Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Romans 3:29
[Is he] the God of the Jews only? [is he] not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also:
29. Is he the God, &c.] More lit. Does God belong to the Jews alone? i.e. as the Giver of peace and life by covenant.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Is he the God … – The Jews supposed that he was the God of their nation only, that they only were to be admitted to his favor. In these verses Paul showed that as all had alike sinned, Jews and Gentiles; and as the plan of salvation by faith was adapted to sinners, without any special reference to Jews; so God could show favors to all, and all might be admitted on the same terms to the benefits of the plan of salvation.
It is one God – The same God, there is but one, and his plan is equally suited to Jews and Gentiles.
The circumcision – Those who are circumcised – the Jews.
The uncircumcision – Gentiles; all who were not Jews.
By faith …through faith – There is no difference in the meaning of these expressions. Both denote that faith is the instrumental cause of justification, or acceptance with God.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Rom 3:29-31
Is He the God of the Jews only?
The Divine unities
I. One God.
II. One law.
III. One faith.
IV. One ultimate purpose. (J. Lyth, D. D.)
Is He not also of the Gentiles?—
The universal Father
The writings of Paul have met with a singular fate. They were intended to reveal the Fathers universal and impartial love; they have been used to represent Him as an exclusive and arbitrary Sovereign. They were designed to open the kingdom of God to all men; and they have been so distorted as to shut it on the many and confine it to the few. The great design of Paul was to vindicate the spiritual right of the race against the exclusive bigotry of the Jews; to manifest God as the Father of all men, and Christ as the Saviour, not of one narrow nation, but the whole world. Note, then, from the text–
I. The doctrine that God is the God of the Gentiles. To understand the fall import of this, we must consider that to the Jew the Gentiles were odious. He thought it pollution to eat with them. He called them dogs. He claimed God as exclusively his God. Could we fully comprehend this, we should be filled with admiration for the moral grandeur manifested in the text. Paul, in writing them, not only offered violence to all his earliest and deepest impressions, but put his life in peril.
1. God is the God of the Gentiles, and do we not respond to this truth? The heathen had indeed wandered far from God; and to the Jews He seemed to have forsaken them utterly. But how could the universal Father forsake the millions of His creatures? Judaea was but a speck on the globe. Was the Infinite One to be confined to this? Could His love be stinted to the few to whom He had specially revealed His will? In the very darkest ages God was the God of the Gentiles. They had their revelation. Light from heaven descended into their souls. They had the Divine law written in their hearts. God keep us from the horrible thought that the myriads who are buried in heathen darkness are outcasts from His level Their spiritual wants should indeed move our compassion; and the higher light is given us that we may send it to these brethren.
2. That God is the God of the Gentiles, we learn from the wonderful progress which human nature made in heathen ages. Remember Greece. Gods gift of genius–one form of inspiration–was showered down on that small territory as on no other region under heaven. To Greece was given the revelation of beauty, which has made her literature and art, next to the Holy Scriptures, the most precious legacy of past ages. In that wonderful country amidst degrading vices were manifested sublimest virtues. Undoubtedly Grecian philosophy was an imperfect intellectual guide, and impotent as a moral teacher. But was not God the God of the Gentiles when He awakened in the Greeks such noble faculties of reason, and by their patriotic heroism carried so far forward the education of the human race?
3. God is the God of the Gentiles; and He was so just when He separated from them His chosen people. For why was the Jew set apart? That all families of the earth might be blessed. Judaism was a normal school to train up teachers for the whole world. The Hebrew prophet was inspired to announce an age when the knowledge of God was to cover the earth as waters cover the sea. Nothing in the history of the Jews shows them to us as Gods personal favourites, for their history is a record of Divine rebukes, threatenings, and punishments. Their very privileges brought upon them peculiar woes. In ages of universal idolatry they were called to hold forth the light of pure Theism. They betrayed their trust, and when the time came for the partition wall to be prostrated, and for the Jews to receive the Gentile world into brotherhood, they shrank from their glorious task; and rejecting mankind, they became themselves the rejected of God. Meanwhile, faith in the one true God has been spread throughout the Gentile world. Thus we see that, in the very act of selecting the Jew, the universal Father was proving Himself to be the God of the heathen, even when He seemed to reject them.
4. This doctrine is one which we Christians still need to learn. For we are too apt, like the Jew, to exalt ourselves above our less favoured brethren. It is the doctrine of the mass of Christians even now that the heathen are the objects of Gods wrath. But how can a sane man credit for an instant that the vastly greater portion of the human race is abandoned by God? But Christianity nowhere teaches this horrible faith. And, still more, no man in his heart does or can believe such an appalling doctrine.
II. The universal principle contained in this doctrine. The language of the text contains an immutable truth for all ages, viz., that God loves equally all human beings; that the Father has no favourites; that in His very being He is impartial and universal Love.
1. This grand truth is taught in nature. Gods works are of the same authority with His Word. The universe teaches that God is the God of all, and not of the few. God governs by general laws, which bear alike on all beings, and are plainly instituted for the good of all. We are placed under one equitable system, which is administered with inflexible impartiality. This sun, does he not send as glad a ray into the hovel as into the palace? Does the rain fall upon a few favoured fields? or does the sap refuse to circulate except through the flowers and trees of a certain tribe? Nature is impartial in her smiles. She is impartial also in her frowns. Who can escape her tempests, earthquakes, raging waves? Young and old, the good and evil, are wrapped in the same destroying flame, or plunged in the same overwhelming sea. Providence has no favourites. Pain, disease, and death break through the barriers of the strong and rich, as well as of the humble and the poor.
2. In religion the universal Father is revealed as working in the human soul, and as imparting to man His own Spirit. Gods Spirit knows no bounds. There is no soul to which He does not speak, no human abode into which He does not enter with His best gifts. From the huts of the poor, from the very haunts of vice, from the stir of very active business, as well as from the stillness of retired life, have come forth the men who, replenished with spiritual gifts, have been the guides, comforters, lights, regenerators of the world.
III. This principle as applied to ourselves.
1. Is God the Father of the rich only? Is He not also the Father of the poor? The prosperous are prone to feel as if they are a different race from the destitute. But to the Possessor of heaven and earth, how petty must be the highest magnificence and affluence! Does the Infinite Spirit select as His special abode the palace and fly from the hut? On the contrary, if God has a chosen spot on earth, is it not the humble dwelling of patient, unrepining, trustful, virtuous poverty? From the dwellings of the downcast, from the stern discipline of narrow circumstances, how many of earths noblest spirits have grown up! May we not still learn a lesson of Divine wisdom from the manger at Bethlehem?
2. Is God the God of the good only, or, is He not also the God of the wicked? God indeed looks, we may believe, with peculiar approval on the good. But He does not desire spiritual perfection and eternal happiness for them more than He does for the most depraved. The Scriptures even seem to represent God as peculiarly interested in the evil. There is joy in heaven over, etc. The good do not and ought not to absorb Gods love. We in our conceited purity may withdraw from them, may think it pollution to touch them, may say, Stand off. But God says to His outcast child, Come near. Do I speak to those who have escaped gross vice? Bless God for your happiness, but set up no insuperable barrier between yourself and the fallen. In conclusion, let us ask ourselves, What was the guilt of the Jews against which the apostle protested? What was it that scattered their nation like chaff throughout the earth? Their proud separation of themselves from their race. And will not the same spirit bring the same ruin upon us? Separation of ourselves from our race is spiritual death. It is like cutting off a member from the body; the severed limb must perish. This spirit of universal humanity is the very soul of our religion. As yet its heavenly power is scarcely felt. Therefore it is that so few of the blessings of Christianity appear in Christendom. We hold this truth in words. Who feels its vitalising power? When brought home as a reality in social life it will transform the world. All other reforms of society are superficial. But a better day is coming. Cannot we become the heralds of this better day? Let our hearts bid it welcome! Let our lives reveal its beauty and its power! (W. E. Channing, D. D.)
The gospel for all mankind
It happened one evening, soon after I began my journey up the country, that I found my way to the homestead of a Dutch Boer, of whom I begged a nights lodging. It was nightfall and the family must soon go to rest. But first, would the stranger address some words of Christian counsel to them? Gladly I assented and the big barn was resorted to. Looking round on my congregation, I saw my host and hostess with their family. There were crowds of black forms hovering near at hand, but never a one was there in the barn. I waited, hoping they might be coming. But no; no one came. Still I waited as expecting something. What ails you? said the farmer. Why dont you begin? May not your servants come too? I replied. Servants! shouted the master; do you mean the Hottentots, man? Are you mad to think of preaching to Hottentots? Go to the mountains and preach to the baboons; or, if you like, Ill fetch my dogs, and you may preach to them! This was too much for my feelings, and tears began to trickle down my cheeks. I opened my New Testament, and read out for my text the words, Truth, Lord: yet the dogs eat of the crumbs that fall from their masters table. A second time the words were read, and then my host, vanquished by the arrow from Gods own quiver, cried out, Stop! you must have your own way. Ill get you all the Hottentots, and they shall hear you. The barn soon filled with rows of dark forms, whose eager looks gazed at the stranger. I then preached my first sermon to the heathen. I shall never forget that night. (Dr. Moffat.)
Gods favours not to be limited to a single people
But, clearly, such a gospel as this was not meant for one or two men, or for a company of men, or for a favourite nation, or for a race. Is He the God of the Jews only? was St. Pauls indignant question, addressed to those who would have limited His favours down to a single people. Like the natural sun in the heavens, the Incarnate Son of Righteousness is the property–we may dare to use the word–He is the property of all the members of the human family. All have a right to the light and to the warmth which radiate from His sacred person and from His redeeming Cross; and this explains St. Pauls sense of the justice of proclaiming the good news of the reconciliation of earth and heaven by faith in Christ to all members of the human family. Every man, as such, has a right to his share in the gospel, just as every man has a right to air, and to water, and to freedom, and at least to sufficient food to preserve bodily life; and not to preach the gospel, and treat it as if it were the luxury of a small clique like any one of the old philosophies, like a rare book in a library, like a family portrait, was to offend against the sense of natural justice. (Canon Liddon.)
Do we then make void the law through faith?—
Law and faith, the two great moral forces in human history
The law means that which is written in every mans soul, and republished on Sinai. Faith means the gospel, the glad tidings of sovereign love to a ruined world. These two great moral forces of the world may be looked upon in three aspects.
I. As agreeing in some respects.
1. In authorship. Both are Divine.
2. In spirit. Love is the moral essence, the inspiration of both.
3. In purpose. The well-being of humanity is the grand aim of both.
II. As differing in some features.
1. One is older in human history than the other. The law is as old as the human soul. The gospel began with man after the Fall (Gen 3:15).
2. One addresses man as a creature, the other as a sinner. Law comes to man as a rational and responsible existent, and demands his homage; the gospel comes to him as a ruined sinner, and offers him assistance and restoration.
3. The one speaks imperatively, the other with compassion. Thou shalt, Thou shalt not, is the voice of law. The gospel invites, Let the wicked forsake his way; Come unto Me; Ho, everyone that thirsteth.
4. The law demands, the gospel delivers. The law says, Do this and that, or Desist from this or that, and will hear no excuse. The gospel comes and offers deliverance from the morally feeble and condemned state into which man has fallen.
III. As cooperating to one result. The law prepares for the gospel by carrying the conviction of sin and ruin. The gospel exalts and enthrones the law. This is the point of the text, Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid. How does the gospel establish the law?
1. It presents it to man in the most commanding aspects.
2. It enthrones it in the soul.
3. It glorifies it in the life. (D. Thomas, D. D.)
How the law may be made void or established through faith
I. How it may be made void.
1. By not preaching it at all.
2. By teaching that faith supersedes the necessity of holiness.
3. By continuing in sin.
II. How it may be established.
1. By insisting on the whole doctrine of godliness.
2. By urging faith in Christ as a means to holiness.
3. By establishing it in our hearts and lives. (J. Wesley, M. A.)
The law made void and established
I. The law is made void–
1. By imagining that the covenant in Christ is unconditional.
2. That justification is eternal.
3. Consequently that a believer is not under the law at all.
II. The law is established–
1. In the heart.
2. As a part of the covenant.
3. By the obedience of faith. (J. Lyth, D. D.)
The law established by faith
God cannot deny or contradict Himself. He cannot recall His own words or disannul His own law (Mal 3:6). Yet it might seem, at first sight, as if grace were opposed to law, so that whichever be established, the other must fall. St. Paul anticipates and meets this difficulty. Consider–
I. The ground or object of faith.
1. In the preceding verses we find two important points.
(1) We are justified freely by His grace (Rom 3:24). God forgives us our sins in a most frank and absolute manner, without regard to any good works on our part, in the way of compensation. But
(2) He does this through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus. Here we see the qualifying condition of the Divine clemency. He upholds His law. If He forgives us our sins, it is because He has first redeemed us by the sacrifice of His Son. God has made Him our substitute, and treated Him as we deserve to be treated.
2. Here two questions occur.
(1) Is such a propitiation allowable in justice? We answer that it would be unjust for God to compel a third party to suffer for sinners; but when One comes forward willingly, it is no outrage to our sense of righteousness for His offer to be accepted. But still it might seem unjust for an innocent substitute to suffer the penalty forever. We instinctively feel that the penalty must be temporary. But, further, if any sense of wrong should still linger it would surely be removed if we could see the substitute compensated for his self-sacrifice. Behold how these things all meet in Christ. As to voluntariness (see Joh 10:17-18). As to the duration of Christs sufferings, we know that, though terrible and severe, they were of short continuance. And then look at his ensuing reward. If there were the sufferings of Christ, there was also the glory that should follow.
(2) Is this particular propitiation adequate to the occasion? If all that Christ suffered had been endured by a mere man, or even an angel, we should not feel convinced of its efficacy. But Christ is an incarnation of Deity. The immortal Creator cannot Himself die; but He can ally Himself to a human nature which may suffer and die, and in His suffering and death Jehovah Himself may be so implicated as to justify the expression that God hath purchased the Church with His own blood, and that the Jews crucified the Lord of glory. Here it is that we see the ground of the infinite meritoriousness and expiating efficacy of the death of Christ. Rather than the law should be broken, or that sin should go unpunished, God gives up His own Son. What than this can more effectually persuade us that the wages of sin is death? What than this can more vividly inspire us with hatred of sin, or more powerfully deter the tempted from rebellion, arrest the criminal, or incite the obedient to watchful diligence and reverential fear?
3. Thus are the high ends of justice secured by the death of Christ: and thus is the law established in its broadest moral commands, and satisfied in its deepest moral requirements. From this it will be easy to see how also in a lower sense the law is established by faith.
(1) Do you speak of the ceremonial law? It was the shadow of good things to come: its substance is Christ, and now He has come it has passed away, so far as its form is concerned; but it still lives in its substance and antitype, by whom it has been ratified.
(2) Similarly with the prophetic Scriptures. The prophets all testified of Christ, and in Him their word is at once accomplished and confirmed. And thus, in every sense, we may boldly say with Paul, We establish the law.
II. The conditions and operations of faith. Here the same principle holds good.
1. In the act of faith the penitent trusts in the atoning death of Jesus Christ as the ground of his acceptance. Now this act of faith–
(1) Is in accordance with Gods command (Joh 6:29). Thus is faith essentially obedience to Gods law, and by it the authority of God in His law is acknowledged and established.
(2) It acquiesces in Christs atoning work: as an arrangement which vindicates the Divine righteousness. It thus acknowledges the validity of Gods law, and the need of sustaining its authority.
2. The preliminary condition of faith is repentance. It is not the hardened unhumbled sinner who is told to believe in Christ, but those who acknowledge that the law is holy, and tremble and weep to think how they have broken it.
3. So with the fruit of faith. When we are forgiven it is that we may serve sin no more (Tit 2:11-15).
Conclusion:
1. The greatest sinner may be forgiven (1Co 6:9-11).
2. The least sinner must be saved by grace through faith.
3. See the guilt of refusing to be justified by faith.
4. The duty of the forgiven man to run in the way of Gods commandments (1Pe 1:13-16). (T. G. Horton.)
The law established through faith
I. The objection stated. Faith supersedes–
1. The authority of the law by releasing the sinner from its curse.
2. The righteousness of the law as a basis of justification.
II. The objection obviated. Faith establishes the law by restoring–
1. Its power of command.
2. Its power of condemnation.
III. The objection retorted. The objector who blends faith and works undermines.
1. Its power of condemnation.
2. Its power of command. (J. Lyth, D. D.)
The law established through faith
I. Faith establishes the law.
1. In its character as holy.
2. In its claims as just.
3. In its threatenings as sure.
II. Obedience to the law is promoted by the gospel.
1. In the motives it supplies.
2. In the strength it supplies. (T. Robinson, D. D.)
The law established through faith
1. The apostle here means that the Divine law must be regarded by us as immutable, and that any interpretation of the gospel at variance with that fact must be a false interpretation. The distinctions between right and wrong are everlasting, and that law of which the apostle speaks helps us to make the distinction.
2. You stand related to–
(1) A holy Being. Then you ought to reverence that Being because of His rectitude and truthfulness.
(2) A good Being: well, you ought to love that goodness. Conceive of a holy and good Being to have put forth these properties to shield you from evil, and of conferring upon you much good–why, then, ought you not to feel grateful toward that Being? One thing more. Suppose that Being to be infinitely good and holy, and suppose Him to have put forth those perfections to secure for you, either in fact or purpose, infinite blessings, then ought you not to reverence and love Him with all your heart, and soul, and mind, and strength?
3. I need not remind you that such is the character of God, and that such are the relations in which we stand to Him.
(1) And while these last, so long must that law be binding upon us which requires our utmost consecration to Him simply as an act of right, giving to God the things that are Gods. Gods rectitude, therefore, binds Him to vindicate His law and punish wrong.
(2) His benevolence must bind Him to this. For sin is not simply the putting of so much wrong in the place of so much right; it is the putting of what defiles Gods work in the place of what gives to it beauty; of deformity and misery in the place of that which would give nobleness and blessedness to His creatures, and the threadwork of retribution that is wrought in with the forms of sin in this world are such as clearly to mark how He abhors this evil. See how drunkenness and licentiousness make the very flesh of men to cry out against the wrongs that are done to it; and how those evil passions of the soul, such as pride, anger, malice, and the like, are made to be as very scorpions to the nature in which you find them. Yes, God has constituted the nature of the human spirit thus, that it shall find happiness only where He finds happiness; that it shall know how to do homage to right, and to love the good. In other words, this law of God is what it is because God is what He is. It comes from His own nature, and it is designed to uphold the God-like.
4. Now there are those who look on the gospel as at variance with the law. This cannot be.
(1) Faith is the gift of God; and if the law comes from His nature, and this faith also comes from His nature, He cannot be a fountain sending forth sweet waters and bitter.
(2) Faith is obedience to the Divine command; and if the mandate is that we are to believe on His Son Jesus Christ, there can be nothing inconsistent between the conformity to a law that comes from Him, and obedience to this particular mandate that comes from Him.
(3) The things that are created from the very act of believing ensure that this shall not be so. For to believe in Christ is to believe in His teaching, e.g., the doctrine of ruin by sin. Well, sin is transgression of the law. Belief in Christ is belief in redemption from sin, from the condemnation that sin has brought upon us. If the condemnation that has come upon me from sin be not just, then the redemption that is said to have been brought to me by Christ must be superfluous; so that faith in Christ comes necessarily of belief in law. You cannot receive the gospel without receiving the law; you cannot understand the one without apprehending the other.
(4) Then the very truths that are apprehended have in them a natural fitness so to change the spirit of man that he who is at enmity with law is brought back to loyalty. The purpose of these things is to make the disobedient obedient.
(5) Added to this we are assured that any obedience possible to us in any form, whether in a converted or unconverted state, is never to be allowed to come into the place–imperfect as it must necessarily be–of that perfect righteousness which the law demands. And you cannot make void the law more than by attempting to put your own real or supposed obedience in the place of that perfect obedience which the law requires.
5. Now, I do not mean to say that there is not a right state and tendency of mind in the experience of the man who believes in Christ: it must be a state of mind right in itself–right from Gods command, right from the nature of the thing; then like will produce like. But though there is a rightness–or righteousness–in faith and flowing from faith which are good as far as they go, what man wants to meet the claims of the Divine law is not a rightness good as far as it goes, but a rightness good altogether. The law is made void, put aside, comes to nothing, when you get rid of the necessity of the perfect obedience which it demands. Any attempt to build upon your own personal sanctity as a ground of acceptance with God must be a mistake. If we trust in the righteousness of Christ at all we cannot presume to think that it needs to be eked out and to be made perfect by ours. (R. Vaughan, D. D.)
The law established by faith
I. The doctrine of faith is the doctrine of salvation through the blood and righteousness of the Son of God. No good disposition or qualification whatever, nothing, in short, that distinguishes one man from another, can be joined with the righteousness of Christ as the ground of our confidence towards God. Here there is no room for boasting. We must be saved either completely by grace, or completely by our own works.
II. Two ways in which the law may be said to be destroyed, or made void.
1. In principle; when any doctrine is taught which, in its just consequences, has a tendency to relax our obligations to obey the law of God.
2. In practice; when persons take encouragement from mistaken views of gospel truths to continue in sin, or to be less punctual in discharging the duties which they owe to God or their fellow creatures.
III. The law of God is not made void, but established through faith.
1. The sacred authority and perpetual obligation of the law of God are vindicated in the strongest manner by the doctrine of faith.
2. There are new obligations superadded by the gospel to enforce obedience.
(1) A conviction of its infinite evil must surely be allowed to be a powerful motive to depart from sin. But by what means can this conviction be produced to such a degree as by a firm belief of the doctrine of faith relating to the sufferings and death of Christ.
(2) Just apprehensions of the holiness of God have always been found to produce correspondent effects on the characters of the persons who entertain them. Now, the doctrine of faith gives us the highest display of this glorious attribute of the Divine nature.
(3) The motives which are chiefly insisted upon in the New Testament, and which the gospel in a peculiar manner inspires, are love and gratitude. Now, where can we find such objects to awaken our love and gratitude as in the gospel of Jesus Christ?
3. The law is established through faith, because obedience is one of the principal ends for which we are called to believe in the gospel of Jesus Christ.
4. The law is established through faith, because the doctrine of faith furnishes the believer with the most powerful encouragements, in his endeavours to attain holiness.
(1) From what has been said, you may judge whether you are possessed of true faith in the gospel. Has it come to you, not in word only, but in power also, and in the Holy Ghost?
(2) From this subject let me exhort true believers to justify the sincerity of their profession by the holiness of their lives. (D. Black.)
The law established through faith
Faith–
1. Better explains it.
2. Better enforces it.
3. Better secures the ends it proposes. (J. Lyth, D. D.)
The moral law established by faith in Christ
The ceremonial law was a mere law of expediency, and served to answer the Divine purposes in the times of Jewish ignorance, until the bringing in of a better covenant to which the types pointed; and when they were swept aside as a handwriting of ordinances, there was no infringement made on the moral law, which, as an unchangeable code of moral requirements, was to stand in full force to the end of time.
I. This moral law is–
1. Transcendently exalted in its source. It is a transcript of the Divine nature. And as, from His infinite perfections, God can only will what is right, so all created intelligences are bound to obey His commandments.
2. Reasonable in its requirements. All laws ought to be for the welfare of the subjects, and the dignity of the throne, so that self-interest might prompt to obedience, and a love to the monarch lead to all due respect for the administration. Jehovahs laws will be found admirably adapted to accomplish these ends, for they only enjoin what contributes to our happiness, and prohibit what would tend to our misery. Blessed are they that keep His commandments.
3. Universal in its application. It requires no more than man should perform; viz., to love the Lord his God, etc.
4. Unchangeable in its nature. For being holy, just, and good, Jehovah could as soon change the perfections of His nature as to change the purity of the moral law, or to substitute an opposite one in its stead.
5. Indispensable in its demands. It must be obeyed; its violation must be pardoned, or its penalty must be endured.
II. Faith establishes the law.
1. As a rule of moral action throughout our whole probation.
(1) Christ could be the author of no system of salvation that would supersede it. For otherwise His mission would be a curse instead of a blessing, by favouring wickedness in abolishing that standard of righteousness that would deter from sin.
(2) And if we deny that we are bound to fulfil that law, then we have no infallible standard by which to measure moral actions. For conscience, except it be regulated by the law of morality, is no sure guide. This is fully established by experience; for when the revealed rule is set aside, men, with the approbation of their own consciences, often run to the most disgraceful extremes.
2. As a medium of happiness (Psa 1:1-3). In every circumstance of life the law of God will beam a light on our path that cannot be dimmed by the trials and sorrows through which we may pass. And while we are walking according to this rule, all things will work together for good to them that love God. Obedience brings an evidence of Gods love, a peace of conscience, a joy in the Holy Ghost, and a clear prospect of heaven.
3. As an infallible standard in the day of judgment, by which we shall be tried, approved, or condemned. This strict procedure of that day calls for a proper standard by which good and evil shall be discriminated and judged.
4. As a correct and eternal standard of the proper amount of rewards and punishments. (W. Barns.)
The doctrine of justification by faith only vindicated from the charge of encouraging licentiousness
I. The objection, that faith makes void the law.
1. The moral law is that rule to which from our relation to God we are obliged to conform. This obligation is founded on the nature of things, which nothing ever can dissolve. Should a doctrine, then, tend to warrant the inference that it might be relaxed, this would constitute sufficient ground for rejecting it. But such is not the tendency of our doctrine. On the contrary, it presupposes this obligation. There would have been no occasion for such a method of deliverance from the penal effects of offences committed against the law, but on the supposition of the antecedent obligation to obey the law. And is the sinner less bound to render obedience when he is pardoned, than when he was in a state of guilt?
2. In respect to the measure of the required obedience the objection falls to the ground. This law requires universal, unsinning obedience, and accounts every deviation to be sin. Should any interpretation, then, of Scripture be advanced, which shall reduce this measure of obedience, it would be justly rejected, as being dishonourable to God, contradictory to the Scriptures, and to the interests of morality. But the tendency of our doctrine is the exact opposite. It teaches us that we must be justified by faith, because the unsinning obedience required by the law renders it impossible that we can ever be justified by works. Were the law less holy, less rigorous in its demands, there would then be no necessity for this method of justification. But since righteousness cannot be attained by the law, the righteousness of faith is manifested in the gospel. Does faith, then, make void the law? No. It implies in the strongest manner the extensive nature of that obedience which the law requires.
3. But may not the doctrine supersede the necessity of any obedience at all? No; for–
(1) Mark the grounds on which the necessity of obedience to the moral law is founded. Because without it man would be unfit to enter into the presence of God, and unable to participate in the holy felicity of heaven (Heb 12:14; Mat 5:8).
(2) Advert next to the particular nature of justification. It is simply one part of salvation–that part by which the guilt of sin is removed, and the sinner is reconciled to God. While it declares that no holiness has any share in atoning for sin, or in reconciling us to God, it does not therefore intimate that no holiness is requisite to qualify us for the enjoyment of our purchased inheritance. An invalid criminal receives a pardon. If we should assert that the state of his health had no connection with the mercy received, such an assertion could never be construed to imply that his recovery from sickness was unconnected with his future happiness. Because his obligation to punishment has been remitted by an act of grace, it cannot therefore be inferred that health is unnecessary to his enjoyment of the royal bounty. Nay, we should rather say that his deliverance from the sentence rendered the removal of his disorder a blessing more than ever desirable. So justification provides a remedy for the penal consequences which past disobedience has incurred; but it leaves the necessity of personal holiness to rest on the same foundation on which it always had rested, on the impossibility of holding communion with God, and of partaking in His felicity, without possessing corresponding dispositions, and being made partakers of His holiness. If, then, the method of justifying the sinner by faith only tends neither to weaken the obligation to obey the moral law, nor to reduce the measure of the required obedience, nor to supersede the necessity of obedience, in what sense does it make void the law? In no sense whatever.
II. The assertion that faith establishes the law. Far from producing effects unfavourable to the cause of morality, it tends to strengthen and promote it by motives of the most exalted nature, and of the most constraining obligation.
1. What is the state of the justified sinner? Under a conviction of the danger and misery of sin, looking unto Jesus, he has found peace and joy in believing. The ground of all his present peace and future prospects is a comfortable hope of his acceptance in the beloved. Let this hope be once destroyed, his peace is broken, his prospects are clouded. Still he is under condemnation. To keep alive, then, this hope is one leading object which the justified sinner has constantly in view. But how is the object to be accomplished? Doubtless the Holy Ghost is the author of this blessed experience, who beareth witness with our spirits that we are the children of God. But He usually evidences to us our adoption by reflecting light on His own work of grace in the heart, and thus by enabling us to trace out the existence of the cause by the effects evidently produced. Sanctification, as it is the earnest of future glory, so it is an evidence, because a consequence, of our present reconciliation with God. Deliverance from the power of sin is a blessing annexed by promise to a state of justification (chap. 6:14). Observe what a constraining motive is thus provided to the attainment of universal holiness. The peace, the hope, the joy of a sinner are inseparably connected with the evidence of his interest in Christ.
2. But the faith which leads a sinner to Christ for justification includes a conviction, not only of the danger, but also of the demerit of sin. In what light does he view himself? As a brand plucked out of the fire; as a pardoned criminal, as a rebel graciously invested with all the privileges of a loyal subject. What sentiments of love, gratitude, obedience, does this view inspire!
3. These sentiments are still greatly augmented by a consideration of the means which have been employed in this work of mercy (Gal 3:13). Redeemed with such a ransom, shall sinners refuse to give their lives to Christ? (1Co 6:20; Tit 2:14). (E. Cooper.)
The gospel salvation confirms obedience,
by furnishing–
I. New views of truth. The believer receives new views of–
1. The perfection of the law in itself. His natural heart rebelled against it, and longed for some standard which should grant indulgence to his sinful infirmities. Even the letter of the law was too strict, and from the breadth of its spiritual application he recoiled. He hated the commandments for their purity. In a renewed heart this spirit is entirely subdued, and that the law is holy and just and good is thankfully acknowledged. There are, therefore, now new and strong inducements to follow after the holiness which it exhibits, and thus the gospel has not destroyed but confirmed the law.
2. His own character and life. His proud and self-confident spirit is broken down under the consciousness of guilt, which quickens the desire for holiness, and increases the abhorrence of transgression. Hence to lower the standard of obedience would bring no gratification. He longs to do the perfect will of God, and is contented only as he can put off the old man and put on the new, which is renewed in holiness.
3. Christ and His Cross. In this there is no countenance given to sin.
(1) It is the most solemn manifestation of Gods justice in dealing with sin. Beholding the justice and severity of God thus displayed the justified sinner feels the abhorrence of sin more deeply impressed; and as he looks upon his crucified Lord put to death by sin and for sin the law gains a new power over him.
(2) It is the most amazing manifestation of the love of God for guilty man. The believer, therefore, rejoicing in the confidence that His blood was shed for him that he might not come into condemnation–how shall he by continuing in sin crucify the Son of God afresh?
II. New motives of conduct.
1. Sincere gratitude and love to Christ who has redeemed him from the bondage of the law. He looks upon himself as a captive, bought with a price, and love for his Redeemer constrains him to serve and please Him. By this he is led to perfect holiness in the fear of God.
2. Consciousness of exalted privilege, he is a pardoned man, and all his fear of the consequences of his past guilt are replaced by the hope of heaven. He is adopted into Gods family, and therefore has all the rights attaching to Divine Sonship, etc. What an assemblage of motives to holiness! How can a man make void the law who has such privileges?
3. The perfect purity of heaven. The justified man looks forward to this as the perfection of character, and consequently longs for the personal purity which alone can meeten him for it. How, then, can faith make void the law when obedience to it is the only preparation for the inheritance which faith expects?
III. New means of attaining this obedience. The work of the Holy Spirit is peculiar to the gospel, and whatever holiness any man attains is given by Him. In his own nature man has no strength to obey the law; but the whole influence of the heavenly Agent is directed to the ultimate point of mans entire obedience to God. To attain this He maintains an unceasing warfare within the renewed soul, and having brought him to the glorious privilege of being a child of God, He enables him to walk worthy of his high vocation. (S. H. Tyng, D. D.)
Religion and morality
1. There are many who cannot see the difference between criticising a weak argument and attacking the thing it purposes to prove. St. Paul had here been saying severe things of that spurious morality which consists simply of obedience to outward rules; and there were foolish auditors who concluded that he was assailing the moral law, the thing expressed in these rules. His answer is, that he was attacking not law, but legalism. St. Paul maintains that, by trying to substitute the principle of faith for that of blind obedience to an external rule, so far from making void the law he was really establishing the law.
2. The question here discussed, from a modern point of view, is one as to the relation between religion and morality. Can a man be virtuous who is not pious, or, if he can, does his virtue lack a quality which only piety can infuse into him? There are few who would maintain that the Christian religion has had a bad influence on virtue; they only contend that virtue is independent of religion. And I think there are many plausible considerations which lend, at least, a colourable pretext to this contention.
(1) No one, e.g., will question that there are not a few of blameless lives who entertain grave doubts as to the Christian faith. Are we to deny the reality of these mens virtue; or, if not, are we to conclude that it makes no difference whether a man is a religious man or no? Again, it has been often urged, that whilst conduct is a test, religious character and belief is not. Sometimes religious belief is a mere accident. Bow many of those who conform to the faith and worship of our country would have given an equally firm adherence to the faith and worship of another country?
(2) On the other hand, do we never find that religion may exist without morality? Is there not some ground for the assertion that it is in the religious and not in the secular world that intolerance, uncharitableness, and the like often attain their rankest growth?
3. Are we Christians, then, driven to the admission that there is no connection between our Christian faith and our goodness of life? Or, at least, are we driven to the confession that morality gains nothing from religion? No. All the apparent incongruities notwithstanding, I maintain that religion and morality are inseparably united; that that morality is at the best a poor, shallow thing which is not fed from the fount of a genuine Christian faith. Whenever, in its power and reality, the faith of Christ takes possession of a soul, we find that it transfigures into new beauty and nobleness all the higher elements of our nature, expanding the horizon of intelligence, kindling the spiritual imagination by a vision of a fairer than earthly beauty, infusing a new and keener sensitiveness into the conscience, a new tenderness into the affections, arming the will with a new commanding power over the passions, breathing, amidst all our struggles and efforts in this passing life, a sweeter, serener peace into the heart, and shedding over all the dim, dark future the light of a diviner, heavenlier hope.
4. There are many ways in which the influence of Christian faith on the moral life may be shown, as, e.g., by pointing out the influence of the sense of Gods redeeming love in Christ Jesus, and of the hope of immortality on the moral life; but passing by these I fix attention on the fact that–
I. The faith of Christ reveals to us a new and infinite ideal or standard of goodness.
1. Eighteen hundred years ago there broke upon the world a vision of human perfection, a revelation of the hidden possibilities of our nature, transcending far all that the race had ever witnessed or conceived; and if we ask today what is the secret of the wondrous power over the hearts and lives of men the Christ-life has had, shall we answer that Christ set us simply a perfect example of human virtue? Had it been nothing more, I believe that there are dim aspirations in these breasts of ours which had never started into life; that there are secret anticipations of an immortal destiny which would never have awakened within us. But I believe that the secret of the transforming power of the life of the Son of God lies simply in this, that it calls us to be sons of God.
2. I can well conceive that to many this conception of the religious life may have an air of extravagance. When one thinks of the multitudes who are sunk in ignorance and vice, and of the dull routine of commonplace respectability, which is the best that most of us can boast of, it may seem the excess of fanaticism to talk of such a nature that its proper destiny is nothing less than sharing in Gods life. And yet think for a moment. Outside of the sphere of religion there are in souls indications of infinitude–a sense of a nature that is one with God.
(1) When, e.g., the book of nature becomes intelligible, when beneath seemingly orderless confusion, or contingency and accident in the phenomena and facts of the world, the man of science begins to comprehend the presence of unseen but eternal laws shedding the light of design, of order, of reason over the visible world, what is the meaning of all this? What but this: that in the study of nature I am simply thinking Gods thoughts after Him; I am simply proving that the mind within me responds to the mind that is impressed on all things without me.
(2) What, again, is the meaning of that even deeper sympathy with nature which finds expression in what we call the sense of the beautiful, the feeling of sensitive persons, with a kind of ecstasy when they look upon the grander scenes of this glorious world? What but this, that man cannot merely observe the glory and beauty of nature but, as face answers to face in a glass, the soul of man is strung in sympathy with the very mind that made it.
(3) So in the sphere of a higher and diviner art, in the life of endeavour after goodness. How shall we explain this, that the better a man is the less content is he with himself? Why is it that in the moral life our aspirations become more elevated, and ever as we ascend we see the moral life unsealed rising before us? Why, but for this reason, that the soul of man was made for God, that with nothing less than a Divine perfection can it ever be satisfied?
II. The religion of Christ not only reveals to us an infinite ideal of goodness, but it assures us of the power to realise it. It says to you not merely, This is what you ought to be, but, This is what you may and can be. Apart from this, the gospel would be no good news. As you know that the first ray of light your eye catches, gilding the eastern horizon in the morning, is to you the sure pledge and prophecy of the coming perfect day; or, as you know, that the future plant is potentially contained in the little seed or germ, so the first movement in a human breast of true spiritual life, the first throb of genuine self-devotion to Christ is fraught with the newborn perfection and beauty of the life that is hid with Christ in God. The religious life indeed, like other life, is progressive, and here, as elsewhere, effort, struggle, conflict are the inevitable conditions of progress. Here lies the power over evil, the conquering impulse of the Christian life, that if only we be true to God and ourselves the final victory is sure. The sun and rain and dew, all the genial influences of nature, will not make a stone grow, but the tiniest germ, the fragile plant, just peeping above the soil, has in it a secret principle which can transmute air, earth, sunlight, moisture into means of its development, and so the heaven born life has in it the vitalising, the assimilating forces that will make all things in this our earthly existence, all things in the moral atmosphere, work together for its good, and bear it onward to perfection. If the Spirit of Christ dwell in your heart today and mould your life, nothing in heaven or earth or hell can ever, ever baulk you of your Christian hope. (Principal Caird.)
.
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Verse 29. Is he the God of the Jews only?] Do not begin to suppose that because you cannot be justified by the works of the law and God has in his mercy found out a new method of saving you, that therefore this mercy shall apply to the Jews exclusively. Is not God the maker, preserver, and redeemer, also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also, as much as of the Jews; for all have equally sinned and there is no reason, if God be disposed to show mercy at all, that he should prefer the one to the other; since they are all equally guilty, sinful, and necessitous.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
By answering his own proposed questions, he plainly shows us, that the covenant of grace, by which God is God of his people, does not belong to the Jews only, that they only should have justification and bliss, but to the Gentiles also, according to the promise, Gen 17:5; 22:18; Psa 2:8; Isa 11:10,12, and many others; which promises are more especially to be accomplished, now the wall of partition is broken down, as Eph 2:13,14.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
29. Is he theGod of the Jews only? c.The way of salvation must be oneequally suited to the whole family of fallen man: but the doctrine ofjustification by faith is the only one that lays the basis of aUniversal Religion this therefore is another mark of its truth.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Is he the God of the Jews only?…. The Jews made their boast of him as such, and would not allow the Gentiles any interest in him: but
is he not also of the Gentiles? yes, of the Gentiles also: God is the God both of Jews and Gentiles; not only as the Creator, preserver, and Governor of them, or as he has a right to demand worship and service of them, but as he is their covenant God; not by virtue of the covenant of circumcision, or by the Sinai Covenant, but by the covenant of grace; as appears by his loving them in Christ, choosing them in him, putting them into his hands, providing blessings of grace for them in him, and sending his Son to redeem them; by calling them by his grace; by their sanctification, adoption, pardon, and justification; by taking out of them a people for his name with whom he dwells, and of whom he takes care; and will never leave nor forsake: all which may lead us to observe the distinguishing grace of God, the happiness of our state and condition, and what encouragement we have for faith and hope in God.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Of Gentiles also ( ). Jews overlooked it then and some Christians do now.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
JUSTIFICATION MEETS A UNIVERSAL NEED
1) “Is he the God of the Jews only?” (e cloudaion ho theos enonon) “Is he (or does he exist as) the God of Jews only?” The implied answer is surely not –He is the God, Creator and sustainer of all men who desires that no person perish but that all come to repentance, Act 17:24-31; 1Pe 3:9; Rom 10:12-13; Gal 3:8; Gal 3:28.
2) “Is he not also of the Gentiles?” (ouchi kai ethnon); “Does he not also exist as the God of nations, races, heathens, or Gentiles?” The Jews did not hold exclusive ownership over God, nor could they claim that he loved, them only, Joh 3:16-17; Joh 6:37; Mat 11:28; To them was Paul called to preach the Gospel, Act 9:15; Act 26:15-18; Eph 3:8-9.
3) “Yes, of the Gentiles also,” (vai kai ethnon) “Yes, he does exist also (as) the God of (all) nations,” of the Gentiles, heathen, and all races and peoples. The fact that God called Paul and specifically sent him to preach salvation to the Gentiles, and that he appeared to Peter and directed him to go to the home of Cornelius, the Gentile, and preach salvation to him and his household, is adequate and incontestable evidence that God is a God of Jews and Gentiles and that each has the identical need of, and provision for, and call to, that salvation, Act 10:34-43; Rom 1:14-16.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
29. Is he the God of the Jews only? The second proposition is, that this righteousness belongs no more to the Jews than to the Gentiles: and it was a great matter that this point should be urged, in order that a free passage might be made for the kingdom of Christ through the whole world. He does not then ask simply or expressly, whether God was the Creator of the Gentiles, which was admitted without any dispute; but whether he designed to manifest himself as a Savior also to them. As he had put all mankind on a level, and brought them to the same condition, if there be any difference between them, it is from God, not from themselves, who have all things alike: but if it be true that God designs to make all the nations of the earth partakers of his mercy, then salvation, and righteousness, which is necessary for salvation, must be extended to all. Hence under the name, God, is conveyed an intimation of a mutual relationship, which is often mentioned in Scripture, —
“
I shall be to you a God, and you shall be to me a people.” (Jer 30:22.)
For the circumstance, that God, for a time, chose for himself a peculiar people, did not make void the origin of mankind, who were all formed after the image of God, and were to be brought up in the world in the hope of a blessed eternity.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(29) Is he not also.Insert or. Or are we to suppose that God is the God of (literally, belongs to) the Jews only?taking up the point in the last verse, that any man, simply qu man, and without regard to distinction of race, was capable of justification.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
‘Or is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles also? Yes, of Gentiles also,’
For if salvation were to be by the works of the Law, which included circumcision, it would mean that God was only the God of the Jews. But Paul immediately raises an objection to this idea. He answers it by a counter-question. Is He not also the God of the Gentiles? And his answer to that question is an emphatic ‘yes’. God is God of both Jew and Gentile.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Rom 3:29 . Or in case what has just been asserted in Rom 3:28 might still be doubted is it only Jews to whom God belongs? and not also Gentiles? He must, indeed, have only been a God for the Jews, if He had made justification conditional on works of the law, for in that case it could only be destined for Jews, [927] insomuch as they only are the possessors of the law. Consequently Rom 3:29-30 contain a further closing thought, crowning the undoubted accuracy of the confidently expressed . . [928] in Rom 3:28 . The supplying of a predicative (Hofmann, Morison, and earlier expositors) is superfluous, since the prevailing usage of is amply sufficient to make it intelligible, and it is quite as clear from the context that the relationship which is meant is that of being God to the persons in question.
How much the , said without any limitation whatever in their case, as with , God is conceived as protecting them, and guiding to salvation run counter to the degenerate theocratic exclusiveness; see on Mat 3:9 , and in Eisenmenger’s entdeckt. Judenth . I. p. 587 f. But Paul speaks in the certain assurance, which had been already given by the prophetic announcement of Messianic bliss for the Gentiles, but which he himself had received by revelation (Gal 1:16 ), and which the Roman church, a Pauline church, itself regarded as beyond doubt.
[927] Not for Gentiles also, unless they become proselytes to Judaism, whereby they would cease to be Gentiles.
[928] . . . .
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
29 Is he the God of the Jews only? is he not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also:
Ver. 29. Is he the God of the Jews only ] That is, Doth he justify the Jews only? For he is their God only whom he justifieth. Now men are said to be justified effectively by God, apprehensively by faith, declaratively by good works. The schoolmen are very unsound in this capital article of justification, and are therefore the less to be regarded. Nam quae de gratia Dei iustificante scholastici seribunt, commentitia universa existimo, saith Cardinal Pighius, who is therefore much condemned by Bellarmine, but without cause.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
29. ] In shewing how completely Jewish boasting is excluded, Paul purposes to take the ground of their own law, and demonstrate it from that. He will shew that God is not (the God) of Jews alone, but of Gentiles, and that this very point was involved in the promise made to Abraham, by believing which he was Justified (ch. 4), and therefore that it lies in the very root and kernel of the law itself . But, as often elsewhere, he passes off from this idea again and again, recurring to it however continually, and eventually when he brings forward his proof-text ( , Rom 4:17 ), Abraham’s faith , and not this fact , has become the leading subject.
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Rom 3:29 f. ; The only way to evade the conclusion of Rom 3:28 would be to suppose as is here presented by way of alternative that God is a God of Jews only. But the supposition is impossible: there is only one God, and therefore He must be God of all, of Gentile and Jews alike. This is assumed as an axiom by the Apostle. is the best attested reading, but the argument seems to require that it should “approximate to the sense of ” (Simcox, Language of the N.T. , p. 171), which is a variant: “if, as is the fact”. It is simplest to read Rom 3:30 as explaining and confirming what precedes: He is God of the Gentiles also, if as is the fact God is one; and (consequently) He will justify the circumcision on the ground of faith and the uncircumcision by means of faith. is probably logical, rather than temporal, whether the reference be made to the last judgment, or to each case, as it arises, in which God justifies. Lightfoot insists on drawing a distinction between and in this passage. “The difference,” he says, “will perhaps best be seen by substituting their opposites, , : when, in the case of the Jews, the falsity of their starting-point, in the case of the Gentiles, the needlessness of a new instrumentality, would be insisted on.” ( Notes on Epistles of St. Paul , p. 274.) But a comparison of Rom 2:26 , Rom 5:1 , Rom 9:30 , Gal 3:8 (Weiss), shows that Paul does not construe the prepositions so rigorously: and in point of fact, what he does insist upon here is that justification is to be conceived in precisely the same way for Jew and Gentile. The and serve no purpose but to vary the expression.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
Is . . . only? Read, “What, is He, &c.”? The question opens with the Greek conjunction e, translated “what” in 1Co 6:16, 1Co 6:19; 1Co 14:36.
not. Same as “nay”, Rom 3:27.
also of the Gentiles = of Gentiles also.
Gentiles. See Rom 1:5.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
29.] In shewing how completely Jewish boasting is excluded, Paul purposes to take the ground of their own law, and demonstrate it from that. He will shew that God is not (the God) of Jews alone, but of Gentiles, and that this very point was involved in the promise made to Abraham, by believing which he was Justified (ch. 4), and therefore that it lies in the very root and kernel of the law itself. But, as often elsewhere, he passes off from this idea again and again, recurring to it however continually,-and eventually when he brings forward his proof-text ( , Rom 4:17), Abrahams faith, and not this fact, has become the leading subject.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Rom 3:29. , yea also of the Gentiles [although they are without the law.-V. g.], as nature teaches, and the Old Testament prophecies.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
Rom 3:29
Rom 3:29
Or is God the God of Jews only? is he not the God of Gentiles also? Yea, of Gentiles also:-As assurance that he will save by the law of faith addressed to all men, he says that he is the God of all other people as well as of the Jews. He accepted the Jews because their fathers trusted and obeyed him. He now accepts all who trust and obey him.
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
Rom 1:16, Rom 9:24-26, Rom 11:12, Rom 11:13, Rom 15:9-13, Rom 15:16, Gen 17:7, Gen 17:8, Gen 17:18, Psa 22:7, Psa 67:2, Psa 72:17, Isa 19:23-25, Isa 54:5, Jer 16:19, Jer 31:33, Hos 1:10, Zec 2:11, Zec 8:20-23, Mal 1:11, Mat 22:32, Mat 28:19, Mar 16:15, Mar 16:16, Luk 24:46, Luk 24:47, Act 9:15, Act 22:21, Act 26:17, Gal 3:14, Gal 3:25-29, Eph 3:6, Col 3:11
Reciprocal: Exo 20:2 – the Lord Num 15:29 – one law Num 19:10 – it shall be Num 35:15 – General Deu 23:8 – enter into Psa 49:1 – inhabitants Son 6:13 – As Isa 19:25 – Blessed Jer 32:27 – God Jer 46:1 – against Hos 2:23 – Thou art my God Mat 15:27 – yet Mar 7:28 – yet Joh 11:52 – not Act 10:11 – and a Act 10:35 – in Act 11:18 – hath Act 15:9 – put Act 18:6 – from Act 28:28 – sent Rom 1:5 – among Rom 2:9 – of the Jew Rom 4:9 – Cometh Rom 4:17 – before him Rom 5:11 – but we Rom 10:12 – there is no 1Co 12:13 – whether we be Jews Gal 3:20 – but Gal 3:28 – neither Gal 5:6 – in 1Ti 2:4 – will 1Ti 2:5 – one God
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
THE GOD OF THE GENTILES
Is He the God of the Jews only? is He not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also.
Rom 3:29
These words give us the basis of the Apostles missionary career. God is not the God of the Jews only, that is, He belongs equally to all men. On this principle must ultimately rest the claims of the missionary enterprise. This great truth that God belongs to all men involves two others
I. The infinite dignity and worth of every human being.The dignity of man is to be judged not by his present condition, but by what he is capable of. Now to say that God belongs equally to all men, implies that there is in every man a capacity for knowing and loving God, and it is this capacity which confers the highest and most lasting dignity and glory on our nature. It was the gospel that first taught the value of individual man, thereby placing all men on an equality, and it did this by revealing that in every human soul there is a capacity for all that is great and noble, which manifests itself even in the worst and most degraded. Now it is this fact alone which will lead us to be interested in our fellow-men.
II. The unity of the race.For if God belong to all, all are one, children of the same Father. It was thus the gospel fused the antipathies and jealousies of mankind. The whole system of the old world was based on inequality and separation; for it is the mournful result of sin, not merely to separate man from God, but to separate him from his fellow-man as well. Hence every circumstance was seized upon as a pretext for setting up some new barrier: race, creed, culture, social position, and even sex, were all made the lines of division and exclusion. The gospel not only leaped over these barriers, but broke them down. They utterly disappeared before it. All classes met and joined hands around the table of the Lord. The fire of His love burned to ashes their feuds and antipathies. This fact, familiar as it is, brings with it responsibilities and duties which we are still unwilling to admit.
Illustration
Sydney Smith sneered at the early advocates of missions as apostates of the loom and the anvil. He put Carey and such as he in the pillory, and then hurled at them the mockery of a pitiless ridicule. To-day the Church, and the world too, bows in homage before the name and memory of these humble working men who left the shoemakers bench, the weavers loom, the blacksmiths forge, the shepherds calling, like the primitive apostles called from the lake-side and the tax-collectors bench, to undertake a worlds evangelisation. The apostates of the anvil and the loom have become the apostles of a new and grand era of worldwide missions, and Sydney Smith is now in the pillory. The retributions of history are sometimes very rapid, and the Nemesis of Providence has a scourge of scorpion stings.
Fuente: Church Pulpit Commentary
:29
Rom 3:29. Another conclusion logically following upon the aforesaid truths, is that God is the God of the Gentiles as well as of the Jews. It also explains how He can accept the services of the Gentiles who did not have any benefit of the law.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Rom 3:29. Or is God the God of Jews only? Or, which is omitted in the E. V., presents an alternative, in case the principle of Rom 3:28 should be doubted. Belong to Jews only is the full sense. The Jews made this claim, and it would hold good, if justification were by works of the law, since the Jews alone possessed the law.
Yes, of Gentiles also. Pauls position as an Apostle to the Gentiles, the revelation of the universality of the gospel made to him, confirmed the promise of the Old Testament (Rom 1:1-5). Hence all this establishes the position of Rom 3:28, that a man is justified by faith.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Rom 3:29-31. Is he the God of the Jews only? He argues from the absurdity of such a supposition. Can it be imagined that a God of infinite love and mercy should limit and confine his favours to the little perverse people of the Jews, leaving all the rest of mankind in an eternally desperate condition? That would by no means agree with the idea we have of the divine goodness, for his tender mercies are over all his works. He is the God of the Gentiles also And therefore hath established a way of justification, equally open to the Gentiles as to the Jews. Seeing it is one God The same eternal and unchangeable Jehovah, that will justify the circumcision The Jews, by faith; and the uncircumcision The Gentiles, through the same faith As if he had said, The way of justification is the same to both, whatever difference men may make in their expressions about it. He shows mercy to both, and by the very same means. Macknight thinks the expression, , through faith, in the latter clause, is an ellipsis, for through the law of faith, mentioned Rom 3:27, (where see the note,) and signifies the method of salvation by faith, established in the new covenant, called a law for the reasons there given. By this law of faith the Gentiles are to be justified. For though they have not the doctrines of revelation, as the objects of their faith, they may believe the doctrines of natural religion, (Heb 11:5,) and live agreeably to them: in which case their faith will be counted to them for righteousness, equally as the faith of those who enjoy revelation. The same learned writer supposes, that in the expression, seeing there is one God, the apostle alludes to Zec 14:8, where the prophet foretels the progress of the gospel, under the image of living waters going out from Jerusalem, and then adds, Rom 3:9, And the Lord shall be king over all the earth, and in that day there shall be one Lord, and his name one; to show, that under the gospel dispensation, all nations shall be regarded by God as his people, that he will be acknowledged and worshipped by all nations, and that in the affair of their justification and salvation, he will observe one rule. Do we then While we maintain this method of justification and salvation, make void the law Set it aside, or render it useless, as properly signifies; through faith By teaching that justification is by faith, and that it is free for the Gentiles, as well as the Jews, in that way? God forbid That we should ever insinuate such a design, or entertain such a thought; yea, we establish the law On a firmer foundation than ever, and place it in a juster and more beautiful point of light: for we show that its honour is displayed in the atonement, as well as in the obedience of Christ; and we make it of everlasting use, for attesting the truth, and illustrating the necessity of the gospel, as well as for directing the lives of men, when they profess to have received it. In other words, we establish the authority, the purity, and the end of it; by defending that which the law attests, by pointing out Christ the end of it, and by showing how the moral part of it may be fulfilled in its purity. For through the influence of a faith that worketh by love, being enabled to love God, his children, and all mankind in sincerity and truth, we are brought to serve him without slavish fear, in holiness and righteousness before him, and to walk in his ordinances and moral commandments blameless. So that the righteousness of the law is fulfilled in us, while we walk, not after the flesh, but after the Spirit; love to God and man, productive of such fruits, being accounted by God the fulfilling of the law, Rom 13:8-10; Gal 5:14; Jas 2:8. Thus also that more ancient and universal law, which God has written on mens hearts, and which we have termed the law of nature, is established in the strongest manner in and by the gospel. For every one that makes the moral law of Moses the rule of his conduct, will also observe the precepts of this, as included therein.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Vv. 29, 30. Or is he the God of the Jews only?is he not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also: seeing it is one God, who shall bring out the justification of the circumcised from faith, and who shall bring about that of the uncircumcised by the faith.
The meaning of the , or, when prefixed to a question by Paul, is familiar to us: Or if you do not admit that…? This question therefore goes to show that the negation of what precedes violates the Monotheism so dear to the Jews, and in which they gloried. The genitive , of Jews, used without the article, denotes the category. Meyer refuses to take this word as the complement of the predicate , God, understood; but wrongly; the natural meaning is: Is God the God of the Jews? Comp. Rom 2:29, 1Co 14:33, and Luk 20:38 (with Mat 22:32). Otherwise we should require to apply here the phrase , to be the property of (to belong to), which does not correspond to the relation between God and man.
To the question: Is He not also the God of the Gentiles? Paul could answer with assurance: yes, of the Gentiles also; for the entire Old Testament had already drawn from Monotheism this glorious inference. The psalms celebrated Jehovah as the God of all the earth, before whom the nations walk with trembling (Psalms 96-98, 100). Jeremiah called Him (Rom 10:7) the King of nations; and the apostle himself had demonstrated in chap. 1 the existence of a universal divine revelation, which is the first foundation of universalism.
Fuente: Godet Commentary (Luke, John, Romans and 1 Corinthians)
Or is God the God of Jews only? is he not the God of Gentiles also? Yea, of Gentiles also:
Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)
29. Is he the God of the Jews only? Is he not also of the Gentiles; yea, indeed of the Gentiles,
Fuente: William Godbey’s Commentary on the New Testament
3:29 {12} [Is he] the God of the {f} Jews only? [is he] not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also:
(12) Another absurd argument: if justification depended upon the law of Moses, then God would be a Saviour to the Jews only. Again, if he would save the Jews after one manner, and the Gentiles after another, he would not be consistent. Therefore he will justify both of them after the very same manner, that is to say, by faith. Moreover, this argument must be joined to that which follows next, so that his conclusion may be firm and evident.
(f) God is said to be their God, after the manner of the scripture, whom he loves and cares for.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
Paul continued to appeal to his Jewish audience in these verses as in the former two. If justification is by the Law, God must be the God of the Jews only since God only gave the Law to the Jews. Paul’s point was that there are not two ways of salvation, one for the Jews by works and the other for Gentiles by faith. This is only logical, he reasoned, since there is only one God who is the God of all humankind. Paul probably used two separate prepositions in Rom 3:30 ("by," ek, and "through," dia) simply for literary variety. [Note: Moo, p. 252.] His point was that there is only one method of obtaining God’s righteousness. [Note: Harrison, p. 46.]