 
 than in the rejection of his merely fleshly issue; and which is 
 
 * Compare also Deut, xxxii. 5, where it is said of the rebellious Israelites, " they 
 are blemishes and not His children." [Their spot is not the spot of His children, 
 Eiig. vers. 
 
 I 
 
OH AFTER IX. 1-29. 309 
 
 apparent from other things, and especially from this, that the 
 heathen, if they fall from their vantage ground of faith (xi. 17), 
 might again, on their part, be deprived of the gospel (which has 
 already, in some degree, been verified in the Oriental church), 
 while, in like manner, there is a possibility for the Jews, on 
 their becoming ready to receive the faith, to enter again into 
 their calling; yea, the Apostle expressly announces that, with 
 regard to Israel, an universal conversion really impends (xi. 
 25). So far the connexion of thought is plain enough ; and it 
 necessarily follows from this, that the Apostle neither intends 
 by the grace of God to take away from man the free determina- 
 tion of the will, nor by means of the latter to question the all- 
 sufficiency of grace — his only object is to establish both together. 
 The manifestation of the grace of God is always made to depend 
 upon the more or less of fidelity with which men employ that 
 knowledge of divine things which they already have. (Ezek. 
 xxxiii. 12.) 
 
 In the meanwhile, it must be allowed, this simple connexion 
 of ideas would not have been misunderstood as often as it has 
 been, if it were not for an intervening discussion (ix. 14-29), 
 which appears to lead to a very different result; namely, the 
 declaration of St Paul, that '' God hath mercy upon whom he 
 will have mercy, and hardens whom he will harden."" This 
 declaration, viewed in itself, might very conceivably lead those 
 who believe in the eternal damnation of the wicked, to the 
 doctrine of absolute predestination, as, on the other hand, in the 
 case of those who do not uphold the former tenet, it serves just 
 as easily to establish that of the restoration ; the compassion- 
 ating and the hardening presenting themselves only in the 
 sense of an earlier or a later election ; and the close of St Paul's 
 argumentation (xi. 23), while it is directly opposed to the 
 doctrine of the predestination of the wicked, which loses all 
 semblance of truth as soon as ch. ix. 14 is viewed in connexion 
 with ch. xi., furnishes a very plausible ground for the last- 
 mentioned interpretation, because the whole question there 
 appears to be about the final reception of all, without one word 
 being spoken of the damnation of any, and the whole reasoning 
 issues in the great thought, " God hath concluded them all in 
 unbelief that He might have mercy upon all,"' (xi. 32); and 
 thus the earlier or later disobedience, together with the unbelief 
 
31 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 wliicli is necessarily connected with it, is just as much attri- 
 buted to all as the earlier or later experience of the mercy of 
 God. Consequently, as ch. i.-iii. teaches the universality of 
 sin, so ch. ix.-xi. would ai)pear to indicate the universality of 
 redemption, and so, in this point of view also, both sections 
 would correspond one with another. But although, perhaps, 
 we may not be able to point to any passage in St Paul's Epistles, 
 with the exception of that in 2 Thess. i. 9, which expressly 
 teaches the doctrine of eternal damnation* — nay, it must be 
 admitted that they contain expressions, such as 1 Cor. xv. 28, 
 which rather seem to lead to the opposite conclusion — yet the 
 New Testament, in those portions which do not belong to St 
 Paul, and notably in the discourses of Jesus Christ Himself 
 (Matt. XXV. 41, etc.), and that not merely in parabolic language 
 (Matt. xii. 32; xxvi. 24; John xvii. 12), contains such decisive 
 passages for this opinion, that we should be very cautious how 
 we place the Apostle Paul in contradiction with them. The 
 business of the expositor is certainly to find the true sense of 
 the passage before him, and not to allow himself to be diverted 
 in his operation through fear of a contradiction of other places ; 
 still he would do well to reflect whether his operation have 
 reached the true meaning of the words, if it issue in an open 
 contradiction with other passages of Scripture; and even such 
 is the case here. For, granting that by admitting the doctrine 
 of a restoration, the passage receives a consistent meaning, it 
 by no means follows that this may not be obtained without this 
 admission; and if this be the case, the last-mentioned sense 
 must be preferred, as the one which was really in the Apostle's 
 contemplation, since, at all events, it must be allowed that St 
 Paul, though he does not bring it prominently forward, is far 
 from combating the doctrine of eternal damnation, or preaching 
 explicitly the doctrine of the restoration. The following con- 
 siderations may serve to indicate the practicability of such an 
 explanation of the passage in question, as may avoid both the 
 one and the other of the two extremes. 
 
 The difficulty and obscurity of the whole section before us 
 are diminished when we reflect that by it no means contains 
 
 * The doctrine of eternal damnation is implicitly given in the passage Rom. ix. 
 4, upon which compare the commentary. In Rom. ii, 8, 9, 16, the eternity of the 
 punishment of the wicked is not expressly marked, and the same applies to 1 Cor. 
 V. 13: xi. 32. 
 
 1 
 
I 
 
 CHAPTER IX. 1-29. 311 
 
 anything peculiar, since the same ideas which so startle us in 
 reading it, are also expressed throughout the whole of the Old 
 as well as the New Testament, It is only their conciseness, 
 their bold and powerful utterance, that lends them, as it were, 
 an unprecedented appearance here. There are two series of 
 apparently conflicting representations of the relation of man- 
 kind to God, which pervade to the whole of the sacred writings. 
 According to one series, all appears to depend upon man, his 
 earthly position as well as his eternal position in the world to 
 come. Already, in the Old Testament, laws were placed before 
 man, accompanied with blessings and with curses; if he ob- 
 served them, he was bid to expect welfare and peace both here 
 and hereafter; if he observed them not, the contrary portion 
 awaited him. In this point of view, man is represented as 
 responsible for all his actions, and for the development of his 
 whole life ; he appears as the absolute master of his destiny. 
 And in the New Testament, a similar series of expressions pre- 
 sents itself "Believe and be baptized,'' is the command given 
 to man : it is their own affair ; it rests with them to receive or 
 not receive it. The most arduous commandments are impera- 
 tively laid upon them, " Be ye perfect,'' or "Be ye holy!" Of 
 the impenitent and unbelieving, it is pronounced, " Ye would 
 not !" It is the Lord himself who calls with deepest sorrow ; 
 it is the Creator who cries with tears before his creature, " How 
 often have I desired to gather you, as a hen gathereth her 
 chickens together, but ye would not !" (Matt, xxiii. 37 ; Luke 
 xiii. 34.) But, by the side of this view, there is another series 
 of representations which apparently constitute a complete con- 
 tradiction of the first.* It is expressly said that it is " God 
 that worketh both to will and to do in man of his good pleasure," 
 (Phil. ii. 13), while immediately before occur the words, "Work 
 out your own salvation with fear and trembling." Christ him- 
 self says, " All that the Father giveth me is mine ; no man can 
 come unto me except the Father draw him." (John vi. 37, 
 44.) " No man can come unto me except it be given him of the 
 Father," (John vi. 65); and, " without me, ye can do nothing." 
 (John XV. 5.) Moreover it is said, " a man can receive nothing 
 (and therefore neither truth nor untruth) except it be given 
 
 • Compare my remai'ks in the earlier volumes of this Commentary, viz., vol. i., 
 Matt. xiii. 10, 17, 36, 43 j xxv. 34, 36. Vol. ii. Matt, xxvii. 3, 10. 
 
312 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 him from lieaven." (John iii. 27.) According to this view, 
 man no longer appears as the lord of his destiny, but Almighty 
 God alone, who worketh all in all. And on this account do all 
 saints acknowledge, with the Apostle Paul at their head, 
 "through the grace of God, I am what I am;" everything, the 
 truth, the belief, the reception of grace, is God's work in man, 
 and man may as justly call his conception, and birth in his 
 mother's womb, his own work, as he can call the life of faith 
 his own work. The believer is God's work, created in Christ 
 Jesus unto good works. (Eph. ii. 10.) " He that glorieth, let 
 him glory in the Lord." (2 Cor. x. 1 7.) Now, on the side of 
 the good, this statement of the exclusive operation of God, as 
 delivered in Scripture, is easily understood and admitted. He 
 who has abandoned the Pelagian point of view finds no difficulty 
 in conceiving that the good are not good beside God, in such 
 sense that He is acquainted with their good thoughts, resolu- 
 tion, works only from without, rather will he feel that no man 
 is good but the one God, who himself both is the good that is 
 in them, and works the good that he discerns in them. But, 
 if such be the relation of man to God, then it further plainly 
 appears that man cannot reserve any good for himself, even 
 though the greater portion be of God, as, for example, the free 
 continuation of the work of regeneration, which God has begun 
 (for what God begins God alone can continue), or belief in grace, 
 or the apprehension and appropriation of the same;* fortius 
 apprehension is precisely the capital point in the whole work of 
 conversion, and this would reserve to God only a secondary 
 part, or, at any rate, man would admit God only to an equal 
 share in the production of the new man, which is certainly 
 altogether inadmissible. It is God who makes the beginning, 
 the middle, and the end in the work of conversion. He gives 
 grace, and empowers man to embrace it at the beginning, and 
 hold it fast to the last ; all, in short, is God's, and nothing is 
 man's of his own. Meanwhile, although we maintain the oper- 
 ation of God in man in its fullest extent, this will yet combine 
 very well with the first series of expressions which apparently 
 attribute all to man, so long as we keep to the side of the good. 
 For the working of God by no means takes away the freedom 
 
 * Compare the subjoined passages in which conversion, belief, fidelity, are ex- ^ 
 pressly referred to God, and nothing of his own left to man. Jar. xxxi. lH; llcb. 
 xii. 2; Luke xxii. 32; 1 Cor. iv. 7; 2 Thess. iii. 2; 1 John v. 4. 
 
CHAPTER IX. 1-29. 313 
 
 of man, but rather perfects it. God works in the good and 
 holy not externally to their wills, but rather within them, and 
 fills them with that energy from a higher world which they 
 experience in themselves. Hence it is, that he is able to create 
 in them to will and to accomplish, without their ceasing to be 
 free, nay, by this operation it is that they just become truly 
 free, since so long as they are able to will any thing, other than^ 
 what God works, they have not the libertas, but rather, at the 
 best (as Adam before he fell), the libera voluntas, or (as is the 
 case with fallen men, in whom exists a predominating inclina- 
 tion to what God willeth not), the liherum arhitrium. The 
 whole world of good angels, as also the just men made perfect,* 
 will nothing and can do nothing of themselves, but only through 
 God, and yet are they free, yea, among the creatures they alone 
 are free, since in them God w^orks as in beings whom he hath 
 constituted in independence and freedom. Moreover these 
 imperative addresses to men, "Be ye perfect,'" etc., are intel- 
 ligible, notwithstanding the fact that man is not able to make 
 himself perfect, but only God, when understood with reference 
 to the good, since this divine command is no other than that 
 creative word whereby they become perfect, according to that 
 deep saying of Augustine, ^^ Da quodjuhes, etjube quod vis." 
 
 The whole weight of the difficulty falls thus upon the side of 
 the evil. God is in Himself, substantially, The Good. He 
 wills and creates only the good; and so it is conceivable, how, 
 in good men, who are known to him, he operates all that is 
 good. But then He is absolutely separate from the evil, which, 
 otherwise, has no substantial being, by virtue of his holy 
 nature he is not able to will it ;"|* and yet the Scripture says 
 that God, according to his eternal foreknowledge, not only 
 knows all evil, but that He works it too. The former assertion 
 
 • Meanwhile no created being has this freedom innate within it. It is only wheu 
 we have been strengthened and stablished in the warfare against sin, that this 
 result is attained. So that we cannot say that God might have so made all 
 conscious beings that it should have been impossible for them to sin. It is neces- 
 sary for the creature to retain the possibility of prevaricating from the law of life 
 implanted in it by God, in order that it may not hold its perseverance therein as 
 somewhat merely mechanical. 
 
 t The difficulty which many find in this whole cycle of doctrine, is aggravated 
 by the want of a distinct conception of the fundamental ideas, good and evil. The 
 good may, it is true, in a subordinate sense, signify a relation, but even then only 
 where it is a question of a merely legal righteousness. In its true and highest 
 meaning, it is to be taken as a substantial thing. God's essence alone is good, 
 and where good is, there is God. On which account no man can generate good, it 
 must be imparted unto him. On the other hand, the evil is nothing substantial 
 
314 KPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 alone might at first suffice, since in consequence of the unity of 
 operation in all His attributes, the knowledge of God cannot 
 be conceived apart from his operation ; but then the Scripture 
 adds to this the explicit declaration, that God worketh evil, 
 both here and in other passages as well. In the prophecies of 
 the Old Testament, from Gen. ix. 27, downwards, God's know- 
 -ledge of evil is decisively enough proclaimed. " Japhet shall 
 dwell in the tents of Shem,'' but then the descendants of Shem 
 are to fall from their vocation. Again, in Deut. xxxi. 16, 17, 
 20, 21, and Deut. xxviii., xxix., xxx., the fall of the people of 
 Israel is predicted in the distinctest manner, and no less clearly 
 is it signified (precisely as in Rom. xi.), that after this fall 
 Israel will be converted and inherit the blessing. The passion 
 of the Messias is foretold in the clearest manner, and this in- 
 volves also the knowledge of those by whom He was to suffer. 
 (Comp. Ps. xciv. 11; 1 Cor. iii. 20.) In like manner Jesus 
 knew who it was that should betray him (John vi. 64, etc.), 
 and yet chose Judas to be one of his disciples; He knew be- 
 forehand that Peter would fall, He warned him, and it came to 
 pass as Jesus had already foreseen and spoken. In consequence 
 of this God's absolute knowledge of evil, it is also said (Is. xlv. 
 7), " I form the light and create darkness, I make peace and 
 create eyil,"" and (Amos iii. 6), " Shall there be evil in the city, 
 and the Lord hath not done it V He hardeneth Pharoah, He 
 awakeneth Nebuchadnezzar; in short, He worketh what He 
 will, good as well as evil. To say that these are merely Oriental 
 phrases, is evidently inapplicable to the solution of this diffi- 
 culty; nor again would any man be disposed, in the face of 
 these and similar passages, to maintain that God does not 
 foreknow the free actions of man, or at least, if he foreknow 
 tlie good, because the good has a being, to deny that he knows 
 the evil, since evil is a nonentity. For the world's history de- 
 velops itself as well by evil actions as by good, even as the cru- 
 cifixion of the Son of God, which was brought about by actions 
 perfectly free, is the turning-point of the old and the new world ; 
 and if there be anything that God does not know, then it 
 becomes impossible to admit any true foreknowledge in God, 
 
 (to affirm which is Manicheism), and yet it is not without reality (a mere /ih ov), 
 it is a real but inwardly, and, by consequence, also an outwardly disturbed rela- 
 tion. And, therefore, all the powers of the evil are in substance good, only their 
 employment has been perverted. And from this it is that God may be operative, 
 in and with all the evil, and yet from the evil, as evil, remain absolutely separate. 
 
 I 
 
CHAPTER IX. 1-29.' Si 5 
 
 and, consequently, any personal Grod at all. Since, therefore, 
 as we remarked before, it is found impracticable, upon deeper 
 considerations of the subject, to separate the foreknowledge 
 from the predetermination of God, nothing remains but to take 
 the thoughts of holy Scripture as they are presented to us, and 
 to inquire in what way it would have them understood. That 
 it should mean that God wills the evil as evil, and hath wrought 
 it himself in His creatures, is so manifestly contradictory to 
 innumerable passages of it, and also to its entire spirit, that 
 none of the elder partizans of the rigid doctrine of predestina- 
 tion, Augustine, Gottschalk, Calvin, ever ventured to maintain 
 it; they only said that, whereas by the fall of Adam, which 
 took place without the predetermination of God, mankind had 
 become a massa perditionis, God, out of them, by an absolute 
 decree of grace, and by means of gratia irresistihilis, hath 
 elected some to happiness, and (as Gottschalk and Calvin in- 
 fer), by a decree of reprobation, hath appointed others to per- 
 dition. The latter supralapsarians were the first who went so 
 far as to maintain that the fall of Adam himself was predeter- 
 mined, in which, indeed, the doctrine of a gratia irresistibilis 
 being once admitted, they were more consistent than Augus- 
 tine and his followers; nay, in consequence of their principles, 
 they were obliged to derive even the fall of the devil and his 
 angels from the decree of God, and not from the misuse of their 
 own free will. Still, as surely as we see it to be the doctrine 
 of Scripture, that God does not work evil as evil, it being the 
 melancholy privilege of the creature, in virtue of the free will 
 created within him, to be able to generate evil, so surely is it 
 equally impossible to exclude evil, viewed as a phenomenon, 
 from the divine operations. The abstract evil never appears in 
 history, it is but evil personalities, who, with their evil deeds, 
 ever appear on the scene ; these, however, exist in necessary 
 combination with the world of good, because, in every evil 
 being, and even in the devil and his angels, the powers them- 
 selves with which they act are of God, who bestows on them at 
 the same time both the form in which, and the circumstances 
 among which, they may come into manifestation.* With re- 
 
 " Without this infinitely consolatory doctrine, the man whom hostile elements 
 assail, would be obliged to believe himself abandoned, without hope, to their savage 
 power. Consider the martyrs of the early church in presence of the shocking 
 wickedness of their persecutors; what could have inspired them with courage, if 
 
816 ePistle to the komans. 
 
 ference to this latter agency of God in evil, He is said in 
 Scripture to be the originator of evil itself, considered as a 
 phenomenon in history, and this was what the ancient dogma- 
 tical authors* intended to express by the canon. Dens concurrit 
 ad materiale, non ad formale actionis malce. Certainly, after 
 this method of understanding it, the great, and, perhaps, ever 
 insoluble problem still remains, namely, the ability of a created 
 being to act contrarily to the will of God.-f* Meanwhile we 
 must proceed upon the supposition of this ability as upon an 
 axiom, even as we lay it down as an axiom that the world was 
 created out of nothing, without forgetting that of the how the 
 world came to be from out of God, and through God, does not, 
 on that account, cease to be a problem. What has been said, 
 however, will serve to elucidate the various expressions used in 
 Scripture, regarding the relation of free beings to God, and 
 solve, at the same time, in essential points, the difficulty of the 
 passage under our consideration. We thus avoid the predestina- 
 tion of the evil to evil, as well as the restoration of all things, 
 and maintain, on the contrary, an election of grace in the case 
 of the holy,}: in pursuance of which God not only knows who 
 will be holy and happy, but also effects that they may be holy 
 and happy, without abolishing their own free self-determina- 
 tion. This, as the confessio Marchica very pertinently says, 
 is " one of the very most consolatory articles," for, whereas no 
 man is acquainted with the mind of God, and God excludes no 
 
 they had not been upheld by the sure conviction that God, in his wisdom, had 
 ordained even this way, in order to their perfection and happiness, and, therefore, 
 had summoned up such forms of evil as those wliich they saw opposed to them. 
 
 * Nor has the most recent science been able to produce anything more satisfac- 
 tory upon the relation of human freedom to the divine omnipotence, than the old 
 theory of the concursus contains. Only this must not be so understood as if 
 God contributed one half to the execution of the free deed and man the other-, but 
 rather that God alone and exclusively is the creator as well as the upholder of the 
 whole man, and of every deed he does. 
 
 + The assertion that, as the possibility of a thing is already the thing in the germ, 
 if God have created man with the possibility of sinning, he must have also created 
 the germ of sin in him, is not tenable, because it is only in the case of substantial 
 realities that there can be any question of a germ at all. But evil is not any sub- 
 stantial reality, the evil is the deflection of created will from the will of God; this 
 originated in a free deed, which was in fact the beginning of an entirely new series, 
 but it draws its ground or cause for and in itself alone. 
 
 X Although, therefore, man is free, it is impossible that all should become evil 
 and oppose God's way of salvation; for, were this possible, man would be more 
 powerful than God, and able to defeat God's plan. Comj). the words of Christ, 
 Matt, xxiv. 24; 1 Cor. x. 13. 
 
I 
 
 CHAPTER IX. 1-29. 317 
 
 man from happiness (1 John ii. 2; 1 Tim. ii. 4), although God 
 knows who excludes himself, so each one can and may hold 
 himself as elected. This belief that we are elect, can injure 
 none but him who inwardly is so impure as to dream it possible 
 for a man to be happy without becoming holy, nor, on the 
 other hand, without this belief can any one be made perfect; 
 for, upon what shall a man found the certainty of his happiness, 
 if he may not* presume to rest it upon the unalterable decree of 
 Grod? Nothing remains but to rest it upon himself, his own 
 will, his own integrity, which, of all conceivable foundations, is 
 the most insecure. Yet we do not by any means conceive this 
 election of grace as a gratia irresistibilis, which necessarily 
 draws after it the whole doctrine of predestination, with its 
 most extreme consequences, but only, as we do not attribute to 
 the holy and the happy the smallest part in that by which they 
 become such, for that is the mere work of God, so man, cer- 
 tainly, in every stage of his earthly development, reserves the 
 negative ability of resisting grace, he may fall at any time from 
 it. So that the whole merit as entirely belongs to God, as the 
 whole of the guilt belongs to man alone.* Though the wliole 
 development and historical formation of the evil in the world 
 depends upon God, so far as it is He w^ho causes the evil to be 
 evil in that particular form in which it is so, yet the being evil, 
 in itself, is the simple consequence of the misuse of man's own 
 free will. Taken in this scriptural point of view, history be- 
 comes no stiff necessity, no fatal physical evolution, nor, on the 
 other hand, are mankind exhibited as a number of little gods, each 
 one of whom makes of himself even w^hatsoever he may please. 
 
 * The non-resistance of grace in the holy does not signify the same thing with 
 the receiving of grace. The former is the pure negative, the latter is positive, and 
 presupposes an enei'gy in the will, which is first wrought in man by God. Man, 
 therefore, hinders God's work, but he is not able to promote it, in the same man- 
 ner in which man is in a condition to destroy created objects in the world, and yet 
 is unable to make a single blade of grass. Nor is there any inconsistency, when 
 we are told in the Bible that in the work of regeneration, man can do nothing of a 
 positive nature, and yet we are directed to pray, for prayer is simply this non- 
 resisting towards that attitude of preparation to the pi'ogress of the human nund 
 which is requisite in order to receive the workings of grace. For the rest, it 
 stands to reason, that there is no moment of human existence, nor any conceivable 
 act of men, in which the negative and the positive portion of it can be entii-ely 
 separated; rather they are continually interpenetrating one another. In the mean- 
 while, one or the other always has a decisive predominance; the positive activity 
 predominates in the natui'al man, but in the work of regeneration the receptivity 
 must prevail, in order to leave the positive side to the Holy Spirit. 
 
318 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 The truth is, that in God all is necessary, as in man all is free 
 — not, however, in mere supposition, but in living truth; and it 
 is only thus that the ideas of guilt and judgment have their 
 deep and awful significance. All evil, in God's hand, serves but 
 for a foil and for the promotion of the good, and yet His wrath 
 burns with justice against it, because it originates only in the 
 wickedness of the creature which receives its punishment from 
 righteousness. The possibility of this punishment being an 
 eternal one, does not depend upon God, but is in the creature 
 alone, which, as it has the power to resist God's will once, may 
 also continue to persevere in its resistance.* The doctrine of 
 the restoration appears inconsistent in admitting the possibility 
 of resistance for a time, and making it cease in as arbitrary a 
 way at a certain point, for there is no point at which the resist- 
 ance of the evil may not be considered as possible to be con- 
 tinued. Moreover, as this doctrine does not deny the reality of 
 sin, it gains little by having recourse to a final restoration of all 
 the evil, because, if God knew beforehand that a being would be 
 evil for thousands of years, and yet created that being, it might 
 justly be said, that, since evil is so awful a thing, that it would 
 appear better never to have been born than to have sinned but 
 once with no more than the glance of the eye, God should have 
 preferred never to have created such a being at all. The only 
 doctrine consistent with itself, is that which denies the reality of 
 evil, but this leads to a consequence which rests upon a rrpuirov 
 •^ixihog) for, according to this, the quality of all actions is alike. 
 Whereas, if w^e assume the reality of sin, and admit only the 
 problem of the ability of the creature to resist God, the whole 
 doctrine of Scripture follows in order, and both divine and 
 human interests are perfectly secured. And the principles here 
 laid down furnish at the same time the following simple con- 
 nexion of the passage in question : " I behold with deep sorrow 
 the unbelief of Israel ; but God's word is not on that account 
 
 » According to the theory of the unreality of sin, and the perpetuation, not of 
 the individual, but only of the race, it might be said that there is neither a restora- 
 tion, nor yet an eternal damnation. Those who have become entirely evil would 
 perish when they die altogether, and come to nothing, as the withei-ed leaves fall 
 from the tree, while the sanctified alone would continue to live. But it is scarcely 
 necessary to observe that the Bible is far from asserting the personal immortality 
 of some persons only; not to mention, also, that upon this supposition, the grief of 
 St Paul, Rom. ix. 1 , etc., would be without adequate motive, " for he who is dead 
 is fi-ee from sin" (Rom. vi. 7)> and no longer an object of lamentation. 
 
CHAPTER IX. 1-2.0. . 319 
 
 made of none effeet ; the All-knowing and Almighty One rather 
 permits both good and evil to have their manifestation according 
 to His will, even as He has long ago predicted the fall of the 
 Jews, and the election of the Gentiles, in the prophecies of the 
 Old Testament" (ch. ix.) But the guilt of this apostacy is not, 
 on that account, at all the less chargeable upon the Jews alone, 
 since by resisting grace, they went about to establish their own 
 righteousness, instead of the righteousness of God (ch. x.) 
 Moreover, even in the fallen nation itself, God hath reserved a 
 holy seed, and in this will the fulfilment of the divine predic- 
 tions one day be realised (ch. xi.) 
 
 If we now proceed to consider the cycle of expressions em- 
 ployed by the Apostle Paul to expound his doctrine of election, 
 we shall find that the circumstance of earlier or later, which are 
 merely human modes of thinking, and which cannot be thought 
 to have any place in the mind of God, are implied in all of 
 them. The terms <?rposidu (Acts ii. 31 ; Gal. iii. 8), ^poyiyvuxTKu 
 (Rom. viii. 29, xi. 2; 1 Pet. i. 20), 'Trpoopi^o} (Acts iv. 28; Rom. 
 viii. 29, 30; 1 Cor. ii. 7; Eph. i. 5-11), rrporidniJ^, (Eph. i. 9), and 
 the substantive itpoymeig (Acts ii. 23; 1 Pet. i. 2), and t^o- 
 diG,? (Rom. viii. 28; ix. ]]; Eph. i. 11; iii. 11; 2 Tim. i. 9) 
 express the knowledge and the will of God, before the object of 
 His knowledge comes into outward manifestation. And as all 
 the expressions applied in Scripture to God have been selected 
 not on His account, but only for the sake of man, so too it is 
 only for man that they hold perfectly good. Considered from 
 the human point of view, God does in fact foreknow, although, 
 as far as regards Himself, the Avhole co-exists in one eternal 
 present. So that, in the expressions in question, there are 
 evidently two distinct classes, first those which express know- 
 ledge or discernment, then those which apply to the will. It 
 may be objected that, albeit the will always presupposes the 
 knowledge of that which a man wills, yet our knowledge need 
 not always be combined with the volition of the thing known. 
 God, for instance, knows the evil as such, not simply as a 
 phenomenon, he discerns in the evil deed what it is that makes 
 it evil, in short, God possesses the thought or the knowledge of 
 evil, but not the will. Still, however accurate this statement 
 is, it has nevertheless no relation to the phraseology of St Paul. 
 The Apostle never speaks but of God's knowledge of the evil 
 
320 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 phenomenon, but this God wills as well as knows; and it is Only 
 and solely because He wills it that it comes into manifestation. 
 We must, therefore, altogether reject the Pelagian distinction of 
 a prcevisio and prcedestinatio when we view the question in rela- 
 tion to the good, since it is only with regard to evil that it has 
 a certain degree of truth, and is of no service at all in solving 
 the difficulties in the Apostle's writings. In St Paul, God's fore- 
 knowledge always implies a fore-working and a fore-determina- 
 tion, just as His fore-determination is never without foreknow- 
 ledge. Now this fore-determination, as has already been 
 demonstrated, does not destroy the freedom of the will, but 
 rather presupposes it. God creates and works in free beings as 
 free, and in beings not free as not free. Now, one remarkable 
 expression of the divine <7rp6k(fi$ is the term IxXsyeiv (John xv. 
 16-19; Acts xiii. 17; 1 Cor. i. 27, 28; Eph. i. 4), equivalent to 
 which is d<popl^eiv (Gal. i. 15), or the exXoy/} (Rom. xi. 5-7; 1 
 Thess. i. 4), also <7rp6&sffi5 xar ixXoyriv = 'Trpohdig ixXeyouecc (Rom. 
 ix. 11), by which the sjcXskto! (Matt. xx. 16; xxii. 14; Rom. 
 viii. S3; Col. iii. 12; comp. comment, on Matt. xxii. 14; xxiv. 
 22) are designated, and which is manifested through the xX^ff/g 
 to the human consciousness. (Rom. xi. 29; 1 Cor. i. 26; Eph. 
 i. 18; iv. 1; 2 Thess. i. Jl; Heb. iii. 1.) This election of the 
 holy and the blessed (since it is to blessedness alone that Jx- 
 Xoyy} in St Paul's language refers, and not, as will be shortly 
 shown, to subordinate advantages) has nothing compulsory in 
 it: the possibility of resisting still remains in every one of the 
 elect, only with God, in virtue of His omniscience, neither this 
 possibility obtains nor any other possibility whatever. (Matt, 
 xxiv. 24.) Nor does the IxXoyyj at all involve in itself the 
 positive rejection of the non-elect. Humanly considered, they 
 also are elect, since God wills the happiness of all; but since 
 they resist this divine will, and God knows it so will be, before 
 Him they are non-elected or rejected, but not through any 
 decree of reprobation, but only through their own rejection of 
 the universal decree of grace. 
 
 After these observations, we may now proceed to consider 
 the particulars with some hope of a prosperous issue out of the 
 labyrinth of the Apostle's discourse, which seems, like the sixth 
 chapter of St John, calculated for the express purpose of sifting 
 the Church of Christ. 
 
CHAPTER IX. 1-29. 321 
 
 Ver. 1, 2. St Paul expresses his sorrow for the unbelief of 
 his people with the most earnest protestation; his use of the 
 phrase aXvjdsiav Xsyca, ou -^s-jdofji^ai, indicates an apprehension that 
 some might not give him credit for these sentiments. It is 
 clear that in the case of the hostile Judaizers, this was so; we 
 have, however, no particular ground for looking for these in 
 Rome; the habitual feelings of the Apostle exerted an involun- 
 tary influence upon his immediately present ideas; and he had 
 the less inducement to repress it, inasmuch as he must needs 
 have expected to meet with the counteraction of these his 
 opponents also in Rome. 
 
 Tholuck is certainly right in not allowing the words h XpiffrS), 
 h TvsvfiaTi ay/(fj to amount to forms of swearing; after these 
 words, we ought rather to understand wv; but he overlooks the 
 fact that there is the resemblance of swearing in these vehement 
 protestations, which are so heightened by the words Iv xptgrO) 
 that they come very near in meaning to an oath. There is no 
 kind of ground for Griesbach's proposal to inclose the words 
 cvfifiaprvpo-jarig fioi rrjg (fuvstdrjcfeuig [lou in a parenthesis. Lachmann 
 rightly connects them with those following. — Ver. 2. bbhvr^ is the 
 stronger expression for sorrow, grief of soul. 
 
 Ver. 3. To show how great his grief is, the Apostle exclaims, 
 »ju;^o/A>}i' alrhg syu ava^s/^a ihai d-Trh rov Xpiffrou vTsp ruv adeXipuv 
 
 fiov. The whole passage loses its meaning and its deep earnest- 
 ness, if we suppose that Paul was really aware that every single 
 individual of the Jewish nation, all mankind indeed, would in 
 the end be blessed. These words, therefore, indirectly contain 
 a strong proof of this conviction, that there is a state of eternal 
 damnation; as he expressly declares, 2 Thess. i. 8, 9, that those 
 who obey not the Gospel shall suffer punishment, even everlast- 
 ing destruction from the presence of the Lord. See John iii. 
 36. The words have no meaning unless we understand him to 
 wish to be banished from Christ, and so miserable for ever, in 
 place of his brethren (u-yg^ = Avrt, not merely for their advantage, 
 comp. Comment. Rom. v. 8, 12, etc.) This wish, it is true, is 
 an impossible one, since neither does love admit of unhappiness 
 (rather where true love is there must needs be happiness), nor 
 can one brother suffer in place of another (Ps. xlix. 8); Christ 
 alone is able to do that, because He is the representative of all.* 
 
 * To maintain the objective possibility of any one giving his soul to bo anathema 
 
 X 
 
322 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 But the love of Christ which had been shed abroad in the heart 
 of Paul, made him also cry, as the same spirit of Christ had 
 already bid Moses say : " forgive them their sins, if not, then 
 blot me out of thy book '' (Ex. xxxii. 32, 33), in which place 
 also, the sense of the whole passage ought, certainly, not to be 
 completed by the words, " for a certain time,'' but " for ever." 
 The words may also be taken for an intercession of Paul with 
 Christ,* who was able to do what he was only able to wish, and 
 what, in the form of a wish, he utters of and for himself. 
 Meyer's view will not hold (v. Pelt's Theology, Mitarb. Pt. 3. p. 
 71) according to which, the imperfect tense is intended to indi- 
 cate the merely momentary rise of this wish. The imperfect 
 here, as Winer has already rightly remarked (Gram. p. 259), 
 has no narrative force, it only stands, as it often does, for the 
 conjunctive, " I could wish." 
 
 'AmkfLa was originally the same with avd&rifia, but in more 
 recent times, and in the N. T. also, the latter form was used for 
 what was consecrated, devoted to the gods, while ava^s/^a came 
 
 for another, leads by direct consequence to Gichtel's doctrine of the Melchizedekian 
 priesthood, according to which, the Christ within us is able to suffer for sins, in the 
 same manner in which Jesus himself suffered. But this doctrine evidently con- 
 tradicts the all-sufficiency of the merits of Christ, who, by His once offering of Him- 
 self, hath perfected all them that are sanctified (Heb. x, 14). No doubt Christ 
 poui's his love into the hearts of the faithful, and they willingly undergo whatever 
 portion of temporal suffering the sin which is in man brings with it for them; but 
 the undertaking of the burthen of sin for another upon one's self, together with its 
 eternal consequences, is a thing not to be conceived of any man except in the per- 
 son of Jesus alone. The partizans of the so-called pure love, as Fenelon and 
 Madame Quion, often quote these words ; meanwhile, if the doctrine of pure love 
 mean any more than that man ought not to love God on account of his gifts alone, 
 it cannot certainly lay claim to any countenance in Scripture. In the rest, the 
 words of Bengel are worth considering : " de mensura amoris in Mose et Paulo 
 non facile est existimare; nou capit hoc anima non valde provecta." Such 
 passages as Eph. iii. 1 3, Col. i. 1 4, 1 Thess. iii. 1 0, which are apparently related 
 to the present, require another interpretation, as will appear when we come to ex- 
 plain them. [Gichtel, mentioned at the beginning of this note, was a German 
 enthusiast, born 163«, died 1710.] 
 
 • Similar sentiments are of frequent occurrence in the mystics, both of former 
 and of modern times, which are to be viewed as the offspring of their overflowing 
 love. So Angelus Silesius, in his " Cherubinical Pilgrim," No. 28, says: — 
 Kein Tod ist seliger als in dem Herrn sterben, 
 Und um das ew'ge Gut mit Leib und Seel 'verderben. 
 " No death is more blessed than to die in the Lord, 
 And for the eternal good with body and soul to perish." 
 
 [Angelus Silesius was the name assumed by John Scheffler, a physician of 
 Breslau, born 1624. He became a convert to the Romish faith, and published 
 several works of mystical poetry. He died in a convent at Breslau in 1677. Hia 
 Cherubinisher Wandersmann is described as having enjoyed great popularity in 
 Germany. See Conversations Lexicon.] 
 
I 
 
 CHAPTER IX. 4. 32:^ 
 
 to signify anything accursed, or devoted to the gods in an evil 
 sense, like the Latin sacer. It corresponds with xdQap^a^ crg^/- 
 ^jj/Aa, vipiTtddapfia (1 Cor. iv. 13), that is, a victim for a com- 
 munity, a man upon whom, in the case of a pestilence or other 
 national calamity, the guilt of the community, which is supposed 
 to be the cause of the visitation, is laid as upon a victim. This 
 meaning would be applicable here by reading I'lrh, which is sup- 
 ported by D.E.G.; but a^o, which, upon critical grounds, merits 
 the preference, does not admit the application of this figure of 
 speech. On this account, it is more to the purpose to compare 
 the Hebrew Q-^rT) ^J which we obtain the notion of extrusion, 
 exclusion, banishment. We need not be reminded that the ban 
 here spoken of is not to be understood as an outward exclusion 
 from the communion of the church, or of merely physical death; 
 the depth of the thought points to the spiritual and eternal 
 exclusion from the communion and life of Christ, in which alone 
 Paul had found happiness (viii. 33, etc.) We may supply here 
 6/ Sucaroi', which occurs in a similarly hyperbolical passage of 
 Gal. iv. 15. 
 
 Ver. 4. In order to set the depth of the fall of Israel in the 
 plainest light, Paul brings forward all their prerogatives, the 
 exercise of which, nevertheless, was bound up with their obe- 
 dience (Deut. xxviii.), and which are kept in reserve by Grod for 
 the people, until the stipulated condition, the obedience of faith, 
 should have been realised in them, just as a throne is with- 
 holden from a kingly race overthrown by their own culpability 
 (xi. 29). In most of all their privileges he places the sacred 
 name 'igpasXTrat, by which the theocratic people were character- 
 ised as the soldiers of God (2 Cor. xi. 22, Phil. iii. 5). But in 
 the days of Christ they were no longer victorious in the struggle, 
 as was Jacob of old (Gen. xxxii. 29) ; on the contrary they were 
 fallen. The vkhaia belonged to the nation as the type of the 
 true Israel of the N. T., for, considered in itself, Israel was yet 
 in bondage (viii. 14), yet the people is already called in hope 
 the first-born of God. (Ex. iv. 22, Jer. xi. 3.) The dd^a, here 
 cannot well be applied to the general glory of Israel, since that 
 could not, properly speaking, be mentioned among its especial 
 privileges, nor is the supposition of an Hendiadys more tenable, 
 since the object of the Apostle evidently is to enumerate, one 
 by one, the greater prerogatives of Israel, and on this account, 
 
524 KPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 xa/ is constantly repeated. The best way, undoubtedly, is, to 
 compare it with the Hebrew n'ill'' TIllD (^^^ ^^ John i. 1), and 
 to understand the pillar of cloud and fire which led the poeple 
 through the wilderness, and was the symbol of the presence of 
 God. To find the reason why the 5/a^^xa/ are distinguished from 
 the vofiokaia, we must remember the covenants of God with the 
 patriarchs Abraham and Jacob. The XuTpsia specifies the vo/tio- 
 6sffla with reference to the several theocratic institutions of the 
 temple worship. Under iitayyikiai are included all the pro- 
 phecies, especially the Messianic ones. Uarspi? denote especially 
 the patriarchs, the first ancestors of the race, of whose posses- 
 sion the Israelites were so proud, and by whose blessing they 
 were blessed. The reading sg uv would restrict what follows to 
 'ffarspsg alone, and xa/ Jg uv reckons the natural descent of Christ 
 among the privileges of the nation. Critical authorities are 
 decisive for xa/, only F.G. omit it, as also the following t6. 
 
 Ver. 5. In the treatment of this famous doxology, interpre- 
 ters have difiered down to the most recent time, according to 
 the dogmatical view which they have taken of the person of 
 Christ. All those who have maintained the divinity of Christ, 
 have understood this passage also of Him ; all those who have 
 denied it, refer it to the Father. Glockler alone is in favour of 
 referring it to God, though he is far from denying the divine 
 dignity of Christ. On the contrary, he expressly acknowledges 
 it. This impartiality is laudable in itself, and it must be ad- 
 mitted that the momentous dogma of the divine nature of 
 Christ cannot sufier from the loss of a single text ; and, more- 
 over. Christian antiquity made but little use of this passage as 
 a proof, properly so called, from an apprehension that too much 
 might be proved thereby, namely, the Sabellian indifference of 
 the persons.* I should, on that account, determine myself, 
 without hesitation, in favour of Glockler's view, if his reasons 
 were more solid than they are. For he takes the words 
 from 6 ujv unto a/A9jv together, and considers the first half, with 
 gW/ or 'ieru understood, as the subject, and the latter half as the 
 predicate. The words are thus intended to fit into the context 
 in such a way, that Paul praises God for the many tokens of 
 His grace exhibited to the Jews; but as the Apostle had just 
 been afflicted by the thous^ht that all these favours had been 
 
 • Compare Reiche'a Comm. vol. ii. p. 268, note. 
 
 I 
 
CHAPTER IX. 5. 325 
 
 forfeited by tlie people of Israel, Gldckler supposes that these 
 words are only to be viewed as a transient smile called up on 
 the countenance of one in sorrow, by the remembrance of happy 
 moments of his life. But this is obviously a forced construc- 
 tion, and it is much more simple to say that Paul's intention is 
 to place the human nature of Christ in contraposition to His 
 divine nature. The observation that, by referring it to Christ, 
 the sentence falls into two parts, an apposition, that is, and a 
 doxology, whereas this is not the case if it be referred to God, 
 is entirely insignificant. Only two objections of any moment 
 remain, first, that ilXoynrog does not occur in application to 
 Christ (comp. Luke i. 18, Mark xiv. 61, 2 Cor. xi. *31, Rom. i. 
 25, Eph. i. 3, J Pet. i. 3), but to God alone ;* and, secondly, 
 that 6 Jt; 'jrdMTuv @s6s can only be predicated of the Father. To 
 the former of these remarks no weight is to be attributed, since 
 it is only so far true that ivXoyrjTos cannot be applied to 
 mere man, or any creature whatever, nevertheless, but in as far 
 as Christ is God of God, so far does this divine predicate also 
 belong to Him, as much as any of the remaining ones, so that 
 it must be looked upon as matter of mere accident that it has 
 not been assigned to Him in more numerous places. The 
 second observation, on the other hand, is not without its weight, 
 and it is, upon the whole, the only one which can perplex the 
 expositor in his treatment of this doxology. For not only does 
 the expression It; '^dnuv 0s6g not occur with respect to Christ 
 (if that were all, the argument would have force, since there is 
 no need that all His names should often occur), but it appears 
 as though it could not be assigned to Him. For, notwithstanding 
 the consubstantiality of the Son with the Father, the latter 
 remains ever the Unbegotten, and so God over all, and the 
 former the Begotten One. If then, this name could, without 
 violence, be reconciled with the scriptural doctrine regarding 
 the Son of God, the reference of the doxology to Christ must 
 
 • In Matt. xxL 9, Luke xix. 28 ivXeyr/^ivrs is certainly applied to Christ, but it 
 occurs in a quotation from the Old Testament. But if we remember that, with 
 the exception of 2 Tim. iv. 18, the New Testament in general contains no formal 
 doxologies to Christ (see, however, Rom. xvi. 27, Rev. v. 12, vii. 10), the want of 
 places in which the term tuXoynros is applied to Christ, is very simply accounted 
 for. But after such passages as John v. 23, the almost total absence of formal 
 doxologies to Christ can be the result of accident alone. The doxology in 2 Peter 
 iii. 1 8, cannot well be brought to bear, as the genuineness of this epistle has been 
 called in question. 
 
326 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 then be abandoned, although everything else is in its favour, 
 since critical authorities in favour of the omission of @s6? are 
 unimportant to the last degree, being no more than a few cita- 
 tions of the Fathers ; and the inversion of the words Qshg st) 
 rrdvrvu, does not at all affect the sense. It must, however, be 
 acknowledged, upon a nearer survey of the words &ibg It/ Tavrwv, 
 that we cannot take 'Trdvruv as the masculine with ai/^^w^wp or 
 06 wv, or some such word understood (as is the meaning Lord of 
 all Lords, God of all Gods, Deut. x. 1 7), since there is here no 
 reference to the Gentiles; it can only be taken in the neuter 
 gender, so that our passage will then be parallel to the words 
 in Rom x. 12, and Acts x. B6y where it is said, oZrog hn 'Trdvruv 
 xvpiog. And if we further consider that in John i. 1, etc., the 
 name @s6g is applied to the Logos, and, at the same time, the 
 universe is represented as dependent upon Him, it is difficult to 
 see why the Son should not be called It/ irdvruv QsSg. The ex- 
 pression would only be an improper one in case the Father were 
 conceived as included among rd 'Trdvra, but it is self-evident that 
 this is not the case, as Paul says, 1 Cor. xv. 27 : orav ds s/Vj^, on 
 'xdvTo. I'TroTitaxraiy brfkov, on sxrhg rov u<7roTd^avTos avrui rd Trdvra. I 
 therefore understand the passage in the usual manner with 
 Tholuck, Ruckert,* and other recent expositors, as relating to 
 Christ. Among the various punctuations on record since Eras- 
 mus wrote, the one which has found the most favour, is that 
 according to which the words o ujv lirl 'xdvrm are referred to 
 Christ alone, and the last words taken as a doxology tothe Father. 
 But in that case the doxology stands without any connexion, and 
 It/ rrdvrm has no regular position, and, therefore, this can satisfy 
 only those who have an insuperable objection to apply the name 
 tV/ 'irdvrcav (dzog to Christ. The conjecture of m instead of wv, is 
 certainly an acute one, but it is destitute of any critical autho- 
 rity from manuscripts. 
 
 Ver. 6-9. After this introduction, the Apostle proceeds to 
 the argumentation itself. In the first place, he shows how the 
 fall of the Israelites from their vocation does not make void the 
 word of God, and the promises contained in it, since among the 
 
 • The last mentioned scholar's remark, that tlXoynros, when applied to God, 
 must, according to the idiom of the Old and New Testament, always precede the 
 noun, is of no importance. Kollner rightly observes, that the position of the words 
 is altogether not a mechanical thing, but is rather determined, in each particular 
 conjuncture, by the connexion, and by the mind of the speaker. 
 
CHAPTER IX. 6-0. 327 
 
 descendants of Abraham, to whom these were to be referred 
 from the beginning, were to be understood not the fleshly but 
 only the spiritual progeny. He might even have said that the 
 Word of God had been established by the fall of Israel, since 
 he shows by the quotations from the Old Testament in Rom. 
 eh. ix. 24, etc., that the fall itself had already been predicted in 
 it. St Paul founds the idea of a spiritual Israel, which he had 
 already broached, Rom. ii. 28, 29, upon that passage in Gen. 
 xxi. 11, where Isaac is denoted as the seed to whom the pro- 
 mises belonged, and upon Gen. xviii. 10, 14, which contains 
 the words of the prophecy itself. Isaac is represented as the 
 antithesis to Ishmael, who was born indeed before the former, 
 and yet was not the heir, and therefore stress must not be laid 
 upon the merely natural descent, but rather upon the spiritual 
 affinity with the faith with which Abraham lived. (Compare 
 the detailed treatment of this antithesis between Isaac and 
 Ishmael, Gal. iv. 22, Heb. xi. 1-9.) The primary object of this 
 demonstration is indeed only to show that the Word of God re- 
 mained unshaken, but this would not make the notion that the 
 Apostle had no positive intention of exhibiting Isaac as the 
 figure of the faithful, and therefore of the happy, and Ishmael 
 as the type of the unbelievers, at all the less assuredly false. 
 It is true St Paul does not here express the idea, but it sleeps 
 in the depths of his soul, as appears from Gal. iv. 22, and as 
 will be made more evident by the sequel of the argumentation 
 in this chapter. Only we must not conclude that because St 
 Paul represents Ishmael as the typical representative of the un- 
 believers, that is, of the non-elected portion of mankind, he 
 therefore viewed Ishmael himself and his descendants as ac- 
 tually condemned; since we ought, on the contrary, to reserve 
 to Ishmael and all the Ishmaelites, the power to cease, in the 
 Apostle's sense, to be that which they are, and also to pass 
 over into the spiritual family, just as respecting Israel we must 
 assume for them the power of excluding themselves from the 
 spiritual family. St Paul is not here intending to off'er any 
 decision upon the secrets of the divine judgment, as to whether 
 Ishmael in person should be eventually blessed or not, but only 
 wishes his spiritual position, as it occurs in Scripture, to be 
 conceived as symbolical.* 
 
 ■ As the meek Isaac, who gave his life for a willing sacrifice, is the symbol of 
 
328 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 The phrase eu;^ oTov on, in ver. 6, is elliptic for ou roTov leTi, oJ6v 
 isriv oTi, meaning, at the same time, I do not mean to say, or it 
 does not however follow from that. [v. Winer's Gram. p. 282.] 
 Lobeck on Phrynichus, p. 427, adduces similar figures of speech 
 from ancient writers, but a precisely parallel idiom is nowhere 
 found. A similar use of ug on occurs in 2 Cor. xi. 21, 2 Thess. 
 ii. 2. Aoyog Qsou refers to the whole of the Old Testament, 
 which would be altogether shaken by the annihilation of so very 
 important a portion as the prophecies. — 'Ex-sr/Vrg/i; answers to 
 h^^> the opposite to ,asvsiv, and signifies to fall away, to lose 
 
 power or significance; here in reference to the fulfilment, it 
 means to remain unfulfilled. Israel denotes not the person of 
 the patriarch, but the nation, with reference however first to 
 their physical existence, and secondarily to their spiritual 
 character. No one can possess the latter who wants the 
 natural descent, and vice versa. Ver. 7. In like manner C'lrspf/.a, 
 = ^^"j is first the physical soholes, and then the spiritual ; the 
 
 former are the tskvu rn? (fapxog, the latter the rsjtm rou crvsu/Aaro? 
 or 0goD. The same distinction between empfj^a. and rsxva occurs 
 in John viii. 37, 38. KaXsTff&ai here, as frequently in the Old 
 Testament (see Comm. on Luke i. 32), has the signification of 
 being, with the secondary idea of being recognised as such ; it 
 can by no means be equivalent to s^Xsysiv, as Tholuck proposes. 
 The quotation, ver. 9, is the substance of Gen. x. 18 and xiv., 
 given freely from memory. The word IXsveofiui refers as it were 
 to God's foresight of the accomplished fulfilment, with re- 
 gard to the phrase xam rov xaiphv rourov = pfJif^ rii^3> compare 
 
 Reiche's letter, p. 15. In the Septuagint, instead of the usual 
 form, we find sig r. x. r. together with sJg upag, and I agree with 
 Reiche in thinking it probable that originally this last phrase 
 alone stood in the text of the LXX., and the phrase xara r. 
 X. r. was first introduced into it from Rom. ix. 9. The expression 
 signifies "this time year," the year being taken as a thing 
 which perishes and again produces itself. 
 
 Ver. 10-13. But the history of the holy patriarchs furnishes 
 
 the gospel in its peculiarity, so Ishmael, the wild man, whose hand is against every 
 man (Gen. xvi. 1 2), symbolises the peculiarity of Islam, which was born of the 
 people descended from him. For as the seed already contains the character of the 
 plant which is to be developed from it, so in the ancestors of nations are found 
 those peculiarities which characterise their descendants. 
 
CHAPTER IX. 10-13. 329 
 
 in the relation of Esau to Jacob a still more decisive proof of 
 the principle that the blessing does not depend upon the flesh- 
 ly descent. For Ishmael was the son of a bondmaid, which 
 makes it more easily conceivable that the child of the lawful 
 wife should be preferred to him ; but Jacob and Esau were both 
 sons of a free woman, nay, they were even twins, and yet as 
 soon even as they were born, and without regard to any act of 
 theirs whatever, their respective positions were assigned, by the 
 predestination of Grod, according to the passages in Gen. xxv. 
 22, Mai. i. 3. Here again, then, Jacob corresponds with Isaac, 
 and Esau with Ishmael. Every attempt, however well intended, 
 to mitigate the harshness of the idea, and to avoid viewing 
 Esau as the representative of the reprobate, must here be 
 abandoned, as contrary to the intention of St Paul, especially 
 as Esau is presented as such elsewhere in Scripture. (Heb. xii. 
 1 7.) In this place the Apostle already adopts into his argu- 
 ment the leading idea which he follows out in the 14th and 
 succeeding verses, namely, that God summons «vil creatures 
 as well as good into the historical order of the world (not cer- 
 tainly as evil, but as evil beings in this or that definite shape), 
 and therefore these last do not avail to defeat his purpose and 
 system of governing the world, which are made known by the 
 prophecies. 
 
 The construction of ver. 10 is elliptical, not inconsecutive; as 
 Eebecca is named, the most natural word to supply is Sarah, 
 when the sense would be, and not only " Sarah shows this, but 
 also Rebecca."' The other ways which have been suggested for 
 completing it, are forced. Koirri, bed, an euphemism for cohabi- 
 tation, where x. sx^'v is said of the woman who conceives in con- 
 sequence of cohabitation with any one, x. didovai of the man. — 
 Ver. 11. The words Tpdcasiv dyadov point evidently to Jacob, 
 xaKov to Esau, so that the meaning is, that although they had 
 neither done either good or evil, yet God spoke of them as if 
 they had. It is doing great violence to the meaning to refer 
 the 'TTpodssig jtar ixXoyrjv, which did not depend upon the works 
 which were not in existence, but rested upon the holy will 
 (jiimiv = T^^, remain unalterably fixed), alone of Him who 
 
 calleth whom He will, Jacob only, and not Esau, with Beck, 
 simply to the right of primogeniture, or with Tholuck to the 
 occupation of the theocratic land. For in St Paul's view, 
 
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 Esau's possession of the primogeniture and the theocracy in- 
 volved his election to eternal life; as therefore he proves in Gal. . 
 iv., that Israel was to be rejected, so in his view Esau is also 
 the rejected son, and the type of all the rejected in general. — 
 Ver. 12. The thought is not materially affected, though we 
 should, as Tholuck does, understand the terms iniX^m and 
 \'kaccm of the nations which sprung from Jacob and Esau, since, 
 according to the sense of St Paul and the Scriptures, these 
 latter participate in the character of their fathers, not indeed in 
 every individual, but in the great mass of them. But ho\j\i\)'uv 
 need not be understood of political servitude, it must be refer- 
 red to a state of spiritual dependence into which Esau was 
 brought by throwing away his birthright, while the stream of 
 grace flowed away to Isaac. — Ver. 1 3. All the assurances that 
 ixidm here does not mean to hate, but only to love less, to be- 
 stow a less advantage, cannot satisfy the conscientious exposi- 
 tor, since he cannot overlook the fact that St Paul has advised- 
 ly selected a very strong and repulsive expression from the 
 passage of Scripture in question. Nor does it make against 
 this, that in the passage of Malachi the immediate question is 
 of outward circumstances, since these also are to be viewed as 
 expressions of the wrath of God. 
 
 Ver. 14. It is only in this severe manner of interpretation 
 that the question has any meaning, il7\ dS/x/a -ra/jd r^ ©sw ; and 
 the thrilling answer in ver. 1 5 suits. The mitigating construction 
 of the passage from ver. 6-13, affords no occasion for such 
 thoughts at all ; and, therefore, the interpreter cannot in any 
 way evade the stringent connexion of thought. Only he must 
 not forget at the same time the principle, Scriptura Scripturce 
 interpres, and therefore many to whom the observations which 
 have been already made (ch. ix. 1), have clearly shown that 
 God does no injustice when He hates the wicked, because God is 
 not the cause of his being wicked, but only of his wickedness 
 coming into manifestation in such a form as is most salutary 
 both for himself and for the universe, might demand how are 
 those other passages in which the universality of grace is as- 
 serted, to be reconciled with this doctrine of the 'rrpokan xar' 
 Ixkoyriv. But we have already given this a brief consideration 
 in ix. 1, in treating of the twofold manner in which the subject 
 is represented in Scripture, according to which the whole process 
 
CHAPTER IX. 15, 16. 331 
 
 ill the work of renewal is attributed at one time to God, and at 
 another to man; nevertheless this doctrine forces itself so 
 strongly upon us in every verse of the following passage, that it 
 stands in need of a fresh consideration. The Scripture declares 
 in the most explicit words, that Grod wills that all mankind 
 should be saved, and come to the knowledge of the truth. 
 (Ezek. xxxii. ]1, 1 Tim. ii. 4, Tit. ii. 11, 2 Pet. iii. 9.) This 
 universality of grace would seem, however, to be done away by 
 the rrpodsffis )car exXoyviv. But, evidently, this could only be the 
 case, were we to attribute the activity wherewith man resists 
 grace also to God, in the way in which this is done by the rigid 
 doctrine of predestination, for in that event God w^ould call those 
 who were not elected as it were in mockery, only to put men all 
 the sooner and more surely to confusion ; a representation which 
 can only be described as one of the most remarkable aberrations 
 of the human mind that has ever been revealed. Whereas, if 
 we will only put down the power of striving against grace, and, 
 in short, all that is evil in man, as his own melancholy property, 
 the two manners of expression may easily be reconciled one with 
 another in the following method. God's all-comprehending 
 love excludes no man from salvation, whosoever is excluded is 
 himself the cause of his own exclusion. But, on the other hand, 
 God compels no man to be saved, and knows, in virtue of his 
 omniscience, who it is who will exclude himself, even, as in 
 virtue of His omnipotence he is the author of every form of sin- 
 ful development. In reference, therefore, to this latter considera- 
 tion, God's will is styled a <7rp6k<sig xar gxXoy^D, in reference to 
 the former God's grace is universal. Though, therefore, in 
 virtue of His attributes of omniscience and omnipotence, God 
 assuredly both foreknows who they are that will resist His 
 grace, and also permits them to appear in definite forms in 
 history. He knows them only as persons who, by misuse of their 
 own free will, have become evil and continued so, and if there 
 exist beings >»possessing the possibility of resisting God, the 
 relation of God to those in whose case this possibility may have 
 been realised, can be represented no otherwise than as the 
 Bible exhibits it. 
 
 Ver. 15, 16. St Paul does not meet the question with a direct 
 answer, he only replies by quoting God's words in Exodus xxx. 
 19. The question indeed involves a self-contradiction, and 
 
832 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 could only have been hazarded by human blindness or temerity, 
 and accordingly, at ver. 20, it meets with its merited censure. 
 God's will is the eternal rule of right (Deut. xxxii. 4.) How 
 then can unrighteousness be in Him ; there is no abstract right 
 to which God is as it were subordinate, but his free and holy 
 will alone is for the creature the rule of right. The circum- 
 stance, however, that in the passage here quoted, the mercy of 
 God alone is spoken of, is but an apparent alteration of the 
 difficulty, since, according to the intention of Paul, we must also 
 add, "and whom He will he hardenetV (ver. 18). The words 
 only agree with the context when taken in the following sense : 
 God's will is absolute, He does what He will, and there is no one 
 who may call him to account, and say, "What doest thou?''* 
 It is self-evident that in God the will cannot be an arbitrary one, 
 but must ever work in union with love and wisdom; but since 
 man is not able to comprehend the ways of God, his duty is 
 humbly to submit himself to His will. 
 
 Ver. 15. No distinction need be sought between IXsbTv and 
 oHnipiiv ypj and Qj-n, both are used only in opposition to the 
 idea of merit, eg 'ipym, ver. 11. But they certainly refer to the 
 election to happiness, not, as Tholuck thinks, to the exhibition 
 of any extraordinary proofs of love. The immediate context of 
 the passage, in the original, gives us here no clue; St Paul 
 treats this as well as the following from a more extended point 
 of view, and we must therefore follow him to his point of 
 observation. Ver. 16. QiXnv and the stronger word rpiyztv^ which 
 needs not to be exclusively applied to running in the race 
 course, signify here the positive activity of man, which has no 
 existence in relation to God. Every, even the least portion of 
 good in man, is from God alone.^f* It is not, however, here pre- 
 tended that man is not able to exert a negative power of 
 resisting God. On which account the Scripture continually 
 urges upon him, ye would not, ye have been unfaithful, dis- 
 obedient, but then on the other hand it says: it is God who 
 
 • It stands to reason that the notion that Paul intends in this place to oppose the 
 Pharisaic doctrine concerning fate, as Herman especially, foUowhig Origen and 
 Chiysostom, has construed it, is altogether untenable. 
 
 •f* Glockler's view of this passage is quite mistaken. He translates it, ** It depends 
 not upon man's willing and running, that is, it is not according and subservient to 
 human willing and running, but yet not contrary thereto. St Paul is treating of 
 the causality of the spiritual life, and this must be denied to man, and awarded to 
 God alone. 
 
CHAPTER IX. 1 7. ,3.33 
 
 liatli wrought both the will, and the faith, and the obedience 
 in you. 
 
 Ver. 17. Although in ver. 15 the question was only of the 
 gracious operation of God, the example in the present verse is 
 taken from an instance of a directly opposite character, which 
 clearly shows that Paul intends this notion to be supplied in 
 the former verse also. In the passage of Ex. ix. J 5, 16, the 
 Scripture expresses itself in such a manner with regard to 
 Pharaoh and his opposition to Moses, the messenger of God, 
 that God would seem to be himself the author of this sinful 
 phenomenon.* Every attempt to explain away the force of 
 these thoughts is altogether contrary to exegetical principles. 
 According to the manifest drift of St Paul, the conceptions 
 denoted by h^riyupa and otw? svdsi^u/na/, are not to be taken in a 
 diluted sense, but in the full power of their import. It by no 
 means follows from this high view of the subject, that St Paul 
 intends to say that God has made Pharaoh evil by any positive 
 operation, but he only means that God permitted that evil per- 
 son, who of his own free will resisted all those workings of grace 
 which were communicated in rich measure even to him, to come 
 into manifestation at that time, and under these circumstances, 
 in such a form that the very evil that was in him should even 
 serve for the furtherance of the kingdom of The Good and the 
 glory of God.-f- Even so, St Paul means to say, must the apos- 
 
 * Glbckler understands i^syit^nv of the elevation of Pharaoh to the throne, and 
 maintains that Ivtulufcxi should be taken in a passive sense, " in order that I might 
 be manifested as to my power." The first proposition is altogether untenable, and 
 needs no refutation, and the second does not mitigate the thought, as Glockler seema 
 to think it does. Moreover, there is a decided predominance of the middle form 
 in the New Testament idiom, and there is no ground whatever to depart from it 
 here. 
 
 + It is quite horrible when Goraarus, and the other Supralapsarians say, that 
 when God will condemn a man, He first creates sin in him, in order that after he 
 lias been plunged into sin, he may be justly damned. But, in the Apostle's view, 
 the 'lyi't^iiv of the evil themselves, is an act of the love of God, not only for the 
 membei's of the kingdom of God and the pious, but even for the wicked. For the 
 evil is in man without having been created by God ; when therefore he causes what 
 is lying concealed to come to sight in the concrete appearance, this is just the most 
 powerful mean to bring the wicked hito a sense of their condition, and, if possible, 
 to effect their conversion. (See Comm. xi. 8.) If, however, any one should rejoin, 
 before men, this may be true, because they may always hope that the wicked 
 may be converted, but not before God, who, by virtue of his omniscience, knows 
 who they are who will not be converted, for in such persons as should not be con- 
 verted, their guilt would be even aggravated by every attempt to convert them ; 
 tlie answer must be, that it certainly is the very curse of the evil that they turn 
 even what is good to their own injury, but that God, when he willed the possibility 
 of sin, thereby established also the possibility of persevering in sin, and of misusing 
 
334 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 tacy of Israel also glorify the name of God, for it, too, lias been 
 brought into manifestation by God in this very form. 
 
 St Paul has intentionally sharpened the language of the LXX., 
 who had expressed the thought in milder terms. He renders 
 ^^r^TO^n ^J s^riyupcx,, whereas the LXX. have hzKiv rovrov disrvi- 
 
 prihii according to which the idea will be that Pharaoh had 
 made himself evil. But St Paul's translation entirely corres- 
 ponds with the original text. The interpretation, " permit to 
 stand," "permit to continue," for which Tholuck decides, is no 
 doubt admissible in itself, but in the first place, it is not the 
 nearest to the Hiphil of 'T^y, and next, it is contrary to the 
 sense and intention of the writer, as the following verses clearly 
 show, and Reiche, Kolner, and Glockler rightly acknowledge. 
 "O'lrcag must be taken strictly rgX/xwg; in order that Pharaoh 
 might become a monument of the penal justice of God, God 
 provided that the evil actually existing in him should be mani- 
 fested in this definite form. The last words of the quotation, 
 which in no way afiect the main idea, agree with the LXX., 
 only they have le-xy^ instead of duvafiiv. St Paul therefore sub- 
 stituted e^^iys/poc with express design, as his argument required, 
 a circumstance which puts all mitigation of the thought out of 
 the question. 
 
 As a sequel to the preceding quotation, the Apostle now 
 plainly discovers the previously suppressed antithesis, according 
 to his bold method of pursuing an idea to the very limits of the 
 truth contained in it ; for he says, God also hardeneth whom 
 he will. Here, also, the &£Xs/v of God is obviously not to be 
 understood of mere arbitrariness, which cannot in any way be 
 imagined in God, but of His will, as directed by wisdom and 
 love. But it is objected that the notion of axXrjpvvm (equivalent 
 to which is 'jrupou from Tupog, callo obducere, ohdurare, Rom. xi. 
 8, John xii. 40), appears to be in itself inapplicable to God ; 
 certainly the usual form is exXrip-^ncdai or apiXripvvsiv kavrov (see 
 Acts xix. 9; Heb. iii. 8, 13, 15; iv. 7. Occasionally also in the 
 Old Testament and the Apocrypha. Ex. vii. 22; viii. 19; Ps. 
 xciv. 8; Sirach. xxx. 11). But here the hardening, as in Rom. 
 
 His grace. There only remains the matter of fact, which furnishes the ultimate 
 problem, viz., " How came God to create a being with power to withstand Him the 
 Almighty One?" And here nothing is left for man but to be silent, and say, " It 
 is God's doing, whatever God does is well done." 
 
CHAPTER IX. 1 7. 835 
 
 xi. 8, is referred to the will of God. In the Old Testament, on 
 the other hand, ^i;^, ntlJOT (v- 2 Sam. xvi. 10; ] Kings xxii. 
 22; Is. Ixiii. 1 7; Deut. ii. 80; Ps. cv. 25), is more frequently 
 found, denoting the positive operation of God against the wicked. 
 The notion of its standing, as Ernesti and Schleusner prefer 
 (like /j^tceTv in ver. 18), for a mere equivalent to ovx sXssTv, is 
 evidently inadequate. They refer to Job xxxix. 16, where it 
 is said of the stork, ocTroffxXripvHi ra tsxvu eaurSjs", i. c, she neglects 
 her young. But even there it is a hard thought to say that 
 God neglects one of His creatures. On the other hand, it is 
 not incorrect to refer to the divine presence in the case of evil, 
 provided this be not extended also to good, so as to make the 
 sense, that God will have mercy upon those of whom He fore- 
 sees that they will, of their own accord, determine themselves 
 to good, and He hardens those of whom He has foreseen the 
 contrary. For the very determination of himself to good in the 
 good man is God's work, but the resisting of good in the evil 
 is no work of God. Meanwhile, this appeal to the prescience 
 of God, even, though it be not incorrect in the case of evil, 
 creates more difficulty than it clears up, in that it makes the 
 divine will appear dependent upon the will of man ; whereas, 
 the express object of the Apostle, in this place, is to set in clear 
 light the absoluteness of the will of God. The best method, 
 therefore, will be to consider more attentively what is implied 
 in the notion of hardening. In the first place, this hardening 
 is not the beginning of an evil state, it rather presupposes this 
 as being already begun. Accordingly, St Paul does not say 
 that God awakens the beginnings of evil in men. He considers 
 these notions as already in being, first as a consequence of 
 original sin, and then on account of man's own unfaithfulness, 
 which does not suppress the already existing sinfulness, but 
 only gives it sway. This hardening, therefore, is not an aggra- 
 vation of sin, but, so far at least as it is partial, it is rather a 
 method of checking its aggravation. It is essentially the with- 
 drawal of the capacity of receiving the operations of grace ; 
 God renders man, under certain circumstances, incapable of 
 receiving grace, in order to mitigate his guilt ; for if the man 
 in question had the eyes of his spirit open, were he aware what 
 was offered to him, and yet resisted, in that case he were a far 
 greater subject of punishment than without this capability he 
 
o36 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 could be. Thus one might say of the cotemporaries of Noah, 
 that God had hardened, had indurated them so that they 
 obeyed not the preaching of Noah (2 Pet. ii. 5), and yet by 
 reason of this very obduracy, they were not rejected for ever 
 (1 Pet. iii. 18). Finally, the total induration is a manifestation 
 of the simple punitive justice of God, when the sins of man 
 have reached that degree of intensity in which they constitute 
 that which is called the sin against the Holy Ghost. If this be 
 the import of St Paul's conception, no objection can be made, 
 on any score, to the proposition, h 6s\ii gjiXripuvst. The divine 
 will, tempered as it is with wisdom and love, applies this har- 
 dening, be it a partial or a total one, only in those cases, and in 
 that degree in which His holiness requires that it should be 
 applied. God neither makes the hardened person evil, nor the 
 evil more evil than they are ; all He does is to cause the evil 
 that is already in him, and must, at any rate, accomplish its 
 development, to come in such a way, and no other, into outward 
 manifestation; this, however, he does, as Calvin says, not 
 merely permittendo, but also intus et extra operando. 
 
 Ver. 19-21. The Apostle now introduces* anew the unwise 
 inquirer of ver. 14, in order to find an apology for himself in 
 this operation of God, even in the forms of evil. St Paul 
 abashes this arrogance with an appeal to the absolute character 
 of God, for whose ways the creature must render an uncondi- 
 tioned submission, even where it is not able to comprehend 
 them. The similitude which he introduces of a potter, and his 
 relation to the clay which he fashions, exhibits this dependency 
 in the most striking manner. Nothing, however, but the same 
 want of sense which suggested that question, could understand 
 the comparison as though St Paul's intention was to represent 
 God as resembling, in all respects, a human artizan. The 
 
 • The whole tone in which Paul here exhibits the remonstrances of the Jews is 
 characterised by a kind of familiarity which we often find, in the Old Testament, in 
 all its simple dignity, and especially in Job, where, towards the close of the book, 
 God himself acknowledges the truth that it contains. When, however, nobility of 
 sentiment is lost, this familiarity then assumes the form of rashness, and, there- 
 fore, this defect also belongs to the darker side of the Jewish character, in the days 
 of its degeneracy. The consciousness of the divine election, which, in an objective 
 view, was a well-founded one, instead of producing an humble adoration under 
 such unmerited favour, imparted to many individuals among the Jews an unblush- 
 ing temerity, a vaunting of their own righteousness even in the sight of God, the 
 like of which was never found in any other nation. Paul's present object is to 
 abash this tendency, and hence the form which his argument assumes, which, how- 
 ever, is not carried to a vicious extreme, but observes the limits of the truth. 
 
CHAPTER IX. 19-21. 337 
 
 difference between the two, which the Apostle nowise intends 
 to deny here, but which he has no inducement to bring especi- 
 ally forward on this occasion, is this: man maketh what he 
 will of his own weak and often unholy and loveless will, whereas 
 God createth with his almighty will, but which is yet ever 
 holy, ever full of love. In consequence of this, God can cer- 
 tainly form beings with different talents, and impart to one 
 more, and to another less of these talents, and, consequently, 
 determine their several vocations to a greater or inferior 
 agency, but He cannot make one evil and the other good, 
 because His holy will is unable in any case to produce evil. 
 But here the question arises, whether the axsvo? sJg ri[iriv and 
 arifj^iav in the present passage, do not exactly denote these two 
 degrees of vocation which God dispenses of his own free deter- 
 mination, without their having any relation to morality or 
 a life of faith, and, therefore, to the bliss dependent upon 
 them ? In the first place, the comparison might be em- 
 ployed to show that no potter ever makes entirely unservice- 
 able vessels, but only such as are destined for some more or 
 less honourable use. Next, this view is apparently favoured 
 by the circumstance, that, in the following verse, the <s'/,z\jn sXkvg 
 and opyvig* may be so discriminated from the vessels of honour 
 and dishonour, that the vessels of honour should not necessar- 
 ily be vessels of mercy, nor the vessels of dishonour vessels of 
 wrath, but only so that, according to the good or bad use of 
 their free will, the Jews, who were the vessels of honour, might 
 become vessels of wrath, whereas the heathen, who were the 
 vessels of dishonour, should become vessels of mercy. And 
 this would contain this admonition for the Jews: do not 
 imagine that you, although you be vessels of honour, must 
 necessarily become and continue vessels of mercy; you may 
 become vessels of wrath, and the heathen, who are vessels of 
 dishonour, may become vessels of mercy ! And no doubt this 
 yields a very beautiful meaning, and we must unquestionably 
 admit that Paul might have followed out this thought ; but his 
 line of argument, upon the whole, does not authorise the notion 
 that this was what he really meant to deliver here, or why 
 
 • The expression <r»ivv i^yyn seems to be formed after the Hebrew myi ^ba 
 (Is xiii. 5), although its signification in the passage fi'om the Old Testament varies 
 a little fi'om that in which Paul employs it. 
 
 Y 
 
338 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 should he have come so suddenly upon the investigation into 
 the dispensation of gifts? The words from ver. 19 onward 
 refer, I admit, to the thought in ver. 18, but then sXssTv and 
 GxXyjpvvsiv, in this verse, refer to moral conditions alone, not to 
 gifts of grace, and verses 24-29 also point to the same. There 
 is not a word to indicate any diiference between the axivr} rifjJrn 
 and uTtfLta?^ and the CTtivn iXsoug and opyrjg; according to St PauFs 
 intention, they correspond, one with another, throughout, just as 
 in the parallel passage of 2 Tim. ii. 20, the wooden and earthen 
 vessels stand, not for those who are more or less endowed, 
 but for the wicked. These latter, indeed, are called vessels of 
 God, inasmuch as God knows how to make even them avail- 
 able to his purpose, and, in this respect, also the similitude 
 of the potter holds good.* God not only permits the wicked 
 to come into the world, but he also causes them to become as 
 they are, although He does not cause the evil that is in them 
 (ver. 19). 
 
 *Av&6(rr7ix,s is not a hebraism for the optative aorist, as Tholuck 
 supposes, but is to be understood thus, " Who hath ever been 
 able to resist His will V — Ver. 20, fisvovvys is wanting in D.E.F.G. 
 In A. it comes after av^pwrs^ but we doubt it was only left out 
 on account of the difficulty; it occurs elsewhere in the New 
 Testament only in Luke xi. 28, and is to be viewed as a particle 
 implying, at the same time, concession and limitation, and to 
 
 • Glockler groundlessly refuses to recognise any similitude here, but only a 
 simple conclusion from the less to the greater, as if the meaning were, if a vessel 
 cannot question the potter, how much less can man question God ? But evidently 
 this will not hold, since it might be answered, that it is the very property of a man 
 that he is able to do what the lifeless vessel cannot. The parallel instances of the 
 Old Testament sufficiently prove that it is intended to be a similitude. But the 
 reader has already been reminded, on Matt. xiii. 1, that no comparison holds good 
 in all its relations, otherwise it were identical with the object which is to be illus- 
 trated by it. Ruckert and Usteri are of opinion that the proof is defective in this 
 place, but the exposition which has been just given of the connexion of thought here 
 will have made it evident that the proof is conducted in the most stringent manner, 
 if only we do not encumber the Apostle with the proposition that God creates evil 
 itself. If, however, it be rejoined, why then does not Paul give the question t-/ 
 irt ftifjt(piTa.i the direct answer, " because thou makest the evil thyself, and God 
 only determines the shape in which it shall come out in manifestation ?" — it will be 
 sufficient to answer, that the Apostle does, in point of fact, expressly make this 
 observation in the 30th and following verses of this chapter; only here he will not 
 allow himself to be diverted from his immediate train of ideas, which is of the 
 highest importance with him, because it might be the means of impressing upon 
 the Jewish mind, that they must first abandon their claims upon God, before any 
 mention could be made of a participation in the kingdom of God, because it was 
 the advancement of these pretensions that entirely stood in the way of an humble 
 reception of grace on the side of the Jews. 
 
 I 
 
CHAPTER IX. 22, 23. 339 
 
 be rendered " certainly it may so seem.'' (Com. Hermann ad 
 Vigor, p. 541, who translates it by quin imo, enim verc.) Upon 
 the image of the potter, comp. Job x. 8 ; Isa. xlv. 9; Eccles. 
 xxxvi. 7; Wisdom xv. 7. But the passage which appears more 
 particularly to have been in the Apostle's mind, in this com- 
 parison, is Jer. xviii. — Ver. 21. ttjXo's is the clay in its raw 
 state, (pvpafia the mass of clay kneaded for work — the doughy as 
 it were. 
 
 Ver. 22, 23. After this may now be mentioned the respec- 
 tive relations in which the phenomenon of the evil as well as 
 of the good in the world's history stand with regard to God's 
 designs; the latter furnishes occasion for the revelation of His 
 grace, as the former does for his power and his justice. On 
 this account, it is impossible to deprive ha of its intentional 
 sense, and the phrase Q'cXm Ivds/^aedai xal ympiaai must be con- 
 sidered as equivalent to JVa. On the side of the good, God's 
 operation is altogether to be considered as ubiquitous though 
 not compulsory, on which account, in ver. 23, it is said, ©ds 
 rrporiroi(j.a(!iv ffKsvyi sXsovg ih do^av. According to which, the word 
 '7rpoyiro//xa<f'sv signifies God's foreknowledge as well as his working 
 and creation of the good, both in its commencement, continua- 
 tion, and end. But of the evil, on the other hand, Paul will not 
 consent to say that God creates the evil in them, but only the 
 form which the evil assumes. Therefore he does not use 'xponroi- 
 fLudiv of them; moreover, instead of the active, he uses the 
 middle form xctTripriaiJjha* by which the production of evil 
 itself is transferred to the side of the creature. 
 
 Ver. 22. A few unimportant MSS. omit g/ bs or hi alone, in 
 order to relieve the construction; but the words are evidently 
 genuine, though the sentence is an anacoluthon. The usual sup- 
 
 * Here also Reiche and others would supply vto toZ Stev. Were this in the 
 text, even then it might be explained of the operation of God in the wicked con- 
 sidered as a phenomenon. But since it is not found there, I cannot consider such 
 an addition warranted by the intention of St Paul, but am much rather disposed to 
 believe that we must assume that the Apostle intended by this method to signify 
 the different relation in which God stands to the good and the evil, since he employs 
 such different terms for the one from what he does for the other. And I am the 
 more readily determined in favour of this sense in the present case (although other 
 wise, I obserf e, as an exegetical cause for the interpretation of this passage 
 the rule of taking every expression in its entire force), because the ^vtyxiv h craXAjf 
 ftccK^oevfAta, will not accord with the prominence thus given to the divine activity. 
 There is something not only discordant but absolutely contradictory in the idea, 
 that God endures with much long-suffering what He has himself prepared. 
 
340 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 plements, ri IpovfLsv or r/ /Ms/M(psra/, do not suit, because they only 
 go back again to the question in ver. 19 ; it is better to suppose 
 that after the words g/ de k. r. X., the subsequent member of the 
 proposition, which, with its present form, xa/ hot, ympkri, denotes 
 the construction with which it set out, ought to have followed 
 
 with some such words as ourug xai yvcapil^si X. r. X. or yvuplt^si Kai 
 
 X. r. X. At any rate, this is more natural than Meyer's most 
 violent supposition, according to which, at the conclusion of 
 ver. 23, an Aposiopesis takes place. The manner in which 
 ver. 24 joins on to ver. 23 is quite incompatible with this inter- 
 pretation. — Th bumrov = r^ dvvaf^ig with the idea of avenging 
 power implied — (pspsiv h fj^axpoSv/j^Ia can only apply to the ripen- 
 ing of the evil in evil. God endures the wicked in their evil, 
 until they become manifest to themselves in their evil fruit, in 
 order that, even by these means, they may yet be brought to 
 repentance, or else be involved in utter destruction. In St 
 PauFs intention u/ojmg in this place is that which is a-s-wXg/a (2 
 Thess. i. 9), even as do^d must be taken as equivalent to ^wjj 
 aiuiviog — SxgDo? kXzoxjg exeuos g'xXoy^g, Acts ix. 15. The choice of 
 expressions here is strictly governed by the already used image 
 of the potter. Moreover, in the Hebrew ^^3 has the more ex- 
 tended meaning of utensil, or means. Comp. Is. xiii. 5; Jer. 1. 25. 
 
 Ver. 24-26. The principles which have just been developed 
 are also openly propounded in Scripture. The passages of Hos. 
 ii. 25, i. 10, are a comment upon ov ^iXs/ sXssT(yeY. 18). These 
 prophecies were realised in the calling of the Gentiles, which is 
 so far from making God's word of no effect, that it rather ful- 
 filled it (ver. 6). God's prophecies, being the utterances of the 
 All-knowing and Almighty one, must needs be fulfilled, not, 
 however, by destroying the free will of the creature, but rather 
 through that very free will. 
 
 In ver. 24, with the word oug, the figurative expression <rx£u>j 
 is dropped for terms peculiar to man. Ob fj^om — dXXa xa/ is a 
 mitigated expression ; for St Paul might have said, few Jews 
 and many Gentiles. It is of the latter alone that there is any 
 question in the first quotations, yet so that the fall of Israel is 
 there already intimated. Since, according to the' analogy of 
 the sons of Isaiah (Isaiah vii., etc.), the daughters of Hosea also 
 wear a typical character, in particular, the oux riya'Trrj/Jw} {^^ 
 TV2TVy) represents the kingdom of Israel. St Paul, however, 
 takes the name in a wider sense, and comprehends under it all 
 
CHAPTER IX. 27-29. 341 
 
 tlie heathen down to whose level the kingdom of the latter had 
 sunk. (1 Pet. ii. 10.) Moreover, the translation does not 
 exactly correspond with the original text ; hut as the difference 
 does not at all affect the thought, it must only be ranked 
 among those incidental to quotations from memory. 
 
 Ver. 27-29. The following quotations from Is. x. 22, 23; 
 Is. i, 9, form the comment on the second half of ver. 18, 
 which constitutes the middle point of the whole of the Apostle's 
 argument, namely, the words, dv ds diXsi gxXripuvs/. According 
 to these predictions, the people of Israel, taken in the mass, is re- 
 presented as rejected, while a holy remnant alone is to remain to 
 later times. The extension of the Jews does not on this account 
 make God's word of no effect, but rather establishes it (ver. 6). 
 
 St Paul might have produced many similar prophecies, e. g., 
 Is. vi. 13; Amos ix. 9; Zech. xiii. 9; Zeph. iii. 12. But he 
 selected these, because, in connexion with the rejection (which, 
 however, in the former of the two passages, is only expressed 
 in a negative and indirect manner), they also make mention of a 
 holy remnant. In contrast with the little troop of the true sol- 
 diers of God, St Paul places the innumerable mass of the fleshly 
 unbelieving Israelites. Though the number of the children of 
 Israel be as the sand of the sea, nevertheless the remnant only 
 shall be blessed. Israel has its old and its new man, the old 
 man must be slain and put off. God's wonderful providence is 
 seen in the dreadful judgments which fell upon the people, 
 while those escaped destruction who were to constitute the xa- 
 rdX£/fificc=]y)^^'0, ^^^, as seed for the future ; a thought which 
 already points to cli. xi. — Ver. 28. The words here quoted fol- 
 low exactly the LXX., until sV; ri^g 7^5, for which the latter read, 
 sv rfi olxovfMsvri oXp. St Paul probably chooses the former expres- 
 sion, because it more decidedly declares the universality of the 
 judgment. The passage portrays the judgment of God visiting 
 the Israelites, which began on them, with the appearance of 
 Christ (which here, as so often elsewhere, is conceived as one 
 with the last times) ; they ought then to have brought forth 
 fruits worthy of repentance, but no such were found among them. 
 In the original the quotation, accurately rendered, runs thus, 
 " God executeth his fixed decree with righteousness, since God 
 will make, that is, accomplish, a decisive decree in the whole 
 land." On which account, the participles must be completed by 
 
342 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 the words &e6s hn ; but Xoyog corresponds with J"')^*?^, fulfilment, 
 decision, word; that is, will of God. luvriXi?]! stands for htOt2)> 
 which properly means stream forth, then fill, fulfil. '2vvT£f/,vnv 
 is used in a peculiar sense, to which the Hebrew "^"^j^ corres- 
 ponds. This word signifies to cut, cut ofij and then to decide. 
 To decide, to shorten, to hasten, are all contiguous conceptions; 
 and the Apostle, following the LXX., has brought the last es- 
 pecially forward. The words, therefore, according to the dispo- 
 sition of the text in the passage before us, must be translated 
 thus, " God is speedily fulfilling His decree, for He will make a 
 rapidly completed decree on the land."' Ver. 29 entirely agrees 
 with the LXX. The fiebrew, ^'^^^ 1*^1t? " ^ remnant, how 
 small, i. e., a small remnant,"" is translated by the LXX, ff'Trspfia, 
 to signify that out of this remnant, as out of a grain of corn, the 
 nation shall, as it were, flourish again. By means of this rem- 
 nant, life was preserved in the whole,* and, without them, all 
 Israel had come to destruction ; and then indeed the promises 
 of God had been made void ; but God, in his omnipotence and 
 compassion, was always able to preserve this holy seed in the 
 nation of Israel. 
 
 § 15. Israel's guilt. 
 
 (IX. SO— X. 21.) 
 
 The Apostle has hitherto confined himself to the distinct con- 
 sideration of the divine agency ; he now with a like precision 
 exhibits the human side of the subject. Although it was not 
 without the knowledge and will of God that the Jews fell from 
 their calling, yet the guilt is solely and entirely their own, not- 
 withstanding all the warnings of God in the Old Testament. 
 For every prophecy is at once an act, and, when it relates to 
 sin, is at the same time a warning to man against the accom- 
 plishing of that act,, e. g., the Saviour's words to St Peter, " Be- 
 fore the cock crow, thou shalt deny me thrice.^f 
 
 * Just as Abraham, at the destruction of Sodom, prayed that God would not de- 
 stroy the city for the sake of the righteous persons that were within it. At the 
 same time, the life-giving power of the holy must ever be considered as standing in 
 some relation to the number of those who are to be preserved. Ten may serve to 
 preserve a city, but not a nation. 
 
 + The remark of Bacon, quoted by Beck. (loc. cit. p. 104), is here in point, 
 
CHAPTER IX. 30, 31. 343 
 
 The Jews opposed the long-desired Messiah when He came, 
 nay, they nailed him to the cross (as is intimated in ix. 33), be- 
 cause he did not answer to the idea which they had formed of 
 Him. Before the Babylonish captivity, the people had. been 
 addicted to idolatry and gross sins; even in those days it was 
 rejected in the mass; only a small d'xkpfjja. returned into the Holy 
 Land, and from this remnant the nation derived a new youth. 
 From that time it appeared entirely cured of idolatry and 
 heathenish vices; but it now fell into the opposite error of 
 proud self-righteousness. This became quite as great a hinder- 
 ance to laying hold on Christ as the former state (comp. Rom. 
 i. 1 8, iii. 20, where these two forms of sinful perverseness are 
 described as those generally prevailing among men) ; for it 
 is humble repentance alone which fits for a reception of Christ 
 and His power, and to bring himself to such repentance is still 
 harder for a self-satisfied, self-righteous person, than for one 
 who has grossly sinned, and therefore our Saviour promises the 
 kingdom of heaven rather to publicans and harlots than to such 
 persons, (Matt. xxi. 31.) 
 
 Ver. 30, 31. St Paul by an oxymoron expresses the idea, that 
 the Gentiles who were degraded and took no thought about any 
 righteousness, laid hold on that which was offered to them in 
 Christ as a free gift, while the Jews, who followed after righte- 
 ousness, did not attain to it. These words are an authoritative 
 commentary on ver. 1 6; all diXnv and rf>k')(iiv of the Jews were 
 unavailing ; while they anxiously avoided fleshly sins and 
 idolatry, they fell into so much the greater spiritual sins — into 
 self-conceit, hard-heartedness, and want of love — and thus the 
 second deceit became worse than the first; they only departed 
 farther from the goal which they sought to reach. But, on the 
 other hand, while Grod punished the sin of the Gentiles by sin, 
 so that they became exceedingly sinful, these came into the 
 condition of true repentance ; they conceived a longing for aid 
 
 " Prophetia historise genua est, quando quidem historia divina ea polleat super 
 humanam pi'aerogativa ut narratis factum praecedere non minus quam sequi posset." 
 Prophecies are to no purpose, unless on the presuppositioa of St Paul's doctrine as 
 to predestination : it is not man that causes their fulfilment, but God by means of 
 man, and that px'ecisely by his free act. Hence it is no illusion if God warns against 
 a sin, and yet that sin must needs be committed; for it is precisely as the free act 
 of the ci'eature that God foreknows it; although doubtless such a sin heightens the 
 guilt of the sinner. But according to the comprehensive love of God, the deed of 
 sin is always meant to lead to repentance and regeneration, as the history of St 
 Peter clearly shows ; and on this account even the evil are not to be rooted out 
 (comp. on Matt. xiii. 30). 
 
S^i EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 from above, and were now able in faith to lay hold on Christ. 
 Thus, then, all depends on God's sXeeh, not on man's rpix&iv. 
 Positively/, man cannot produce the least of what is good; he 
 must, therefore, always place himself in a passive position to- 
 wards God, never in an active; his whole productive power is 
 negativej and its fruit is evil, of which the essence is opposition 
 to the will of God. Hence no sin is so difficult to cure as self- 
 righteousness; for this is want of love; and love alone is the 
 fulfilling of the law, for God is love, and it is only through his 
 power that the creature can love purely. 
 
 Glockler is for connecting r/ oh spou(jt,iv with ver. 22, and con- 
 sidering all that intervenes as a continuation of the first clause 
 of the sentence; but this is clearly very unsuitable. Nor is the 
 question to be regarded as a subsumption of the whole preced- 
 ing argument (ver. 6, seqq.), and to be translated, " What 
 shall we now say after all this?" (It is so taken by Koppe, 
 Riickert, Beck, De Wette, who make the answer to begin at on 
 s&vr} X. r. X.) The following 5/ar/ (82), is in favour of the continu- 
 ation of the question to 'i(p6a<si. Ver. 30, 31 contain the problem 
 to be solved, but not the solution of it, ri oZv spoufisv, therefore, 
 must relate only to what follows, not to the preceding words. 
 
 Ver. 32, 33. The cause of this strange phenomenon is their 
 unbelief — i e., their resistance to the grace which would work 
 belief in their heart; for this reason it is that the rock of salva- 
 tion became to them a stone of stumbling, as had been foretold 
 long before in the Old Testament (Is. xxviii. 16, viii. 14.) The 
 nature of cr/Vr/?, therefore, is the key to the mystery ; as it is 
 impossible to pour anything into a vessel which is stopped up 
 and full, in like manner is a soul full of pride and devoid of love 
 incapable of receiving the streams of the Spirit. Man cannot, 
 indeed, by his own deed, empty and open himself, but doubtless 
 he can hinder God's accomplishing this work on him, and on 
 this resistance, which is within the power of man, his guilt rests 
 as its final cause. 
 
 In ver. 32, ug eg 'ipyuv v'o[Lo\j denotes the subjective fancy of the 
 Jews, that they might attain to righteousness through works 
 (comp. Winer's Grammar, p. 497). On "kikt 'Kpoay.dfhiLarot comp. 
 note on Matt. xxi. 42 seqq., where there is a similar citation 
 from Ps. cxviii. 22. For cxavSaXov, see note on Matt, xviii. 6. 
 St Paul accommodates Is. xxviii. 1 6 to his purpose, by an addi- 
 
CHAPTER X. 1-4. 345 
 
 tion from viii. 14 (on this proceeding see note on Luke iv. 18, 
 1 9). The same union of texts is found in 1 Pet. ii. 6, in com- 
 bination with Ps. cxviii. 22. Neither of these passages relates 
 to the Messiah in its immediate connexion, but they had been 
 typically applied to Him as early as the Chaldean and Rabbini- 
 cal paraphrases, and St Paul with propriety so applies them. 
 The Old Testament is one great prophecy of Christ; all isolated 
 and particular relations of men to Grod have in Him and by 
 Him become universal and comprehensive truth. — Uag is here 
 spurious; it is wanting in the MSS. A.B.D.E.F.G., and in several 
 versions; it was perhaps adopted from xi. 10. — Kara/(r;^ui/- 
 &7i(fsrai would correspond to )^^y^, but the text has ^*)f^\ which 
 
 .X • T 
 
 primarily mesins festinavit, and then is commonly taken in the 
 sense offugit, expavit Perhaps the LXX. read l^yy^. 
 
 Chap. X. 1, 2. There was, after all, a true side in the legal 
 striving of the Jews ; it arose from a deep earnestness and a 
 lively zeal, which, however, were without a true insight into the 
 nature of the old covenant, as well as of the new. This, then, 
 the Apostle explains more exactly in what follows. (The fiiv 
 presupposes an omitted bi, by which the guilt of Israel should 
 be marked. Compare Winer, Gr. p. 500.) Ej3o?t/a and hiriaig 
 do not harmonize with reference to J^gp ajrwv, if the usual sense 
 of "good pleasure'" be retained; but the connexion is enough 
 to show that it is here inapplicable; the word is rather to be 
 taken in the sense of longing, wish, as ^-^^j*^ is also used. E/j 
 
 CMTTipiav signifies the object of the prayer for Israel. In ver. 2, 
 IriXog 0£oD does not denote the greatness of the zeal (as if it 
 were a divine zeal), but zeal for God and His cause. Josephus, 
 Philo, and the profane writers of the first centuries of the Chris- 
 tian era, are full of examples of the zeal which the Jews shewed 
 for their religion ; but it was a raging, fanatical zeal, and hence 
 was full of conceit, without higher aspirations, love, and the 
 tender virtues of the spirit which truly seeks God. The words ou 
 xar I'TTiymtstv are meant — not, indeed, to acquit the* Jews of all 
 guilt (for they might have had the knowledge from the Word 
 of God), but yet — to soften their guilt, and render visible the 
 possibility of the conversion promised in c. xi. 
 
 Ver. 3, 4. The ignorance of the Jews relates to sin and 
 righteousness. The law had not wrought in them any Wiymet? 
 rrig a/xafr/ag, and therefore they did not lay hold on the new 
 
346 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 way of salvation, which offered them that which the law could 
 not bring. They clung to the law, although it had reached its 
 end in Christ. 
 
 In ver. 3, vmrdynffav bears a middle sense. The aorist points 
 to the act of proffering the gospel to them. De Wette wrongly 
 understands rfj duccc/ogvvy) rou ©sou ov^ vTSTdyrigav to mean, " They 
 have not submitted to the righteous ordinance of God, the vofiog 
 'r/ersug." Aijiatogvvri never occurs in such a sense. The meaning 
 is: They have not penitently submitted themselves in faith to 
 the righteousness which has been won by Christ, and which 
 was offered to them, but they have wished to originate a righte- 
 ousness of their own In ver. 4, Christ is to be under- 
 stood in combination with His whole work ; but it is a peculi- 
 arity of the gospel, that in it every thing is referred to the 
 person of the Redeemer himself, not to any thing in Him or 
 from Him. Agreeably to the connexion, and to the usage of 
 language, rsXos vo/nou can only mean the object, the end, as our 
 
 Lord says (Luke xvi. 1 6), 6 vo/^og x,ai o) '7rpo(priTai swg 'iwavvcD. But 
 
 this, of course, is not to be understood of a portion of the law 
 only (the law of ceremonies alone, for instance), but of the 
 whole law ; nor must we conceive of it as an abrogation, but as 
 a higher and real fulfilment. (Matt. v. 17.) Everything in 
 the Old Testament is, in its enduring import, transferred into 
 the New, and is only done away with in such a sense that 
 there it remains preserved. Hence we learn from the fate of the 
 Jews, that man must not depend upon any momentary opera- 
 tion of God, but on God himself, so as to be able to follow the 
 changes of His dealings. The Jews strove against the Lord 
 by the very circumstance that they wished to maintain an in- 
 stitution which unquestionably originated from Him, at the 
 time when He did away with it. True piety fixes its love on 
 God, not on His gifts. 
 
 Ver. 5-8. The Apostle proceeds, as if by way of supplement 
 to the argument in iii. 21 , seqq., to exhibit the difference be- 
 tween these positions of men under the law and under the 
 gospel, by passages from the Old Testament, and that from the 
 writings of Moses, from the law itself; whence it appears that 
 the Jews had not understood the writings of Moses, inasmuch 
 as they fancied that they were adhering to them when they 
 opposed themselves to faith. He shows from Lev. xviii. 5, that 
 doing is the character of the law, and from Deut. xxx. 12, 13, 
 
I 
 
 CHAPTER VII. 5-8. 347 
 
 that believing is that of the gospel ; the former presupposes an 
 active, the latter a passive position of the soul. That St Paul 
 intends here to found a formal argument upon the passages 
 which he quotes, has been well maintained by Reiche, in oppo- 
 sition to Tholuck and Riickert, who had followed earlier inter- 
 preters in questioning it. The difficulty in the second quotation 
 is the only thing that could suggest such an assertion; for the 
 passage from Leviticus (which is also referred to in Ezek. xx. 21; 
 Neh. ix. 29; Matt. xix. 16; Gral. iii. 12), is excellently adopted 
 to the Apostle's line of proof. " No one can live {i. e., t^u^v 
 a'lmiov £%£/!') by the law, but he who keeps it; but no one can 
 keep it (Rom. i.-iii.); consequently, another way of salvation 
 is needed." 
 
 The reading oti before rriv dixawcemv in ver. 5 is merely an at- 
 tempt at correction on account of the construction of'ypd<psi, with 
 the accusative. It is not suitable to take ypdpiv as meaning 
 " to describe, to represent." We shall do better to take the ac- 
 cusative absolutely " with respect to the righteousness/' Ahrd 
 and ahroTg refer to 'ipya, understood in the idea of voi/^og. On this 
 passage compare the remarks on Gal. iii. 12. 
 
 There is, however, unquestionably a difficulty as to the 
 second quotation (Deut. xxx. 12-1 3) in which the righteousness 
 of faith is conceived of as if personified, pr God, as its author, 
 speaks to man, in whom it is produced, with the intention of 
 directing his mind from that which is outward to that which is 
 inward — to deep self- contemplation and heedfulness to God's 
 working in him. In the first place, the passage in St Paul does 
 not agree either with the original text or with the LXX. The 
 clauses tout sgTi XpigThv naTayaysTv and tout 'i(fTi XpiffTov ix vixpQjv 
 dmyaysTv are, indeed, to be regarded as explanatory additions of 
 the Apostle, which he did not at all intend to be reckoned as 
 part of the question; and thus, leaving out of sight unessential 
 omissions and abbreviations, the variation certainly does not 
 appear so very considerable. Still, it is here said r/s xara^jj^sra/ 
 ilg TTiv a^\)(s<SQv\ instead of which, the LXX. have tI? diwrspdffst rifiTv 
 t/g Th rrepuv Trig 6aXdgar}g; which, with the other alterations, is 
 enough to cause perplexity to the defenders of literal inspiration. 
 According, however, to the principles which we have through- 
 out maintained, such a free use of the Old Testament text does 
 not occasion any difficulty which can affect us; St Paul made 
 use of the Old Testament in the same Holy Spirit in which it 
 
3 1:8 EHSTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 was composed, and therefore could not charge its import with 
 anything foreign to it. But, besides this, the sense of the pas- 
 sage is itself obscure. The connexion in Deut. xxx. is as fol- 
 lows: — In ch. xxix., Moses had threatened the people with 
 ejection from the land of promise in case of unfaithfulness, but 
 afterwards, in ch. xxx., foretells that they will return to them- 
 selves, and will at last be gathered again by God into the land 
 of their fathers. " Here Grod will circumcise their heart, that 
 they may love Him with all their heart, and keep His com- 
 mandments. For God's commandment is not far from them, 
 neither in Heaven, that they should say. Who shall go up for us 
 to Heaven, and bring it to us? neither is it beyond the sea, that 
 they should say. Who shall go over the sea for us, and bring it 
 to us? it is nigh unto them, in their mouth, yea, in their heart." 
 Thus the passage refers, in a way which cannot be mistaken, to 
 the dispensation of the Messiah; it points to the circumcision 
 of the heart — to a state in which man will be able truly to love 
 God, and to keep the commandments. The only possible 
 difficulty is from the circumstance that, in xxx. 11, it is said — ^ 
 ivroXn ^V syw ivTiXkofjbai (Soi ff/ifMspov, by which it would seem that 
 the passage which follows is referred to the law of the Old Tes- 
 tament, and not to faith. But if we consider that the law is by 
 no means wanting in the New Testament — that it is only re- 
 garded as no longer something merely outward, but as inward 
 — as the voice of the eternal Word in man's heart (John xii. 50), 
 nay, that this reception of the divine into itself is the very 
 essence of the New Testament, and of the life of faith which be- 
 longs to it — it will be clear how the Apostle might, with perfect 
 justice, interpret those words of the Old Testament as relating 
 to the circumstances of the New.* He conceives of Christ in His 
 person, andasthe object of preaching, not merely according to His 
 historical appearance, but as the eternal Word, which is dormant 
 in every man, and which preaching from without only wakens 
 and renders active. This word, then — the living law itself — has 
 also in itself the power and energy whereby man is placed in 
 a condition to keep it, and to love God above all things.f The 
 
 • Some (as lately Reiche) have falsely designated the Apostle's explanation in this 
 place as allegorical, such as that in Gal. iv. 22, seqq. The only proper name for it 
 is spiritual ; i. e., it is such an explanation as penetrates through the letter of the 
 Old Testament into its spirit. The whole passage (Deut. xxix.-xxx.) points most 
 properly to the New Testament dispensation, and in this inner sense it is understood 
 by the Apostle. 
 
 t Christ is active in the Old Testament (1 Pet. i. 1 1 ; Heb. xi. 26) also; but 
 
 I 
 
CHAPTER X. 5-8. 349 
 
 course of thought, therefore, in St Paul takes this form. " The 
 Scripture saith of the righteousness of the law, that whosoever 
 shall fashion himself conformably to the law which meets him 
 from without, shall live; but this no man can do; consequently, 
 no man attains life thus; all that he can attain by this way is 
 the knowledge of sin (iii. 20.) But, in the New Testament, he 
 hath, by the operation of the Spirit, the law within himself; it 
 is written on his heart; therefore, he need no longer seek it 
 from afar, but only become aware of this treasure within him, 
 and follow the power of the Spirit/'* The words, " say not in 
 thine heart. Who shall ascend or descend" (with which those in 
 vii. 24, " Who shall deliver meT' are parallel) are a negative 
 expression of an idea which would be positively expressed as 
 follows: — If in the Old Testament doing was required, so now 
 it is faith ; for all has been done through Christ. The words ava- 
 ^aiviiv i}g ovpavov and xaTcc^a/vsiv g/V tyiv a^v(fffov, therefore, are 
 merely symbolical expressions to signify a seeking in the re- 
 motest quarters. 
 
 The latter phrase is stronger and bolder than that of the 
 
 rather as an operation {fyifjt.ee) than as a person (xaya?) (comp. on John i, 1 ; also 
 my Opusc. Theol. p. 123 seqq., and the essay on the Word of God in the Christo- 
 terpe for 1835, p. 1 seqq.) But, in the preaching of the Apostles, the subject was 
 not the doctrine concerning Christ, but He Himself, in His life and power. (Comp. 
 1 Pet. i. 23-25, which forms the most pei-fect parallel to ver. 8.) 
 
 * If the connexion of the words, both in the Old Testament and in the passage 
 befure us, had been moi-e carefully attended to, it could not have been possible that 
 BO many single applications should have been brought forward — as, that the inten- 
 tion was to prove that Chi'ist is omnipresent (Origin)— ror, that the gospel is not 
 hard to fulfil or to discover (Flatt, Morus, Rosenmiiller) — or, that the reaUty of the 
 appearance and the resurrection of Christ is the subject (Reiche, Rlickert, Usteri.) 
 These applications, it is true, all lie in the words; it is not, however, as isolated 
 truths that they are there, but in as far as they belong to the essence of faith gene- 
 rally. Bengel, Knapp, and Tholuck suppose that St Paul is representing to the 
 anxious heart, which knows not how to enter into heaven or to escape hell, that 
 Christ can effect this in it. The context in this place, however, evidently does not 
 point to the distresses of penitent hearts, although it is true that, where there is 
 faith, penitence is presupposed. Rather the Apostle contrasts the law and the 
 gospel with each other in their most general character, and shows that this is already 
 recognised and exhibited in the Old Testament, The nature of the law is repre 
 Bented directly, as requiring the doing of the law; the gospel indirectly, as the life 
 of faith. The indirect form of the proof, however, is of such a nature that faith is 
 indicated in its origination [Genesis] ; faith personified, on one who already believes, 
 is represented as speaking to unbelieving mankind, or to an individual unbeliever. 
 Unbelief has for its characteristic a turning to what is outward. It regards God 
 as a distant being. Frf)m this outward direction, the spirit is called back into its 
 inwai'd depths, in which it finds God's eternal Word present ; and this finding is 
 faith itself. But St Paul, of course, conceives of the eternal Word as that which 
 has become incarnate; and hence he brings forward the consideration that Christ 
 is neither far off nor dead, but intimately nigh to every one and living. 
 
350 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 LXX. — biampav ih rh 'iripccv rrj? GaXaffffrig; for the word a(3vaffos, 
 which corresponds to ^'it^^j?, is not to be understood as mean- 
 ing the sea, but the regions of tlie dead.* In making choice of 
 it, the Apostle had, no doubt, Ps. cxxxix. 8 before his eyes. 
 "A^vffffog is properly an adjective, bottomless, from (Svffffog, the Ionic 
 form of ^vdos; thus Euripid. Phoen. 1632, raprdpou ci^vcaa %a<r- . 
 yotara. Comp. Luke viii. 31; Hev. ix. 1, 2, 11; xi. 7; xvii. 8; 
 XX. 1. After what has been said, it only remains to be ex- 
 plained how St Paul could apply the dm^rjffsrai and xarajSjjtrgra/ 
 to Christ, as if they related to bringing Him down from heaven, or 
 up from the dead. As in Christ, the eternal Word had been 
 made flesh (John i. 1-14), and this Word forms the very object 
 of the preaching of faith in the gospel (ver. 8), every seeking 
 after the Truth, as if it were something distant, which had not 
 yet appeared among men, is to be looked on as an ignoring of 
 Christ and His Almighty presence ; by such seeking, men act 
 as if Christ had not yet come down from heaven into the flesh, 
 or as if He were still among the dead, and not long ago risen 
 again. 
 
 Instead of ^^/^a T/Vrsw^, 1 Tim. iv. 6 has Xoyog '^r/grsug. It 
 is not the business of preaching to introduce the word originally 
 into man, but only to arouse its dormant life as a spark does 
 fire. There is in all things a word of God, for God upholdetli 
 all things by the word of His power. (Heb. i. 3.) 
 
 Ver. 9-11. This having of the Divine Word within ourselves, 
 in unspeakable intimacy, so that it is nearer to us than we are 
 to ourselves, is the essence of faith, in which profession is in- 
 cluded ; whosoever, then, possesses faith, obtains, through the 
 power of the Divine principle in it, the salvation which he could 
 not have attained to without it. The power of faith, which 
 leads to salvation, is, moreover, owned in the Old Testament 
 also. (Is. xxviii. 16.) 
 
 The distinction between o/AoXoyg/v (fTo/nar/ and mffrsvsiv xap- 
 dicf, is caused simply by the foregoing quotation ; for the two 
 are correlatives. No true belief remains without confession, 
 any more than fire without light ; and every confession presup- 
 
 • The opinion of some writers (as Bolten and Koppe), that us ro ^ipav rrn SaXatr- 
 ffns also signifies Scheol [Hades] — this being imagined, as by Homer, to be situ- 
 ated at the boundary of the ocean — is inadmissible. The Hebrews supposed the 
 region of the dead to be beneath the earth (comp. note on Eph. iv. 9); the expres- 
 sion in question denotes merely a distance which it exceeds man's power to reach. 
 And this idea has only been expressed more pointedly, but not altered, by St Paul. 
 
CHAPTER X. 12-21. 351 
 
 poses belief, for a hypocritical confession is no confession at all, 
 but a counterfeit of it. A dumb faith is no faith. " I be- 
 lieved, and therefore have I spoken.'' (2 Cor. iv. 13.) The 
 reason why the resurrection of Christ is especially brought for- 
 ward as the object of faith, is that it is the moment of victory, 
 the emblem of the spiritual resurrection of all men. ^urvjp/a and 
 dixonoffvvv} are not to be distinguished as Glockler supposes; for in 
 ver. 9 dudrjcrri stands by itself. As this distinction, then, cannot 
 be pressed, and as, moreover, ver. 11 also relates to one thing 
 only, ver. 10 seems tautological after ver. 9. The emphasis, 
 however, is to be laid on xapdia and cro/^a, so as to yield the 
 sense. — In order to the attainment of salvation, what is out- 
 ward must be united with what is inward. On the quotation of 
 Isaiah xxviii. 16 in ver. 11, compare the remarks on ix. 83. 
 
 Ver. 12, 13. The distinction made under the Theocracy be- 
 tween Jews and Gentiles, therefore, no longer appears in the 
 New Testament; all men have one access to the Lord of all, 
 namely, faith, of which calling on Him is the expression. This 
 is again confirmed by a passage of evangelical prophecy. (Joel 
 ii. 32.) 
 
 As to ou ydp hri d/asroXTj (ver. 12), compare iii. 22. 'O ahrSg 
 is the subject, and xupiog the predicate. According to the con- 
 text God is primarily meant, as the quotation indicates, but 
 according to St Paul's way of thinking, it is of course God in 
 Christ. UXovTeTv relates to the riches of grace and mercy, from 
 which no one is excluded. By ets is signified the direction in 
 which the stream of grace pours itself forth. ''E.mKokiMai^ like 
 oiMoXoyiTv above, presupposes a lively faith. We need not there- 
 fore supply, ** If the calling be sincere and honestly intended," 
 for unless it be so, it ceases to be a calling , it only appears to be 
 that which it really is not. 
 
 Ver. 14-21. If, however, this new way of salvation is to be 
 for all, it is necessary that to all — Gentiles and Jews alike — the 
 opportunity of becoming acquainted with it should be given. 
 This St Paul sets forth in four questions, which depend one upon 
 the other, and then he shows how God, agreeably to His pro- 
 mise (Is. Hi. 9), has sent His messengers to preach. But men, 
 especially the Jews, have been inattentive to the preaching, as 
 God had foretold (Is. liii. 1); they have not listened to it or 
 acknowledged the preaching.* The sentences in ver. 16-19, 
 
 • This is not to be understood as if the preaching alone were of God, and faith 
 
352 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 therefore, answer exactly to the several questions in ver. 14, and 
 carry out the idea that God has done what was to be done on 
 His part — He has sent messengers and has set them to preach 
 — but men have not laid hold on God's word (John i. 5). The 
 reference to Israel peeps through in the whole passage, but is 
 not expressly brought forward until ver. 19, seqq. 
 
 In ver. 14, to which ver. 1 7 is a necessary supplement, we meet 
 with the important idea that preaching is the only way by which 
 the gospel is propagated among mankind. (In ver. 1 7 dxor/ is 
 to be taken as = ni?^?2lD> ^hp^yf^oc-) It cannot be produced by 
 some immediate operation of the Spirit, scattered as seed here 
 and there, but in order to its propagation there is constantly 
 required an imparting from the centre of the Church. The 
 Church of Christ partakes in the nature of every self-con- 
 tained* organization, which cannot develop itself save on the 
 condition that all the members remain in connexion with the 
 whole. Not only is it impossible that a community of Christians 
 should come into existence without connexion with the whole 
 body of the Church, without having the history of Christ preached 
 to it,t but, moreover, without this living connexion, it cannot 
 subsist for a length of time without changing its nature — as is 
 proved by the history of the Ethiopian Church. This is to be 
 accounted for, first, from the historical character of Christianity, 
 which essentially rests on the /ac^5 of the history of Jesus; and, 
 next, from the Spirit, which is the power that operates in preach- 
 ing. This principle is connected with the person of Jesus (John 
 vii. 39), and is diffused from Him in continuous operation. 
 Hence in ver. 1 7 g^/^a ©soD is certainly to be referred to the doc- 
 trine of the revelation which forms the basis of the preaching, 
 but in such a way that this doctrine is conceived of as one ani- 
 mated and quickened by the Spirit of God, so that the expression 
 might also have been i] hi axori dia 'TrvsvfMUTo? ©eoD. Missionary ac- 
 
 were of man ; rather, as God ci-eates both the h'ght and the eye, so also the preach- 
 ing and faith are both of Him. Unbeliefs however, is man's fault, as, without being 
 able to produce the light, he can certainly close his eye intentionally against light, 
 that he may not see. 
 
 • [Gesehlossen.] 
 
 t No people ever has been or can be converted, nor can a church be formed, by 
 means of the Holy Scriptures alone, without an interpreter and the living word [of 
 preaching] ; otherwise the first member would have to begin by baptizing himself. 
 Wherever there arises a really lively feeling of the need, thither God sends mes- 
 sengers of the faith; the Bible, however, may certainly awaken the need. 
 
CHAPTER X. 14 — 21. 353 
 
 tivity, therefore, is an essential property of the Church, and the 
 charge in Matt, xxviii. 19 is of force for her to the end of 
 time. Next, however, comes the question, what ought to be 
 supplied after sav (xt] aTotfraXw<r/ ? First of all, evidently h'rrh roZ 
 XpsiTov. He Himself, the Lord of the Church, sends forth alL 
 the messengers, and by His Spirit arouses them for His ser- 
 vice. But that the order of the visible Church may be pre- 
 served, this inward calling requires the addition of an outward 
 sanction; therefore, the inward call must have recourse to the 
 constituted ecclesiastical authorities, in order that it may be 
 able, through their confirmation and recognition, to co-operate 
 in a regular manner towards the edification of the Church. 
 An opposite course would introduce a tumultuary and separa- 
 tistical manner of working, in which all superintendence of the 
 teachers, and, consequently, all prevention of enthusiastic and 
 fanatical efforts, must become impossible. St Paul, who was 
 called from the world in the most immediate manner, neverthe- 
 less, by his example, most strikingly confirms the reality and 
 necessity of this mutual operation with the established organs 
 of the Church. Although baptized with the Spirit by the 
 Lord Himself, he yet receives baptism from Ananias at Damas- 
 cus (Acts ix. 19); and, although expressly set apart by the 
 Lord for the ministry of the Gentiles, he yet does not formally 
 enter on his ministry among them until the Church of Antioch 
 chooses him, and sends him forth as a messenger to the Gen- 
 tiles (ch. xiii. 1). The subordination of the individual* to the 
 needs and regulations of the whole body, is a necessary condi- 
 tion of the Church's developing itself with a blessing. 
 
 The passage from Is. lii. 7, does not exactly follow the LXX. 
 St Paul keeps nearer to the Hebrew text, and gives the pas- 
 sage in the form which was most suitable for his purpose. The 
 feet are mentioned as the organs which are most characteristic 
 of the messengers, and of their itinerant office.-f* The parallel 
 with the angels, as spiritual messengers of God, forces itself on 
 us; the incarnate God sends forth human messengers also to fulfil 
 His commands. The passages from the second partf of Isaiah, 
 which are quoted in tins section, are all to be considered as 
 most properly evangelical ; all other applications — e. g., to the 
 people of Israel, the prophets, or the better members of the 
 
 • ISvhjectivitat.] i- [Wandernden Wirksawkeit.'} $ [chap, xl.— Ixvi.] 
 
354 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 people — are not excluded by this, but by a typical interpreta- 
 tion lead us back to the evangelical sense. In ver. 15, Goschen 
 renders u^am by veloces. The speed of the messengers, and the 
 zeal from which it proceeds, are certainly included in the idea, 
 but yet it is because of the delightful tidings which they bring, 
 that the feet of the messengers, i. e., they themselves are espe- 
 cially styled wga/o/. In ver. 18 and 19, itin ohx. are not to be 
 joined together ; (j^n is the interrogative particle, and oh belongs 
 to the verb. (Comp. Winer's Gr., p. 427). Ps. xix. 5 is quoted 
 according to the LXX. The passage relates, in the first in- 
 stance, to nature, which tells the glory of God; which is the 
 reason that <pHyyog, corresponding to ^-^p, is used, whereas in 
 the application to persons, x6yo? or xTj^vy/j.a would be more suit- 
 able. St Paul, however, considers the Church as a new work 
 of the creation of God, the creatures of which — the saints — 
 penetrate the world with their song of praise, and draw all 
 things to join in the general ecstacy. Whatever opposes this 
 movement (as the Jews did), shuts itself out from the joy of 
 the new world. Hence s^rjXk is to be understood as propheti- 
 cally spoken ; that which is begun is viewed as if already com- 
 pleted, and therefore we need not seek for any further explana- 
 tion, how it is that St Paul can represent Christ's messengers 
 as spread all over the earth, whereas, when he wrote these 
 words, they had not so much as carried the preaching of Christ 
 through the whole of the Roman empire. Ver. 19. The unbe- 
 lief of Israel had been expressed as far back as Deut. xxxii. 21, 
 in terms which also indicate the pressing forward, in faith, of 
 the Gentiles, w^ho are designated by ouk Uvog, Uvos dcmsrov, to get 
 before them. The idea that even in those days there was a 
 possibility of the gospel reaching the Gentile world, pre-sup- 
 poses its rejection by Israel. napa^riXou, ra^o^y/^u, to excite jeal- 
 ousy, are expressions taken from the figure of the marriage 
 between Jehovah and Israel ; by bestowing His love on others, 
 God. designs to awaken in them a consciousness of their infi- 
 delity. Bretschneider and Reiche wrongly take 0£oV as the no- 
 minative to syvu, making the sense to be, " Does God then no 
 longer know {i.e., love) Israel?'" It is not until xi. 1, seqq., 
 that this idea is brought forward ; to supply Qsog here is too 
 hard, and is quite unnecessary, as the connexion is plain. Ovz 
 tyvc^ is parallel with ovk ^-/.ovaav in ver. 18, and in this place as in 
 
CHAPTER XI. 1 — 36. 355 
 
 that, we ought to supply %y\i\iyiLa. 'jtUnua, which is agreeable to 
 the bearing of the whole passage.* The object of ver. 19, then, 
 is merely to apply the general question to Israel in particular. 
 There is no reason for apprehending that the quotations which 
 follow would not accord with this way of taking it. For St Paul 
 could not again answer that messengers had been sent to them, 
 since he had just before declared, in the words of Ps. xix. 
 5, that messengers had been sent into all lands, even into the 
 distant regions of the Gentiles ; he therefore answers indirectly; 
 in showing that the Gentiles believe, he implies — How, then, 
 should Israel have been unable to believe, if only it had been 
 willing ! The same idea is repeated by Isaiah Ixv. 1 : " I am 
 found of them that sought me not;'' how much more might 
 Israel have found me if it had been willing; but it is in vain 
 that God stretcheth forth His arms to the unfaithful people ; 
 they would not (Matt, xxiii. 37). n^wro? in ver. 19 refers to 
 the later prophecies of Isaiah. In ver. 20 bs is not to be taken 
 as marking opposition but continuation. ' AvotoX[m^ denotes the 
 boldness of the prophet's speech in representing the heathen as 
 called. The idea in ver. 20 is parallel to that in ix. 30, and 
 the contrast which is there expressed (ix. 31), is to be sup- 
 plied in this place also. — And those who {in appearance) 
 sought me, have not found me. Ver. 21. For 'Trfog \ahv u'Trs/dovvra. 
 xai dvriXsyovra the Hebrew has only 'yy'^0 Dvh^> Perhaps the 
 LXX. found added in their copies n"^"i?3^, which occurs in con- 
 nexion with y^'^o in Jer. v. 23. 
 
 § 16. Israel's salvation. 
 
 (XL 1-36.) 
 
 After having shown the guilt of Israel, St Paul proceeds to 
 teach prophetically that this apostacy of the people is neither 
 total nor perpetual — that God has preserved in Israel a holy 
 
 * Kolliier follows Koppe and Rosenmiiller in understanding — " Did not Israel 
 know that it was to stand below the Gentiles ?" But ver. 21 does not agree with this, 
 and, moreover, a subject is thus anticipated which St Paul does not begin to treat 
 before ch. xi. It is only by taking the first two quotations (19, 20), apart from 
 their main connexion, that this way of supplying the ellipse could be suggested. 
 
356 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS, 
 
 seed, and in this all Israel is to be blessed. For the understanding 
 of this section, however, it is necessary to consider more par- 
 ticularly an idea without which it must be obscure, namely, the 
 relation of individuals to the whole body — which has already 
 been cursorily touched on in vol. i. p. 865,* and in the note on 
 Rom. V. 12. Doubtless the whole race of men forms one unity, 
 in which the nations are lesser wholes, and these in their turn 
 are composed of individuals; but yet the degrees of develop- 
 ment of the collective body, and of the several nations, is very 
 different, and consequently so is their responsibility. At the 
 moment of Christ's appearance, when the fulness of time was 
 come, and mankind had attained the age of maturity (Gral. iv. 
 4), yet all the nations w^ere not equally advanced, but many 
 were still in the lowest grades of development, as continues to 
 be the case at this day. But as to the question of a nation's 
 guilt, everything depends on its degree of development. In the 
 wilderness the people of Israel incurred guilt, so that it was 
 necessary that the elder generation should die there; the like 
 happened in the captivity, where the greater number of the 
 exiles remained behind among the heathen, and were mingled 
 with them; but, because the development of the people was not 
 then so far advanced as in our Lord's day, their guilt in those 
 earlier times was also less. (Comp. on Matt. xi. 20, seqq.) And 
 in the same way do individuals in the greater or smaller aggre- 
 gations of people stand relatively to each other. True it is tliat 
 all the members of a nation without exception are influencedt 
 by the same spiritual atmosphere — the spirit of the nation, as 
 we commonly call it. The lower the condition of the whole 
 people, the greater is the dominion exercised over individuals 
 by this spirit of the generality ; as development advances, indi- 
 vidualization increases in a nation. But yet the condition of all 
 the individuals who compose the nation is not alike, whether in 
 the higher or in the lower degrees of development. Rather, as 
 different nations in the unity of mankind stand at different 
 stages in the same period of the development of the whole, so 
 too do the various individuals in the unity of a nation. When, 
 therefore, we speak of the guilt of a people at a particular period, 
 
 • [i. e., of some German edition earlier than the third, to which the reference is 
 not suitable. The passage intended would seem to be a part of the commentary 
 on the warnings in Matt, xxiv.] 
 
 t IGetragen.} 
 
CHAPTER XI. ] — 36. * 357 
 
 this guilt is distributed in very various measures among tlie 
 individuals of that people. Now, in every people there may be 
 distinguished active and passive individuals; in acts of sin, the 
 latter are merely drawn along in the train of the former class, 
 but the active are those who, in the critical moments, determine 
 the tendency of the whole to sin. Thus, in our Lord's time, it 
 was the Pharisees and Priests who produced the sin of the apos- 
 tacy ; the mass of the people was only carried along by them ; 
 if the leaders had taken another direction, it might have been 
 differently guided. Thus, then, in a case of national guilt, the 
 degree of guilt is variously determined in such a way that the 
 active members especially bear it. In the mass, which is only 
 swayed by them, the guilt of many may be very slight in such 
 a proceeding as the rejection of Christ was, inasmuch as an exact 
 knowledge of the circumstances is often not even rendered pos- 
 sible for them. Those, then, who thus have loaded their con- 
 science but little, may form the seed of a new generation. 
 Hence the great judgments which befel Israel (in the wilderness, 
 in the captivity, under Titus, and under Hadrian), — in which 
 those members of the people who had fallen wholly under the 
 dominion of sin, were removed — appear, at the same time, as 
 restorations, inasmuch as the remnant of the people, like a living 
 root which is set free from the dead tree, was in a condition to 
 put forth new shoots. There are, therefore, three classes to be 
 distinguished in the people of Israel ; first, the few who had the 
 energy, in opposition to the corrupted spirit of the mass, to re- 
 cognise and apprehend the Messiah in Him who was crucified; 
 these passed over into the spiritual Israel of the Church. Next, 
 those members of the nation who, with more or less clearness of 
 knowledge, strove against God ; these fell off from Israel, and, 
 although circumcised in the flesh, became in spirit like the hea- 
 then uncircumcision (ii. 28-9), for which cause God caused them 
 to perish in the great judgment under Titus which followed. 
 Thirdly, those who were not strongly enough actuated either by 
 sin or by grace ; so that they neither became so deeply guilty 
 as the second class, by their not believing, nor, on the other 
 hand, did they attain to the same perfection as the first. This 
 third class remained over as a seed, and out of it was developed 
 the Israel after the flesh, which we see descending through the 
 course of the Christian ages, and which sojourns among our- 
 
358 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 selves, as a living miracle of tlie Lord, scattered over all the 
 world, yet faithfully adhering to the customs which it has in- 
 herited. Japheth indeed now dwells in the tents of these chil- 
 dren of Shem ; i. e., they are bearing the guilt of their fathers, 
 and have ceased to be the centre of the divine system of salva- 
 tion ; yet they are not cast off for ever, but their prerogative is 
 only withdrawn from them for a time, and still remains in store 
 for them. They are like a royal race excluded from the throne 
 through the fault of its ancestors, but for which the crown is 
 reserved until the time when it shall please God to restore it to 
 its dominion. 
 
 After these remarks, the following statement of the Apostle 
 as to the various classes of individuals, and the aggregate of the 
 people of Israel, will be more easily intelligible. 
 
 Ver. 1. In accordance with what has been said, the question 
 f/^n aTuiffaro x. r. X. is not to be understood of the individual 
 members of the nation who lived in the days of our Lord and 
 the Apostles; for they were, in truth, for the most part rejected, 
 and in ch. ix. St Paul expressed that deep sorrow over them that 
 they did not belong at all to that Israel for which the promises 
 were intended (ix. 6, seqq.); it relates to the people as a body. 
 This depended on the XeTfM,u.a (xi. 5) ; i. e.y on the better disposed 
 among the people, who either already believed, or, at least, did 
 not intentionally strive against faith. For these the promise 
 remained, according to God's prescience (h T^oeyvw) which also in- 
 volves the operation of grace, and, therefore, cannot be in vain. 
 Those, on the contrary, who had fallen away, were never in God's 
 sight members of the true Israel ; for he foreknew their unfaith- 
 fulness, and had not elected them ; just as the dry branches of a 
 tree are cut away by the gardener, without his thereby giving 
 up the tree itself — nay, rather the priming is a proof of his 
 continuing care for it. As an example of this holy seed in the 
 nation, the Apostle mentions himself; but with St Paul we are 
 also to think of all those who had at that time already attached 
 themselves to the Church; for by these it was visibly manifest 
 that God had not forsaken his people. 
 
 Ver. 2-4. He proceeds, however, further from the visible to 
 the invisible nucleus* of the people of God. The history of 
 
 * [Keim. The term must be retained in this place, because the figure is after- 
 wards carried out.] 
 
CHAPTER XI. 5, 6. ooO 
 
 Elijah (1 Kings xix. 10, 14, 18) offers him an excellent oppor- 
 tunity of illustrating this truth as to the existence of a hidden 
 handful of true believers in an apostate people. It is evident 
 that St Paul cannot here mean those Jews only who had passed 
 over to the church — for they were discernible — but those, un- 
 known to every human eye, who bore in their heart, without 
 being themselves conscious of it, the hidden treasure of faithful- 
 ness and uprightness. These stand in the same relation to the 
 bulk of the people as the remains of the Divine image to the 
 old man in the individual ; or, as in the regenerate person the 
 new man, undeveloped, and often repressed by sin, stands to- 
 wards the sinful man which encompasses him. As this latter 
 must die in order that the other may dominate, so too must the 
 Xi7,(i[ia be set free from the alien husk in which it dwells, in order 
 that it may be in a condition to extend itself. It is always the 
 people properly so called (ix. 6, seqq.), to which all promises 
 relate, as the new man which makes no show is alone the true 
 man in the rude mass of the old man. 
 
 In ver. 2, h 'HX/i* means the section in which the history of 
 that prophet is told. In like manner Thucydides i. 9, uses h 
 rfi exriTTpox) itapaho<sii to denote the second book of the Illiad. 
 'Ej'ru7;:^^ai/w xard rmg does not occur elsewhere, except in the 
 Apocrypha, 1 Mace. x. 60. In ver. 8, the quotation is freely 
 made, and does not exactly follow either the LXX. or the He- 
 brew. xpriiJjartti[j.Ui the answer of an oracle; the substantive 
 occurs in this place only ; as to the verb compare note on Matt, 
 ii. 12. Ver. 4. The form i] jSdaX is chosen by St Paul after 
 the example of the LXX., who most commonly use this form, 
 although in the story of Elijah (1 Kings xix. 18) it is 6 (SdaX. 
 The feminine for n^^S ^^^^ ^^^ occur in the Old Testament as 
 meaning the goddess who is there spoken of by the name of 
 Queen of Heaven or Astarte. The circumstance that the LXX. 
 represent the male god as also female, is to be traced to his 
 androgynous character, and is not to be regarded as intended in 
 mockery. 
 
 Ver. 5, 6. Having in ch. x. decidedly characterised the want 
 of faith as guilt, he now as strongly denies that the superiority 
 of the better kind is their desert ; this, like all other good, is 
 not to be ascribed to any works whatever, but solely to grace. 
 
 In ver. 5 Xe7;u./Ma == xara>.g//x/Aa, comp. on ix. 27. The words 
 
360 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 iTikoyri xdpirog do iiot require hXoyn xpldiojg by way of opposition, 
 for the Divine operation produces only what is good. The idea, 
 however, of the election of grace doubtless includes this — that 
 God perfects those whom He chooses. The election is in itself 
 as comprehensive as the love of God itself; but through His 
 foreknowledge of those who, by resistance, make themselves 
 evil, it becomes partial. In ver. 6, A.B.D.E.F.G., omit the 
 addition ei ds J^ epyuv ovxen heri yapii' I'Tsi to 'ipyov ouxsr/ Wr/w 
 spyov. There is evidently something superfluous in it; and 
 moreover, the last words, rh 'ipyov ohxiri hriv 'ipyov, are in their 
 form quite out of character with St Paul's manner. 'E^rg/ is to 
 be taken in the sense of " otherwise," comp. iii. 6. 
 
 Ver. 7-10. Israel, therefore, considered as a people, is di- 
 vided into two parts — the Xe/>/>ta or I^Xoyr] — the people in the 
 true theocratic sense (ix. 6), and the hardened. In the former 
 class, the grace of God accomplishes everything ; in the latter, 
 it produces the form in which they appear in history. In 
 order to establish this idea of the division of Israel into a be- 
 lieving and an unbelieving half, as an act of God, the Apostle 
 again appeals to the Old Testament, where the unbelief and 
 the sinful development of many Israelites (always, of course, in 
 respect of the manifestation only, and not in that it is sin itself), 
 is not only foretold according to God's omniscience, but is also 
 ascribed to His omnipotence. Thus the ideas of ix. 1 7, are here 
 repeated, only with a definite application to Israel. 
 
 Reiche is for extending the question to I'Trirvx^v, but it is bet- 
 ter to understand r/ ovv only as interrogative. The words refer 
 back to ix. 30. Here, however, as in ix. 6, 'lepaiiX is to be under- 
 stood of the physical posterity only; the IjiXoyri alone is the 
 spiritual Israel. But it is God alone, as omniscient, that can 
 distinguish between the spiritual and the physical Israel he- 
 fore the event ; man cannot do so until after the event. — liupou 
 = (SKknp^vMy comp. note on ix. 18. The only words that can 
 be supplied, agreeably to the quotation which follows, are h'jrh 
 rou @sou. But God hardens only those whom He will; and He 
 only wills to harden those who, to a certain degree, have given 
 themselves over to sin. Such an one He intends to restrain from 
 deeper guilt by the 'zoopucig, if it is but temporary, or to punish 
 by it, if it is permanent. It is evident from the words sug rvjg 
 &i(iepov vf^/spag, that the Apostle has in view, in the first instance, 
 
CHAPTER XI. 11. 361 
 
 only a temporary hardening, and hopes that it will soon be pos- 
 sible to remove the spirit of slumber from them, without being 
 obliged to apprehend that they will afterwards, when awake, 
 continue to resist, and only incur heavier guilt. The received 
 text reads rourov, but A.C.D.E.F.G. have rouroy which reading is to 
 be preferred, as the most unusual ; s'Trirvyx^^^'^ usually takes the 
 genitive, comp. Heb. vi. 15, xi. 33; James iv. 2. The reading 
 eirripu)&n(^(iv {they were hurt, or maimed), has no considerable 
 authority in its favour. The quotation in ver. 8 is freely made 
 up from Is. xxix. 10, and Deut. xxix. 4. The unbelief of Israel 
 is the proper subject of both passages ; but in the first flre-ToV/xgv 
 stands instead of sSwxs, and in the second the turn of the sentence 
 is, " Grod gave you not eyes to see and ears to hear \' whereas 
 St Paul refers the negative to /SXg'rg/v and axous/c. The word 
 Tcocrdvu^ii signifies in the LXX. deep sleep, TVyT\r\^ ^^^^ •"^^> 
 not, as in profane writers, pricking, from vuccw. The expression, 
 spirit of slumber, is meant to denote the reality of the divine 
 operation — the outpoured element which produced the same 
 effect in all. Ver. 9, 10 are from Ps. Ixix. 23, 24. In this 
 passage Israel is not the subject; rather David is speaking of 
 his enemies, and curses them. Here, however, as in other 
 Psalms, these are not his personal enemies, but the enemies of 
 God's cause in him; his curses are the expression of God's 
 righteous judgment, the effect of which was the only thing 
 that could avail to lead the adversaries from their evil way and 
 convert them. This quotation also is freely made from memory; 
 &rjpot> is neither in the original nor in the LXX. The sense of 
 the first verse is — Where they least expect it, let the snare of de- 
 struction come upon them by way of recompense ; of the second 
 — Load them with misery, let their eyes become dark, boiv down 
 their backs for ever. The original has, in the first verse, 
 D*^t2i^tZ?7 fi'^ those who are at rest, the secure; as the LXX. 
 translate e/g avTa'^rodofMcx,, they no doubt read D't^^^tl?!?- '^^^ 
 darkening of the eyes, and bowing down of the back, cannot well 
 be understood here of age and its troubles, because dia'^avrog, 
 equivalent to *i*i^;n, is joined with them ; we shall do better 
 to understand subjection, perhaps with blinding of the eyes. 
 
 Ver. 11. The subject of ver. 1 is now resumed and carried 
 further — how that God has by no means rejected the people as 
 
362 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 such, but rather salvation has come to the Gentiles, through 
 the fall of the Israelites, in order thereby to incite these to the 
 recovery of their prerogative. Thus (as in ver. 8), the harden- 
 ing of Israel would appear as merely transitory, out of which 
 God, according to his wisdom, knows how to bring forth some 
 good effect. If, however, this idea were understood of all the 
 individual members of the outward body of the nation, then, as 
 has been already remarked at ver. 1, in the first place, the 
 grief which St Paul expressed in ch. ix. seqq., would be merely 
 affected; for, in that case, the calamity would be nothing more 
 than that some reached the goal later than others; and as, 
 moreover, the salvation of the Gentiles was hereby brought 
 about, all cause of complaint would substantially disappear. 
 And further, in that case the Apostle would contradict himself; 
 for in ix. 6, seqq., he had said that not all those who were 
 physically members of the Israelitish people were such inwardly 
 also, but that to these latter alone the promise belonged; con- 
 sequently he cannot here intend to speak of all who were Israel- 
 ites by fleshly descent. If we should choose to suppose (which, 
 however, according to the subsequent discussion, is not pro- 
 bable), that St Paul imagined the coming of Christ to be im- 
 mediately at hand, and hoped that it would effect the conver- 
 sion of the Israelites; still there had been an interval of more 
 than twenty years since our Lord's ascension, and during that 
 time many Jews, who might have become believers in Christ, 
 had died in unbelief ; and therefore, even on this supposition, 
 the Apostle could not mean all the individuals who had ever 
 belonged to the nation. "We must rather, according to the prin- 
 ciples laid down at the beginning of this chapter, make a clear 
 distinction between the individuals and the essential part* of the 
 nation. Many individuals " stumbled at Christ that they 
 should fair' — i. e., in punishment of their own sin they utterly 
 forfeited the salvation which is in Christ; but these were such 
 as in nowise belonged to the people of God, properly so called, 
 being only members of the fleshly Israel ; the Xg^/^/ooa, on the 
 other hand (ver. 5), which is the proper essence of the nation, 
 was, through this very stumbling of the others, and the calling 
 of the Gentiles, to be saved, and hereafter to become a great 
 blessing to the world. The sense of the words is consequently 
 
 • [KernJ^ 
 
CHAPTER XL 11. 363 
 
 tliis — to the elect all things must serve for good, even the sin 
 of their neighbours; to those who are not elect, all things serve 
 for their hurt, even the divinely-appointed means of salvation; 
 for their inward perverseness causes them to pervert everything 
 from its proper purpose. (Comp. Ps. xviii. 27; Rev. xxii. 11). 
 Of course, however, as has already been often remarked, this 
 election of God is not to be thought of as arbitrary, but as 
 directed by Divine wisdom and holiness, and consequently as 
 leaving no one unchosen but such as resist the operation of 
 grace. After what has been said, the only thing in the pas- 
 sage under consideration that strikes us as a difficulty is, that 
 the Apostle does not distinguish these two classes, but speaks 
 of the whole mass as if it were of uniform quality. The cause 
 of this circumstance, however, is only to be sought in the 
 fact, that St Paul views the people as a definite unity, and 
 attributes to it collective actions. The two wholly different 
 classes contained in this unity — those of genuine and false 
 Israelites, of elect and non-elect — can be separated by God 
 alone ; it is only in the generations which have quitted the 
 earthly scene that man begins to perceive their difference, and 
 even in these it is but partially and uncertainly, while in the 
 living he cannot discern at all. One who, to the last moment, 
 is an unbeliever, may yet, with his last breath, turn and be- 
 come a believer. And it is with the whole of mankind as with 
 the people of Israel. In God's sight there are two wholly dis- 
 tinct classes among mankind, but for man this distinction is 
 not perceptible. In the living and in future generations, man 
 sees a great mass destined to salvation ; it is only in the gene- 
 rations which have passed away that he sees the difference; 
 and even among these, again, he sees it but imperfectly, since 
 no human eye penetrates into the depth of the soul, and we 
 can seldom be entirely assured as to the happiness or misery of 
 another. 
 
 We must not attempt at all to refine the relations of Trahiv 
 and Ti'TTTsiv to each other ; the former means simply to stumble 
 against (with reference to ix. 33), the latter the falling, which 
 is the consequence of stumbling, with the result of this fall, 
 viz., the ocTTuXsicx, which may follow from such falling. The ten- 
 dency of the Apostle's argument in this place, is to prove how 
 God's wisdom Cvan turn the fall of Israel, in the sense which has 
 
364 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 just been more particularly defined, to the good of others in 
 the first place (as had already been seen), and eventually to 
 that of Israel itself also, "iva is, therefore, to be understood 
 reX/xSs, as it is also in ver. 1 9, which is a passage very similar 
 to the present. ''Eyhiro is to be supplied to i] gurnpioi,. Salva- 
 tion, doubtless, would have come to the Gentiles, even in the 
 case of Israel's having believed; but, in the first place, it would 
 not have been until later, and moreover, if Israel had rem.ained 
 true to its calling, the Grentile world would not have become, 
 as it has, the transmitter of the ordinances of salvation.* As 
 to nrapaZrikZxsai, compare note on x. 19. As in the individual, a 
 deep fall is often necessary in order rightly to kindle the new 
 life in him to a flame (as, e. g.^ in the case of St Peter), so, too, 
 are the fall of the Jews am on mankind, and the sight of the 
 Gentile world enjoying their prerogatives in consequence of 
 this fall, the means in God's hand of bringing the Israel of 
 God to the true life. 
 
 Ver. 12. St Paul goes on to shew, by an argument a minori 
 ad majus, how powerful an influence Israel exercises on man- 
 kind — like the heart, by the motions of which the life of the 
 whole organic system is regulated. If even their fall has had 
 the power per contrarium, to operate for blessing, how much 
 more will their rising again, when it takes place ! The Apostle, 
 however, forthwith defines more precisely the idea of the ^a^a- 
 crru/Ma; for, in another view, this fall of Israel was the acceptance 
 of some members of the people. If it had been possible that 
 the Apostles also (who were all children of Abraham), the 
 Seventy, and all the Israelitish friends of our Lord, should 
 have continued in unbelief, or have become apostate (which 
 certainly was impossible, according to Matt. xxiv. 24), then 
 neither would the gospel have reached the Gentiles; it would 
 have utterly failed. St Paul's idea, therefore, is properly this : 
 — If so small a number of Israelites has been able to efiect so 
 much in the Gentile world {xofffMog = e^vri, comp. note on iii. 7), 
 what will Israel efi'ect when the whole body comes to act! The 
 expression chosen for this idea, ^Vr>j,aa xa/ '^Xripufioc, is as diffi- 
 cult as the idea itself is simple. na^a-rrw/Aa would require, by 
 way of contrast, some such notion as oi,vdera(fig ; but this is want- 
 ing, and is absorbed in crXyipujubu. "Hrryjfia, attic for T^fforifia, is 
 
 [* Trager ier Ileilsanstalten.] 
 
CHAPTER XI. IS, 14. 365 
 
 used by profane writers like vjcau or ^rra, in the sense of over- 
 throWj hurt, loss; in that sense it would be synonymous with 'Ttapd- 
 /rrbf^Uj but if so taken, it would not, seemingly, form a contrast 
 with 'TrX/jpufji^a. The only other place where it occurs in the 
 New Testament is 1 Cor. vi. 7, where it means, like iXarrw/Aa, 
 a moral defect, degradation. The expression ^Xripoofia which is 
 used of the full complement of a ship, the whole population of 
 a city, and the like, points to the idea of a part as its opposite; 
 but it cannot be certainly made out that rrrrifji^a can bear this 
 sense. [Olsh. would render it by the word Ausfall (" abate- 
 ment, deficiency,") which, he says, " is used to signify that por- 
 tion of a connected multitude which is not filled up.''] The 
 Apostle, no doubt, had in his mind the idea of a definite num- 
 ber, w^hich, in the course of its development, the people of 
 Israel must make up — an idea which also appears in a modified 
 form in Rev. vii. 4. This number had, in our Lord's day, 
 an important deficiency [^AusfaW], in consequence of the unbe- 
 lief of many ; and yet, if the faithful few already had such 
 powerful influence — this St Paul means to say — then we may 
 well infer v/hat the effect will be, when the number determined 
 by God shall be full!* The passage was rightly explained in a 
 similar way as far back as Origen. Beza and Grotius in later 
 times, and most recently De Wette, also agree in this explana- 
 tion, of which ver. 25 is a further confirmation. 
 
 Ver. 13, 14. St Paul proceeds to say that, actuated by a 
 knowledge of what is in store for Israel, he, although especially 
 an Apostle to the Gentiles, yet always keeps his own people also 
 in view, in the hope that his labours among the Gentiles may 
 react beneficially on Israel. As, however, he says cwo-w tivag 
 eg ahrojv, it is clearly a mistake to suppose that the Apostle con- 
 
 " The passage Gal. iv. 24, seqq., is very instructive as to the Apostle's whole 
 view of the relation between the aggregate of Israel and the individuals who com- 
 pose it. The nation is the mother, who constantly represents a possibility of bear- 
 ing; but she is long barren (Gal. iv. 27); and when slie bears, as Sarah bore only 
 Isaac, she bears but few children. But the time will come when the forsaken, 
 aged, barren one, shall bear more children than she that hath an husband. Israel, 
 scattered among all nations, and forsaken of God, is like to such a declining and 
 barren woman; individuals alone here and there separate themselves fi'om the 
 people, and enter into Christ's Gentile Church, which at present has the husband — 
 i. e.y in which God and His grace are in operation. But this barren widow will, 
 in her age hereafter, bear children, as the dew is born from the dawn (Ps. ex.), 
 [where the latter part of ver. 4 is I'endered by Luther, " Thy children are born to 
 thee as the dew from the dawn."] Israel's growing-old is a continuous process of 
 purgation; the refuse gradually falls away, the pure gold remains behind. 
 
366 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 tinued, at the date of the Epistle to the Romans, to imagine our 
 Lord's second coming to be as near as he had thought when he 
 wrote to the Thessalonians. For, as appears from ver. 25, he 
 expected the conversion of 'rrag 'icpariX at the advent; conse- 
 quently, if he had still regarded this as so near, he would have 
 chosen some more comprehensive expression instead of rmg- It 
 might indeed be said, that St Paul left the conversion of the 
 mass of the Jews to the twelve, and himself only hoped to con- 
 vert some Jews in addition to his proper work. And if so, no 
 conclusion could be drawn from this passage as to St Paul's 
 views respecting the nearness of Christ's coming. Still, how- 
 ever, the Epistle to the Romans gives the impression, that St 
 Paul no longer considered the advent so near. (Comp. note on 
 xii. 11.) But in any case, he hoped by his conversion of some, 
 to hasten greatly the restoration of all. 
 
 'Ef ' odov is to be taken in the sense of in so far as, inasmuch 
 as (supplying rpoTov), not so long as, (supplying x^ovoi/). The 
 conversion of some Jews appears to the Apostle, who always 
 keeps in view the great prerogatives of his nation, as a 5oga^g/v 
 of liis office. 2a/5g fio'j=z^^^'r^ (comp. Gen. xxix. 14), in tlie 
 sense of kindred, persons of the same nation, fellow-countrymen. 
 
 Ver. 15. Now, from this conversion he expects a beneficial 
 effect for the whole kingdom of God, according to the principle 
 of ver. 12, that if even the deficiency* of so many conduced to- 
 wards the salvation of the world, the accession of these would 
 have a yet far more powerful effect. Here xaraXXwyri ^cogfiov ex- 
 plains the more general expression 'n-Xouros (ver. 12). The Gen- 
 tiles were in a state of natural enmity to God (Eph. ii. 1, 
 seqq.) ; the removal of this enmity, by their calling unto Christ, 
 is the xaraXKocyrj. Here too the Gentiles are conceived of as a 
 collective body, standing in contrast to the Jews as another col- 
 lective body. Although so many Gentiles were still in unbelief, 
 it is yet already said of them in altogether general terms that 
 they are called, inasmuch as the Gentile world, as such, was des- 
 tined by God's decree to be, instead of the Jews, the transmitter 
 of the divinely-appointed ordinances of salvation ; and although 
 individual Jews became believers, and in the course of ages 
 many more continually joined the Church, it is yet said of them 
 that they are rejected, because, regarded as a people, they had 
 
 • [Ausfall.J 
 
CHAPTER XL 16. 367 
 
 ceased to be the centre of the ordinances of salvation. 'Am^oXri 
 is used as equivalent to nrrrifjja in ver. 12. The rejection of 
 Israel is at the same time the reception of some, and it is only 
 on this positive side that it is the blessing of the Gentile world. 
 The '7rp66Xr}^ig, however, is that reception of the whole body which 
 is to be expected (according to ver. 25), and of which the opera- 
 tion will be so much more potent for all mankind, because 
 already so small a number had been able to work on them so 
 powerfully. The term r/V — &/ m (which corresponds with -roVw 
 iMaXkov in ver. 12) is intended to give prominence to the great- 
 ness of this influence. Zm sx. uKpuv (sc. xoc/Aoy), is equivalent to 
 avatfratf/?, which is to be regarded as that still higher result which 
 arises out of the xaraXXay/j, exactly as in Rom. v. 9, seqq., the 
 two are mentioned together as the lower and the higher. The 
 resurrection is here to be primarily understood in a spiritual 
 sense (as in Ezek. xxxvii.) The enmity of the Gentiles was, 
 indeed, removed by the fall of Israel, but the spiritual life was 
 still weak in them ; from the assumption of Israel, on the other 
 hand, St Paul expects the most powerful excitement of life for 
 them. The two divisions of mankind, therefore, Jews and 
 Gentiles, operate reciprocally on each other. The life which is 
 in the Gentiles arouses the emulation of the Jews; and the life 
 of the Jews, in its turn, heightens that which is in the Gentiles. 
 But inasmuch as, according to ver. 25, it is not until the end of 
 the world's development that the 'TrpoGXn-A^tc is to take place, 
 and then also the physical resurrection of the saints follows, 
 thus far the idea of the ^wji Ix vsxpsjv has reference at the same 
 time to the bodily resurrection also — as the two, indeed, always 
 properly imply each other. (Comp. on John vi. 39, seqq.) 
 
 Ver. 16. Again continuing his argument with si (a particle 
 which begins six sentences between ver. 12 and ver. 21), the 
 Apostle employs figures of which the sense is in itself plain, al- 
 though there is an obscurity as to their connexion with the 
 course of the reasoning. The object of both figures is to afiSrm 
 that the part bears the nature of ihe whole, or the derivative 
 that of the original. The aitapyj] is the general* — the holy first 
 
 * There were two kinds of firstlings Dmaa n-tt'N'i the first ripe fruits, and rT'ir^N'i 
 mDT^n the parts offered to the Lord of that which was prepared. To suppose, 
 with Tholuck and Reiche, that the latter are meant, is a needless increase of the 
 difficulty ; for so the two images would stand in an opposite order. The root is the 
 general, out of which the branches grow; and by analogy (pvpa/aa must also have 
 
368 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 fruits which were oifered to the Lord, from which the (phpafj^a is 
 prepared as a derivative ; in like manner, the Ilia is the original, 
 out of which the xXdboi grow. The nature of the tree is shown 
 also by the branch which shoots forth from it. St Paul holds 
 fast to this second image, and uses it as a substratum through- 
 out the argument which follows. But how does he light on the 
 idea at all? and what does he intend by it in this place? The 
 sentence which must be supplied in order to restore the connex- 
 ion, is this : — But that iir poGXri-^ t g which has been spoken of 
 may he expected with certainty, for that which is derived must 
 needs have in it the nature of its original^ and consequently the 
 Israel that now is — (the branches) — must also have the nature of 
 the root from which it grew. Now these roots are, of course, the 
 patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (ver. 28); because they 
 are holy, their seed must also be holy ; for the blessing of the 
 righteous descends to thousands (Exod. xxxiv. 7). Then the 
 connexion is quite simple between this and the further state- 
 ment (ver. 17, seqq.), that the Gentiles indeed were grafted in 
 instead of the branches which were cut off, but that, notwith- 
 standing, Israel was not rejected for ever. If it be objected that 
 too much would follow from this idea, viz., that the Jews could 
 not have fallen at all, whereas the Apostle had just been repre- 
 senting that they had fallen — it is to be considered that St Paul 
 does not mean to deny the possibility of a good tree putting 
 forth unprofitable shoots ; the only inconceivable thing is that 
 it should not produce a?!?/ fruitful branches at all. The apostacy 
 of many, therefore, nowise proves that all hope is given up for 
 ever ; rather generous branches must yet be put forth from the 
 generous root. De Wette's explanation, which makes g/^a to 
 denote the ideal theocracy, founded in the patriarchs, and 
 xXddos, on the other hand, to mean the mere external relation 
 to it, fleshly descent and outward membership — exactly coin- 
 cides with our interpretation ; for outward membership is de- 
 stood first, and ucra^x^ have followed. But, that St Paul should have intentionally 
 chosen the one position in the first comparison, and the other in the second, is 
 utterly unlikely, since his argument requires that the derivative should follow from 
 the original, as existing before it. 'A!Ta^;^;>j means the first fruits which are conse- 
 crated to the Lord, (pv^ufio. the dough which is prepared from them. Reiche tells 
 us that we nowhere read of dough being prepared from the first fruits, but it is not 
 necessary that a thing which is understood as a matter of course should be specially 
 related. If St Paul had wished to express the other idea, he would have had to 
 say, £< ^£ TO (pv^ecf^a elytov, xa) o a^ros. Moreover, the distinction altogether is of later 
 origin. Comp. Winer's Real-lexicon in voc. 
 
CHAPTER XI. 17, 18. 
 
 signed to include an invitation to enter into 
 inward also. 
 
 Ver. 17, 18. The figure of the treet which has been chosen, is 
 more exactly defined by its being characterized as a generous 
 olive-tree. From this branches have been cut off — (the Apostle 
 gently speaks of them as nn?, whereas he might have styled them 
 the greatest part); and instead of these, wild olive-branches have 
 been grafted into the generous parent-stock. St Paul, of course, 
 means by this the children of Japhetli who dwell in the tents of 
 Shem, and who are thus, consequently, admonished to preserve 
 a humble consciousness of this benefit as Si/avour shown to them. 
 The circumstance that St Paul makes choice of the olive-tree 
 for the illustration of his idea, while our Lord chooses the vine, 
 arises from the character of the former tree ; its 'r/oV»j? is sym- 
 bolical of the spiritual fulnessof Israel. Hence the holy anoint- 
 ing-oil (Exod. XXV. 6, XXX. 31, xxxvii. 29) was a symbol of being- 
 filled with the Spirit. And whereas, according to the image in 
 this place, the wild branches are engrafted into the generous 
 tree, reversing the usual process by which good branches are 
 grafted into wild trees — we are informed by both ancient and 
 modern writers that such a process is practicable in this very 
 •tree, the olive, and is often practised in the East — a circum- 
 stance which is fully sufficient to account for the representation 
 in the text, (Comp. Columella de Re Rust. v. 9; Palladius de 
 Insit. xiv. 53; Schulz, Leit. des Hochsten, vol. v. p. 38.) Still 
 the main idea in these verses — the engrafting namely — has itself 
 an appearance of difficulty. What is the idea which it is intended 
 to express when the figure is explained ? The converted Gen- 
 tiles will after all not become Jews, as might be said of a prose- 
 lyte [to Judaism], inasmuch as he is quite absorbed into the 
 nationality of the Jews, and joins them in their manners and 
 way of life. Still, it is said that the Gentile Christian is grafted 
 not only into the root, but into the very branches which are cut 
 off {h avToTg). These w^ords are by no means to be considered 
 pleonastic, but denote the place where the branches grew on to 
 the tree, the wound (as it were) which was produced by their 
 removal, and into which the Gentiles are engrafted. The 
 Apostle's whole representation of the case can only be under- 
 stood by premising the following fundamental ideas. St Paul 
 conceives of the true Israel, i. e., the community of all true be- 
 
 2 A 
 
370 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 lievers — as an articulate organization which has in it its own pro- 
 per life. Whoever does not stand in connexion with this body 
 has no share in the life which animates it. Now, this organi- 
 zation has been developed from Abraham, as the Father of 
 the Faithful (Rom. iv.), until Christ, who was, in his humanity, 
 the absolutely perfect fruit of this organization; its influence 
 did not extend beyond the bounds of the fleshly Israel, inas- 
 much as the Gentiles whom it received into itself were always 
 proportionately few, and these, moreover, became at the same 
 time nationally Jews. But with the appearance of Christ arrived 
 the hour of salvation, and at the same time of judgment on the 
 fleshly Israel ; the power of life in this holy self-contained 
 organization broke forth, attracted the kindred natures in the 
 physical Israel, and repelled the uncongenial multitude. As the 
 latter preponderated, and formed, properly speaking, the mass 
 of the nation, the physical Israel now ceased to be the centre of 
 that spiritual organization, the true Israel. The Gentile world 
 now became this centre, and the gaps left by the unfaithful 
 members of the fleshly Israel were filled up by the faithful Gen- 
 tiles. We must, therefore, consider the idea — that if members 
 in this organization fall away, others must fill the gap, — as the 
 basis of the argument. This is typically shown in the body of 
 the Apostles ; when Judas had fallen out of it, his place was 
 filled, another was to take his bishopric (comp. note on Acts i. 
 20). This idea leads us to apprehend the powerful realistic 
 manner in which St Paul conceives of this spiritual body, which 
 is no other than the true UxXriffla, extending through all man- 
 kind — the new man coming into being within the great old-man 
 of the human race, who was even from the beginning filled with 
 the breath of the Eternal Word, although it was not until the 
 fulness of time (Gal. iv. 4) that thisWord personally incorporated 
 Himself in it,* and so brought him to the knowledge of himself. 
 'AypisXa/os is less usual than the feminine form aypisXaia; xaX- 
 XisXaitg, ver. 24, is its opposite. ' Eyxsvrpl^siv, to insert into any- 
 thing by pricking, from -/.hrpov, Acts ix. 5. Y.ara7ta\j-xag6ai here 
 means selfish exultation over another, as opposed to the humble 
 consciousness that whatever has been received is of grace. E/ 
 hi in ver. 18 requires us to supply " then know — then thou must 
 know."' 
 
 " [Derselben fem. Eeemingly the ixxXryta,, or perhaps Menschheii, mankind.} 
 
CHAPTER XI. ]9-22. 371 
 
 Ver. 19-22. Notwithstanding that the Apostle*s statement 
 appears in certain parts to subject everything to a rigid neces- 
 sity; yet other passages, on tlie other hand, clearly show how 
 firmly he at the same time holds free-will ; and to this latter 
 class the following verses belong. He reminds the Gentiles of 
 the possibility of their falling away, and of the restoration of 
 the people of Israel. St Paul, therefore, is far from teaching a 
 doctrine of irresistible grace. It is, indeed, through God alone 
 — as well through His election as through His operation — that 
 the good man does any good thing; but yet he retains tlie 
 power oi resistance as long as he lives on earth; hence the con- 
 tinual possibility of falling away. And, on the other hand, the 
 worst of men, so long as he sojourns in the body, retains the 
 possibility of ceasing from his resistance, and hence the continual 
 possibility of conversion. God, indeed, knows the event before- 
 hand, but lie knows it precisely as one that is brought about 
 through the free-will of the individuals. This possibility St 
 Paul states in the passage following; and we must acknowledge 
 in consequence the possibility that the candlestick of the Gen- 
 tiles might be removed. History presents us with partial ap- 
 pearances of this kind, especially in the Eastern Church; but, 
 according to ver. 25, it is not to be conceived that, as to the 
 Gentiles as a whole, i\i\^ possibility should ever be realised* 
 
 In ver. 20, faith and unbelief are specified as the tempers 
 which fundamentally determine the mind, by which the man 
 stands or falls. The former means, as it always does, the inward 
 openness to receive the influences of a higher w^orld; the latter, 
 the self-suflScient self-isolation and limitation to its own powers, 
 which consequently cannot lead to anything above itself 'r-^n- 
 Xo;ppoviTv is again found in 1 Tim. vi. 1 7, and is the opposite to (p'o^ita- 
 Qaij which is not meant to denote a slavish fear, but a tender 
 carefulness — not a fear o/God, but a fear /or God and His cause, 
 a fear o/one's-self and sin. In ver. 21, ^o/SoD/xa/ is to be supplied 
 before /aj? Twg. The received text has (piiarirai, which is indeed more 
 
 • The adherents of the well-known fanatical preacher, Irving, in London, hold 
 that the whole Gentile Church has already become apostate, and that now, at the 
 end of the development of the Church, a Jewish Church will again be formed. This 
 idea, however, has evidently no foundation in Scripture, and must, therefore, be 
 reckoned among the many errors of that party. It may, however, not impossibly 
 be in the scheme of Divine Providence, that in the last days a Jewish Chui'ch 
 may again arise, by the side o/'the Gentile Church, as was the case in the apostolio 
 age. 
 
t^72 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 suitable than (pslffirai to the usual construction of fXTi rroo?-, there 
 is, however, no lack of examples of the construction with the in- 
 dicative also (comp. Winer's Grr. p. 471). In ver. 22 the meaning 
 of aTTOTOfj^/a is sufficiently determined by the opposite, ;s/p7)(rror>3$; 
 it is equivalent to opyvj^ but is preferred on account of the figure 
 of the cut-off branches. By lav s<7n/!is/vr,g it is not intended to 
 ascribe to man an independent power of action of his own, as if 
 without the help of grace he could preserve himself from falling 
 away by his own strength and faithfulness; but rfj 'Triffrsi is to be 
 understood (comp. ver. 23), and it is intended to signify the con- 
 tinual preservation of the receptivity for that grace which pro- 
 tects from falling away. 'e-ttsI else, otherwise, as in ver. 6. 
 
 Ver. 23, 24. The possibility of the restoration of rejected 
 Israel is now placed by the side of the possible apostacy of the 
 Gentiles; the condition of it is, that they no longer continue to 
 resist the divine grace, by which resistance the omnipotence of 
 God itself is hindered, inasmuch as it cannot be His will to put 
 constraint on a being which was created free. The whole, how- 
 ever, continues thus far to be on the footing of a hypothesis, as 
 it is not until ver. 25, 26, that the certainty of such a restoration 
 is expressed; further observations on this idea are therefore re- 
 served for the following verses. 
 
 In ver. 23, dwuTog k. r. X. denotes the divine omnipotence, 
 which, however, is never to be thought of as separate from wis- 
 dom; hence God cannot again engraft those who continue in 
 acr/oT/a, since His wisdom does not admit of His willing it. The 
 opposition of xara (p\j6iv and 'jrapa (p'jgiv must by no means be re- 
 garded as an unmeaning part of the image; rather it has the 
 important signification that the Jews, considered as a people, 
 have in their whole tendency and qualifications, a higher call 
 than all other nations to employ themselves on the things of 
 God. This calling of theirs is not taken away by their unfaith- 
 fulness, but only suspended; the consciousness of it, conse- 
 quently, can very easily be re-awakened in them, while a very 
 long time was required to bring the Gentile world into its pro- 
 per relation to the divine ordinances of salvation. 
 
 Ver. 25, 26. In order, then, to bring the Gentile Christians, 
 whom he seems in this place to regard exclusively (or quite pre- 
 dominantly in the Roman Church, to the proper estimate of their 
 position (JW firj rn 'xap tavroT; <ppovt,aoi), the Apostle points with 
 
CHAPTER XL 25, 26. DYS 
 
 prophetic emphasis (oj &iXu bf^ag dyvoiTv, comp. note on i. IS), to 
 tlie mystery of Israel's restoration, when H vXtipu/jju rojv sdvuv 
 shall have first come in (to the community of the faithful, or of 
 the kingdom of God). That this remarkable passage contains 
 a prophecy, properly so called, respecting the people of Israel, 
 is acknowledged by the great majority of expositors, both 
 ancient and modern ; and the context so positively requires us 
 to understand Israelites after the flesh, that a different interpre- 
 tation of the passage will never be able to gain a permanent 
 footing. It was only from a mistaken opposition to the Jews, 
 and from apprehensions of fanatical abuse of the passage, that 
 Chrysostom, Theodoret, and Jerome, long ago, and in later days 
 the reformers especially, were led to explain the Apostle's words 
 as relating to the spiritual Israel. The correct application, how- 
 ever, was again established as early as Beza in the reformed* 
 Church, and in the Lutheran by Calixtus and Spener. How 
 forced the sense of the words is, according to that interpretation 
 which refers them to the spiritual Israel, is apparent from the 
 translation of the passage to which this leads, Israel has been 
 in part affected with hardness, throughout the whole time that 
 {d^pig ov) the fulness of the Gentiles is entering into the kingdom 
 of God, i. e., while the Gentiles are entering in a body, individual 
 Jews only will become Christians ; there is no help to be expected 
 for the Jewish people as a whole.t) But then (viz., when all 
 the Gentiles shall have entered), will the whole spiritual Israel, 
 made up of Jews and Gentiles, be blessed. The utter irrelevancy 
 of this last sentence must be apparent to every one ; it is only 
 when applied to the fleshly Israel that it acquires a meaning. 
 Ammon, Reiche, and Kollner acknowledge this, indeed, but 
 suppose that the prophecy has remained unfulfilled; J as if the 
 history of the people of Israel to this day did not preach aloud 
 that it is yet to receive its fulfilment. Benecke, without any 
 ground, transfers this fulfilment wholly into the next world; the 
 
 • [i. e., Calvinistic] 
 
 + The positiveness with which Luther asserts the impossibility of the conversion 
 of the Jews is remarkable. He says, among other things : — " A Jewish heart is 
 so stock-stone-devil-iron-hard, that in nowise can it be moved ; they are young 
 devils, damned to hell ; to con vex't these devil's-brats (as some fondly ween out of 
 the Epistle to the Romans), is impossible." From this, as from other expressions, 
 it is manifest that the knowledge of the last events of the world's history was a 
 province closed against the great Reformer. 
 
 X [*• ^j apparently, that it is utterly void.] 
 
374 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 portion of truth wliicli may lie in tliis idea will forthwith come 
 out more distinctly. The first question which occurs, on our at- 
 tempting to ascertain more exactly the sense of this remarkable 
 prophetic expression, is — what does the Apostle wish to be un- 
 derstood by '!rag 'ic/'ajjX? Does he mean all the individuals who 
 ever belonged to the fleshly Israel ? and consequently among 
 them, Judas Iscariot, Absalom, and all the cut-off branches? 
 It might seem so, according to vers. 15 and 23, where the pos- 
 sibility of engrafting is declared with respect to those who have 
 been cut off, i. e., the reprobate. This is also strongl}^ favoured 
 by ver. 11, where it is expressly stated that the design was not 
 that they should utterly fall, but that they should be stirred to 
 emulation. Still, the xo^ksTvoi only means the Jews regarded as 
 a whole, in opposition to the Gentiles, but not the single indi- 
 viduals of the nation who had contracted especial guilt. If all 
 individuals were one day to be made blessed, there would, as 
 has been remarked already, be an inward untruth in St Paul's 
 grief (ix. 8); and so too in the separation between the spiritual 
 and the fleshly Israel (ix. 6), since in that case the ■ whole of 
 Israel would be spiritual, only that this character would not be 
 developed in some until a later time. Or (2), does '^rag 'lapan'k 
 signify only those Jews who live in the last days, so that we 
 must suppose all earlier generations of the people of Israel ex- 
 cluded from bliss? If so, the history of Israel since Christ's 
 coming would be like the forty years in the wilderness, only that, 
 as the space of time is greater, the repetition also would be on a 
 larger scale. In the one case, it was necessary that the old 
 generation should utterly die out, in order to make room for a 
 new; in this case, it wouli be necessary that a whole series of 
 generations should die off, in order more and more to gather to- 
 gether the scattered seeds of a better life, and at length to ex- 
 hibit them united in the last generation, as in a matured fruit. 
 In like manner, as we see in the patriarchs of the nation, that 
 of Abraham's descendants his son Isaac alone (and not Ishmael) 
 could be regarded as the transmitter of the holy life, and of 
 Isaac's in turn, only his son Jacob, not Esau; while, on the 
 other hand, of Jacob's, all his twelve sons form the pillars of 
 Israel. But the Christian spirit is opposed to this representa- 
 tion, on the ground that, according to it, the one saved genera- 
 tion would not stand in any proportion to the many who 
 
CHAPTER XI. 25, 26. o75 
 
 perished, while yet the loss of salvation would not appear as 
 caused by any personal guilt of the latter, by their resistance to 
 grace. Rather the Apostle unquestionably means, that the 
 'kiTlj.i^cx. %ar sTtXoynv yapiToc, (xi. 5), is to be conceived of as existing 
 in the nation at every period of time. Israel would have ceas6d 
 to be Israel if this had been utterly wanting in any generation. 
 Consequently, we can only understand the prophecy in such a 
 sense that all those members of the Israelitish people who ever 
 belonged to the true XiT[M[j.ci attain acarripia) at the end of the 
 w^orld, assuredly, the people will enter in a mass into the king* 
 dom of God, but even then too there will be no want of such 
 individuals as are Israelites after the flesh only. But all the 
 better persons of the earlier generations, who remained in 
 ignorance of Christ without guilt of their own, and yet led their 
 lives in sincere fulfilment of the law, true repentance, and firm 
 faith in the Messiah, whom they had been taught to look for — 
 (as is doubtless to be supposed of many Jews in all ages) — these 
 will be dealt with like those who lived before the coming of 
 Christ, and who learn in the next life to know that which here 
 they knew not; in like manner as pious heathens also, who here 
 had no means of becoming acquainted with Christ, will there 
 find a possibility of laying hold on Him as their Saviour. Thus 
 the fulfilment of the prophecy is of a truth to be partly placed 
 in the next world, and this is the truth which is contained in 
 Benecke's view. And in this sense St Paul could with propriety 
 speak of -ras 'i(Span\ since those who forfeit salvation do not 
 really belong at all to the Israel of God. (ix. 6.) It is indeed 
 certain that the Apostle did not imagine the fulfilment of this 
 prophecy to be so distant as experience has shown it to be; still, 
 it has been already observed (on ver. 14) that neither did St 
 Paul conceive it to be quite close at hand, as if it might take 
 place in his own lifetime ; he did not know the time of Christ's 
 second coming (Acts i. 7), but hoped that that which he longed 
 for would soon come to pass. The greater or less length of the 
 interval, however, does not in any way afiect the substance of 
 the view ; if there were but a single generation between, still 
 the question always arises how this is to be regarded ; and it 
 cannot be answered otherwise than as it has been, since there is 
 nothing to warrant us in supposing that the generation either 
 attains salvation without exception or perishes without exeep- 
 
37 6 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 « 
 
 tion. The expression a%p/g oZ, consequently, is meant merely to 
 indicate the term at which the eoirnpia of Israel will come to pass, 
 without more particularly defining the time. The slgsp^sff&ai of 
 
 the 'TrXTjpufia Tuiv shuv (viz., g/j rriv /3a(r/Xg/av rou &eov), is, however, 
 no less a difficulty than the definition of ras 'icparjX. Are we, 
 by this phrase, to understand all Gentiles who ever lived or 
 will live, without exception ?* This, again, cannot possibly be 
 the Apostle's meaning, since in chap. i. he had represented them 
 as so deeply sunk, and nowhere intimates that all will allow 
 themselves to be brought to repentance. Or is it only all the 
 Gentiles who shall be alive at the time of Christ's second com- 
 ing ? If so, how should the better-minded of the earlier heathens 
 (ii. 14, 26, 27) have offended, who, without guilt of their own, 
 knew nothing of the way of salvation ? And how can we recon- 
 cile with this the statement, which is continually repeated in 
 Scripture (comp. on St Matt, xxiv.), that just at the time of the 
 second advent, sin will be exceedingly powerful among men ? 
 That every individual should be won to the truth by the preach- 
 ing of the gospel among the Gentiles, is in itself unlikely, and 
 contradicts Scripture, which represents the gospel as preached 
 to them for a witness unto them. (Matt. xxiv. 14.) The elect 
 among the Gentiles, therefore, can alone be meant. But why 
 does St Paul choose for this meaning the word irXnpuiiia^ which 
 may also signify the whole aggregate body ? (Comp. on ver. 12.) 
 It is in order that here again he may hold fast the idea of the 
 supplying of a deficiency. *!" The gap caused by the unfaithful- 
 ness of many Israelites will be filled up by a corresponding 
 number of the Gentiles, who enter on the higher calling of those 
 who have fallen out from their places. In God's kingdom, all 
 is rule and order ; and thus even the number of His saints is 
 counted ! (1 Cor. xiv. 83.) The explanation of ver. 32 will 
 show that that verse may be reconciled with this interpretation. 
 Mvarripiov does not mean something which in itself cannot be 
 known, but something which (as being the free counsel of God) 
 
 • According to Rev. xx. 8, there are still heathens even in the kingdom of God, 
 who are led astray by Gog and Magog ; thus all heathens cannot become Christians. 
 
 t It is similarly taken by Bengel, who rightly renders it supplementum. So, too, 
 Stier, who refers to John x. 1 6, xi. 52 ; and remarks that the conversion of the 
 Gentiles will not fully flourish until forwarded by the activity of the converted 
 Israelites. (Comp, Isa. ii. 3, Ixvi. 19, seqq. ; Zechar. viii 20, seqq. ; Mic. v. 6.) 
 Compare, also, Justin Martyr, Apol. ii. p. 82, ed. Sylburg., who in like manner ex- 
 presses the idea of a number of the Gentiles which is to be filled up by degrees. 
 
CHAPIER XI. 26, 27. 377 
 
 cannot be discovered by man. In like manner, the calling of 
 the Gentiles is also called /ji^vffTrjpiov. (1 Cor. xv. 51 ; Ephes. i. 
 9, iii. 3.) — nag savrf (ppovt/j^o? elvai answers to v^^3, D!Dn (Pi'ov. 
 
 T : T T 
 
 iii. 7.) The ^dJpMgig (comp. on ver. 7) here appears in so far as 
 an act of grace, as it withdraws the knowledge from the people 
 imtil the suitable moment for their conversion. If the Jews had 
 resisted salvation with their eyes open, their guilt would have 
 been far greater than in the actual case. " h^xpi? ov can, of 
 course, signify only th^ term, until the entrance of the Gentiles 
 shall be complete, not the duration of their entering through 
 all ages. 'Ato fji^spov? is not to be joined with 'Trupooffi?, as if the 
 hardening were partial, but with Israel; as many Jews became 
 believers, this addition was necessary. Glockler is mistaken in 
 his interpretation of the passage — " Hardening came on the 
 people of Israel from a portion of it;" viz., from those who 
 lived in our Lord's day — {i. e., a part brought guilt on the 
 whole); a^b (lepovg must be the opposite to -rots 'upayiX. — o-Jrw 
 is to be taken as meaning " Such circumstances having arisen.'^ 
 
 Ver. 26, 27. For the confirmation of the hope which he had 
 expressed, St Paul now again refers to a prophecy of the Old 
 Testament. He quotes freely, from memory, and thus, as he 
 liad before done, mixes up two passages (Isaiah lix. 20 and 
 xxvii. 9). Hence no stress is to be laid on the variations from 
 the original and the LXX. The Apostle was concerned only 
 with the leading idea, that, according to the Old Testament, a 
 deliverance is to be expected for Israel — an idea which is in- 
 deed expressed in both passages. That St Paul regards Christ 
 alone as the person who accomplishes this deliverance of Israel, 
 and does not suppose (as some enthusiasts have fancied) that 
 at the end of time a further special Redeemer is to come for 
 Israel, — this point requires no proof. The circumstance that 
 here His coming is represented as future, whereas Jesus had 
 already performed His work at the time when St Paul wrote, 
 is easily explained by considering that the intention is hereby 
 to express that the experience of this redemption through 
 Christ, before which it cannot be said to have acquired its 
 reality for them, \s future for the Israelites. 
 
 Instead of H 2/wi/, the LXX. have mxgv 2/wv, from the He- 
 brew ^S'lf^, St Paul probably had in his mind such passages 
 
S78 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 as Ps. xiv. 7, where \^'^^^ is found. The title ^vof^svog answers 
 to ^^''i^i, a well-known Jewish designation of the Messiah, 
 which is the same in idea with aujTTjp. — A/a^jjxTj <ra/ Bfiou' points 
 to the fact that the covenant proceeds from God, and is founded 
 in His grace. 
 
 Ver. 28, 29. After this full statement, the Apostle is now 
 able to recur to the fundamental idea, that the Israelites, con- 
 sequently, although by resistance to the gospel they had put 
 themselves into a position of enmity, must yet ever continue to 
 be regarded as friends by the believer, for the sake of their 
 fathers, in whom they were called — a relation which cannot 
 be done away with by their unfaithfulness. In these verses 
 there is an opposition between ihayyiy^iov and sxXoyTj, and again, 
 between d/ b[j.ag and bia rovs Tarspag. The former of these op- 
 positions is, of course, to be so understood, that the gospel is 
 taken in connexion with the resistance to it which proceeds 
 from the Jews, and the h.Xoyri with the grace of God which 
 keeps them upright. In the word did, the signification *' with 
 respect to," is primarily to be kept to. The C/xs^^, consequently, 
 are to be conceived of as Gentiles, the fathers as the true 
 Israel, so that in these words are signified the two divisions of 
 mankind according to the fundamental idea of the Theocracy. 
 But when the election is traced back to the fathers, the idea 
 comes out that the posterity are regarded as included in the 
 ancestors. (Comp. the more particular remarks in note on 
 Rom. V. 12; Heb. vii. 9.) If the individuals were absolutely 
 isolated, the children would have no connexion with the fathers. 
 The important point in these verses, however, is the question 
 whether here (ver. 29) the doctrine of gratia irresistihilis do 
 not appear to be expressed. We must, indeed, allow that Holy 
 Scripture does not contain any passage from which that doc- 
 trine might be deduced with greater plausibility than from 
 this, taken in combination with ver. 32. But even here it is 
 easy to show the unsafeness of such an inference. The divine 
 xkn^i? is not to be thought of except as united with God's 
 omniscience, by which He knows the non-resistance of the 
 elect; He does not, therefore, force the resisting will, since 
 there is no such will, but he does according to His pleasure in 
 those hearts which give themselves up to Him. But if it 
 
CHAPTER XI. SO, 81. S79 
 
 sliould be said that there is in all men a certain resistance to 
 grace, forasmuch as they are sinful beings, and therefore it can 
 only be the power of grace tliat overcomes this resistance in 
 the elect; that hence, we must either suppose, if there be 
 any eternal damnation, that God by a decree does not suffer 
 grace to become powerful enough in the damned to overcome 
 their resistance, or else we must suppose an universal restora- 
 tion, as many of the later writers have been led by ver. 32 to 
 imagine; but that, in any case, the Divine grace is to be con- 
 ceived of as irresistible, since it is the working of the Almighty; 
 — if, I say, such a conclusion were proposed, it may be met as 
 follows, from a scriptural point of view and on scriptural prin- 
 ciples. The Almighty and All-wise God, who has once created 
 man with a capacity of resisting His wnll, cannot contradict 
 Himself, as would be the case if He wished to force the resist- 
 ing will of the creature to a conformity with His own. Hence 
 results the operation of grace for every man according to the 
 measure of the position in which he stands, so that there 
 always remains for every one a possibility of resisting the oper- 
 ations of grace which come to him. This agency of God is in 
 the passage under consideration understood only in combination 
 with His omniscience, by means of which God knows from 
 everlasting those individuals who compose the true Israel as 
 persons who do not liinder the power of creative grace which 
 visits them. 
 
 The yafkihcLra are the several manifestations of %a^/?, which 
 word would suit the place equally well ; we are, of course, not to 
 think of the extraordinary gifts of the Holy Spirit. KX^c/g, on 
 the other hand, is the Divine agency by which the grace which 
 dwells eternally in God visits man in time. And from this re- 
 lation of the two expressions, the circumstance that vXriCig 
 stands second is to be explained; if the extraordinary gifts of 
 the Holy Ghost were meant, xX^c/s must of course stand first. 
 The only other passage of the New Testament where the form 
 aiLiraij/ikr\roi is found is 2 Cor. vii. 10. In profane Greek it is 
 of very frequent occurrence. 
 
 Ver. 30, 81. The general principle which has just been 
 declared is now established equally with respect to Gentiles 
 (who are again exclusively and expressly addressed), and Jews, 
 so that the divine grace forms \\\Qi Israel of God alike from 
 
380 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 Jews and Gentiles. But if the unbelief of the Jews was the 
 occasion of the calling of the Grentiles, it yet will not in turn 
 be the apostacy of the Gentiles that is to cause the restoration 
 of Jews ; for an universal falling away of the Gentile world is, 
 according to ver. 25, inconceivable ; but, on the contrary, the 
 Gentile world's experience of God's mercy will soften the heart 
 of Israel also to emulation of its example. (Comp. on x. 19, 
 xi. 14.) 
 
 In u'xukTv and a^g/^s/a, the notions of disobedience and un- 
 helief interpenetrate each other; the latter is properly the 
 deviation from true obedience towards God.* The dative, rfi 
 uTsihicf,, is naturally to be taken in the sense of " by occasion of 
 their unbelief." The attempt to connect 'j/^grspw sXUi with ^crg/- 
 dn<foLv is quite inadmissible, if there were no other reason than 
 that the unbelief of the Jews did not follow but preceded the 
 reception of the Gentiles. In ver. 81, vf^srspu) Ixhi is to be taken 
 passively " through God's showing you mercy," not actively 
 ^'through your practising mercy." For, according to ver. 11, 
 St Paul means to say, "Your reception is intended to provoke 
 Israel to jealousy, in order that it also may lay hold on the 
 salvation which is in Christ.^i* The insertion of vuv or vgrspov 
 before sXsr}6u(fi is a mere correction of the transcribers, which 
 varied according as they imagined the future conversion of the 
 Jews to be nearly or more remote. 
 
 Ver. 82. The whole statement is at length concluded with a 
 deeply significant declaration, in which the w^hole history of the 
 world is represented as the act of God, without prejudice to the 
 freedom of man. Sin itself must become a foil to that which is 
 good and beautiful; it turns love into grace, and grace into 
 mercy. Sin (in its outward determinate form), no less than 
 mercy — all is the act of God, the All-sufficient. The limits, 
 however, which in the Apostle's mind are set to this sublime 
 declaration, are exceeded by those among the later interpreters 
 (especially Reiche, Kollner, and Glockler), who understand the 
 
 • St Paul does not intend, in this place, to treat of the m'igiv of unbelief among 
 the heathen, but only of the fact. Hence, there was no need for Bengel's obser- 
 vation, " Incredulitas cadit etiam in eos qui ipsi non audivere verbum Dei; quia 
 tauien primitus id in patriarchis, Adamo, Noacho, sut;ceperant." It is simpler 
 to say that, as through their fall in Adam they were sinners, so, too, were they un- 
 believers. 
 
 t [The German has " in order that i/ou also, etc.," which does not appear lo 
 make sense ] 
 
CHAPTER XI. 32. 38] 
 
 words 0/ TuvTs? to relate to all individuals of the Jews and Gen- 
 tiles. This word stands in direct contradiction to the plain 
 statements of St Paul, that all are not the children of faith (ix. 
 6); moreover, the article before cravrgg* forhids us to suppose 
 so, showing, as it does, that we are not to think of the absolute 
 total of the individuals who compose mankind, but of that 
 aggregate of the elect among Jews and Gentiles, which had 
 previously been indicated. And lastly, the words, ha rovg -ravra? 
 iXiriffr, ought in any case to be understood as signifying the divine 
 purpose only, like other passages which declare the universality 
 of grace (1 Tim. ii. 4; 2 Pet. iii, 9; \ John ii. 2), without giving 
 us to suppose that this purpose takes eifect in the case of every 
 individual. Since, then, St Paul teaches in the strongest terms 
 that salvation is not in fact attained by every individual of man- 
 kind (2 Thess. i. 9), the interpretation of this passage w'hich has 
 been noticed, can only be regarded as erroneous. Stier, among 
 later writers, rightl}^ declares himself to the same effect. The 
 parallel passage. Gal. iii. 22, speaks decidedly in favour of our 
 interpretation. It is there said, Gvnx'kucsv tj ypa(pri ra vavrcx. 
 V'xo afiapriav, ha, rj irayyeXicc Ix. v/ffrsug 'irjffov Xpi/rrov dodfj roTg 
 viffTsvovgi. Thus, although the Apostle had in the former 
 part of the verse taken a more extensive conception of the 
 whole, so that even the xrhig may be understood as compre- 
 hended in it,-|- still in the latter part he restricts the salvation 
 to those who believe; but that all the individuals of mankind, 
 without exception, will believe, is assuredly not St Paul's mean- 
 ing, since in 2 Thess. iii. 2 he says expressly, ou yap 'Trdvruv tj 
 mffrig, and in 2 Tim. iii. 1, seqq., he particularly describes the 
 manner in which very many give themselves wholly up to sin, 
 and fall away again from the faith which they had acknow- 
 ledged. 
 
 The expression gvyxXslsiv is based on the metaphor of a prison, 
 in which those whose guilt is alike are shut up together. In s/j 
 
 * Comp. the commentary on John xii. 32. I would remark, further, that in the 
 exposition of that passage I have not given prominence to the circumstance that 
 there too it is the purpose and not the effect that is spoken of. We may say that in 
 that place the subject is the universality of the operations of grace, but not the 
 blessedness of al!; L e., not the actual result. 
 
 t D. and E. read t« •ravra, and F.G. read ^eivra in Kom. xi. 32 also, but these 
 variations are seemingly to be regarded only as corrections from Gal. iii. 22, which 
 passage, as being an important pai'allel, might easily influence the text of the 
 other. 
 
382 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 uTstkiav is signified as the element to which men are thereby made 
 over; while in Gal. iii. 22, uto a/MapHav denotes sin as the hard 
 master, to whose service sinners must be subject. The whole 
 passage, however, represents God, not as the author of sin, 
 through whose influence and counsel it is generated, but as one 
 who distributes in equal measures the evil which has been gene- 
 rated by the misused free-will of the creature, in order to afford 
 a possibility of salvation to all who do not resist. 
 
 Ver. 83. This whole contemplation of the wonderful ways 
 of the Lord, who knows how to gather His flock unto Himself 
 out of all languages, kindreds, and tongues, was assuredly fitted 
 to excite a feeling of amazement and admiration.* To this 
 feeling, then, the Apostle gives vent in an exclamation which is 
 indeed short but deeply felt, and full of great ideas. If, how- 
 ever, Sudog rrXourov be taken as one notion (according to the usual 
 explanation), then that very attribute of God is wanting which, 
 from the context, we must expect to find mentioned before all 
 others — the attribute of compassionate love. There is some- 
 thing so distressing in this want, that we decide with Glockler 
 in favour of understanding -irXovrog to mean riches of mercy — of 
 love. In this there is no difliculty whatever, since St Paul speaks 
 directly of vrXoDrog X/5/(rroD (Eph. iii. 8; Phil. iv. 19), which can 
 only be understood of His grace; and since, besides, in the idea 
 of love there is involved an intimation of its overflowing, rich 
 character, which establishes a natural connexion between love 
 and spiritual riches. Add to this, that the clauses which follow 
 correspond exactly, in a reversed order, to the three attributes. 
 The words ug avs^^prjvrjTa '/.. r. X. refer to yvuffis ; Tjg yap syvu x. r. X. 
 to ffo(pi<x, ; and lastly, r/g '^rposdojx.sv aurS) to the mere grace, which 
 gives where there is no desert. Nay, further, in ver. 36, the 
 three prepositions eg, did, and sJg point back to the three 
 characteristics mentioned in ver. 33. Reiche's remark, that if 
 three genitives were to be connected with (Sddog, there ought 
 also to be xal before rrXourou, or that which stands before ffo<piag 
 should be wanting, is insignificant. For, to say nothing of the 
 
 * This bold and powerful flight seems, however, to have a foundation only on 
 the supposition of an entire restoration. If only some, or but a few in al), are 
 blessed, how is God's wisdom to become manifest in the result l but if all become 
 blessed, without prejudice to free-will and justice, this, assuredly, appears as a 
 miracle of God. The doctrine of a restoi-ation has very many passages of St Paul's 
 epistles apparently in its favour. 
 
CHAPTER XI. 34-36 383 
 
 fact that the xa/ before 6o<piag is wanting in some MSS., we have 
 no ground for supposing that there must necessarily have been a 
 triple xa/ in this place ; it would be necessary only if it had the 
 sense of as well . . . as also; but here we may take it as merely 
 a connecting particle, like the Hebrew *], so that the passage 
 resembles Matt. xxvi. 59, Eph. iv. 6. 
 
 2of)/a is God's knowledge of the purposes, yvMgig His know- 
 ledge of the nature of things. " Avs^spsuvyirog is not found else- 
 where in the New Testament, but Aquila uses it, Prov, xxv. 3, 
 for -^pf^ ^^^. ' Avs^txv'cX'(fro5 occurs again, Eph. iii. 8, and in the 
 LXX. version of Job v. 9, ix. 1 0. K^/>ara and 6do/ signify the 
 utterances of God's will in as far as they give things their 
 nature and subsistence, while in ver. 34 is described the agency 
 of God in determining ends. 
 
 Ver. 34, 35. The Apostle enlarges on the unsearchableness 
 of God in words taken from the Old Testament (Is. xl. 13; Job 
 xli. 2). The meaning of course is only that no creature can 
 penetrate into the counsel of God ; but, doub1:less, God Himself 
 may, by revelation of Himself, give glimpses into His ways. 
 The words r/g vposduxsv avrO), however, are in every respect to be 
 taken absolutely, inasmuch as tlie giving powers of the creature 
 are themselves only derivative; the creature has nothing of its 
 own but what is evil. God's gift is always a grace, for it can 
 never be deserved. 
 
 The passage. Job xli. 2, is in the LXX. xli, 11, and runs thus 
 — Tig avnar^ffsrai fio'i xa/ vTo/ji^evsT. In the Hebrew, on the other 
 hand, it is Q^tt^fc^'i '^^Tl^^^^lpH '^?D> which exactly agrees with the 
 sense of St Paul's words. Perhaps, therefore, the Apostle trans- 
 lated immediately from the original. In the Alexandrian MS. 
 of the LXX., the words are placed at Is. xl. 14, but as they are 
 there altogether wanting in the Hebrew, they must, no doubt, 
 have been written by some copyist in the margin of xl. 13, and 
 so have found their way into the text of some MSS. 
 
 Ver. 36. St Paul at length closes his great doctrinal investi- 
 gation with a doxology, in which God is described as embracing 
 all things* — as the beginning, middle, and end of all things, 
 and, consequently, of the believing Israel as a whole, and of 
 every individual. That these references are what is intended by 
 
 * Tholuck aptly compares with this Dante's address to God — *•' Tliou in whom 
 all good things begin and end 1" 
 
3S4 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 tlie prepositions if, did, and sig, is no longer questioned by later 
 writers. But, on the other hand, they continue blind to the fact 
 tliat these references also express the relation of Father, Son, 
 and Spirit. In an exactly similar way it is said of God, Eph. 
 iv. 6, s<7ri Tdvruv xai d/d tuvtuv, xai h cratf/. Of the Father as 
 the source of all being, U or C-ri is always used in the New Testa- 
 ment, and s'ttI with respect to His absolute power; of the Son, 
 always bid, as the Revealer of the Father, the organ of His 
 agency (comp. on John i. 3); of the Spirit, g/'g, inasmuch as He is 
 the End to which the divine agency leads, or h, inasmuch as 
 He is the element w^hich penetrates and supports all things. 
 1 Cor. viii. 6 is decisive in favour of this interpretation; as there 
 St Paul himself explains If o5 and 5/ cl of the Father and the 
 Son, and if so only by accident that he does not also mention 
 the Holy Ghost. The only objection which might be advanced 
 is, that the passages, thus understood, might favour Sabel- 
 lianism. It is, indeed, unquestionable that the personality of 
 Father, Son, and Spirit, cannot be deduced from these passages, 
 which witness only to the unity of Essence ; but if the person- 
 ality be warranted elsewhere, such passages as these are no 
 argument against it, affirming, as they do, nothing more than 
 that one divine Being manifests itself as Father, Son, and Spirit. 
 — Again, Col. i. 1 6 might seem to bear against our interpreta- 
 tion, as there the predicates of the Spirit (g/V and kv), although 
 not those of the Father, are transferred to the Son. This, how- 
 ever, may be got over by the consideration, that the agency of 
 the Son and that of the Spirit are, in the New Testament, not 
 unfrequently represented as blended together, — the Spirit re- 
 ceives everything from the Son (John xvi. 14); hence also that 
 which belongs to the Spirit may be ascribed to the Son, without 
 our having any reason thence to conclude, that the difference of 
 personalities in the Divine Being, as indicated by prepositions, 
 is not to be maintained. . . . liavra e/g avrov might also be refer- 
 red to the restoration of all things; but in this aphoristic clause 
 there is not so much the declaration of a fact, — that all things 
 shall be brought back, — as that all are designed to be brought 
 back to Him ; but whether all things have attained this destina- 
 tion, this, it may be said, is a different question. Still, in this 
 place, as in others, there is a very strong appearance in favour of 
 the restoration. (Comp. the remarks on 1 Cor. xv. 26, seqq.) 
 
 I 
 
385 
 
 PART III. 
 (XII. 1— XV. 33.) 
 
 THE ETHICAL EXPOSITION. 
 
 SECTION I. 
 
 (XIL 1— XIII. 14.) 
 
 EXHORTATIONS TO LOVE AND OBEDIENCE. 
 
 The Apostle most suitably follows up his detailed doctrinal 
 statement with an ethical part, as is the case in almost all his 
 epistles. As blossom and fruit grow only from a sound root, 
 so, too, it is only from faith in Christ, and in the redemption 
 wrought by Him, that the true moral life proceeds. But from 
 this faith it must indeed of necessity be produced, as surely as 
 light and warmth must be diifused where there is fire. But if 
 from this it should be argued that, therefore, there can be no 
 need of particular moral admonitions, we should overlook the 
 perverseness of human nature. If indeed the life of faith had 
 its thoroughly right course in every individual, then, certainly, 
 it would not be necessary to call attention particularly to the 
 fruits which ought to proceed from it, even as there is no need 
 of any special precautions in order to make a generous tree 
 bring forth generous fruits. But in man, changeable as he is, 
 the life has no such physically regulated course. The dis- 
 ordered relations of head and heart often lead him to persuade 
 himself that he has the life of faith, without really having it. 
 Hence it is necessary to point to the fruits of faitli, inasmuch 
 as the defect of these is a decisive token of the defects of the 
 inner man. The object of the ethical admonitions is not, 
 therefore, immediately through them to produce fruit ; for of 
 this the law altogether is not capable, not even in its New 
 Testament form. Still, neither is their object the purely nega- 
 tive one of merely forming a mirror, in which the reader may 
 be able to discern what he has not and is not. Rather the 
 ethical admonitions of the New Testament have a 'positive cha- 
 racter, which consists in this, that, although they do not work 
 productively (which nothing can do but faith, or the power of 
 
 2b 
 
S86 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 the Spirit accompanying the admonitions), yet they are meant 
 to arouse the consciousness how far the power of faith must 
 work into all circumstances of life, even the minutest. The ad- 
 vanced members of the Church, therefore, and, above all, the 
 Apostles, have to shew others the way how to attain, by degrees, 
 to the estate of being penetrated on all sides by the Christian 
 principle. 
 
 In the ethical development before us, we must first direct 
 our view to the plan which the Apostle follows in it. For I 
 can by no means accede to the assertion of the majority of ex- 
 positors, that St Paul has no plan at all here, and merely strings 
 his exhortations together without regard to order; rather we 
 should adhere to the deep saying of Hamann : " In the Bible 
 there is the same regular disorder as in nature/'* In the first 
 chapter of this portion, the Apostle starts from the idea which 
 is the foundation of all Christian morality — an absolutely-em- 
 bracing consecration of the whole life. This has humility for 
 the principle which gives the tone to the inner man (xii. 3), 
 and out of it are rightly shaped, first, the relation of the indi- 
 vidual Christian to the Church of God on earth (xii. 4-13), 
 according to faith (4-8), love (9-11), and hope (12, 13); and 
 also, further, his relation to the world (xii. 14-21), inasmuch 
 as the principle teaches him even to love and bless his enemies. 
 And this general relation of the Christian to the world finds 
 its especial application in his position towards the ruling power, 
 which, as such, always stands without the Church, inasmuch as, 
 from the character of the community, it can only represent 
 the law and not the gospel. In submitting to the ruling power, 
 therefore, the believer submits to the Divine law itself, and his 
 submission to both is equally without exception (xiii. 1-7). 
 But, again, this obedience to the Divine ordinance has its root 
 in nothing else than love, which is the fulfilling of the law, to 
 which the time of the Messiah urgently warns us to devote our- 
 selves, since now the night is pastf and the day has dawned ; 
 for which cause, also, the believer is bound to walk as a child 
 of light, and has before him the task of quelling all the works 
 of the flesh (xiii. 8-14). The Apostle takes this last turn with 
 
 * Coin pare the Essay by Stier, — "Die geheimere Ordnung " (in his "Andeu- 
 tungen fur glaubiges Schriftverstandniss." Konigsberg, 1824, p. 83, seqq.), which 
 well deserves a reading. 
 
 1 1" Is far spent."— Eng, V.] 
 
CHAPTER XII. 1-21. 387 
 
 a prospective regard to what follows in ch. xiv., where he has 
 to deal with an error opposite to the indulgence of the flesh, 
 viz., with erroneous asceticism. 
 
 § 17. OF LOVE. 
 
 (XIL 1-21.) 
 
 The Apostle sets out with the idea of an entire devotion, ?'. e., 
 offering up of one's-self to God, as the fundamental moral prin- 
 ciple of the Christian ; (renunciation of vice being the funda- 
 mental moral principle of the man who lives under the law). 
 The motive of this is the mercy of God (manifested in Christ), 
 which must call forth a return of love; and the devotion is re- 
 presented as absolute, inasmuch as it extends even to the body 
 — thus presupposing the devotion of spirit and soul. It is only 
 in this absolute entireness that devotion to God has a meaning 
 and significancy, or is a Xccrpua. Xoy/xTj ; the Lord of all requires 
 every man to give his all. 
 
 The ovv is immediately connected with xi. 36, but, in so far 
 as this verse is a summing-up of the whole preceding deduction 
 (especially from ix. 1), it is also connected with the whole of 
 what precedes. 2w/Aa is not chosen because it suits better with 
 the notion of a sacrifice, or even because it stands by synecdoche 
 for the whole of man (according to the analogy of the Hebrew 
 Q^j^), but in order to extend the idea of the Christian sancti- 
 fication even to the lowest power of human nature. In the 
 idea of the sacrifice is indicated the spiritual priesthood of the 
 Christian (comp. note on 1 Pet. ii. 9), which has no relation to 
 the outward Church, but rather to the inward life; the un- 
 ceasing praying devotion of the faithful is the continual sacri- 
 fice which they present to God. The predicates ^uffa^ ayia, and 
 svdpsgrog, characterize the nature of the Christian sacrifice; even 
 the Old Testament required for sacrifice animals free from 
 blemish (Lev. xxii. 20; Deut. v. 21);- how much more must the 
 New Testament require a pure mind ! The epithet Jwca, how- 
 ever, is peculiar. For every sacrifice only becomes what it is 
 when the animal dies and sheds its blood ; but the Christian 
 life is an unceasing spiritual devotion of self, a living sacrifice 
 
388 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 or self-offering. The only other place where XoyiKo? occurs in 
 the New Testament is 1 Pet. ii. 2. It is equivalent to vozpog, 
 which, however, is not found at all in the New Testament,* 
 although the substantive voug is the usual expression, and Xoyog 
 does not occur as synonymous with voug. This service of God is 
 here styled "reasonable," as alone answering to its idea. 
 The opposite to it is not that which is false (for the outward 
 sacrifices of the 0. T. were not false), but only that which is sub- 
 ordinate; the 0. T. institutions are sensible forms for the ideas. 
 There is a hardness in the construction of the accus,, as it does 
 not suit well with -ragaffr^ca/; it should have been 6' hn Xoyiy,?} 
 
 Xarps/cc. 
 
 Vcr. 2. The negative idea is opposed to the positive: — Be 
 not conformed to this world, in which good and evil are min- 
 gled, but form yourselves after the pattern of the absolutely 
 pure heavenly world. The idea of man's capability of forma- 
 tion, the reception into his inward part of a holy or an unholy 
 pattern is, according to scriptural principles, closely connected 
 with the doctrine of the [divine] image, and of the essential 
 character of the soul. The -^v^tj has no active, creative nature, 
 but is passive in its character ; it cannot of itself produce a 
 form, a shaping of the being, but the influences which it re- 
 ceives impress a form on it. It has, however, the power of 
 warding off unholy agencies, and of giving itself up without 
 reserve to those which are holy; and this self-abandonment is 
 the way of sanctification. 
 
 On a/uv ovTog, comp. Comment, vol. i., p. 411, seqq.;+ aluv 
 fjjsWm, i.e., ovpdme, is here to be understood as its opposite. 
 ivffx^fMarl^sffdai is also found at 1 Pet. i. 14; its meaning is, to 
 take the axnf^^ of something else. It is substantially equivalent 
 with fierafMop(pQv<fdai ; the latter expression, however, bears more 
 on what is inward, while the former relates more to the outward 
 part. The avaxalvuffig rou voog here denotes the progressively 
 transforming operation in the believer. The voug itself is the 
 first object of this operation; but from it as a beginning, the 
 whole man, even to his body, is renewed. Tit. iii. 5 is the only 
 other place where the substantive occurs ; the verbs avuKamu) 
 (2 Cor. iv. 6; Col. iii. 10) and di/axa/v/^w (Heb. vi. 4-6) are more 
 
 • The parallel )iovvix'<'S occurs IVTark xii. 34. 
 t 1. 404 of Ed. 3; ii. 108 of the Translation. 
 
CHAPTEil XII. ]-21. 389 
 
 frequent. The renewal is not diiferent in kind from regeneration; 
 tlie latter term, however, regards the matter more as an act, 
 the former, more as a consequence of this act. Renewal coin- 
 cides exactly with sanctification — in which expression, also, the 
 gradual prevalence of the new life is especially marked. In g/V 
 TO doKifji^d^siv it is signified that the natural man cannot truly 
 prove the will of God ; he is without the higher light and the 
 delicacy of the moral feeling; he can, consequently, discern 
 God's will only in that which is most palpable.* 
 
 The first particular to which the Apostle passes from speak- 
 ing generally, is humility, the especially Christian virtue, the 
 supporter of all the rest. Through this it is that each man 
 acknowledges the place and the gift allotted to him,f and thus 
 makes possible a joint operation of the whole. The Apostle 
 utters this and the following exhortations, however, not as his 
 personal good wishes, but by virtue of his apostolical authority; 
 and this for the faithful alone, since it is only for the position 
 of the life of faith that the instructions which follow are suitable. 
 Where the principle itself is yet wanting, no directions can be 
 given how it shall diffuse itself through and impregnate all the 
 circumstances of life; or, at the utmost, they can only effect 
 that which is all that the law altogether can effect — the know- 
 ledge of sin. (Rom. iii. 20.) 
 
 xdpis denotes primarily the apostolic office, but of course in 
 connexion with the gifts imparted for discharging it. The 
 words cravW ruj ovr/ h v/mTv are intended, unquestionably, to make 
 the exhortation quite general ; but the eJvat b vf/jTv is meant to 
 mark especially that the exhortation is addressed to believers, 
 to members of the Church. ' i'7rip(ppovi7v = h-^riXo<pponTv, comp. xi. 
 20. In Tag dsT <ppoviTv, it is indicated that there is also a false 
 humility, which will not own to itself what God has done. True 
 humility is fully conscious of the grace which it has received, of 
 the call which has been addressed to it, yet not as if this were 
 anything of its own, but as of God. This true humility is the 
 ffoo(ppov67v = rd ffSja (ppove/v, the right and healthy view of ourselves 
 and our position. God's creation knows no absolute equality; 
 
 * Augustine aptly says: " Tantum videmus quantum morimur huic saeculo; 
 quantum autem huic vivimus, non videmus." 
 
 t Reiche supposes that the Apostle is led away from the chief idea, humility, to 
 a subsidiary consideration, the gifts ; but the two subjects are most closely 
 connected. It is precisely the consciousness of our own limited gifts that teaches 
 the necessity of co opei'ation with others, who possess other gifts. 
 
890 EPISTLE TO THE EOMANS. 
 
 as among the angels there is subordination, so too in the Church 
 of God the measure of faith, and consequently also the mea- 
 sure of the Spirit, is variously dealt out. And this is not as if 
 according to individual faithfulness, but according also to the 
 free ordering of God. ulffng is here taken quite generally, as 
 denoting the subjective disposition of soul, in which man is 
 capable of receiving into himself the objective working of the 
 Spirit — the grace spoken of in ver. 6. This expression ju,srpov 
 'TT/ffTscog has, as is well known, given rise to the dogmatic term 
 analogia fidei ; but it is needless to remark that the sense of 
 the phrase is here quite different. On the trajection hdarc^t 
 us comp. Winer's Grammar, p. 508, seqq. 
 
 Ver. 4, 5. After the figure of the human organization, the 
 Apostle regards the faithful as an organized whole, in which the 
 individuals as members, are mutually supplementary; the visible 
 Church, therefore, like the invisible, cannot be conceived with- 
 out members respectively leading and led ; and hence follows 
 the necessity of government for the visible Church. 
 
 Comp. as to the figure of the aujuija w^hat is more particularly 
 said at 1 Cor. xii. — As to 6 ds xad' i7g, comp. on Mark xiv. 19, 
 John viii. 9, where s/k xa9' eJg occurs, as here, in the sense of 
 " each." (Comp. Winer's Gr., p. 227.) Every one is regarded 
 as a collective notion, and is construed with the plural /nsXr}, 
 In order to the completion of the parallel, there should imme- 
 diately have been added — and these members have also diverse 
 operations; but this is more fully set forth in ver. 6 and what 
 follows. 
 
 Ver. 6-8. Having hitherto regarded the persons themselves, 
 as the members of the body of Christ, the Apostle in the sequel 
 makes use of the figure in such a way as to represent the va- 
 rious gifts of the Divine Spirit (who, if regarded in His opera- 
 tion, is the same with grace), as giving the law to the various 
 operation of the members. St Paul here only names some gifts 
 by way of example — and indeed only three; while in 1 Cor. xii. 
 7, seqq., a much greater number is reckoned up. To ihQ^Charis- 
 mata properly so called — i. e., to the extraordinary and mira- 
 culous gifts which were peculiar to the apostolic age — there are 
 then added (ver. 8) other points, which might either be taken 
 as merely expressions of the three Charismata, or as appearances 
 of the Christian life in general, such as are enumerated in the 
 
CHAPTER XII. 6-8. 891 
 
 8tli and following verses. As expressions of the three Charis- 
 mata, they might perhaps be taken in a reversed order, so that 
 -TrapaxaXs/v should be applied to the bibddKcc'kog, iMirrxhibomi to the 
 8/dKovo?j 'TrpofffraaSai and e79ieTv to the rrpo^yirrii, with reference to the 
 severe and to the gentle aspects of his office respectively. For in 
 the three gifts there seems at the same time to predominate a 
 reference to the three principal offices in the Church, inasmuch 
 as the irptxpriTrig answers to the bishop, the diddgKaXog to the priest, 
 and the third gift to the didxovog. There seems, however, to be one 
 objection to this supposition of the three gifts, viz., the g/Vg before 
 TapaxaXcov. But, as appears from the evidence of D.E.F.G., and 
 other critical authorities, this is spurious, and has found its way 
 into the text only from the analogy of the preceding s7rs 6 hMa- 
 Kuv. St Paul knows nothing of a special Charisma of TrapaxXriffig. 
 ... As to the structure of the sentence, Meyer would erro- 
 neously connect exovrsg with efffisv (ver. 5) ; but the ds of ver. 6, 
 by which, in opposition to the already concluded sentence, ver. 
 4, 5, the discourse is begun afresh, and carried onwards, is de- 
 cidedly against this. Rather the sentence has something of an 
 anacoluthon in it ; the verb is wanting to g^oi/rgg, and the most 
 natural words to supply would be — " Let each use his gift ac- 
 cording to its purpose.'' Moreover, St Paul also leaves the 
 accusative, and in ver. 7 puts the nominative, and the concrete 
 instead of the abstract. It is, however, remarkable that, in the 
 clause about prophecy, there is put, not, as in the case of other 
 gifts, sv rf 'rpo(pviT£(Cf,y but xara rriv dvaXoytav r9j? "T/Vrgw?, which is 
 evidently synonymous with jui^sTpov vitsnug above, and, conse- 
 quently, as being quite a general expression, would seem ap- 
 plicable, not to the prophecy alone, but to all gifts. It is, 
 indeed, impossible to draw from the ^/cr/g any special and 
 exclusive reference to prophesying, and therefore we must say 
 that the Apostle, by an inexact way of expressing himself, 
 especially connects with the chief Charisma, the general idea 
 which is to be understood in the case of every gift, and thus 
 comes to leave out Iv rfi irpo(pi^relct. For cr/Vr/g is here, as in ver. 
 3, the fundamental disposition of the soul, without which it is 
 altogether impossible to conceive any working of the Spirit, and 
 consequently also any gift in man. 
 
 On Tpo^Tjrg/a, the gift of teaching as to the things of God with 
 full consciousness in the power of the Spirit; on diaxtvla = xu- 
 
o92 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 ^ipvvjffigj and on btbaaxaXia, comp. the more particular observa- 
 tions at 1 Cor. xii. 28. ' Km\oy'ia is not found elsewhere in the 
 New Testament; in profane usage, it is especially employed of 
 mathematical proportions. Here it answers to fMsrpovy ver. 3, In 
 ver. 8, ccrXorng excludes all mixture of purposes in giving; it 
 ought to be the expression of pure benevolence, and it is only 
 as being such that it has any real value. 
 
 Ver. 9-11. The Apostle now leaves the subject of the extra- 
 ordinary operations of the Spirit, and turns to other exhorta- 
 tions, especially the exhortation to make love, in its true nature, 
 the regulating principle in all circumstances. In the most 
 general way, love manifests itself in hatred of what is evil (a 
 hatred necessarily implied in love itself, which loves the sinner), 
 and in cleaving to what is good; and next, in more particular 
 workings. Even the honour shown to our neighbour is beautifully 
 referred to love; without love it is mere hypocrisy or flattery. 
 
 On ver. 9 comp. Amos v. 15, where the same idea is found. 
 In the general clause, vj a/a-r^j dwrnKpirog, it is better to supply 
 effri than gVrw, as the latter is very rarely supplied. (Comp. Ben- 
 hardy's Syntax, p. 831.) In ver. 11, the two clauses rfi amvhri 
 tin oKVTjpoi and r^ 'rmbfian ^sovTsg, express the same idea, first 
 negatively and then positively. They both describe the nature 
 of love — " The coals thereof are coals of fire, which hath a 
 most vehement flame." (Cantic. viii. 6.) In addition to many 
 earlier commentators and critics, some of the moderns, especially 
 Tholuck, Ruckert, Lachmann, and Reiche, have decided in fa- 
 vour of the usual reading, xvpitf), which has certainly by far the 
 greater support from authorities, as only D.F.G., and some Latin 
 Fathers, read jtaipQi. But the internal reasons appear to me so 
 weighty, that I decide unreservedly for xaipcfj. A charge so 
 entirely general, to " serve the Lord,"" is out of place among 
 such altogether special exhortations. The form xu^/c^u douXsvsiv is 
 so well known, that it might easily have been substituted for 
 the unusual xa/go5. In Latin, indeed, tempori servire occurs 
 (Cic. Epist. Famil. vi. 21), but it is not found in Greek before 
 the second century. To serve the time in a right manner, how- 
 ever, is an expression of love which perfectly suits the context, 
 and is, moreover, a thought which easily arises out of the 
 Pauline circle of ideas. 
 
 Ver. 12, 13. Lastly follow the expressions of the third great 
 
 I 
 
CHAPTER XII. 14-16. 393 
 
 Cbristian virtue — Hope. The manifestation of this in endurance 
 of sufferings and in prayer is simple ; but acts of kindness and 
 hospitality seem not so much to come under the head of hope as 
 of love, especially of the (piXadiX(pia mentioned in ver. 9. Both 
 these virtues, however, have also an essential connexion with 
 hope, inasmuch as they point to the recompense which is to be 
 expected ; and here, without doubt, St Paul had a view to this 
 side of the subject, which is also touched on in other passages 
 of Scripture. (Comp. on Matt. x. 40, 41, and on T^oax.a^rsgsu, 
 Acts i. 14; ii. 42; vi. 4, etc.) In ver. 13 the reading /nvstaig 
 instead of %^g/a/?, is remarkable; but it undoubtedly originated 
 in a later time, when the invocation of saints became customary. 
 The same MSS. which read xa/^w support also the various read- 
 ing f/^vstaig — a circumstance which, as must be allowed, is favour- 
 able to the maintenance of xv^icf). 
 
 Ver. 14-16. From the relation of the Christian to the mem- 
 bers of the Church, the Apostle now turns to his position rela- 
 tively to the unbelievers.* Faith and hope must now retire; it 
 is love alone who here celebrates her triumphs ; she blesses the 
 enemies, she weeps with them that weep. The Christian is 
 always accessible to the universally human feelings of joy and 
 grief, from whatever quarter they meet him; he never in stoical 
 indifference or insensibility holds himself above such sympathy, 
 but willingly condescends to the wretched. The words rb avrh^ 
 iig aX\>]Xoug (ppovouvTsg (ver. 16), however, do not seem to suit 
 with this connexion. An exhortation to Christians to unity 
 among themselves is certainly quite out of place here; but it 
 fits easily into the connexion if we take it as follows : *f* — Paul 
 exhorts all believers to be alike in this love towards the unbe- 
 lievers (and that for the very purpose of converting them), not 
 arrogantly to place themselves at a distance and above them, 
 but to enter into their needs. 
 
 Ver. 14 refers to the words of Christ, Matt. v. 44. Chrysos- 
 
 * It might be said that even in the Church itself there is room for the applica- 
 tion of the precepts of love towards enemies (comp. on Matt. v. 43, seqq.), and 
 that, consequently, we cannot conclude from their occurrence that they form a 
 transition to the relation of Christians to unbelievei's. But, in so far as these 
 precepts still find their application in the visible Church, the aJuv oSros also still 
 exists in the Church itself ; the admonitions which follow regard the relation to 
 those who are still moving wholly or partially in the element of this aluv, 
 
 t The sense in which the Fathers take it — that we should enter into the cir- 
 cumstances of another, in order to understand his feelings — is hardly justifiable in 
 point of language. 
 
394 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 tom's remark, that it is harder to rejoice sincerely with the 
 joyful than to weep with the sorrowing, is very true ; but this, 
 doubtless, has its foundation in the remarkable and deep-seated 
 temptation of pleasure at the misfortunes of others, which it 
 is difficult to extirpate. In the misfortunes of our best friends, 
 says Kant,* there is something which is not altogether dis- 
 pleasing to us. In ver. 16 the rainmi are, of course, not the 
 humble or poor in spirit, but those who are outwardly or in- 
 wardly unhappy. The word here answers to the Hebrew h^^ 
 or "^^^^ Reiche, without sufficient grounds, is for taking it as 
 neuter. Syva-ra/w, to carry off wiih^ aum^ayis&aiy to carry off 
 with ones- self y i. e., to put one's-self into connexion or com- 
 munion with a person. Luther rightly says — Let yourselves 
 down to the wretched, nay (since there is nothing to restrict 
 the words to the communion of believers with one another), 
 withdraw not thyself from the poor and despised who as yet 
 know not the gospel. Self-withdrawal and exclusiveness belong 
 to the religion of the Old Testament ; that of the New Testa- 
 ment bids us remain in communion even with those in whom 
 the life of Christ denominates not as yet. The proverb, " Tell 
 me what company you keep, and I will tell you who you are,''"f* 
 is therefore true only for the Old Testament, where exclusive- 
 ness is a duty because the power is too little to master the 
 opposition. The Son of God teaches the faithful to consort 
 with publicans and sinners, in order to win them for his 
 kingdom. 
 
 Ver. 17, 18. The words fin y/vsffh <pp6vifioi 'Trap suvroTg again do 
 not seem suitable to the connexion, which is otherwise very 
 exact as far as ver. 21. This clause, however, must be taken 
 as parallel with firi ra h-^rika (ppovouvrsg above; it is the worst 
 form of high-mindedness — i. e. of lovelessness — to think highly 
 of self; by this a man's view is limited to himself, and the 
 loving care for others is checked. 
 
 The words /tiYidsv} x,ax,hv x. r. X., are merely a negative expres- 
 sion of the same idea which is positively contained in Trpovoou- 
 /Msvot X. r. X. The latter words are taken from Prov. iii. 4. With 
 the second half of ver. 17 compare Is. v. 21, which appears to 
 be referred to in the Apostle's words. UpomTv is used with the 
 
 * [The sentiment is Rochefoucauld's.] 
 
 t Answering to the Latin — Noscitur ex socio qui non cognoscitur ex se. 
 
CHAPTER XII. 19-21. ' 39^ 
 
 genitive, 1 Tim. v. 8; with the accusative, 2 Cor. viii. 21. The 
 words humov a\idp(Ii'7r(av are to be explained according to Matt. v. 
 16. Universal peace is not possible except where sin does not 
 exist ; therefore the Apostle says u dvmrov ; but yet Christians 
 may on their part (rh Ig v/mmv), often by endurance mitigate the 
 sharpness of opposition, and gain even their enemies. 
 
 Ver. 19. Even in the worst case, however, the Christian 
 must not avenge himself, but must, according to Scripture 
 (Deut. xxxii. 85), leave vengeance to Him with whom alone it 
 is always holy. 
 
 In the phrase don to'ttov rpopyfi, most expositors have rightly 
 supplied 0soD, so that the sense of the words is — Do not antici- 
 pate the ways of God, allow time and space to His righteous 
 retribution. Reiche wishes to understand it of human anger, 
 and takes the words to mean — Allow space to wrath, that it 
 may not at once break out into act.* But the quotation does 
 not agree well with this, since it forbids not only the wild 
 anger of a moment, but also that anger of man, which is de- 
 ferred, and thereby mitigated. It is quite unsuitable to 
 understand the anger of the person wronged, in the sense — 
 Do not expose yourselves to anger, give way to it. On rSmv 
 didomt, comp. Eph. iv. 27. The quotation is free; in the LXX. 
 version the words are — h vjfji^spcc IxbixTiaiug avra'^oduxfoj. St Paul 
 is nearer to the Hebrew — n^mi ^^^ ^^, 
 
 Ver. 20, 21. Instead of the wrath of the natural man, the 
 Apostle recommends the love of the spiritual man, which, at 
 the same time, is of the most potent influence in overcoming 
 evil; it not only gains something from the adversary or on him, 
 but it even gains his most proper self. 
 
 The passage is borrowed, word for word, from Prov. xxv. 21, 
 22. The image of coals heaped on the head is to be explained 
 especially from 2 Esdras xvi. 53; it can only mean — Thou 
 shalt prepare for him a sensible pain, yet not in order to hurt 
 him, but to lead him to repentance and improvement. The 
 Oriental style, which delights in strong expressions, contains 
 many kindred forms of expression. (Comp. the passages in 
 
 • In other respects, the Latin Spaiium dare iroe, would suit well with this inter- 
 pretation. Perhaps Lactantius had an eye to the passage before us when he wrote, 
 Laudaremy si, cumfuisset iratus, dedisset ircc sitce spativnif ut haheret modum castigatio. 
 De Ira., c. 8. 
 
396 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 Tlioluck and Reiclie in he) Glockler thinks that the figure 
 is taken from laying coals on pots in order to soften hard 
 meats, and, consequently, that the meaning is — Thou shalt 
 soften his hard heart; but this is quite erroneous. — 2ups{ju, from 
 <fup6g, a heap, is also found in 2 Tim. iii. 6. 
 
 § 18. OF OBEDIENCE. 
 
 (XIII. 1-14.) 
 
 Without any apparent connexion, there follow exhortations 
 to obedience towards authority. According, however, to the 
 manner in which we have indicated of understanding xii. 14- 
 21, the dissertation which follows is very naturally connected 
 with those verses. The hostile element against which Paul had 
 hitherto directed the behaviour of the Christian in his private 
 relations, met the Church of the apostolic age in a concentrated 
 form, as it were, in the civil power of the Roman empire. A 
 wrong conception of the idea of Christian freedom might, there- 
 fore, easily have misled the Christians to place themselves in a 
 false relation towards the heathen authorities; as it is well 
 known that among the Jews the party of Judas the Galilean 
 made it an article of faith that it was unlawful to pay tribute 
 to heathens, inasmuch as the genuine Jew could recognise 
 Jehovah alone as the king of the Theocracy, according to Deut. 
 xvii. 15. (Comp. note on Acts v. 87, and Josephus Antiq. 
 xviii. 1, 1; Bell. Jud. ii. 9). In the statement of Suetonius 
 (Claud, c. 25), that the Jews of Rome made a commotion 
 under the leadership of one Chrestus, there is perhaps an indi- 
 cation that a portion of the Roman Christians, in their lively 
 feeling of Christian liberty, may not have quite rightly appre- 
 hended their relation towards the authorities. If, now, we 
 consider that the Epistle to the Romans was written under 
 Nero, after Tiberius, Caligula, and Claudius, with their abomina- 
 tions and madnesses, had already passed over the scene, there 
 appears in the following exhortation a greatness and purity of 
 thought strikingly contrasting with the malice and baseness 
 which were manifested in the ruling power of the Roman em- 
 pire. This purity and truth could not but at the same time 
 carry in it the power of renewing the youth of the whole old 
 
CHAPTER XIII. 1. 897 
 
 and corrupted world, and of restoring it for a series of ages. At 
 present we look forth into a world which has, in like manner, 
 passed into corruption, in which " the people are become wild 
 and desolate because prophecy is nothing heeded ;"* in such a 
 case, the object is that the law should be again " kept," as com- 
 ing from above, and that the doctrine of holy Scripture respect- 
 ing the magistracy, as Grod's representative on earth, should be 
 anew established. 
 
 Ver. 1. The precept of obedience towards the magistracy is 
 one of universal extent, so that no one may suppose himself 
 released from it by attaining a high degree of spiritual advance- 
 ment, or the like; hence it is said <7ra<ia -vj^u^Ji ImTaaaieQu = 
 ^Q^-^5, i. e.f 'hccCTog. By the term l^ovglai, St Paul designates 
 
 T 
 
 the magistracy in the widest sense, and under it we must un- 
 derstand not only the emperor and the highest official autho- 
 rities, but also the inferior authorities which act only in his 
 name. The predicate v'Trs^sxovga/ designates them as actually 
 existing, as having the power in their hands, and answers to 
 the following a/ b\ oZaai. The bs in a/ hi ovaai is to be under- 
 stood as explicative, not as adversative. By this the believer 
 is exempted from all investigations as to the rightfulness or the 
 origin of an actually subsisting power; in that which subsists 
 he sees the ordinance of God, although it may be only provi- 
 sional, f Notwithstanding, however, this unconditional subjec- 
 tion to the human magistracy, there is no one further removed 
 than the Christian from the service of men ; in the magistracy, 
 as in all other relations, he serves his God alone. Every autho- 
 rity by the grace of the people, leads to frightful tyranny of 
 
 " Prov. xxix. 18. \^Wenn die Weissaqnng aus ist, wird das Volk wild und wuste: 
 ivohl aber dem der das Gesetz handhuhet. Luther's version. There is a difficulty in 
 translating this passage, inasmuch as Olshausen follows Luther's handhahet (admi- 
 nisters), whereas the more cori-ect English version is **keepeth." — A. would render 
 — " It is then necessary that the law should again be administered as by Divine 
 commission," and has kindly pi'ocured translations from two eminent German 
 scholars. (1), "It is necessary that the law should again be exercised from 
 above (by those in authority.)" J. C. H. (2), " It imports that the law be 
 again maintained (or affirmed) as from above." R, C. T. — In the text it has been 
 attempted to combine Olfchausen's meaning with a reference to the English vei'sion. 
 
 •f The question how the believer ought to act in the perplexing transitions from 
 one government to another, e. g., in revolutions, especially at what point a newly- 
 arisen government is to be regarded as de facto subsisting, is not referred to by 
 the Apostle ; because, on account of the multiplicity of circumstances which are 
 conceivable in such cases, it is impossible to lay down any objective rules on the 
 subject. 
 
398 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 man, even under the mildest rule ; the magistracy, regarded 
 and conceived of as by the grace of God, is a ministry of God, 
 even if a Nero sits on the throne. Thus the believer is servant 
 of none save his God, and yet is subject to every one who has 
 power over him ; thus only is true freedom compatible with 
 order; the freedom which is independent of God has within 
 it the element of the most fearful confusion. In this re- 
 presentation, however, the Apostle's idea, ou yd^ sffnv s^ovtria, g/ 
 fji^ri d'Trl (or, according to another and perhaps more correct read- 
 ing, 6^i) 020 D, appears very remarkable. Was a Nero of God? 
 But of course the person of the ruler ought to be separated 
 from his office, and then we must certainly say that Nero's 
 office was of God; even the worst government is better than 
 anarchy, and whatever such a government still contains of the 
 elements of order, that is of God. But are there not absolutely 
 ungodly powers which come into being by sedition or other evil 
 means ? Are these also of God ? Certainly they are so, in as 
 far as they really come to appearance and subsistence.* "We 
 must here apply the same principles which were laid down in ix. 
 1, with respect to the phenomena of evil generally. All evil 
 which comes into existence has been willed by God, not as evil, 
 but as a phenomenon ; and thus, too, it is with powers which 
 originate through sin. The Christian, who as such knows him- 
 self to be the citizen of a higher world (unless he he also obliged 
 thereto by his civil relations)^ has not to enter into investigations 
 as to the rightfulness of the subsisting power, which, besides, 
 are generally of great difficulty, and hence cannot possibly be 
 devolved on each individual; he belongs to that power to which 
 God has given the sway over him. Evil governments have 
 their judge in God alone, not in men. 
 
 Ver. 2. Hence the act of resistance to the magistracy — inde- 
 pendently of the motives which, at the utmost, may render it 
 less criminal, but never can excuse it — is as such a resistance to 
 
 • Reiche is altogether wrong in his understanding of this passage, inasmuch as 
 he thinks that the recognition of every defaclo government, as of God's willing, is 
 erroneous, and that we must only extend what is predicated to good governments. 
 For, according to this principle, evei'y one is left to consider the power ahove him 
 as good or bad at pleasure, and thus an opening is made for any revolutions. 
 The Apostolic principle alone wholly prevents them, since by it both good and evil 
 governments are warranted in demanding obedience. But the moment when a 
 government is to be regarded as de facto subsisting, cannot (as has been already 
 observed) be deteiTQined by objective rules. 
 
CHAPTER XIII. 3, k 399 
 
 God's ordinance, and whosoever has been guilty of it falls under 
 the Divine judgment. But here arises the question, Why does 
 not the Apostle mention that the magistracy may also require 
 something contrary to God's command, and that in this case 
 it is not to be obeyed (according to the saying in Acts iv. 19, v. 
 29, that " we ought to obey God rather than men," on which 
 the observations in the commentary are to be compared), since 
 surely such cases were of very frequent occurrence, in the Apos- 
 tolic age especially? The reason of his silence is, undoubtedly, 
 because it is in the nature of the thing itself, that, as God's or- 
 dinance is to be recognised in the magistracy and in its will, 
 the will of God has precedence of the magistrate's command, 
 where the one is against the other ; inasmuch as in such cases 
 the latter has ceased to be what it was meant to be. Unques- 
 tionable, however, as is the abstract principle — that we must 
 obey God rather than men, even than the magistracy — it is no 
 less difficult to reduce to definite rules the application of it in 
 the concrete circumstances. The Mennonite finds a conflict 
 between the order of the magistrate and God's commandment 
 in the requisition to become a soldier; the Quaker and other 
 parties in other points. Holy Scripture, therefore, has not 
 gone into any definitions on the subject, because it is always a 
 question of the most particular inward and outward circum- 
 stances, to decide what is the right course in the case which 
 occurs. This only it maintains without reserve — that the fun- 
 damental character of the Christian must always be endurance, 
 and that no force and no injustice can justify him in opposing 
 the subsisting authority by act, whether in a negative or in a 
 positive shape. 
 
 Kplfji^a XafM(3dvsiv is according to the analogy of the Hebrew 
 t^QU^D fc^i2}2> comp. James iii. 1. Under xplfAu it is best to in- 
 elude outward and inward, temporal and eternal detriments, 
 inasmuch as these are all regarded as the punishment of dis- 
 obedience, which God lays on us. 
 
 Ver. 3, 4. Without allowing himself to be in the slightest 
 degree prejudiced or embittered by the state of things which was 
 before him in the Roman empire, the Apostle Paul holds exclu- 
 sively to the idea of authority, which is indeed never wholly 
 realised, because the authority is represented by sinful men, 
 but may yet be recognised even in the worst magistracy, inas- 
 
400 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS, 
 
 much as even this is under a necessity, for the sake of its own 
 existence, of upholding social order in essentials. Hence tLe 
 magistracy appears as a blessing for every one, even for such as 
 should suffer from it through individual acts of injustice which 
 proceed from it. Hence results, then, the simple exhortation to 
 do that which is good, which is at the foundation of all laws in 
 idea; for only he who does what is evil need fear the magistrate. 
 
 In ver. 3, very many considerable critical authorities, instead 
 of the genitive plural, read the dative singular — rw aya^ih 'i^yoj 
 dxxa rif) xaxf). To me, also, as to Reiche, this appears to deserve 
 the preference over the usual reading, since the collective use of 
 ipyov might easily be mistaken. In ver. 4, the phrase iMax^-'P^^ 
 (popsTv denotes the power of punishment in general, not merely the 
 right over life and death, which is but the highest exercise of that 
 power. The expression is commonly understood of the dagger 
 which the emperors were in the habit of carrying as an ensign of 
 the judicial power. (Sueton. Gralba, c 11, Tacit. Hist. iii. 68). 
 The punishments inflicted by the magistracy, therefore, are 
 God's punishments, since it is His minister; but in regard to 
 this it must again be kept in view that St Paul argues from the 
 idea of the magistracy, which cannot be done away with by 
 individual exceptions. 
 
 Ver. 5-7. Hence, consequently, fear alone cannot be the mo- 
 tive of obedience, but the consciousness of the good itself which 
 results to every one from the orderly arrangements of the state. 
 For this reason are to be fulfilled even those duties which appear 
 more trivial, and, therefore, are very readily neglected; the 
 trivial is closely connected with the great — with the funda- 
 mental tone of the mind. 
 
 Ver. 5. avdyjcri does not denote any outward force, but that 
 inward moral control which the truth exercises. The two terms 
 opyrj and auvs/dri6ig are to be differently referred; the former 
 belongs to the magistracy, the latter to the faithful. — Ver. 6. 
 T£Xe7rs must, on account of the preceding /ag, be the indicative, 
 not the imperative — "For this cause, i. e. inasmuch as ye recog- 
 nise this right of the rulers, it is that ye pay tribute.'' In the 
 words which follow, the Xsirovpyol m\ght be the officers who gather, 
 the tribute, who must be active for this very purpose (sJg ahrh 
 rovTo, for the collection of it). But in that case, 'xpocTcapn- 
 ^ovvm must be taken as the subject, and with this the want of 
 
CHAPTER XIII. 8-10. 401 
 
 the article does not agree. It is better, therefore, to supply, 
 with De Wette, the leading notion of the whole sentence, ap-xovng, 
 and to translate, "for they, the rulers, are God's ministers, who 
 attend upon this very thing,'' viz., the Xstrov^ysTv. This construc- 
 tion, indeed, is not without difficulty ; for there is a hardness in 
 taking the notion of the Xstrov^ysTv out of the Xstrov^yo} Qsov g/V/, 
 and then connecting the sis aurb rouro with crgcxrxagrg^g^, which 
 also does not suit perfectly with it ; but yet it seems to me pre- 
 ferable to the other. — In ver. 7 it is a mistake to refer the 
 d'ffodoTi rradi to all men indifferently, as Reiche does ; the ideas 
 which follow relate undoubtedly to the authorities, and there- 
 fore we must think only of the gradations among the authorities. 
 The extension of .the idea in the 8th and following verses, must 
 not be supposed to have an influence so early as ver. 7.* The 
 only question is, for what reason St Paul may have chosen this 
 very position for the sentences. Perhaps, as has already been 
 liinted, it is intended that the special should be represented 
 according to its foundation in the general ; whosoever fears and 
 honours the prince, will also pay scot and toll to his officers. 
 ^opog denotes taxes on persons; rsX©?, on things. 'Airobon is to be 
 supplied with the datives. How careful the early Christians 
 were even in this point, which is so often treated with disregard, 
 appears from Tertullian's Apolog. c. 42. 
 
 Ver. 8-10. With a remarkably spirited turn, St Paul, in the 
 following verses, again passes to the subject of love, as that 
 which contains the security for the fulfilment of this, as of all 
 other commands of God. The Apostle keeps to the idea of 
 debt, and characterises love as the only debt which can never 
 be cleared off, which the Christian may owe with honour. The 
 whole ethical part of this epistle is in substance as much a re- 
 presentation of the nature of love as the doctrinal part is an ex- 
 position of the nature oi faith, and the supplement to that part 
 (ch. ix.-xi.) of hope; hence the Apostle can from any point re- 
 vert to love, which is the fulfilling of the law. In the first verses 
 the Apostle probably had in his mind the word of Christ, Matt, 
 xxii. 40, as to which the observations in my commentary may 
 be compared. 
 
 In ver. 8, opiXsn is to be taken imperatively — " ye should not, 
 must not owe anything!" Mridev is used, and not oudh, in order 
 
 • [The original erroneously reads 9th and 8th, for 8th and 7th respectively.] 
 
402 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 to give prominence to the subjective application ; according to 
 the various degrees of inward enlightenment and development 
 the notion of guilt contracts or expands — love alone has the 
 wonderful quality, that the more it is practised, the more amply 
 it unfolds itself, and rises in its claims. While, therefore, in 
 other circumstances a man stands better in proportion as he 
 owes less, love is in the best condition the more that it feels 
 itself in debt.* Reiche's objections to this idea are altogether 
 mistaken. The ground of his error is, that he conceives of love 
 as a commandment, which is true only for the position of the 
 Old Testament; whereas, according to the apostolical view, it 
 is an element, a power, namely, the life of God in man. Hence 
 love is as inexhaustible as God himself, and is the absolute ful- 
 filment of the law. In man, however, love is growing, and, 
 consequently, is only the fulfilment of the law in process of ap- 
 proximation. Ver. 9. It is not intended that any exact order 
 should be observed ; hence the sixth commandment stands first. 
 The addition ov •^ivhofiu^ru^rjcug is spurious, according to the best 
 critical authorities. On X070J comp. note on ix. 6. 'Ai/axs^aXa/- 
 ov66ai to comprehend under one chief idea (xs^aXa/oi/) ; it also 
 occurs in Eph. i. 10. As to the quotation comp. note on Mark 
 xii. 31, Lev, xix. 18. Ver. 10. ^X^gfii>/Aa is chosen merely on 
 account of in'TrXri^uxi, ver. 8, and denotes perfect observance. 
 
 Ver. 11, 12. The exhortation to love is indeed one of univer- 
 sal force, and it is already found in the Old Testament; yet 
 ■under the New Testament dispensation it has a peculiar mean- 
 ing.-f- For in the Old Testament the precept of love is intended 
 chiefly to awaken the consciousness of the want of it ; whereas 
 in the New Testament, on the contrary, it is present as a real 
 source of power. To this character of the New Testament the 
 Apostle refers, by way of giving point to his exhortation. The 
 time before Christ is in his view the period of night, of men's 
 unconsciousness as to their higher origin; the time since Christ, 
 on the other hand, is the day, since which the Sun of Righteous- 
 ness sheds forth His beams, since which the true consciousness has 
 
 • Augustine says, with equal beauty and truth, Amor cum redditur, non afniltitur, 
 sed reddendo multiplicntvr. 
 
 t Ver. 11-14 are historically remarkable, inasmuch as they were the means ol 
 the conversion of Augustine, that greatest teacher whom the Church had until the 
 Reformation. — [Confe&s. viii. 29.] 
 
CHAPTER XIII. IS, 14. 403 
 
 become awake in man. With this figure, of day arid night, light 
 and darkness, sleep and waking, St Paul proceeds to mix up a 
 second, of putting on an armour, for a more particular notice 
 of which the notes on Eph. vi. are to be compared. The 
 man who has awaked goes also into the fight which is ap- 
 pointed for him, and arms himself for it with the armour 
 of light or of the Spirit. (Comp. Rom. vi. 13.) The only diffi- 
 culty which can be felt here is in the words vuv yS^p syyvrspov 
 i}fiuv 9] aurrip/a, rj ors gV/oTgytfa^gi/. These evidently point to the 
 second coming of Christ, and the perfecting of humanity which 
 will then take place, and which is here denoted by 6uTr,^ia. 
 Consequently the v\jv and its contrast n on apply to the time 
 when Paul wrote, as opposed to the time of his first conversion, 
 " Salvation is nearer to us than at the time when we embraced 
 the faith.'' We need not, however, conclude from this passage 
 that the Apostle, at the date of this epistle, continued to ex- 
 pect the second advent in his own lifetime ; he says, indeed, no 
 more than that they have advanced nearer to this great con- 
 cluding act of the world's history. (Comp. on xi. 13, 14.) The 
 exhortation to the faithful, to put ofi* the works of darkness, is 
 rather a reminding of the resolution already embraced at their 
 baptism, and which ought to be daily renewed. 
 
 Ver. 11. Togovr(^ (jjaXkov is to be supplied after xa/ roxjro. 
 Comp. Heb. x. 25. — Kat^og is the nature of time generally, w^a 
 that which is properly chronic in time. The parenthesis is not 
 to be placed (as Griesbach has it) after ^'77/xgv, but after k'jna- 
 TivdoLiiiv) the words jj vug x. r.x. are a more exact description of 
 xatpo?. — Ver. 12. On 'TrpoxoTru, comp. Luke ii. 52. Here the idea 
 of growth, increase, has combined with it the sense of being 
 completed, passed by. Reiche erroneously derives acro^w^g^a 
 from dTo^su, instead of from a'jrori&niJ^i. 
 
 Ver. 13, 14. In the admonitions which here follow, we 
 must not think of gross manifestations of fleshliness, such as 
 even the law punishes, so much as of more delicate spiritual 
 manifestations in evil thoughts and inclinations, which may be 
 quelled by a careful discipline of the body. 
 
 Ver. 13. Eu(r;)/>j/Aovws is also found in 1 Cor. xiv. 40; 1 Thess. 
 iv. 12. — Kw/40?, commessatiOj properly roving about in villages, 
 thence roving^ dissoluteness /in general. Gal. v. 21 ; 1 Pet. iv. 3. 
 
^O-i EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 Kolrr), bed, is euphemistically put for unchastity. — Ver. 14. 
 The phrase xp/crhv hdusaffdat is derived from the figure of a robe 
 of righteousness (Is. Ixi. 10); it occurs again in the N. T. at 
 Gal. iii. 27. Profane writers also use d<7rod-jeff&a. and hbuid&at in 
 like manner, in the sense oi fashioning ones self unlike or like 
 a person. (Comp. Dion. Halic. xi. p. 689, Lucian in Gal., c. 
 19.) Yipovoiav <7roisT(f&ai='7roovoiTff^ai, comp. xii. ] 7. The negative is 
 on account of the connexion with what follows, to be so taken 
 as not to censure the care of the body as such, but only in the 
 excess, when it excites the lusts of the flesh. Hence we may 
 supply ourug ucfrs after 'rronTak, since the g/'s denotes that opera- 
 tion which alone is intended to be forbidden. 
 
 SECTION II. 
 
 (XIV. 1— XV. 13.) 
 
 OF BEHAVIOUR AS TO THINGS INDIFFERENT. 
 
 By the transition which the contrast suggests, the Apostle 
 comes from the improper care of the body to the opposite error 
 of improper asceticism and shows in what manner love ought to 
 bear itself towards the maintainors of this tendency. The pre- 
 cepts which St Paul gives with reference to this breathe the 
 deepest truth, and real freedom — i. e., impartiality — of spirit. 
 The following section is the more important in proportion as 
 the errors of believers have been, and still are, more frequent in 
 respect of the so-called Adiaphora; errors which might have 
 been avoided if men had been at pains to apprehend the 
 apostolic counsels more deeply in their inward meaning. For 
 there are two classes of intermediate things; (1) those connected 
 with moral laxity, and (2) others which are connected with 
 moral strictness. It is only in respect of the latter that Holy 
 Scripture contains express admonitions, and especially in the 
 passage before us; respecting the former, there are only the 
 general observations as to keeping ourselves unspotted from the 
 world. (2 Cor. vi. 14, seqq.) There is nowhere a direct pro- 
 hibition of sharing in dancing, theatrical amusements, and the 
 
CHAPTER XIV. 1 — XV. 13. 405 
 
 like. This is, doubtless, in part to be explained by the circum- 
 stance that, in the apostolic age, the severe tone of feeling 
 tended much rather to exaggerated strictness than to laxity. 
 But assuredly this absence of directions has also its foundation 
 in the whole manner of dealing of the sacred writers. They do 
 not begin with outward things, but first change, through God's 
 grace, the ground of men's hearts, convinced that with this in- 
 ward change that which is outward will also be spontaneously 
 changed. In the later ages of the Church, as also at the present 
 day, this course has often been reversed ; outward things are 
 treated as that by which all is decided, and from a forsaking of 
 these, a change of the inward man is expected. No heart, how- 
 ever, is regenerated by forsaking dances, plays, and other such 
 indifferent things, but rather the heart which is renewed by re- 
 generation will of itself lose its relish for such trifles. The cause 
 of this unwise and unscriptural proceeding is chiefly to be 
 sought in this — that men confound such indifferent things with 
 positive divine commands, and treat the former like the latter. 
 It is, indeed, true, that nothing is morally indifferent, and that 
 the most trivial thing may be good or evil according to the 
 mind with which it is done; but, nevertheless, the notion of 
 Adiaphora is correct, and is necessary in ethics. For that 
 which is denounced by divine laws must never be done under 
 any conceivable circumstances; thus we must never steal, com- 
 mit adultery, or abuse the name of God. But with the Adia- 
 phora it is otherwise. In these it is not the act, as such, that 
 is sin, but the circumstances under which, the manner in which 
 it is done. Now, because in these matters the question is 
 usually about subjective conditions, on which their moral worth 
 or unworthiness depends. Holy Scripture wisely avoids defining 
 as to things indifferent by objective commands, but seeks always 
 to influence the subjective conditions, in order thereby to sanctify 
 the whole. According to these principles St Paul proceeds here 
 as elsewhere. He does not command — Ye shall eat flesh, ye shall 
 drink wine — although, in an objective view, he held the ascetic- 
 ism in question to be wrong, but he exhorts to treat with for- 
 bearance those who maintain it, and expects their deliverance 
 from that error to be the gradual result of the gently transform- 
 ing power of the Spirit of God. 
 
406 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 § 19. OF BEARING WITH THE WEAK. 
 (XIV. 1-23.) 
 
 Ver. 1, 2. The particularity with which St Paul treats these 
 ascetics leads us naturally to suppose that they lived in Rome, 
 and that the manner of behaving towards them had been a sub- 
 ject of discussion there. It is, however, difficult to determine 
 of what spiritual tendency these ascetics were, since w^hat St 
 Paul adduces respecting them does not seem to agree either 
 with rigid Jewish Christians, with Essene, or with Gentile as- 
 cetics. For the first of these classes kept, indeed, the precepts 
 of the Old Testament as to food, but they did not wholly avoid 
 the use of flesh and wine,* as St Paul reports of these Roman 
 ascetics (xiv. 2, 21); for there is nothing to afford a founda- 
 tion for the assumption that in the passages in question the 
 subject is only the partaking of flesh offered in sacrifice to idols, 
 and of wine used in libations. The Essene ascetics, on the 
 other hand, whose life was similar (comp. Josephus Vit. § 2, in 
 the description of the ascetic Banus), never lived in towns, but 
 in the wilderness. And again. Gentiles who, in the apostolic age, 
 also often practised a rigid asceticism, did not observe days in 
 the manner related in xiv. 5 of the persons here described. It 
 is, therefore, most correct to suppose that in these ascetics we 
 have before us persons in whom Jewish principles mainly pre- 
 vailed, indeed, but in combination with Gentile elements. This 
 conclusion is especially supported by the passage, xv. 7, 8, where 
 the " strong " are designated as Gentile, and the *' weak " as 
 Jewish Christians. Such mixtures of elements, in themselves 
 heterogeneous, are not inconceivable in a time of such excite- 
 ment as that of the Apostles was. Among the Neopythagor- 
 eans and other philosophical sects of the first century of Chris- 
 tianity, there had been developed a sort of religious-moral 
 eclecticism, which might easily call forth appearances of this 
 kind. Seneca describes, in his 1 08th Epistle, how he himself 
 
 * Still such a form of asceticism might easily be developed in Jewish Christians out 
 of the Nazarite rule, as appears, among other instances, from that of St James, the 
 Lord's bi'other, which Hegesippus relates (in Eusebius, Hist. Eccl. ii. 2^) — oHvov 
 Kx) ffUt^oe. ovK iTiiv, olTi 'ifji.-^'vxov 'i<pa.yu Comp. my Monum. Hist. Eccl. i., p. 11.) 
 Jewish ascetics will be spoken of more particularly in the Introduction to the Pas- 
 toral Epistles. * <« 
 
CHAPTER XIV. 3, 4. 407 
 
 had for a time been engaged in a similar endeavour; in oppo- 
 sition to the prevailing immorality and voluptuousness, many 
 of the nobler spirits had recourse to rigid self-denial. Such a 
 tendency must, indeed, have been repulsed by Pharisaical 
 Judaism, but it might very readily amalgamate with Essene 
 elements. Eclectics of this kind, then, when they had become 
 Christians, still persevered in their accustomed way of life; 
 and St Paul desires that they may not be disturbed in it, since 
 they did not insist on it as necessary to salvation, as the Jewish 
 Christians of Galatia insisted on circumcision. In any case, 
 these ascetics must be altogether and most carefully distin- 
 guished from the Pharisaical Jewish Christians, who every- 
 where persecuted St Paul, and against whom he wrote the 
 Epistle to the Gralatians. (Comp. Introd. § 8.) These Jewish 
 Christians were fanatics who carried on attacks against the 
 Apostle; whereas the Roman ascetics appear to have been 
 quiet, anxious persons, who were only unable from scruples of 
 conscience to disengage themselves from their accustomed ob- 
 servances, but did not affect to lay down rules for others. 
 
 In ver. 1, cr^otrXaz-t/Savetr^a/ signifies forwarding, helpful, sup- 
 port. — Mii £/V hiaxpiGiig biakoyiCiMMV SC. eXduffi. AiaKpigii is opposed 
 
 to 'T/ffTig, as the condition of inward wavering or uncertainty. 
 The affdivsTv vigni brings forward not so much the wavering itself 
 as the source of it — the powerlessness of the principle of faith. 
 — The conjecture 3/a XoytC[Luv is unnecessary; for the thoughts 
 are represented as brought into a state of uncertainty in the 
 weak. — Ver. 2. The form Xa;^ai/a Icdhiv indicates not only the 
 refraining from the use of sacrificial flesh, or of animals forbid- 
 den in the law, but the avoiding all use of flesh — an abstinence 
 which did not exist in the Jews as such. Ad-x^va denotes all 
 sorts of vegetables, as opposed to flesh. 
 
 Ver. 3, 4. Both parties, as well the weaker as the stronger, 
 are then warned against one-sided judging of others; the de- 
 cision is to be left to God, who alone can begin and complete 
 the work of regeneration. 
 
 Ver. 3. y,piviiv has the sense of xara^cp/vs/v. It is not the judg- 
 ment as to the objective ground or want of ground that is for- 
 bidden, but the determination as to the personal guilt in the 
 matter — the condemning. — iipoesXa^sro has reference to ver. 1, 
 but is used in a modified sense, as it here relates to reception 
 
408 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 into the Church. — Yer. 4 proves this idea from the circumstance, 
 that no believer is lord over another, but all are God's servants, 
 and to Him, consequently, the case of His servants is also to be 
 left; by judging, we place ourselves above the servants, to whom, 
 however, we ourselves belong ; it is, as it were, God's own affair to 
 keep His servants for Himself, and if man thinks to assume the 
 care of it, he invades God's province. The form (rrjjxw, formed 
 by aphaeresis from sW^jxa, is very often used by St Paul. Be- 
 yond his writings, it occurs in the New Testament only in 
 Mark xi. 25. 
 
 Ver. 5, 6. It might be supposed that a new class of persons 
 is here spoken of; but, from the manner in which the eating is 
 mixed up with the observance of days in ver. 6, this is not pro- 
 bable. It accords, also, with the whole tendency of such 
 anxious religionists, that, where the one scruple exists, the 
 other develops itself likewise. For such points of difference 
 also the Apostle recommends forbearance towards the weak, 
 and that each should act faithfully according to his own 
 subjective conviction. If this be observed, and that with 
 an entire reference to God, He by His Spirit guides to 
 the objectively right view also. Ver. 5. By the forms jj/^s^aw 
 xpm/v or (ppovsTv is expressed the attaching a value to days, such 
 as Sabbaths, new-moons, and the like. Kpivsiv signifies examina- 
 tion and selection ; (ppoviTv, careful consideration, valuation. In 
 the words xphstv 'Kaaav yjfispav is expressed the original apostolic 
 view, which did not distinguish particular festivals, because to 
 it the whole life in Christ had become one festival. As, however, 
 the season of the Church's prime passed away, the necessity 
 could not but at the same time have again made itself felt, of 
 giving prominence to points of festival light in the general cur- 
 rent of everyday life. An Old-Testament-like observance of the 
 Sabbath, such, for example, as prevails in England, is, accord- 
 ing to this passage, assuredly not that which is objectively cor- 
 rect.* The requisite for each of these positions — neither of 
 which alters the essence of the gospel — is an assured conviction, 
 gxatfrog h T(fj ibiu) vof <7r\7ipo<popu(S&(a. For vXripocpopiTddaij which is the 
 opposite of diaKpmff6ai, see on Rom. iv. 21. In ver. 6, the words 
 
 • [The reader may be referred to Mr Vansittart Neale's Essay on " Feasts and 
 Fasts," London, 1845, for information as to the degree in which the view here 
 censured is countenanced by the authority of the English Church and Legislature.] 
 
CHAPTER XIV. 7, 9. 409 
 
 xa/ fj^n (ppovujv — (ppovsT Sire omitted by very many important MSS,; 
 the context, however, imperatively requires them, and it appears, 
 consequently, that they have been omitted only because the 
 copyists were misled by the homoiotelenton. 
 
 Ver. 7-9. An unreserved devotedness to the Lord is that 
 which must ever be the essential of the Christian life; whatever 
 can consist with this may be willingly borne with in a brother. 
 It is not until something is remarked in a brother, which might 
 interfere with this devotion, that love acquires a right to be 
 jealous. The opposition of living and dying is not meant 
 merely to denote absoluteness, but, as ver. 10 shows, to point 
 to the idea of the divine judgment, by which all human judg- 
 ment is excluded. Ver. 7. The Christian is neither another's 
 nor his own; he is wholly God's; as in marriage the wife de- 
 votes herself wholly to the husband. The presential forms, ^fj, 
 a'jroQvriax.ii, express the ideal, which, indeed, is not always actually 
 realized. The believer, however, must always keep before him 
 the ideal in its absoluteness; he must always regard it as his task 
 to bear himself as betrothed unto the Lord, in order that by 
 degrees he may realize it to the full. Ver. 8. The conjunctive 
 a'xo6vri(i%(^[i.iv is not to be explained (as it is by Reiche) by the 
 apostolical view as if Christ might come again before the death 
 of many who were then alive — an opinion which we are con- 
 vinced that St Paul had ceased to entertain at the date of this 
 epistle — but by the uncertainty of the moment of death. The 
 indicative, which is found in many MSS., is assuredly to be re- 
 jected. This union of the faithful with the Lord for death and 
 life, is then, in ver. 9, regarded as the essential object of His 
 work. The life and death of Christ were, so to speak, an 
 acquisition, a purchase, a conquest of the living and the dead; 
 with this His property no one may interfere. A profound and 
 forcibly practical idea ! Whosoever knows himself to be thus 
 bound to the Lord of the world, will not wish to belong to any 
 other, and will loose all ties which might still hold him! The 
 readings vary greatly in the words of ver. 9, xa/ airUan xai 
 'i^rjffsv. The first xa/ is decidedly to be rejected; it would seem 
 to have been added only on account of the xai vsxpuv. The vari- 
 ations in the verbs undoubtedly arose from the position; it 
 seemed that 'i^rigsv ought to stand first, or, if it were meant to 
 denote eternal life, it seemed that the present was required. 
 
410 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 Hence s^jjo'si' was taken in the sense of avst^rjffsv or ai/krTj. It is 
 probable that sometimes one, sometimes the other, of these ex- 
 pressions, was at first written in the margin, and that from it 
 sometimes one, sometimes both were adopted w^ith the text. 
 The explanation oVst^riffe, which is in any case the right reading, 
 as an aorist and in this position, is indeed not free from diffi- 
 culty. To take it w^ithout scruple as equivalent to aviZriei is 
 altogether inadmissible ; even where the resurrection is referred 
 to, the tense which is used of the simple verb is always the 
 present, and never the aorist (comp. Rom. vi. 10, 2 Cor. xiii. 4), 
 even although an aorist preceded. But to explain the aorist, 
 as Meyer does, by supposing that it is intended to mark the 
 beginning of the condition, is altogether a perversion; for, in 
 the first place, there is no motive for marking the beginning; 
 and further, this suits only with states in time, not for those of 
 eternity. The simplest way is to assume a hysteron-proteron 
 for the explanation, and to understand g^Tjo-g of the earthly life 
 of Christ, since Zoovng also denotes those who are alive on earth.* 
 By His perfect participation in the life of earth and its neces- 
 sities, the Lord has won for Himself the right of dominion over 
 man. (Comp. Heb. ii. 17, 18.) This transposition was no 
 doubt caused by the circumstance that the idea of dying im- 
 mediately preceded, and that Paul wished to connect with it 
 the parallel with the Saviour. 
 
 Ver. 10-12. The universal equality of all believers, notwith- 
 standing their inward difierences, admits, then, no judgment of 
 one respecting another ; each has to give account for himself in 
 the general judgment. If, however, believers, as well as others, 
 are here represented as appearing before the judgment-seat of 
 God, whereas in John iii. 18 it is said that " whosoever believeth 
 on Him is not judged,''-f- the seeming difierence is to be ex- 
 plained by the consideration that the Divine declaration of 
 exemption from judgment may itself be regarded as an act of 
 judgment. The fundamental idea of judgment is the separating 
 from the mass, the joining together of what is akin ; where this 
 separation has already taken place, as in the case of believers 
 (1 Cor. xi. 31) it cannot, of course, be again executed in the 
 
 [* Olsh., therefore, would read itfUetvi ko.) 'i^rertv, and he translates hat gelebt 
 vnd ist gestorhen, i. e., " lived and died."] 
 
 t Eng. Vers'. " He that believeth on Him is not condemned." 
 
CHAPTER XIV. 13-1 5. 411 
 
 proper sense ; Grod, however, may recognise it as executed, and 
 thus the judgment is to be understood in this passage. 
 
 Ver. 10. On /3^/Aa, compare note on Matt, xxvii. 19, and 2 
 Cor. V. 10. For Xp/oroD, I prefer to read with Lachmann and 
 Reiche, supported by the authorities A.D.E.F.G., 0goD, since 
 the substitution of Xpiaroxj might easily have taken place on ac- 
 count of the preceding words. — Ver. 11. The quotation is from 
 Is. xlv. 23, and is very free. It expresses, indeed, the idea of 
 adoration only, but this is one with the consciousness of depen- 
 dence, which is here the subject. Reiche wrongly applies i^oi^o- 
 "Koyritsirat to confession of sins — which, according to the parallel- 
 ism, cannot possibly be meant. 
 
 Ver. 13-15. The Apostle follows up the negative side with 
 the positive. He does not suppress the fact that the ascetics 
 in question did not hold the objectively correct view; but, as 
 their subjective error was not one of essential importance, he 
 exhorts other Christians not merely to abstain from condemning 
 them, but even to accommodate themselves to them. These 
 verses (with which the parallel verses, 1 Cor. viii. 9, seqq., are 
 to be compared) furnish a commentary on the apostolic saying 
 as to becoming " a Jew to the Jews, and a Gentile to the Gen- 
 tiles,'' (1 Cor. ix. 20, seqq.) For this idea may easily be mis- 
 understood, as if the Apostle allowed us to accommodate our- 
 selves to all weaknesses; and then an inference might be 
 drawn, that the Reformers did amiss in refusing to keep the 
 fasts with the [Roman] Catholics. There was, however, the 
 difference, that with these the question was not merely of fast- 
 ing, but of fasting as a means to salvation and as a meritorious 
 work ; whereas the ascetics of Rome had no such idea of their 
 fasts; and it was on this account only that the Apostle could, 
 without injury to the truth, advise accommodation to them.* 
 But, besides this, the idea in ver. 14 is difficult — ohbh xoivhv di' 
 avTou, compared with ver. 20. For by this the laws as to food 
 in the Old Testament appear degraded to merely capricious 
 ordinances — which is unsuitable to their Divine origin. The 
 Apostle, indeed, does not here refer immediately to the rules of 
 the Old Testament; for the Roman ascetics did not adhere 
 
 * This is most clearly shown by 1 Tim. iv. 1, seqq., where St Paul reckons 
 among doctrines of devils the forbidding to marry and the abstaining from meati 
 which God has created. This, however, applies only to such as make it a principle of 
 doctrine that, for the sake of salvation, men must not eat this or that kind of food. 
 
412 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 closely to these, but went far beyond them ; but yet they doubt- 
 less presupposed these rules, and only thought to do an opus 
 supererogatorium if they ate no flesh whatever, and abstained 
 from all wine. There is, therefore, good ground for inquiring 
 into the relation of these apostolical declarations to the laws 
 laid down as to food in the Old Testament. Now these laws 
 cannot be merely capricious orders; we cannot conceive that 
 God might have declared other animals to be unclean than 
 those which He has declared. In the creatures which were 
 declared unclean, the sin of nature must be supposed to have 
 been most remarkably concentrated ; and in any case it seems 
 that, since all nature is defiled by the Fall (comp. note as to the 
 xr/ffis, on viii. 18, seqq.), it might rather be said that nothing is 
 clean than that all things are so. Farther, we must say that 
 St Paul would have assuredly disapproved of it if any one 
 under the law had allowed himself in not observing the regula- 
 tions as to food ; which yet would have been objectively right, 
 if none of the forbidden animals had been in itself unclean. 
 We can and may, consequently, understand the Apostle's idea 
 only in this sense — that through Christ and His sanctifying in- 
 fluence the creation has been restored to purity and holiness. 
 If it should be said that this influence does not manifest itself 
 as yet, but (according to viii. 18) only at the end of the world, 
 and that nature still appears as unholy and unclean — the 
 answer is, that this is certainly true, but that (1), as is often 
 the case, the inchoate work of Christ is already regarded as 
 complete; and (2), the superior force of Christ's power in the 
 faithful neutralizes the slighter effects arising from nature in such 
 a way that they become as if null. The passage before us is, 
 therefore, to be taken exactly as 1 Tim. iv. 4, 5, where it is 
 said that " every creature of God is good, for it is sanctified hy 
 the word of God and prayer." 
 
 Ver. 14. We might be inclined to connect iv zxjpiu) 'in<sov with 
 what follows, rather than with crg^g/(r/xa/, but that the position 
 of the words is against it. Still, from the mention of the 
 Christian conviction, the idea must be drawn that Adam's 
 fall and its consequences are not to be thought of as removed 
 until removed by Christ. Ver. 1 5. Uimv drroXXus refers, of course, 
 to the shaking the person in his persuasion, and the conse- 
 quent wavering and doubting as to everything, so that aVwXc/a 
 
CHAPTER XIV. 16-23. 413 
 
 aiJjms is indicated as a possible result of it. The value of even 
 the poorest and weakest brother cannot be made more strongly 
 prominent than by the words, v'^rsp oZ xpicrbs d'redavs. 
 
 Ver. 16-18. Consequently the point is, to distinguish between 
 what is and what is not essential, for which purpose, indeed, the 
 distinguishing principle, the Holy Ghost, is necessarily required. 
 Ver. 1 6. BXoiff(pyjfMsMM is of course to be understood as meaning 
 — Do not by your conduct give occasion that the good which 
 has been manifested in you be slighted. — Ver. 17. Ba<r/Xs/a 
 r. 0., is the community of life which Christ has brought in and 
 founded, conceived in the widest sense, hoik as outward and 
 as inward. (Comp. Comment, on Matt. iii. 2.*) BpSjg/g xai 
 Tog/g is a short expression for the attaching importance to 
 eating and drinking, whether by abstaining from certain things 
 or by eating of everything. We might have expected that the 
 sXsvhp/a should be brought into prominence; but since this 
 might itself be also carried to a faulty extreme, St Paul puts 
 the general idea, bmuioGhvri. The words h Uvsvfiar/ aylu) are 
 to be extended to all the three points named; for it is in- 
 tended precisely to exclude the se^/'^^S^t^ousness to which a 
 mistaken asceticism so readily leads. Hence also h rovrcfj and 
 not Tovroig is to be read in ver. 18; for with the principle of the 
 Holy Ghost all individual virtues are implied. 
 
 Ver. 19, 20. From this fundamental principle of the Chris- 
 tian life the Apostle proceeds to deduce an exhortation to 
 strive after peace, and to edify God's building, not to destroy 
 it by unwise and unseasonable instruction. The persuasion 
 of liberty in such matters must be organically developed from 
 within. 
 
 After aXXrjXovg, D.E.F.G. have ^uXagw/^ev, which, however, 
 cannot well be more than an addition of the copyists. 
 
 Ver. 21-23. " All things are lawful for me, but all things are 
 not expedient" (1 Cor. vi. 12); to this Pauline princij)le the 
 following exhortation reverts. In cases where any one out of 
 personal conviction does or refrains from a certain thing, with- 
 out making his own practice an objective law, his conviction is 
 to be honoured by the stronger believer through voluntary ab- 
 stinence; for in such things of intermediate character the sub- 
 
 • [This is, no doubt, the passage intended. The author's reference is to " vol. 
 i, pp. 150, seqq," which does not agree with the edition befoi'e us — the third.] 
 
4J4 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 jective conviction is the rule of action. For that so important 
 moral principle, crai/ o oux U m&rsug, a^aapr/a hrh is throughout 
 to be taken with this necessary restriction, if it is not to lead 
 to the grossest errors. Where positive commands or prohibi- 
 tions of God are in question, the subjective conviction has no 
 voice.* As has been already remarked on ver. 1, no conceiv- 
 able grounds can be a sufficient motive for the suspension of a 
 positive command of God. But in Adiaphora, i. e., not in 
 morally indifferent cases (for such have no existence), but in 
 cases for which no positive rule can be laid down, because, 
 through circumstances, they may at one time be morally good, 
 at another time wrong, and in which the greater or less de- 
 velopment of the subjectivity has an influence — in Adiaphora, 
 the personal conviction of the moment, i. e., the rriffr/s, is the . 
 decisive ground of determination. Hence, also, we cannot say 
 that true faith, correct conviction, alone may be the decisive 
 ground which determines our action; on the contrary, even that 
 which is objectively false may be so. The conviction of these 
 ascetics at Rome was of this objectively false nature, and yet 
 St Paul advises them to go on according to its dictates, until 
 the Christian life should have developed within them to a purer 
 conviction. This, however, applies only in the case of such 
 Adiaphora; never in cases which are immutably fixed by ap- 
 pointments of God, 
 
 In ver. 21, A. and C. omit the clause ri (fxav8aX/%srui ri 
 affkvsr-j and indeed both these verbs appear to be merely sup- 
 plied from what goes before. In ver. 22, the reading &u mcriv 
 rjv ix^tg xarcL tfsavrhv, 'iyi x. r. >,. only interferes with the idea; yet 
 it is supported by A. B.C. 
 
 § 20. CHRIST AN EXAMPLE OF BEARING WITH THE WEAK. 
 
 (XV. 1-13.) 
 
 That the insertion of the concluding doxology (xvi. 25-27) 
 between chap. xiv. and xv., is altogether unsuitable, has been 
 
 * An addition to Luke vi. 4, which is contained in the iMS. D., is very highly 
 instructive for the understanding of this passage. It is, indeed, unquestionably 
 spurious, and probably belongs to an apocryphal gospel; but the idea is genuinely 
 Christian, and perhaps the whole incident related may have really taken place. It 
 
CHAPTER XV. 1-6'. 415 
 
 already fully shown in tlie Introduction (§ I .) The connexion 
 of the following passage (xv. 1-13) with the preceding is so 
 close, that the division of chapters ought to have been diiFerent. 
 It is not until ver. 14 that an entirely new subject comes in. 
 The earlier verses are merely a setting forth of Christ as a pattern 
 of the conduct towards the weak recommended in chapter xiv. 
 
 Ver. 1, 2. St Paul here clearly distinguishes two classes among 
 the Christians of Rome (and the same may be assumed as to all 
 churches) ; the one includes the strong {dvmro/), the other, the 
 w^eak {ddumrot, agdsvsTg). The distinction between the two is to 
 be sought in the degrees of spiritual development, especially of 
 the yvojff/g, which gives insight into the peculiar connexion of 
 doctrines and laws. Among these classes it is the duty of the 
 stronger towards the weaker not to live after their own plea- 
 sure, but lovingly to bear with the infirmities of the others. 
 
 On eavrSi dpsajcetv and rw '7rXr}aIov dpiffxs/v, comp. 1 Cor. X. S3, 
 
 Gal. i. 10. It is the nature of love to go out of itself, to live 
 not in itself but in others. 
 
 Ver. 3. This love towards the weak manifested itself in per- 
 fect purity in the Saviour (Phil. ii. 7), who left all His glory to 
 enter into the deepest ignominy for man. According to this 
 conception, the quotation from Ps. Ixix. 10 stands in exact con- 
 nexion with the course of the Apostle's ideas. The living not 
 for one's own pleasure but for that of our neighbour is always 
 a self-denial, which grieves the flesh; this self-denial Christ 
 practised in the purest form, as is manifested in His course of 
 suffering. He loved those who hated Him, and out of love 
 willingly endured all the ignominy which they heaped on Him, 
 and all this for the building up of the work of God. 
 
 On quotations from the same Ixixth Psalm, compare Matt, 
 xxvii. 39, seqq.; John ii. 17, xix. 28; Rom. xi. 9. The words 
 are quoted exactly from the LXX. 
 
 Ver. 4-6. Exactly as in the passage, Rom. iv. 23, 24 (on 
 which compare the comment), St Paul again announces the 
 important canon of interpretation — that the whole substance of 
 Scripture is designed for man and for his instruction. It is not, 
 therefore, to be understood according to its outward letter, but 
 
 is there told that Jesus saw a man working on the Sabbath, and said to him u 
 
 oT^as Tt TotsTf, f/,a,XK^ias sT, it Ti f/.h o7^ceSt 'eTtxecrd^aroi Ka) ^ec^a^drtis tl rev vif^ou. 
 In these words, the r/Jeva/ expresses the same which is here signified by irta-rtunv, 
 namely the settled subjective conviction. 
 
416 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 rather according to what is inward; i. e., according to the 
 Eternal Spirit which pervades its whole substance, and which 
 renders it a mirror of truth for all times and for all circum- 
 stances. This eternal purport of the Scriptures, however, is 
 recognised by the 'ffvsv/^arixog alone; it is Spirit alone that 
 discerns and understands the Spirit. The reason why St Paul 
 here gives especial prominence to the ideas of patience and con- 
 solation is, because the relation to the weak members of the 
 Church of God itself has in it something especially trying,* and 
 for this the believer requires above everything consolation and 
 strength to endure. The Apostle then expressly wishes his 
 readers the communication of these gifts, in the hope that in 
 their power all such differences may be overcome, and unity 
 may be preserved. 
 
 Ver. 4. On account of the chief idea — of Scripture and its 
 significancy for men, the words ruv ypcKpm are to be referred (as 
 by Reiche) to both the preceding genitives, Cto/aoi/^s and irapcL- 
 xXrjesug, not (as by De Wette) to the latter only. The intention 
 here is, of course, to characterize Scripture as the channel of 
 grace which God employs in order to work patience and com- 
 fort in men. Ver. 5. The expression ©shg rng v'TrofiovT^s xa/ 'rapa- 
 xX^tfsw? denotes the all-sufficient God as the real source of these 
 gifts; He may be designated according to all that is good and 
 beautiful, because He includes all in Himself Similar expres- 
 sions occur, Rom. xv. 13, 33; 1 Thess. v. 23; 2 Cor. i. 3. On 
 the former @shg xocl <rarrip 'irjgov xpi(fT0Vj comp. note on 2 Cor. i. 
 3. For ofiodvfMocdov, corap. Acts i. 14. 
 
 Ver. 7, 8. By a peculiar turn, St Paul further sets forth the 
 person of the Lord as an example of merciful love towards the 
 weak, in that out of mercy He called the Gentiles into His 
 kingdom. It is evident that the Gentile Christians are here 
 conceived of as the strong, and the Jewish Christians as the 
 weak; whence it results that the Roman ascetics cannot pos- 
 sibly have derived their views from Gentile sources alone. But 
 
 • The Christian does not make any claims on the world, since he knows that in 
 it the Spirit of God is not; but so much the more does the believer, in the begin- 
 ning of his life of faith, make claims on the Church. Every neophyte is a born 
 Donatist; he requires that the Church should be the perfected kingdom of heaven! 
 The continual striving with the weaknesses of the brethren is the most difficult 
 self-denial for the faithful, even as in the Saviour's life it was one of the most try- 
 ing necessities that he had unceasingly to contend with the perversities and weak- 
 nesses of his disciples. 
 
CHAPTER XIV. 7-13. 417 
 
 it has been fully shown in the Introduction (§ 3), that these 
 Roman Jewish Christians are not to be regarded as Judaizers 
 in the same sense as the Galatians were so. In a peculiar 
 manner the Apostle now represents the relation of Christ to 
 the Jews as a matter of duty; because of the promises made 
 to the fathers, it was in a manner necessary, for the sake of 
 His truth, that God should send Christ to the Jews. It was, 
 therefore, out of mere mercy that the gospel was preached to 
 the Gentiles, inasmuch as they had no right to lay claim to 
 the fulfilment of promises. The whole manner of representing 
 the matter is, of course, to be understood xar avQ^wxov) for in a 
 preceding part of the epistle (ch. x.), St Paul had reproved the 
 Jews for the very fault of supposing that God owed them His 
 favour. His object here is, to impress upon the Gentiles the 
 advantages of the Jews, and, therefore, he makes use of this 
 particular form of stating the case. 
 
 Ver. 7. On irpocXaiM^dncQai comp. note on xiv. 1. — Ver. 8. Xiyu 
 bs, " Now I mean — I intend to say.*' The title d/dxovog 'TnpirofjJrig, 
 used of Christ, occurs only here. So strong an expression is in- 
 tentionally chosen, in order to represent Israel in its exaltation. 
 Baur has, without ground (comp. Introd. § 1), declared the 
 expression unpauline, and characterised the following vTsp aXn- 
 6i/a.g ©sou as containing too great a concession to the Jewish 
 Christians. For in the bidxovog there is only a reference to the 
 devotedness of Christ, which is represented as a serving in 
 Matt. XX. 28 also ; and that the salvation in Christ is primarily 
 intended for the Jews, was clearly declared by the 'rpurov in i. 
 16, and in like manner in ix. 5, xi. 16, 28, as it is by Christ 
 himself. Matt. xv. 24. All that it implies, therefore, is, that 
 Israel is the people of the covenant, and that the truth of God 
 requires the fulfilment of his promises on it. 
 
 Ver. 9-13. The calling of the Gentiles, as the idea which 
 actuates the Apostle, is again represented by means of quota- 
 tions from the Old Testament as purposed by God. The pas- 
 sages are taken from Ps. xviii. 50; Deut. xxxii. 43; Ps. cxvii. 
 1 ; Isa. xi. 1 0. Paul almost entirely follows the LXX. in his 
 citations. 
 
 Ver. 10. 'H ypa(pri is to be supplied to Xsys/. In the quotation, 
 ver. 10, the Hebrew text varies from the LXX., who, perhaps, 
 read it differently. — Ver. 12. 'uagai, Jesse, the father of David. 
 
 2d 
 
4] 8 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 The root of Jesse or David is Christ, as branch or son of David. 
 Comp. Rev. v. 5, xxii. ] 6; Ecclus. xlvii. 26. — 'o av/tfra/Agyo? ap%e/v, 
 *' He who is born or destined for rule;" for dviaraffdai is here to 
 be taken in the sense of " to appear, to announce one's self 
 as.'' — Ver. 13. The triple h gave occasion for alterations ; 
 some MSS. wholly omitted h ruJ 'rrKsnUiv, others the U before 
 TT] IXrrih. But the not altogether proper accumulation of pre- 
 positions is itself an evidence for the correctness of the usual 
 reading. 
 
 SECTION III. 
 
 (XV. 14-33.) 
 
 PERSONAL COMMUNICATIONS. 
 
 The following section is really only a sort of appendage to 
 the ethical part, which properly ends at xv. 13. The Apostle 
 begins by apologizing for the free admonitions which he has 
 ventured to give to the Romans, and then gives information 
 as to his intended travels, at the same time expressing a wish 
 that he may be able to visit the Christians of Rome, (xv. 
 22-33.) 
 
 § 21. APOLOGY. 
 
 (XV. 14-21.) 
 
 It seems at first sight somewhat strange that the Apostle apo- 
 logizes for his serious admonitions. It looks, as it were, worldly, 
 that he, the Apostle clothed with divine authority, speaks as if 
 he might possibly have been too bold in what he had said. 
 Ver. 20, however, shows what induced him to this turn. Even 
 although disciples of his might have been at work at Rome 
 (comp. Introd. § 3), still St Paul could not altogether regard 
 the Church in Rome as his own, since he had not been its 
 founder. According, then, to his principle of never invading 
 another's field of labour, there arose in him the apprehension, 
 
CHAPTER XV. 14-16. 419 
 
 that his free-spoken language to the Romans might be made a 
 crime by the Jewish opponents who everywhere followed in his 
 track, and that by their insinuations the Romans might be 
 prejudiced against him. This possible danger the Apostle seeks 
 to avert by the following captatio henevolentice, in which he 
 places himself as a brother on a level with them (as in i. 12), 
 without asserting his dignity as a teacher and an Apostle of 
 the Lord. Baur and Kling have altogether groundlessly taken 
 offence at this. It is naturally understood that here the ques- 
 tion is not of any hypocritical or flattering captatio henevolenticBy 
 but of one which is pure and true, and such St Paul often 
 makes use of. In 1 Cor. i. 4, seqq., he praises the Corinthians, 
 although he had much to blame in them. To this kind belong 
 also the passages, 2 Cor. vii. 4, seqq., vii. 12, seqq. 
 
 Ver. 14-16. If there had indeed been contentions among 
 the Romans like those in Galatia, ver. 14 would contain an 
 untruth. The Roman Church was really in a good condition 
 (i. 8); hence St Paul could praise it with truth. His boldness 
 in admonition he excuses on the ground of his high calling, 
 which (he says) makes the Gentile world his especial care, and 
 makes it his task to prepare it as a holy sacrifice, well-pleasing 
 to God. 
 
 Ver. 14. xal avrhg lyu) "I as well as others," even although in 
 appearance my admonitions indicate the contrary. — " AyaQMebvin 
 is also found Eph. v. 9, 2 Thess. i. 11. It belongs to the later 
 Greek. As this denotes the condition, so does yvojgii the know- 
 ledge respecting it; these two elements constitute the capacity 
 for voukr^Tv. — Ver. 15. On account of the a-ro fMepovg, the roX/j^yipo- 
 repov cannot apply to the writing itself, but only to the manner 
 of writing in some parts, especially from chap. xi. onwards. 
 The words ug sTamiui.i/ji.vriaxMv suppose everything to be before 
 known to the Romans, and are, consequently, a mitigating ex- 
 pression. — xdpig signifies again, as in xii. 3, the apostleship. — 
 Ver. 16. St Paul by a grand figure represents himself as an 
 officiating priest, and the Gentile world as a great sacrifice to 
 be consecrated to God {'7rpog<popd), which he had to offer to God 
 through the gospel (hpovpy&Tv), so that the whole Christian pro- 
 cess of sanctification appears as an adorning of the sacrifice 
 which is to be consecrated to God. Aeirovpyog properly signifies 
 one who administers business of the state, and secondarily often 
 
420 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 stands as equivalent to dtdxovog (Rom. xiii. 6); by the LXX. it is 
 commonly used of priestly servants. This is the only place in 
 the New Testament where kpovpyeTv occurs ; it is the proper 
 term for sacrificing. Hesychius explains '/spovpys? by dvs/j hpoi 
 IpyaZ^rai. 
 
 Ver. 17-19. Tlie mention of his apostolic calling very na- 
 turally leads the Apostle on to speak of its blessed effects, which 
 are such as to give him an apparent warrant for administering 
 admonition to the Romans. The whole of this blessed efficacy he 
 humbly refers to Christ, without claiming any part of it for 
 himself The help of the Lord, however, manifests itself quite 
 as much through ordinary as through extraordinary supports. 
 
 Ver. 17. Kau;:^w(r/5 is to be taken as in iii. 27, in the sense of 
 " occasion for boasting.'' — Ta icpU rh ©eoy is to be taken as an 
 accusative absolute, — " as regards the cause of God.'' — Ver. 18. 
 The transition is somewhat obscure, and so is the term XaXs/P n 
 &v ou X. r. X. If, however, we only take in its positive form the 
 idea which is here negatively expressed, it is quite simple; in- 
 stead of saying — " I shall not venture to bring forward anything 
 which Christ hath not done by me," the same idea may be thus 
 expressed : " I shall never venture to glory in my deeds, but 
 will proclaim the glory of Christ alone." Reiche's objections 
 to this way of taking it are not to the point. He supposes the 
 negative to apply, not to the manner of the operation, but to 
 the operation itself; and, moreover, that St Paul could not 
 intend here to disclaim the conversion of the Gentile world, 
 inasmuch as in the preceding and following parts of the epistle 
 he ascribes it to himself According, however, to the way of 
 understanding the words which we have indicated, both these 
 objections are needless. He does not disclaim the conversion, 
 but regards himself wholly as Christ's servant, and hence refers 
 it wholly to the Lord. Consequently the idea is meant to refer 
 precisely to the operation itself, and not to the manner of it, to 
 which the interpretation here given in nowise constrains us. — 
 Aoyw xai spycfj signify the ordinary operation of grace ; h dvvdf/.s/ 
 erif^iim xai rspuTuv, that which is extraordinary — through cha- 
 rismataj for fuller details as to which the comment on 1 Cor. 
 xii. is to be compared. In the words Iv dwd/xei Uvsv/iuro? aylov, 
 the common source of both is named. — Ver. 19. uXr\povv ivay- 
 ye'Xiov is certainly not a Chaldseism, according to the Chaldee 
 
CHAPTER XV. 22-24. 421 
 
 *1D5 which means, first, to fill, and secondarily, to teach ; but 
 like the form Xoyov '^rXvipouv, to bring a discourse to an end, to 
 speak completely to an end (Col. i. 25), it has the sense of " to 
 publish in its whole compass,'' = xripuaasiv. That St Paul visited 
 Illyria itself, is nowhere related; probably he only proceeded 
 as far as the boundary of this province during his residence in 
 Macedonia. 
 
 Ver. 20. St Paul feels himself further induced to mention 
 the principle of his action as an apostle (Gal. ii.), according to 
 which he wrought only where no one had before preached, in 
 order to avoid building on another's foundation. If, indeed, 
 the passage ou^ otov uvofj^dedn xpiarSs were literally taken, St 
 Paul would have been obliged to refrain from preaching at 
 Rome also; but, 1, no other Apostle had preached there, and 
 this was the very point of his determination, in order that the 
 spheres of operation might not come into any conflict ; and, 2, 
 the population of Rome was greater than that of many a pro- 
 vince, and, consequently, as several apostles might labour in 
 difibrent parts of the same province, so also Peter and Paul 
 might preach together in Rome. 
 
 Ver. 20. ^iXortfMsMai, properly to strive after honour, and 
 thence to strive with zeal in general. The accusative of the 
 participle refers to ^e, ver. 19. ' rtvofidaQi^ means more than 
 simply to he preached, viz., to he named as Saviour, i. e., to be 
 acknowledged as such. Ver. 21 is quoted from Is. lii. 15, 
 closely according to the LXX. In the quotation irspi aurov is, 
 according to Paul's intention, to be taken as masculine, and 
 referred to Christ, 
 
 § 22. NOTICE OF JOURNEYS. 
 
 (XV. 22-24.) 
 
 Ver. 22-24. In this principle of his, then, St Paul also finds 
 ^he ground of his never having as yet -visited Rome, because the 
 gospel' was already spread there. It was not until after it 
 should have been di:9fused in the eastern provinces of the 
 Roman empire that he could hope to be at liberty to gratify his 
 wish to see Rome. Even then, however, it would not be so that 
 
422 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 Rome should be the proper mark of his travels in the West, but 
 he only hoped that he might be able to touch it in passing on 
 towards Spain. The only thing which seems surprising here is, 
 how St Paul can say firixin rorrov £%wv h ToTg jOjfx.atSi rovroi^, since 
 he was yet far from having preached everywhere in Greece and 
 Asia Minor. We see him always labour in the great chief towns 
 of provinces, and then devolve on his assistants, who were 
 fixedly stationed there, the further difi"usion of the gospel from 
 these points. Moreover, he undoubtedly did not believe that 
 every individual was to be received into the Church, but only 
 those who, according to God's gracious election, were ordained, 
 unto eternal life. His task, therefore, appeared to him to be 
 that of everywhere breaking ground and preaching the gospel 
 to all nations for a witness concerning them; and this he might 
 regard as fulfilled in the eastern provinces. 
 
 Ver. 22. The di6 refers to ver. 20, " by reason that I always 
 found much yet to be done in the East." The hexo'Trrofxriv, sc. 
 odov is to be taken thus — "The way was cut off for me, I was 
 hindered."" (Comp. Acts xxiv. 4; Galat. v. 7; 1 Thess. ii. 18; 
 1 Pet. iii, 7. Ta iroXka = 'TroXXdxic. — Ver. 23. xX///,a, from the 
 inclination of lands towards the pole, — a geographical term of 
 the ancients. Paul's wish to visit Rome is no doubt to be ex- 
 plained from the circumstance that in that city he saw the 
 centre of the heathen world. He wished to preach in the seat 
 of the prince of this w^orld the kingdom of the Lord of heaven. 
 — Ver. 24. This passage is certainly insufficient to prove that 
 St Paul executed his plan, which is here merely represented as 
 possible, of going into Spain. But yet the necessity of supposing 
 a second imprisonment,* combined with the statement of 
 Clement of Rome (Ep. i. and Cor. ch. v.), that St Paul pene- 
 trated s/g rh ripfLoc rrig dvffsug — (an expression which, when written 
 at Rome, can only be understood of Spain) — render it in the 
 highest degree probable that the great Apostle of the Gentiles 
 was also preserved by God for the complete fulfilment of his 
 vocation. He does not speak of Rome as the proper object of 
 his journey, because Christ was already known there (xv. 20); 
 he only wishes to salute the Roman Christians in passing. He 
 was, however, afterwards involuntarily detained there for a long 
 time. The reading iXsveof^ai <7rph? vfiag^ Wiri'^u yap is opposed by 
 
 • Compare Introd. to the Pastoral Epistles. 
 
CHAPTER XV. 25-29. 423 
 
 so many and important critical authorities that it ought un- 
 doubtedly to be rejected.* Rink and De Wette, however, 
 endeavour to assert the genuineness of the words against 
 Lachmann, because A.B.C. have the yap, and with this conjunc- 
 tion the whole clause stands or falls. It is more correct to 
 suppose, with Meyer, that the vrords were early interpolated, 
 and that when the original text was restored in A.B.C., the yap 
 still remained. — iipo'7ri[ji.<pQrimi relates to the convoy usually given 
 to apostles on their leaving a place; comp. Acts xv. 3, xvii. 14, 
 seqq. ; xx. 38 ; xxi. 5. — 'T/awi/ g/^-rXTjo'^w, until I he filled with you, 
 satiated ; the addition of a'xl ^spov? is intended to signify the 
 insatiableness of the Apostle's longing. 
 
 Ver. 25, 26. In the first place, however, he remarks, he has 
 before him a journey to Jerusalem, whither he has to convey a 
 coUectionf for the poor Christians of that city. How on this 
 journey he was arrested at Jerusalem, afterwards remained two 
 years in prison at Csesarea, and at length was taken to Rome 
 as a prisoner, is (as is well known) fully related in the Acts of 
 the Apostles. On the x,oivm/ct or d/ax.ovia for the poor of Jerusa- 
 lem, compare more particularly the notes on Gal, ii. 10; 1 Cor. 
 xvi.; 2 Cor. viii. 9; Acts xix. 21; xxiv. 17.— Ver. 26. The ex- 
 pression tig roug itroiyohz tojv ccyiuv sliows that not all the Chris- 
 tians of Jerusalem were in poverty; hence the community of 
 goods cannot have produced the poverty, or at least it cannot 
 itself have been long in force. 
 
 Ver. 27-29. In the observation that the believers of Mace- 
 donia and Achaia had regarded themselves as debtors to the 
 Jewish Christians, there is implied a delicate hint for the Ro- 
 mans, that they should also do so, and consequently should 
 contribute to the collection. After accomplishing this business, 
 the Apostle continues, he hopes to go to Spain by way of 
 Rome, and he knows that he shall not come to them without a 
 blessing. 
 
 Here again, as in verses 8 and 9, the Jews are regarded as 
 the first rightful possessors of the gospel, the priestly nation 
 for mankind, as it were, to which earthly things are to be given 
 for heavenly, in like manner as to the individual spiritual 
 
 * [ Thus the reading will be ti>s tav (or av) ^re^ivufcen us rhv ^-raviav, tX-riZ.w ^id,- 
 f On St Paul's purpose as to the collections, comp. the remarks on 1 Cor. xvi. 1 
 
424 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 pastor (1 Cor. ix. 13, 14). — Ver. 28. s^^ay/^scr^a/ denotes secur- 
 ing, making fast, in general. Here the personal conveyance 
 is the means of the secure delivery. The explanation of this 
 passage which has been attempted by Bottger (Beitr. Part. iii. 
 pp. 67, seqq.), can hardly be regarded as other than an utter 
 failure. He wishes to illustrate it by the Roman laws, which 
 prescribed in what manner contracts ought to be sealed, and to 
 be secured against falsification. Ver. 29. oJda is more than 
 subjective conjecture; it is certainty of conviction, because he 
 had a word of the Lord for his warrant. (Comp. Acts xxiii. 11 .) 
 UXvipu/na, svXo'yias='7rXovrog svXoyiag, rich, fall blessing. The read- 
 ing '7rXripo(popia for 'jr'kripuiia. has indeed D.E.F.Gr. in its favour, 
 but Paul uses this expression not in the sense of ^XoDroj, but for 
 " firm conviction,'' which is not applicable in this place. 
 
 Ver. 30-33. The Spirit of the Lord, however, signified to the 
 Apostle, at the same time, the suiferings which threatened him 
 from the enmity of the Jews ; hence he recommends himself to 
 the intercession of the believers at Rome, for deliverance from 
 their hands. The knowledge of the Divine plans, therefore, 
 was not in St Paul of a fatalistic nature ; he does not say — I 
 know that I must surely go to Rome, and therefore I have no 
 need of any precaution or of any intercession ; rather it was a 
 lively, free acquaintance with the plans of the free personal 
 God, which are fulfilled through the working together of the 
 free actions of free beings. 
 
 Ver. 31. The iv'xpochxroi indicates, that St Paul supposes 
 even the Christians of Jerusalem to be prejudiced against him, 
 as is confirmed also by Acts xxi. Instead of ava-raiicw/Aa/, D. 
 and E. read dm-^v^M, and F. Gr. dva'^vx,^^ fjbs&' v/mujv. The Oriental 
 MSS., however, unanimously support the usual reading. — Ver. 
 33. As the ethical portion is here ended, St Paul concludes it 
 with a short doxology. It is, however, in the nature of the 
 case, that for so rich a letter he reserves a more full-toned con- 
 clusion; this does not follow until quite at the end, after the 
 greetings. 
 
425 
 
 PART IV. 
 (XVI. 1—27.) 
 
 SALUTATIONS AND CONCLUSION. 
 
 It h^s been already shown in the Introduction (§ i.), that there 
 is no ground whatever to warrant us in denying that this con- 
 cluding chapter was written by the Apostle, or belongs to the 
 epistle. The great number of the salutations is certainly strik- 
 ing, when it is considered that Paul had not yet been at Rome. 
 As, however, this city formed the centre point of the then world, 
 where people from all countries met, and from which journeys 
 were taken into all parts of the vast Roman empire,* it is in- 
 telligible that St Paul may even in it have had a particularly 
 numerous acquaintance. And, moreover, it is nowise necessary 
 to suppose that St Paul knew them all personally; he had, 
 doubtless, heard of many of the Roman Christians through 
 Aquila and Priscilla, and now greets them as acquaintances 
 known not in person but in the spirit. 
 
 § 23. SALUTATIONS. 
 
 (XVI. 1-20.) 
 
 Ver. 1, 2. First, St Paul recommends to the Christians of 
 Rome the deaconess Phoebe, who was no doubt the bearer of the 
 epistle. She did not serve the Church in Corinth itself, but in 
 Cenchrea, to which place also it thus appears that the gospel 
 had already spread. Ver. 1. 'H didKovog, afterwards jj d/uKov- 
 /Vtfa, denotes the female ministers of the Church, whom the 
 rites of the early Church, especially in baptism, and the position 
 
 * On this compare the passage from Athenaeus, Deipnos i. fol. 20, quoted by 
 Neander, Apost. Zeitalter^ vol. i. p. 343, note. T^v 'VufAxluv •roXtv ivirofiriv t'Hs 
 etKevftivvis, iv y trvvihiTv 'iffTiv fzrdffas raj ^oXng i^^vf^ivcis — xai yu^ oXet ra. 'i^w a,6pous 
 avToh ffvvtuKiirrui. With especial reference to Christendom, Irenseus, as is well 
 known, says of Rome and the Church there — "Ad banc enim ecclesiam propter 
 potiorem principalitatem necesse est omnem convenire ecclesiam, h. e. eos qui sunt 
 undique fideles." {Adv. JJaei: II. iii. p. 201, edit. GrabU.) 
 
426 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 of the female sex in the East, imperatively required. For more 
 particular information, compare the commentary on 1 Tim. iii. 8, 
 Cenchrea was the name of the eastern port of Corinth; Lechaeus, 
 of the western. — Ver. 2. h xvplu), in the mind and in the name 
 of Christ, because she is a Christian, and as befits such an one. 
 Grotius rightly observes, that St Paul does not say irapuGrang, 
 i. e., a helper, but 'xpoardrig, i. e., a chiefy a patroness. By 
 this title of honour Paul intends to raise her consideration, and 
 to make his recommendation more complete. 
 
 Ver. 3, 4. For an explanation how Aquila and Priscilla could 
 already be again at Rome, whereas 1 Cor. xvi. 19 represents 
 them as still being at Ephesus, the observations in the Intro- 
 duction, § 1, may be compared. It is not known to what ocur- 
 rences Paul here refers. As to this celebrated family in gene- 
 ral, see note on Acts xviii. 19. In Rome, as well as at Corinth 
 and Ephesus, it appears to have had in its dwelling the place 
 of assembly (sxxXjjtr/a xa/ olxov), for a division of the city. A 
 city of such extent as Rome must naturally have very early had 
 places of assembly in various parts of it. 
 
 Yer. 3. n^/cxa is the original form of the name, but n^/<r- 
 x/XXa is more commonly used for the wife of Aquila. The 
 phrase rpdyriXov brroridUoLi is figurative, and means, to expose one's 
 self to the most evident dangers. 
 
 Ver. 5-7. The persons here named are not further known. 
 The title aj^apyri denotes the first convert of a city or province. 
 Instead of 'A;^a/ag, we should read, agreeably to the best criti- 
 cal authorities, 'Aaia?, i. e., Asia proconsularis. For according 
 to 1 Cor. xvi. 15, Stephanus was the first fruit of Achaia. De 
 Wette, however, has observed, in favour of the former reading, 
 that that passage may itself have been the very cause of an 
 alteration, and further, that d'Trapxyi need not be precisely limited 
 to an individual, inasmuch as several persons might have been 
 named together as the first converts. But in that case it would 
 probably be *' one of the first fruits.'' — Ver. 7. Junia appears to 
 have been the wife of Andronicus ; it is not known where they 
 were fellow-prisoners with St Paul. Their relationship to him 
 is probably to be understood only of national connexion. The 
 title of Apostles is of course to be taken here in the wider sense 
 of the word. Comp. Acts xiv. 4, 14. 
 
 Ver. 8-1 2. The names which follow are also unknown. The 
 
CHAPTER XVI. 8-18. 427 
 
 formula in ver. 10, rods \x ruv ' ApKsro^ohXov, is to be filled up like 
 Tou? 6x Tuv Noc/px/Vtfou, Tovg ovrag h xvp/uj in ver. 11 — tliose among 
 the slaves of Aristobulus or Narcissus who have become 
 believers. Narcissus, the well-known favourite of Claudius 
 (Sueton. Claud.), had been some years dead at the date of 
 the epistle, and therefore cannot well be meant here. 
 
 Ver. 13-16. It is of course only in a figurative sense that St 
 Paul styles the mother of Rufus his mother, from her having 
 shown motherly love towards him. The expressions in vers. 
 14 and 15, o/ ahX(pol ffvv auroTg are to be explained like r} gxxX>j<r/a 
 KUT oJxov in ver. 5 — the brethren attached to their community 
 or circle, so that the persons named are to be regarded as the 
 presbyters and deacons of this church. — Ver. 16. As to the 
 kiss of peace, comp. 1 Cor. xvi. 20; 2 Cor. xiii. 12; 1 Thess. v. 
 26; 1 Pet. v. 14. The Christians regarded themselves as mem- 
 bers of one family of God, and expressed the consciousness of 
 this spiritual unity by the symbol of the kiss. The addition 
 adTra^ovrcci v/j^ag a) sKxXrialai 'Troiffai rou Xpiarov is omitted by some 
 authorities ; perhaps because it was supposed that the greetings 
 were not in place before the section xvi. 21, seqq. In the com- 
 mon text, 'Traffa/ alone is wanting, doubtless because it was sup- 
 posed that Paul could not know whether all churches on earth 
 saluted the Romans. But no doubt cracra/ is to be understood 
 only of the various churches of Corinth and its ports. 
 
 Ver. 17, 38. It is not until here, quite at the end of the 
 epistle, that we find a short admonition against divisions, 
 couched in altogether general language, which may be referred 
 to the Judaizing party which persecuted Paul everywhere, 
 but which wrought in Galatia especially with so pernicious 
 effect. The circumstance of its being conceived and introduced 
 so abruptly, and in such general terms, is most decisive evidence 
 that the erroneous teachers in question did not actually exist 
 in Rome, but that St Paul only wished to give a warning 
 against them, with a view to the possible, and unhappily only 
 too likely case, that they might make their appearance there 
 also. The edict of Claudius, which still continued in operation, 
 and only by degrees fell into oblivion, was no doubt the only 
 cause which had until then preserved Rome free from these 
 opponents of St Paul.* 
 
 • De Wette and Meyer also acknowledge, that the passage cannot prove, as 
 
428 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 The term biha-x/i^ h vfj^iTg s/jt^dhn, is an indication not to be 
 mistaken that it was disciples of St Paul who had first preach- 
 ed at Rome. — Ver. 18. The charge of serving their belly is not 
 to be so understood as if Paul meant to represent them as per- 
 sons of grossly sensual habits ; for this is precisely what the 
 Pharisaical Jewish Christians usually were not; the meaning 
 is only to describe them as working for themselves and their 
 own advantage, not for Christ. (Comp. on Matt, xxiii., and 
 Phil. iii. 19.) xpyiffroXoyia usually includes the bad subsidiary 
 meaning, of kind and gentle speech without deeds to corres- 
 pond. In exactly a similar way svXoyia is here used in its pro- 
 perly classical signification ; it stands for words fair and well 
 put together, but of deceptive appearance. The omission of 
 svXoyia originates only with such as understood the word in the 
 sense of blessing, which it usually bears in the New Testament, 
 and which they naturally, according to the context, regarded 
 as unsuitable in this place. 
 
 Ver. 19, 20. With respect to this danger, however, St Paul 
 trusts to the obedience (i/craxo^) of the Roman Christians, and 
 therefore expresses the hope, that they may be found no less 
 wise and prudent than free from falsehood; with God's help 
 they then would soon overcome all evil, together with the 
 prince of darkness. 
 
 Ver. 19. 'r^ajion g/'g 'xdvrag d(phsTo, as is said in i. 8, of the faith 
 of the Romans. The t6 has wrongly been omitted before €<p* 
 IfiTv ; it is intended precisely to bring out a particular feature in 
 the Romans as a subject of joy. The reference to Matt. x. 16, 
 is not to be mistaken in the end of the verse. — Ver. 20. The 
 God of peace is placed in contrast with the author of all strife, 
 who works by his instruments here on earth. The power of 
 God in the faithful — Christ in them — bruises the head of the 
 serpent. The words cuvTpi-^n v<n-b rovg <ro5ag contain an allusion 
 to Gen. iii. 15. The form of conclusion, ij xdpig x. r. X. is un- 
 doubtedly genuine, although it is wanting in D.E.F.G. 
 
 Baur asserts, that there had already been disputes with Jewish Christians at Rome, 
 but only that the Apostle is anxious to provide against their breaking out there as 
 in other churches. In addition to the Epistle to the Galatians, compare especially 
 2 Cor. ii. and Phil. iii. 
 
CHAPTER XVI. 21-2:^!. 429 
 
 § 24. CONCLUSION. 
 
 (XVI. 21-27.) 
 
 The verses 21-24 cannot but seem somewhat strange if one 
 ascribe them to St Paul. For ver. 22, is, in any case, an addi- 
 tion by the penman of the epistle, Tertius himself; but how 
 singular it would be if ver. 21 were by St Paul, ver. 22 by Tertius, 
 and ver. 23, 24, by St Paul again ! There is, too, the circum- 
 stance, that St Paul had already concluded his salutations before 
 the exhortation in ver. 1 7-20, with the comprehensive form atr-ra- 
 Zovmi iifias at sxx\ri0/ai 'jradcci rou XpiOTov. Is it then to be supposed 
 that, after this, he added some others by way of supplement ? 
 It is far simpler to assume, that the great doxology, ver. 25-27, 
 was immediately connected with the blessing in ver. 20, but that 
 (according to the hypothesis of Eichhorn which we have adopted, 
 comp. Introd. § 1 ), it was written on a small separate parchment 
 as the larger was already full. The back of this small parch- 
 ment remained empty, and this the writer Tertius then employed 
 for writing in his own name, ver. 21-24, including the blessing. 
 The only objection which may be made to this is, that Timothy 
 is styled awspyog /nov, and Gains ^svog fjs^ov, which seems to point 
 to St Paul rather than to Tertius. There is not, however, any 
 discoverable ground why Tertius also might not have styled him- 
 self a fellow-labourer of Timothy, or connected by hospitality 
 with Grains. But even if this were an inconvenience, it will bear 
 no comparison with the difficulties in which we must entangle 
 ourselves if we refer the verses to St Paul. 
 
 Ver. 21, 22. As nothing further is known of Tertius, some 
 have wished to identify him with Silas, the well-known compan- 
 ion of St Paul, and to regard his name as merely the Latin 
 translation of the Hebrew 'st!J'^^;Z?> " the third." There is, how- 
 ever, no historical ground that can be adduced for this conjec- 
 ture. The addition 6 ypd-^u? denotes the penman, as St Paul 
 was in the habit of dictating his epistles. Comp. 1 Cor. xvi. 21, 
 Col. iv. 18, 2 Thess. iii. 17, and Gal. vi. 11.) 
 
 Ver. 23, 24. Gains is undoubtedly the person named in 1 Cor. 
 i. 14, whom St Paul himself had baptized. In Acts xix. 29, xx. 
 
430 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 4, 3 John 1, other persons of this name are spoken of. The ex- 
 pression ^svog TTjs kKKXriaia.? o'kn?, signifies that Gains had at 
 Corinth the assemblies of a congregation in his house. Erastus 
 occurs perhaps in Acts xix. 22, 2 Tim. iv. 20; but if so he must 
 have resigned his office as manager of the city funds. The bless- 
 ing in ver. 24 is also best referred to Tertius, as St Paul had 
 already used the same words in ver. 20. It is precisely on 
 account of the repetition that the MSS. A. C. and other critical 
 authorities have omitted it. 
 
 Ver. 25-27. On the position of the great concluding doxology, 
 and on the variations of MSS.,* and the learned hypothesis con- 
 nected with it, compare the remarks in the Introduction, § 1. 
 As we cannot adopt Reiche's hypothesis of the spuriousness of 
 the doxology, on account of its internal nature, and as Grlockler's 
 view — that Tertius was the author of this doxology, as well as 
 of the preceding verses — is also improbable, inasmuch as Tertius 
 would assuredly not have written xara rh iuayysXiov f^hv, 
 Eichhorn's hypothesis, although in itself somewhat farfetched, 
 is yet the most deserving of commendation, viz., that the vari- 
 ations in this section are to be explained by supposing a trans- 
 position of the different pieces of parchment on which the 
 epistle was written. The similarity of the conclusion of the 
 Epistle of St Jude, which is not to be mistaken, I should regard 
 as arising from imitation of this in the Epistle to the Romans 
 rather than the reverse. As to the internal structure of the 
 doxology generally, Reiche, in his effort to prove it spurious, has 
 very considerably exaggerated its difficulties. The (jS in ver. 27 
 certainly raises a difficulty; but Glockler has already rightly 
 shown how this may be got over by the simple means of supply- 
 ing <fvv/<frri/M/. The form of the doxology will thus become per- 
 fectly regular — " To God, who alone can stablish you in the 
 faith, to the only wise God, I commend you through Jesus 
 Christ, to whom be glory for ever." It is consequently nowise 
 necessary to suppose an anacoluthon, as Tholuck would do. 
 And in other respects the doxology fits most appositely into the 
 connexion, and by means of the ideas introduced,t agrees very 
 well with the purpose of the whole epistle. For, according to 
 our view, the doxology is immediately connected with the ex- 
 hortation against getting into any divisions. With this, then, 
 
 • [KntischeErscheinungen.l t [Zwischengedauken.] 
 
CHAPTER XVI. 25-27. 431 
 
 the notion of the erripi^at perfectly agrees. In order that they 
 may be secured against the assaults of the seducers, St Paul 
 wishes the Christians of Rome establishment in the life of faith. 
 With respect, next, to the intervening clauses,* they relate 
 exactly to the substance of the epistle ; they bring forward the 
 two leading ideas which the Apostle has developed in it: — first, 
 the mystery of the gospel, which was long hidden but now is 
 made manifest; and secondly, its transition to the Gentiles. 
 Hence we must not allow ourselves to be misled by the triple 
 xara into supposing three parallel members ; there are but two 
 oppositions in the passage, and these ought to be so connected 
 as that the second point shall be introduced by the n. The 
 following would then be the rendering of the passage: — "To 
 God, who alone is of power to stablish you, according to my gospel 
 and the preaching of Christ — (these representing God as the 
 source of all strength) — which (gospel and preaching) are agree- 
 able to the revelation of the mystery which was kept secret from 
 eternity, but now is made manifest, and which, according to the 
 commandment of the everlasting God, by the scriptures of the 
 prophets, is made known to all nations for the obedience of faith; 
 — to this only wise God I commend you through Jesus Christ, to 
 whom be glory for ever. Amen!" The mention of the pro- 
 phetical scriptures, and the name alumg ©sSg, which apparently 
 do not suit the context, had the object, which we have already 
 seen manifested in the epistle, of marking out the transition of 
 the gospel to the Gentiles as not a new or unheard-of thing, but 
 as something already announced beforehand by the unchangeable 
 God in the scriptures of the Old Testament. And with relation 
 to this it is, too, that in the end of the doxology God is desig- 
 nated as the only wise, while in the beginning of it he had been 
 designated as the Almighty. 
 
 • IZwischensiUze.} 
 
 THE END. 
 
 EDINBURGH : PRINTED BY ANDREW JACK, CLYDE STREET. 
 
fr^ 
 
 Of 
 
 ^-- Z'^s.^^ 
 
 S3mk.^ 
 
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA 
 LIBRARY 
 
 This is the date on which this 
 book was charged out. 
 
 
 
 m 
 
 .>rrA >_|j 
 
 [30m-6,'ll] 
 
^ 
 
 
 ^C 40969 
 
 ,110