Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Romans 10:1

Doctrinal Message: The Doctrine of Justification (An Exposition of The Gospel of Jesus Christ) In Rom 1:8 to Rom 11:36 Paul the apostle gives an exposition of the Gospel of Jesus Christ; but it is presented from the perspective of the office and ministry of God the Father as He makes a way of justifying mankind and bringing him into his eternal glory in Heaven. Thus, we can describe Rom 1:8 to Rom 11:36 as an exposition of the doctrine of justification through faith in Jesus Christ. The body of the epistle of Romans discusses God the Father’s method of justification for mankind (Rom 3:21 to Rom 8:16), while His predestination is emphasized in the introduction (Rom 1:1-7), His divine calling introduces this section of doctrine (Rom 1:8 to Rom 3:20), and His plan of glorification for the Church (Rom 8:17-28) and for Israel are given (Rom 9:1 to Rom 11:36) are given last.

In this grand exposition of the doctrine of justification through faith in Jesus Christ Paul uses a number of examples to explain God’s way of justifying mankind. For example, Abraham’s faith is used to explain how we also put our faith in Christ to be justified before God. The analogy of Adam being a type and figure of Christ is used to explain how divine grace takes effect in the life of the believer. He uses the example of the laws of slavery and freedmen to explain our need to walk in our new lives, no longer under the bondages of sin. The illustration of marriage and widowhood is used to explain how we are now free from the Law and bound to Christ. It is very likely that the Lord quickened these examples and analogies to Paul while he sought to understand and explain this doctrine of justification in the synagogues and to the Gentiles during his years of evangelism and church planting. So, when he sat down to write out an exposition of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, Paul drew upon many of the examples that he had used over the years under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.

Outline Here is a proposed outline:

1. The Calling of Gentiles Rom 1:8 to Rom 3:20

2. God’s Righteousness Revealed In Christ Rom 3:21 to Rom 8:16

3. Glorification by Divine Election: Glorification Rom 8:17-28

4. Summary of God’s Divine Plan of Redemption Rom 8:29-39

5. Divine Election and Israel’s Redemption Rom 9:1 to Rom 11:32

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures

Divine Election and Israel Having revealed God’s four-fold plan of redemption (Rom 1:16 to Rom 8:39), Paul next explains the role of Israel in His plan of election and glorification for the Church. Chapter nine discusses Israel’s past election by God (Rom 9:1-33), while chapter ten explains Israel’s current role in divine election (Rom 10:1-21). Chapter eleven explains Israel’s future role in God’s plan of election (Rom 11:1-32). These passages serve to explain how Israel and the Church are one, but its primary emphasis is to show that the Church’s glorification is dependent upon and awaiting Israel’s restoration and glorification.

Having revealed God’s plan for the church in the first eight chapters, we can say, “But wait a minute, the story of redemption is not complete. What about Israel and the fulfillment of Old Testament Scriptures? How does this plan a role in the Church’s redemption? The story of redemption is more glorious than has been revealed up to now. Rom 9:1 to Rom 11:36 expounds upon God’s plan of divine election for His people Israel. In this lengthy passage Paul will quote directly from no less than twenty-seven passages in the Old Testament, and with others implied, thus relying heavily upon his knowledge of these Scriptures in order to establish his points concerning Israel’s divine election. He will quote from eleven books of the Old Testament, relying heavily upon the book of Isaiah (Isaiah 10, Genesis 3, Hosea 3, Deuteronomy 3, Exodus 2, Leviticus 1,1 Kings 1, Job 1, Psalms 1, Joel 1, Malachi 1).

Paul has just explained the glorification of the Church in Rom 8:17-39. He will now turn his attention to the restoration and redemption of Israel as a part of this overall plan. The reason is because the Church’s glorification is wrapped up and dependent upon Israel’s glorification. God’s redemptive plan for Israel was never nullified, but only postponed while provision was made to include the Gentiles into this wonderful plan. Israel’s restoration will also mean the glorification of the Church (Rom 11:11-12) In other words, the Gentiles have been grafted into the vine, not taken the place of Israel, as Paul will explain in Rom 11:15-19. This is exactly what Jesus meant in Joh 4:22 when He said that “salvation was of the Jews.”

Paul will begin this lengthy passage in Romans 9-11 by stating Israel’s divine plan of redemption as “the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises” (Rom 9:4). He will say that God is “over all” (Rom 9:5). That is, God is watching over His divine plan of redemption to perform it. Paul will take three chapters to explain how God is performing His plan in and through Israel. Thus, the word of God has taken effect, as Paul asks rhetorically in Rom 9:6 a.

Chapter nine discusses Israel’s past election by God (Rom 9:1-33), while chapter ten explains Israel’s current role in divine election (Rom 10:1-21). Chapter eleven explains Israel’s future role in God’s plan of election (Rom 11:1-32). These passages serve to explain how Israel and the Church have become one body in God’s plan of redemption.

However, the fact that the epistle of Romans separates the discussion of the divine election of Israel from its discussion of the election of the Church reveals that God has a parallel, but unique, plan for His people Israel. Old Testament prophecy supports this unique plan that God is orchestrating through Israel by the very fact that many of these prophecies are for Israel and not the Church.

The fact that Paul takes three chapters to discuss Israel’s redemption reveals the love and importance that this subject had in his heart. His opening statements in Rom 9:1-3 express his sorrow and pain because of their rejection of Christ. If Paul the apostle could have chosen his own calling, he would have wanted to evangelize his own people Israel, whom he loved. In God’s divine order, He sent Peter to the Jews and Paul far away to the Gentiles.

Paul will open this lengthy passage by explaining that God’s plan of redemption for Israel is only for those Israelites who have chosen to believe in the promises to Israel; for he says, “They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed,” (Rom 9:8).

Outline Here is a proposed outline:

1. Election Revealed in Israel’s Past Election Rom 9:1-33

2. Election Revealed in Israel’s Present Rejection Rom 10:1-21

3. Election Revealed in Israel’s Future Salvation Rom 11:1-32

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures

The Jews the Cause of Their Own Rejection.

Their refusal to accept the righteousness of God:

v. 1. Brethren, my heart’s desire and prayer to God for Israel is that they might be saved.

v. 2. For I bear them record that they have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge.

v. 3. But they, being ignorant of God’s righteousness and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God.

v. 4. For Christ is the end of the Law for righteousness to everyone that believeth.

The apostle continues the line of thought which he had begun in chap. 9:30. But he cannot go on without giving expression to the deep grief which the situation causes him. He assures his brethren, his readers in the congregation at Rome and elsewhere, that the salvation of the Jews is a matter of prayerful concern to him, that he feels anything but satisfaction at the necessity devolving upon him to speak of their rejection by God. His kind and earnest desire in their behalf, the supreme wish of his heart, which finds its expression in his supplication to God, is their salvation. That is the object which he has in mind as he makes his plea before God, as he intercedes in their behalf, that they might obtain salvation. Far from desiring to exaggerate and to play up the evil of their conduct, the apostle is rather inclined to give them full credit for whatever may be commendable in their behavior. He bears them witness, he is perfectly willing to testify in their behalf that they have a zeal for God, toward God. So much one must acknowledge and yield to them, that they are not indifferent to God and to His glory. For centuries they had held fast to the doctrine and cult of their fathers as they understood it, even enduring bloody persecutions for the sake of Jehovah. And they believed that by this insistence upon the outward formalities of religion they were meriting salvation, Act 26:7. But in spite of all this well-meant effort their zeal was not in accordance with correct knowledge. Their lack of proper knowledge was not only an intellectual, but also a moral fault. In spite of all the teaching on the part of the prophets, they persisted in their external worship, refusing to accept the proper knowledge of God. A service of God as they had developed it for themselves they adhered to, and all other opinions were rejected by them. But the true zeal for God and His glory stays within the bounds of God’s revelation and does not follow human opinion.

And now Paul pictures the contrast to his own desire and prayer in the behavior of the Jews according to their false knowledge. For, being ignorant of the righteousness of God and seeking to establish their own righteousness, they have not placed themselves under the righteousness of God. Instead of the proper knowledge the Jews showed ignorance; instead of having the true righteousness, hey were bound to bring out their own. God has found a way of justifying sinners; He has prepared for them a perfect righteousness: He offers them this righteousness in the Gospel But because the Jews are willfully ignorant of this righteousness of God, because they maliciously ignore His justification and are determined to set up their own righteousness of works, therefore they would not and did not submit themselves to the righteousness of God, the divine order and arrangement for the salvation of men, the way of justification. And therefore all their zeal for God will avail them nothing, since they refuse to see the one way of salvation, by the acceptance of the righteousness of God through faith.

And Paul brings another proof that the pursuit of one’s own righteousness by the observance of the Law is a mistake and cannot result in salvation: For the end of the Law is Christ unto righteousness to everyone that believes. Christ is the end of the Law: He has fulfilled all its demands perfectly, in every detail, and therefore in Christ the Law has found its end, its termination. That the Law still has its value, even in the Church of the New Testament, the apostle has shown above, 3:20; 7:7 ff. The Law, being fulfilled by Christ, can no more accuse and condemn us, for full and complete righteousness is now present and ready for every one that believes; that is the aim of Christ’s being the end of the Law. A person need but accept the fulfillment of the Law, the perfect obedience rendered to the Law by Christ, and he will, by such faith, be the possessor of the righteousness of Christ, imputed to him in and by the act of justification. And this is true not because of any intrinsic merit in the act of faith, but because it is the only means of apprehending and appropriating the righteousness of Christ as gained for us. In this way v. 4. is a summary of the entire Gospel message.

Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann

EXPOSITION

In this chapter the view of the whole subject introduced at Rom 9:30 is continued and carried out, according to which the present rejection of the Jews as a nation is traced to no absolute and irreversible Divine decree, but to their own refusal to accept God’s plan of mercy to all mankind; testimonies being, as usual, adduced from the Old Testament in support of the argument. But, before proceeding, the apostle renews expression of his regret (cf. Rom 9:1, seq.) at the present position of his countrymen, and his earnest desire that it should be otherwise.

Rom 10:1

Brethren, my heart’s desire (, expressing good will) and prayer to God for them (for Israel, as in the Textus Receptus, has no good support) is, that they may be saved (literally, is unto salvation). “Non orasset Paulus, si absolute reprobati essent” (Bengel).

Rom 10:2, Rom 10:3

For I bear them record that they have a zeal of God. For , meaning zeal for God, cf. Joh 2:17; Act 22:3; Gal 1:14. The word was commonly used for the religious ardour of the Jews at that time (cf. Act 21:20, ), and there was a faction among them called distinctively , to which Simon Zelotes (Luk 6:15; Act 1:13) is supposed to have belonged originally. St. Paul’s mention of the religious zeal of the Jews of his day is apposite in this place. In Rom 9:1-5, where he was about to speak of their rejection from the inheritance of the promises, he appropriately dwelt on their ancient privileges; here, where he has in view their own failure to respond to God’s purpose for them, he as appropriately refers to their undoubted zeal, which he regrets should be misdirected. But not according to knowledge. For being ignorant of (, in explanation of preceding) God’s righteousness, and seeking to establish their own (righteousness, repeated here, is ill supported), they have not submitted themselves to the righteousness of God. For the meaning of God’s righteousness, opposed to man’s own righteousness, see on Rom 3:19, Rom 3:20; also on Rom 1:17, and Introduction.

Rom 10:4

For Christ is the end of Law unto righteousness to every one that believeth. The word “end” () might in itself mean

(1) termination,

(2) fulfilment,

(3) aim or purpose,

which is the evident meaning of the word in 1Ti 1:5 and 1Pe 1:9. This last seems best to suit the line of thought in this place. The Jews evinced ignorance, i.e. of the real meaning and purpose of Law, in resting on it for justification. This is St. Paul’s constant position in speaking of the office of Lawthat it could not and was never meant to justify, but rather to convince of sin; to establish the need of, and excite a craving for, redemption; and so prepare men to appreciate and accept the righteousness of God in Christ which was its (see especially ch. 7.; and cf. Gal 3:24, ). being here anarthrous, we translate it according to the rule observed in this Commentary. The apostle has, indeed, in view the Mosaic Law; but it is the principle of law, as such, that he is speaking of. He next proceeds, as elsewhere throughout the Epistle, to quote from the Old Testament in illustration of the contrast between the two principles of justification, and this with the intention of showing that even in the Pentateuch that of justification by faith was intimated, and thus that it was all along the real of the Law. “Nam si prophetas suae sententiae testes citasset, haerebat tamen hic scrupulus, cum Lex aliam justitiae formam praescriberet. Hunc ergo optime discutit, quum ex ipsa Legis doctrina stabitit fidei justitiam” (Calvin).

Rom 10:5

For Moses describeth the righteousness which is of the Law, That the man which doeth those things shall live by (literally, in) them (Le 18:5). This quotation is intended to express, in the words of Moses himself, the principle of Law, viz. the requirement of entire observance of it, such as the apostle elsewhere contends is impossible (cf. Gal 3:10-12). It may be objected that Moses himself, in the original passage, does not seem to be setting forth any such impossible requirement. He says, in the name of the Lord, “Ye shall therefore keep my statutes and my judgments, which, if a man do, he shall live in them;” implying, it would seem, that a man might so keep them as to live in them; else were the injunction delusive. In the quotation also of the same text in Eze 20:11, Eze 20:13, Eze 20:21 and Neh 9:29, only such a requirement as might have been fulfilled appears to be understood. But St. Paul (as appears from the context, and from Gal 3:12, where the text is similarly cited) refers to it as expressing the strict principle of law, as above defined. It, then, the text, in its original connection, seems to fall short of the sense put upon it, we may understand the apostle to quote it as a well-known one, sufficiently suggestive, if taken, as he intends it to be, in connection with others, such as Deu 27:26, cited with it in Gal 3:10, “Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the Law to do them.” It is his way to refer to familiar texts, or such as most readily occur to him, as suggestive of Old Testament ideas which he expects his readers to be acquainted with. Calvin’s remarks on this whole passage deserve attention: “Lex bifariam accipitur. Nunc enim significat universam doctrinam a Mose proditam, nunc pattern illam quae ministerii ejus propria erat; quae scilicet praeceptis, praemis, et poenis continetur Quod ergo hic de justitia Legis dicitur referre convenit non ad totam Mosis functionem, sed ad partem istam quae peculiariter quodammodo ei commissa fuit.” His drift is, that the passage before us intimates the strict principle of law, which it was the peculiar function of Moses to promulgate, whereas the passage which follows from Deuteronomy is significant of its universa doctrina. This distinction may help us to understand St. Paul’s drift, in referring, as he proceeds to do, to Deu 30:11-14. The determination of this drift is attended with some difficulty. First, we observe that, whereas the original passage certainly refers to the Law given to the Israelites through Mosesto the same “statutes and judgments” that were the subject of the previous quotationSt. Paul applies it to describe justification through faith in Christ; and, secondly, that, in order to apply it, he alters some parts of it, and interposes comments of his own. One view is that he is only making a free-use of the words of the passage to clothe his own thoughts. So Bengel: “Ad hunc locum quasi parodia suavissime alludit, sine expressa allegatione.” But his obvious intention, here as elsewhere, to support his positions from the old Scriptures surely precludes this view. Nor can he be supposed to cite the passage as simply prophetical of the gospel which was to supersede the Law, since it evidently was not so. The proper view seems to be that he adduces it as illustrating, in the first place. what Calvin calls the universa doctrina of the Law itself, with regard to its actual application as a norma vivendi to the needs of man. Here, he would say, the very Mosaic dispensation is presented to us, not as exacting any impossible obedience to the strict behests of law, but only such as the “circumcised in heart” could render, and be accepted still; it is presented to us, not as a rigid external code, enjoining and threatening, but as a word very nigh unto us, even in our heart, that we may do it; it is, in fact, an anticipation and foreshadowing of gospel salvation. In confirmation of this view of the apostle’s meaning, it is to be observed that the passage occurs, not in the earlier books of Moses, but in Deuteronomy, which appears as an appendix to them, containing for the most part long discourses in the style of the prophets, wherein the Law is, as it were, spiritualized, and its universa doctrina opened out. In it we feel ourselves as rising out of the region of strict legal exaction into a higher and more spiritual one. Observe also that the passage before us is based on the idea of a people circumcised in heart, and loving the Lord with all the heart and all the soul (verses 6, 20); on an ideal view of a state of favour and acceptance never realized in Jewish history, but such as we find often in the prophetic writings (cf. Jer 31:31-34, the famous passage referred to more than once in the New Testament as having its eventual fulfilment in Christ). Thus the passage before us is legitimately referred to by St. Paul, as an intimation in the Pentateuch itself of the “righteousness which is of faith.”

Rom 10:6-10

But the righteousness which is of faith speaketh on this wise, Say not in thine heart (in the original, It is not in heaven, that thou shouldest say), Who shall ascend into heaven? (that is, to bring Christ down). The parenthesis is St. Paul’s own; the original has, after “heaven,” and bring it unto us, that we may hear it and do it? Or, Who shall descend into the deep? (that is, to bring up Christ again from the dead). Again the parenthesis is St. Paul’s; and he has substituted “into the deep” ( ) for “ beyond the sea.“ The original is, Neither is it beyond the sea, that thou shouldest say, Who shall go over the sea for us, and bring it unto us, that we may hear it, and do it? But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach; that (or, because) if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. The apostle’s purpose in varying from the original is obvious from his interposed comments, and from the application that follows. It seems to be as though he had said, “See how, with a slight alteration, the passage in Deuteronomy becomes an exact description of our Christian doctrine.” The most marked alteration is the substitution of “into the deep” for “beyond the sea.” The “sea” in the original, to which the term “abyss” is applicable (cf. Job 28:14; Psa 107:26), may have suggested the word; but St. Paul here evidently means by it the regions of the dead, imagined as subterranean, equivalent to the Hebrew Sheol, and the Greek . For use of the word in this sense, cf. Psa 71:20, cf. also Luk 8:31 and Rev 9:1, Rev 9:2, Rev 9:11; Rev 11:7; Rev 17:8; Rev 20:1, Rev 20:3; in which passages seems to denote the penal abode, corresponding to the Greek idea of Tartarus; but the word itself does not contain this idea, which is by no means intimated here. It may be taken to denote Hades, into which Christ “descended.” Some commentators suppose the previous expression, “ascend into heaven to bring Christ down,” to mean bringing him back to earth from heaven, whither he has ascended now. But the mere fact of its coming first, as well as the general sense of the passage, shows it to refer rather to the Incarnation, and what follows to the Resurrection. These were the two grand stages in the great work of redemption; both were required that “the righteousness which is of faith” might effectually be brought “nigh unto us.” The impossible task of effecting either was not required of man; God has done both for us, and we have but to “believe in our hearts,” that “the word” of his grace may be nigh us, in our mouth and in our heart, that we may do it. Thus all that was intimated or foreshadowed by that old passage in Deuteronomy is in its fullest sense to us fulfilled. In verse 9 the applicability of the words, “in thy mouth, and in thine heart,” to the gospel dispensation is shown; the two expressions, properly understood, denoting all that is required of us. Confession of the Lord Jesus with the mouth must be taken to express generally, not only fearless avowal of the Christian faith, but also consistent life, according to the full meaning of our Lord’s words in Mat 10:32; Mar 8:38; Luk 10:26; Luk 12:8, etc. Confession of the Lord Jesus with the mouth, too, would have a peculiar significance then, when Christians were often so sorely tempted to deny him under persecution (cf. 1Co 12:3). We may observe also how “the mouth” is elsewhere regarded as the index of the heart; as the main bodily organ whereby character is evinced and expressed (cf. Mat 12:34, Mat 12:37; Mat 15:11, etc.). Further, the belief spoken of is belief in the hearta living operative faith, not intellectual conviction only. Nor is belief that God raised the Lord Jesus from the dead to be taken as meaning belief of this one article of the Creed alone; it carries with it belief in the gospel generally, the doctrine of the Resurrection being here, as elsewhere, regarded as the central doctrine on which all the rest depends (cf. I Corinthians Luk 15:17; 1Pe 1:21). “Haec summa Evangelii est. Nam, cum credimus Christum excitatum esse e mortuis, credimus sum pro peccatis satisfecisse, et in coelis regnare, ut nos ad imaginem suam perficiat” (Bucer). In Luk 12:10, where the offices of the heart and of the mouth are denoted in general terms, the distinction between “unto righteousness” with respect to the one, and “unto salvation” with respect to the other, is significant. By faith alone we are justified; but by confession in actual life, which is the fruit of faith, our salvation is secured.

Rom 10:11-21

What follows to the end of the chapter is abruptly expressed, in such wise as to render difficult a clear exposition of the intended argument. It seems (as in other parts of the Epistle) as if St. Paul had dictated rapidly, and without pausing to consider whether readers would easily follow the thoughts of which his own mind was full. First, having done with his illustrations from the Pentateuch, he resumes the line of thought expressed at the end of Rom 10:4, by . For, though Rom 10:11 is logically connected (in a way usual with St. Paul) with the preceding onethe quotation from Isaiah being adduced in proof of in verse 10yet what follows is really a continuation of the thought of verse 4, viz. that the “righteousness of God,” spoken of in verse 3, is of faith, and also for all. In evidence of this he returns to the text from Isa 28:16, already cited in Rom 9:33, and himself supplies at the beginning of it, so as to bring out its universal application. It may be that, quoting from memory, he had forgotten that this word was not in the original, or he may have purposely added it in order to express more clearly what the originalin which there is no limitation of really implied. The latter supposition is probable, inasmuch as (according to the best-supported readings) he had previously (Rom 9:33) quoted the text without this addition, and now follows out the idea of by giving a reason for it, and then, in Rom 9:13, adds a text from Joel in which does occur, so as to intimate that the “calling on the Name of the Lord,” spoken of by Joel, implies the “believing” spoken of by Isaiah, and hence that the two texts must be equally universal in their application.

Rom 10:11, Rom 10:12

For the Scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed (see above, on Rom 9:33). For there is no difference (rather, distinction) between the Jew and the Greek: for the same is Lord of all, being rich unto all that call upon him. Here, in Rom 10:12, the apostle comments on the text from Isaiah, so as to show the universality of its application (see previous note). It is (he would say) in itself applicable to Jew and Gentile alike, and it must needs be so, since the one God is the same to all that call upon him, even as the Prophet Joel also testified. The thought thus expressed was one deeply fixed in St. Paul’s mind. He elsewhere speaks Of the very unity of God as implying of necessity that he is the same alike to Jews and Gentiles (see above, on Rom 3:29).

Rom 10:13

For whosoever shall call upon the Name of the Lord shall be saved (Joe 2:32). The text from Joel is in a passage which is distinctly Messianic; the same that is quoted by St. Peter (Act 2:16) as fulfilled on the Day of Pentecost. Hence, and from the fact of being emphatic in the original, it is well quoted by the apostle as supplementing the previous one from Isaiah, and as conclusive for his argument.

Rom 10:14, Rom 10:15

How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? This question may be taken, in the first place, as serving to connect the two passages from Joel and from Isaiah (see previous note). But it is further the beginning of a sorites, suggested by a new thought, which is carried out to the end of the chapter. The course of this new thought through the rest of the chapter may be expounded as follows: It might be pleaded, in behalf of the unbelieving Jews, that they had never really heard, through preachers duly sent to them, the gospel message; and hence that they were not to be blamed for rejecting it. With this idea before him, the apostle first (verses 14, 15) allows generally, in the form of a series of questions, that, as before calling on the Lord there must be faith, so before faith there must be hearing, before hearing there must be preaching, and for preaching there must be authorizing mission; and he quotes, in illustration, a passage from Isaiah, which describes beautifully the preaching of good tidings of peace by commissioned messengers to all the world. But he is careful to add (verses 16, 17) that, according to the same prophet, such universal preaching, and consequent hearing, does not involve universal hearkening; thus showing, in view of the main purpose of his argument, that the fact of the Jews not hearkening now is no evidence that they had not heard. Then he goes on to ask whether any could plead the excuse of not having heard, so as to justify want of the faith that cometh of hearing. Nay, he replies (verse 18), the sound of the good tidings has gone forth to all the earth, even like the language of nature spoken of in Psa 19:1-14. Then (verse 19), pressing his argument home to the Jews, who have been all along in view, he asks, “But I say, Did not Israel know?” The word , being different from previously used, must express some different meaning. But what St. Paul exactly meant by it is not quite clear. The quotations from the Old Testament that follow in proof of knowledge (verses 19, 20) seem to support the view that what Israel knew, or ought to have known, was the Divine design of the promulgation of the “good tidings” to all the world, which has just been spoken of. Such promulgation should have been to them no stumbling-block; for it had been told to them from Moses downwards, and they had full opportunity of knowing it. Lastly (verse 21), the apostle intimates that the present state of things, in which Gentiles accept the gospel while Israel in the main rejects it, far from being an objection to it, is but a further fulfilment of Isaiah’s prophecies, which represent God as making himself known to those who had not known him, while pleading with Israel in vain. This exposition of the supposed course of thought being borne in mind, the passage (with the further aid of some interposed comments) may become intelligible. It continues: And how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard! and how shall they hear without a preacher! and how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that [preach the gospel (or, good tidings) of peace, and] bring glad tidings of flood things! (Isa 3:7). The genuineness of the. words within brackets is at least doubtful. Even with them the text is not quoted in full, though sufficiently to remind of its purport.

Rom 10:16-18

But not all obeyed (or, hearkened to) the gospel (or, good tidings). This means, apparently, that in the prophet’s representation of the proclamation of the good tidings all were said to hear, but not all to hearken, For Esaias saith, Lord, who Believed our report? (The Greek word here is , the same as in Rom 10:17, there rendered “hearing,” and corresponding to the verb in Rom 10:14,Rom 10:18.) So then faith cometh of hearing, and hearing by the Word of God ( , God’s own Word, committed to, and spoken by, preachers duly sent). But I say, Did they not hear?. The previous aorist, , in Rom 10:16 having been understood as referring to the prophetic representations rather than to present known facts, the aorist here must, for consistency, be similarly understood, though with a view also to the actual universality of the gospel message. The unexpressed nominative to appears from the context to be men in general, not the Jews in particular. Israel is not specified till Rom 10:19. Yea, verily, their sound went into all the earth, and their words unto the ends of the world (Psa 19:4). The “sound” and the “words” in the psalm are those of the heavens and the firmament. But in the second part of the psalm, beginning at Rom 10:7, the psalmist passes from God’s revelation of himself in nature to his revelation of himself in his Word. Still the psalm itself cannot well be understood as intimating the universal proclamation of the gospel. Nor is it necessary to suppose that St. Paul so understood it. Enough for him that the words he quotes express admirably what he desires to say.

Rom 10:19

But I say, Did not Israel know? (see explanation given above). First, Moses saith, I will provoke you to jealousy by them that are no nation; by a foolish nation I will anger you. It may be observed that in the Greek we have the same word, ,, in both classes of the sentence, though, in order to bring out the supposed meaning in the first clause, it is there, in the Authorized Version, rendered “people,” and in the second, “nation.” The passage occurs in the song attributed to Moses in Deu 32:21, and expresses the idea of God, in consequence of the defaults of Israel, favouring those who were so far, as it were, no nation at all, so as to provoke Israel to jealousy. It is therefore aptly cited as an intimation in the Pentateuch itself of the calling of the Gentiles in place of unbelieving Israel. The idea involved in “provoke you to jealousy”in the sense of moving to emulation, so that Israel itself as a nation might, through the calling of the Gentiles, in the end be savedis pursued, as will be seen, in the chapter that follows.

Rom 10:20

But Esaias is very hold, and saith, I was found of them that sought me not; I was made manifest unto them that asked not after me. (Isa 65:1). The peculiar boldness of Isaiah’s utterance consists in thisthat, at a time when Israel was recognized as God’s one chosen people, he is said to make himself known even to those who sought him not at all.

Rom 10:21

But to Israel he saith, All day long I stretched out my hands unto a disobedient and gainsaying people. (Isa 65:2). Tholuck remarks, “If from this passage we once more look back upon the tenth and ninth chapters, it is manifest how little Paul ever designed to revert to a decretun, absolutum, but meant to cast all blame upon the want of will in men, resisting the gracious will of God.

HOMILETICS

Rom 10:1

Solicitude and supplication for the salvation of sinners.

Paul was himself a Jew, a Hebrew of the Hebrews. His first ministry was to Israelites, and, when upon his missionary tours, he made it his first business to address the frequenters of the synagogues. By his training and by his associations, and also by his evangelistic intercourse with his countrymen, he understood the Jewish mind, and how to deal with it. From the Jews he met with obstacles, opposition, and persecution; and he could not be blind to their faults and errors. This, however, did not prompt him to anger or to neglect; he loved his nation, and felt the claim of kindred and nationality. He laboured, spoke, wrote, and prayed for his Jewish kin; he sought above all things their salvation. Looking away from the special reference, let us consider the words of the apostle as supplying an example of the benevolent spirit of Christianity.

I. WE MUST BE AWARE THAT THERE IS A WIDESPREAD NEED OF SALVATION. Many of our neighbours need saving from debasing vice and unjustifiable, inexcusable crime; many have fallen into dangerous errors, from which they need to be delivered; many need to be awakened from the densest ignorance and carelessness with regard to spiritual realities. Some are sensible of their need; multitudes are utterly indifferent to it. Go to a hospital, and you will see many and varied forms of disease, accident, privation, affecting men’s bodily stateall want healing. So is it with sinful society: salvation, and nothing less than salvation, is the world’s great want.

II. WE KNOW THAT THERE IS SALVATION FOR THOSE WHO NEED IT. As Christians, we are assured that our Redeemer is a mighty, all-sufficient Saviour; we believe that he came that the world should be saved through him; we have been authoritatively told that he is “the Propitiation for the sins of the whole world;” that God is “the Saviour of all men, specially of those who believe.” Further, we have ourselves experienced the grace and power of Jesus to pardon, purify, and bless; and what he has done for us he can do for others. The offers and promises of his gospel are free and valid. He saves to the uttermost all that come unto God by him.

III. CHRISTIANS SHOULD BE ANXIOUS AND PRAYERFUL ON BEHALF OF SINNERS THAT THEY MAY BE SAVED. In this the apostle is an example to all who have themselves tasted and seen that the Lord is good.

1. It should be our heart’s “good pleasure” (for such is the literal rendering). A benevolent mind, in sympathy with the Saviour, who pitied, wept over, expostulated with sinners, will find pleasure in witnessing the power of the gospel to rescue and to save the lost.

2. Supplication should be offered with a view to the same end. We know that such prayer is acceptable; for Christ has said, “It is not the pleasure of my Father that one of these should perish.” Supplication should not be selfish; it should be intercessory and benevolent.

IV. CHRISTIANS SHOULD USE THE APPOINTED MEANS FOR THE SALVATION OF THEIR FELLOW–MEN. Sympathy and prayer, unaccompanied by effort, would be a mockery. Certainly, Paul was not the man to grieve over his erring countrymen, and at the same time to neglect endeavours for their recovery. Some of us may preach the gospel, others may “send” the preachers, others may invite their neighbours to hear the gospel; sympathy and prayer will lead to some form of practical effort.

APPLICATION.

1. Whilst others are concerned for your salvation, are you seeking this salvation for yourself?

2. Are you manifesting practically solicitude for the spiritual good of your neighbours and fellow-men?

Rom 10:2-4

False righteousness and true.

Paul’s desire for the salvation of his countrymen and kinsmen arose from his clear perception of their spiritual destitution and need. They might hide their condition from themselves, but it was clear enough to him. The measure of true light which they enjoyed made it the sadder that many of them refused to accept and to walk in the full light of the Sun of Righteousness. And the apostle’s sympathy was excited on their behalf all the more because he understood their case so well.

I. ZEALOUS RELIGIOUSNESS MAY BE MISDIRECTED BY IGNORANCE. The apostle does not charge the Jews with neglecting, far less with despising, religion. In their own way they were very religious, and many of them were found willing to put forth great efforts and endure many sacrifices for their religion. They had “a zeal for God.” They hated idolatry; they revered their Scriptures, their temple, their priesthood, their sacrifices and festivals; they prided themselves upon their ceremonial purity and their scrupulous observances. Yet, with all this, they were not commended by the apostle. Their zeal was without knowledge. We meet with similar characters in our own time. Some persons consider that if there is religiousness with sincerity, that is sufficient. It is a great mistake. We need light as well as warmth, knowledge as well as zeal. If truth has been revealed, our first duty is to learn and receive it.

II. THERE IS A FALSE AND UNCHRISTIAN CONCEPTION OF RIGHTEOUSNESS. The Jews are censured for seeking to establish “their own righteousness.” The Law, indeed, was good in itself. For those who perfectly obeyed it, it was a means of salvation. But the Law is Condemnation to those who trust in it and yet do not conform to it. And, as a matter of fact, the Law was “weak through the flesh,” was insufficient for the salvation of sinful men. It is no foundation for a sinner’s hopes. Further, the Hebrews were too much accustomed to regard their religious acts as services rendered, for which Divine recompense and payment are due. This is a notion still prevalent, but it is radically unscriptural and unreasonable. We cannot be justified by the works of the Law, and we can earn nothing as a right from God.

III. THE TRUE RIGHTEOUSNESS IS THAT WHICH IS THROUGH CHRIST JESUS. Observe:

1. The relation between Christ and the Law. The word “end” may be taken literally. The Law, as a dispensation, came to an end when Christ appeared. The Law was to the Israelites a Conductor to lead them to Jesus. But the word “end” may mean more than this; it may mean the purpose and design of the Law. The Law was given in order to reveal both the righteousness of God and the sinfulness of man. It thus prepared the way for the coming of him whose obedience fulfilled the Law, and whoso redemption secured pardon and liberty for those whom the Law was powerless to save.

2. Observe the way in which the higher righteousness is secured through Christ. This is described by three several expressions in this passageknowledge, subjection, belief. The ignorant are without the means of obtaining justification; the unsubmissive rebel against the means; the unbelieving reject the means. It is the will of God that faith should be accounted for righteousness. This is a principle as old as Abraham; yet its most mighty working is apparent in the case of those who believe in Jesus. The doctrine of justification by faith is here plainly revealed, and its superiority to all rival doctrines plainly exhibited.

Rom 10:5-10

Gracious terms of salvation.

The blessings of the gospel were designed for, and were offered to, Jews and Gentiles alike, with the most perfect impartiality. The descendants of Abraham, the disciples of Moses, did indeed enjoy an advantage; but, instead of profiting by it, they turned it against themselves. The apostle here teaches that if any of his kinsmen and countrymen come short of Christian privilege, the fault is their own, and cannot be laid to the Divine Author. St. Paul so presents the gospel as to exhibit

I. ITS CONTRAST TO THE LAW. The former dispensation promised life to those who obeyed the Law. By life is meant more than continuance of existence and national and territorial advantages; the expression conveys the promise of Divine favour and acceptance. Perfect obedience would secure life; but such obedience no Hebrew, and indeed no mortal man, has rendered. The old covenant did indeed assure to the upright and pious Jew the blessings of salvation, and enjoined obedience upon all its sons. But it was only human pride and self-righteousness which could deem the life of even the holiest such as to merit the favour and fellowship of God. Christianity, on the other hand, provides all spiritual blessings as a free giftthe gift of grace.

II. ITS SIMPLICITY AND ACCESSIBILITY. To exhibit this, the apostle borrows language from the Book of Deuteronomy. What the Lord, by Moses, said of the commandment published to Israel, that Paul says of the gospel. The Divine righteousness speaks; and what is its message to men?

1. It is a message which gently reproaches those who complain of the difficulty of understanding and realizing the will of God. How especially does this apply to Christianity! We have not to soar to heaven, or to plunge into the abyss; for Christ, the Son of God, has condescended to come down from the celestial heights that he might dwell among us; he has risen from the dead, conquering sin and death for us, and leading us in the way to God. Thus the Lord has deigned to make the truth of God intelligible, and the grace of God real and near.

2. But the Divine righteousness, speaking, assures us of the nearness of the Word of life to the hearers of the gospel, personally and individually. How could the word which quickeneth be nearer, more accessible? It is “in the mouth, and in the heart,” of every Christian. Pause to think how true this is. Your English Bible is in your hands; the gospel is preached at your own doors; the creeds, the prayers, the thanksgivings, are framed and uttered in your own familiar speech; the name of Jesus is a household word; the simplest can understand the message of the gospel, the terms of life eternal; the child, the unlearned, the feeble, the aged, appreciate the truth as it is in Jesus; Christianity gains many a convert from among the poor, the vicious, the very heathen. All this is a testimony to the Divine adaptation of the gospel to human nature; it meets our deepest wants and supplies them, it creates its own witness by its own success.

III. THE TERMS IT PROPOUNDS. They are two.

1. Faithas this whole Epistle tells, and tells again and yet again. The righteousness is of faith; “with the heart man believeth.” A provision which attests the infinite wisdom of him who made it. The condition is one which can be fulfilled by men of every rank and age and culture; yet it is one profoundly affecting the moral and spiritual nature. It is profitable to man and honouring to God.

2. Confessiona condition, doubtless, very different in the apostles’ days from our own, but, as the Lord teaches us, ever indispensable. Men have not the right to say in what way confession shall be made. But it must not be withheld.

IV. THE BLESSINGS IT SECURES. These also are two.

1. Righteousnessthe new, Divine, Christian righteousness, that which is the gift of God; a righteousness which is by grace, but which is real, genuine, and eternal.

2. Salvationby which we are to understand the final and complete enjoyment of what the gospel brings and promises. The end of your faith is the salvation of your souls. It is not only deliverance from sin and danger; it is the participation in the Divine nature, and in the eternal life.

APPLICATION. Let the hearer of the gospel think, not merely of the mysteries which belong to religion, but of the simplicity of what is most essential for him to believe. You have not to climb a lofty tree in order to pluck the fruit; the bough hangs low, and you have but to reach out your hand. You have not to climb the mountain crag, and cross the dangerous bog, in order to come at the water of life; the stream flows by your side, and you have but to stoop and drink.

Rom 10:11-13

Lordship and riches.

This passage exhibits the identity of the old covenant and the new. Paul quotes from the prophecies of Isaiah and Joel, in such a manner as to show, not only that he acknowledged the inspired authority of those writers, but also that he regarded words of promise uttered in the former dispensation as valid in the later. The language quoted harmonizes with the widest conceptions of the Divine benevolence, and must have been adduced with especial satisfaction by one so broad in his sympathies as was the large-hearted apostle of the Gentiles.

I. THE LORDSHIP AND WEALTH OF CHRIST. In speaking of the blessings of salvation, it was very natural that Paul should be led to refer to the glory of the Saviour, in order that it might be understood how vast was his power alike to deliver and to protect his people, and to confer upon them priceless favours.

1. As Lord of all, Christ is Possessor of all power in heaven and in earth. He is of right Ruler of all; and the application of this language, referring to Jehovah, to the Son of man, is proof that he was regarded by St. Paul as Son of God. To Christians, however, it is delightful to reflect upon Christ’s authority, exercised over them, benignantly on his part, and gratefully and practically acknowledged and submitted to by themselves. A rebel and a loyal subject think very differently of their sovereign. To us Jesus is the King, because he is the Prophet and the Priest, who has come to us with the voice of God, and has bought us with his precious blood, tie is enthroned in our hearts; he gives laws to our life.

2. Jesus is rich unto all. We are assured of “the unspeakable riches of Christ,” and are counselled to buy of him “gold tried in the fire, that we may be rich.” If “all things are ours,” it is because we are Christ’s, and Christ is God’s. He who redeems and rules, supplies the wants of his ransomed ones. He is not, like some of the wealthy of this world, rich for himself; he is rich for us, rich boundlessly and inexhaustibly, rich benevolently and for ever.

II. THE CONDITIONS UPON WHICH THE LORDSHIP AND THE WEALTH OF CHRIST MAY BE ENJOYED. These are stated in two modes.

1. Believing on him is essential to participating in the blessings Christ offers to men. The apostle has previously been insisting upon faith as the means of obtaining the true and Divine righteousness, as God’s way for man to come to himself and to enjoy his favour. They who have faith shall not be put to shame, shall surely and eternally be saved.

2. Calling upon him would seem to be a natural result of faith. They who believe in the heart will give their faith utterance by the lips. By this Hebrew expression we may understand both open confession and earnest prayer. By calling upon the Lord’s Name, no vain and superstitious invocations or repetitions are to be understood, but the sincere entreaty of the soul for deliverance, guidance, or help.

III. FOR WHOSE BENEFIT CHRIST‘S LORDSHIP AND WEALTH ARE DESIGNED.

1. The limitations of nationality are abolished. The religions of heathenism are local; the deities of heathenism are national and tutelary. Under the older dispensation, Jehovah was revealed as the one God, the God of all the earth; yet the Hebrews too often regarded the Lord as their God, and theirs only. The distinction between Jew and Gentile was, to the Hebrew mind, deep and ineffaceable. To St. Paul largely belongs the honour of giving currency to the true doctrine of Christianity, that religion is one and universal; that God is the Father of mankind; that Christ is Saviour and Lord of all men; that the middle wall of partition is broken down; that in Christ there is neither Jew nor Gentile.

2. The offers of Christianity are made to all, and its terms and conditions are adapted to all. He is “rich unto all,” and his riches are for “whomsoever believeth,” for “whomsoever calleth upon his Name.” What language could be used more fitted to encourage every hearer of the gospel to submit to the Lordship and to seek the true riches of Jesus Christ, the Son of God?

Rom 10:12

Spiritual enrichment.

The experience of the apostle was sufficiently large to enable him with confidence to make this sweeping assertion. And the experience of the Church of Christ, through the many centuries which have elapsed since St. Paul thus wrote, enables Christians to make the same assertion with undiminished confidence. In fact, the actual proofs at our disposal and command are overwhelming, both in number and in appropriateness; for, whilst the bestowal of Divine and spiritual wealth has been incessantly proceeding, the resources are unexhausted and inexhaustible.

I. THE RICHES OF THE LORD. In Christ is wealth adapted to the enrichment of dependent, needy men. He has in himself:

1. Riches of revelation.

2. Riches of redemption.

3. Riches of replenishment, owing to the nature and perpetuity of the spiritual dispensation of grace.

4. Riches of resurrection, inasmuch as the true riches endure unto life eternal.

II. THE LIBERALITY WITH WHICH THESE SPIRITUAL RICHES ARE DISPENSED.

1. It is because Christ is Lord over all, that he is rich unto all.

2. The riches of redeeming love are conferred upon men of every nationality. In the apostolic age, the great distinction which Christianity transcended was that between Jew and Gentile; but, in subsequent times, it has been proved by experience that there is no nation, no class, and no condition incapable of this Divine enrichment.

III. THE CONDITION UPON WHICH SPIRITUAL RICHES HAVE BEEN, AND STILL MAY BE, APPROPRIATED. As throughout this chapter, the apostle here insists upon that spiritual condition of receptivity and application by which all that is good may enter the nature of man. Calling upon him is an act

(1) of repentance,

(2) of faith,

(3) of prayer, and

(4) of aspiration.

As we exercise this means of communion, all things are ours.

Rom 10:14, Rom 10:15

Preaching.

Paul was himself brought to the Saviour by that Saviour’s immediate interposition. Doubtless he had heard much of Jesus; yet he had never truly known him during his career of unbelief and persecution. It was when Jesus met him by the way that his hostility was overcome, that his heart was melted, that his nature was changed. But this was exceptional treatment. The Lord who, by a supernatural appearance and voice, called Saul to the knowledge of himself, commissioned him to preach the gospel to his fellow-men, and made him one of the first, and perhaps the most successful, of the innumerable baud of preachers of the cross. We have here

I. A DIVINE PROVISION. All good is from God. No apostle more constantly insists upon this great truth than does Paul; and in no treatise is it more prominently set before the mind of the reader than in this Epistle to the Romans.

1. We are told what the ultimate blessing is which Christianity proffers. It is salvation. Righteousness has reference rather to what is positively given; salvation, rather to the state from which men are rescued by the Redeemer. A worthy end!worthy even of the interposition of Heaven, of the benevolence of God the Father, of the sacrifice of Christ, of the grace of the Spirit. A deliverance of the spiritual nature from condemnation and from all evil, and the provision for the saved of new associations, a new lot, a new hopea salvation which is final and eternal.

2. We have brought before us the extent to which salvation may be enjoyed, the persons for whose benefit it is proposed. All mankind are qualified to be recipients of this boon upon compliance with the terms proscribed. There is no difference in the view of God. The comprehensive term “whosoever” is conclusive upon this point. Jews are not excluded; Gentiles are welcomed; the provision is for humanity.

3. The text sets before us the conditions upon which this blessing may be enjoyed. It is required

(1) that men should call upon the Name of the Lord, i.e. Christ Jesus; and

(2) that they should do this in intelligent and cordial faith: for “how shall they call on him in whom they have not believed?” The expression, “call upon the Name of the Lord,” is full of meaning and beauty. It reminds us whence the blessing of salvation proceeds; and as the voice, the call, the cry, come from a heart conscious of need and longing for deliverance, it speaks of the spiritual state which prepares for receiving salvation. Thus Christians are spoken of as “all who in every place call upon the Lord.” They who act thus glorify God and his promises of faithfulness. They seek what he has promised to bestow, and they seek with earnestness and confidence. “He is near to all that call upon him in truth.” In order to intelligent calling upon the Lord, the apostle reasons, there must be faith. “He that cometh unto him must believe that he is, and that he is a Rewarder of them that seek after him.” Faith is the first requirement of the gospel; faith in the glad tidings proclaimed; faith in that Divine Saviour to whom those tidings relate, and who, indeed, is himself the Gospel. “Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved.” An arrangement this in harmony with the wisdom of God, and with the moral nature of man. Dead in unbelief and unspirituality, the sinner rises in faith into newness of life, for he lays hold of the grace of God revealed in the Saviour Christ. Consider how unspeakably rich is the provision here made, and how unspeakably gracious the conditions here proposed. Hearers of the gospel, how can you remain without such a blessing as this when it is put within your reach, and when you are invited to take it, and when the terms upon which you may enjoy it are such that you cannot cavil at them? How can you think of such a Saviour and such a gospel, and remain faithless and unmoved? How can you do other than, from your sin and danger and helplessness, call upon One who is “mighty to save”to “save to the uttermost all that come unto God by him”? This is the day of visitation. “Today,” says Christ, “if ye will hear my voice, harden not your hearts.”

II. A HUMAN AGENCY. The apostle brings before us two classes of agentsthose who, by the publication of the gospel, are the means of leading their fellow-men to faith; and those who send forth such preachers upon such a mission.

1. God employs preachers in bringing men to salvation. They have glad tidings of peace, of good things, to communicate. As the first bands of returning exiles, bringing good news of a larger company following in their train, were welcome to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, who hailed their approach by the mountains of Judaea; so the preachers of Christianity may well have been welcomed by the spiritually captive tribes and nations whom they visited on their errands of grace and evangelization. This method of promulgating truth, though not peculiar to our religion, is very distinctive of it. Christ chose twelve apostles; he sent out other seventy also. Before he left the world he directed and sanctioned personal agency in the ministry of the gospel. Paul instructed Timothy to commit the things he had received to faithful men, who should be able to teach others also; thus arranging for a succession, not of a priesthood, but of a teaching ministry. Christ calls out, sanctifies, and blesses the ministry of man to man. Would that there were a more general disposition to listen to his voice and to respond to his summons, “Whom shall I send?” in the ancient language, “Here am I; send me.” The success which attended the ministry of the apostles and first evangelists was such as to confirm faith in the Divine appointment. God was pleased by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believed. And every succeeding age has witnessed, in greater or less measure, to the efficacy of this wise provision. In our own day literature is so vigorous, and education so general, that the press has become a mighty auxiliary and ally to the ministry. Every preacher who has confidence in the Divine origin of his message, and in his own sincerity, will welcome the aids to general intelligence which are afforded by the able and varied literature of these enlightened days. Amongst a Christian community, preaching becomes naturally something more than the publication of the great fundamental facts of the gospel. But whilst there is abundant room for instruction, by which the Word of God may be expounded, and the application of religion be shown to all spheres and relationships of life, there is still a pressing need for evangelization. The young have to learn afresh “the first principles of the oracles of God;” the inattentive and careless have to be aroused by the Word which is as “a fire, and as a hammer that breaketh the rock in pieces;” the regions around have to be enlightened by the gospel, which is the true light; the world has yet to be gladdened by the good news of salvation and eternal life.

2. God employs his Church to send forth preachers of the gospel. All are not called upon to preach, but, in a sense, all are called upon to send. True, the one great Sender is the Divine Head of the Church; and they who are not commissioned by him are without authority, whatever human sanction, credentials, and approval they may enjoy. “The Lord gave the Word, and great was the company of those that published it.” We have an instructive instance of the way in which the Lord inspires his people to send forth his servants upon a benevolent mission, in the narrative of the proceedings of the Church at Antioch, when that Church became the second great centre of missionary enterprise. “How shall they preach, except they be sent?”a query little regarded by very many of the congregations named after Christ. It is thought enough to leave the matter to individual impulse, wise or unwise, or to consider it the vocation of the pastorate to call out living agencies. Yet, look at the vast demands of our own day. Clergy of all variety of gift; pastors for congregations; evangelists for our rural districts; city missionaries for our great towns; popular itinerant preachers; colonial missionaries; labourers, by voice and pen and press, among the heathen; defenders and promulgators of Christian truth in all the departments of literature;we need all these, of the best and most varied quality, and in increased numbers. In order that Christian society may send out into the world those who shall diffuse the faith of Christ, it is first of all necessary that that society should be in such a condition that from among its members such agencies shall naturally emerge. Mechanical means are of little avail in this matter. Where there is little life there will be little movement. If love to Christ be chilled by worldliness, no place will be found for love of souls. Out of the fulness of the heart the mouth will speak; when the feeling of the Christian community is strong, its voice will not be silent. The use of any and every means will depend for efficacy upon the sound and living condition of the society in which such means may be employed. It should be habitual with Christian congregations to call out and encourage the exercise of gifts divinely imparted. There are many other gifts beside that of religious instruction and persuasion, and gifts equally precious to God and useful to man. But there are reasons why speech for Christ needs special culture, Natural timidity has to be overcome, and formidable difficulties have to be encountered. It is here that wise counsel and affectionate encouragement come in with especial appropriateness. Almost every youthful speaker has been tempted to renounce this means of usefulness; and often it has happened that a word, providentially spoken, has cheered the diffident and discouraged. It must not be forgotten that, if there are to be learners, there must be teachers. If the Christian Church is to send out preachers and instructors, it must do something more and better than fling them unfurnished on the world. Those who are to influence men must in the first place be influenced by men. That community is rich which contains a large amount of teaching, quickening power. One of our chief dangers is lest we should overestimate the power of money. There is much which cannot be purchased by material wealth. It is in the abundance of the highest type of Christian character that spiritual wealth consists. Where there are found the lofty, noble-minded, the holy and the learned, the spiritual and benevolent, among the leading spirits of a Church, there the young and ardent and devoted wilt gather by a subtle magnetism, and thence they will derive in turn, by God’s grace, the power of Divine attraction. Hence the importance of seeking a high standard of biblical knowledge and Christian intelligence among all classes in our congregations. And hence, too, the importance of seeking out, and wisely employing, all the ability and culture which are devoted to Christ and sanctified to his glory. Can they be said to be truly sent who are thrust forth and then forgotten? Or, rather, does not that Church truly send which follows its agents, whether near or far, with kindly interest, with watchful sympathy, with fervent prayer? Sympathy is invaluable to those who labour, as all Christian servants must do, amid many difficulties and much opposition. Prayer of intercession is due from every member of the universal Church, and is especially required on behalf of Christian labourers. “Brethren, pray for us, that the Word of God may have free course, and be glorified.” In order that the Churches may more adequately fulfil their office as illuminators of a dark world, it is necessary that there should be a sincerer pity for the multitudes who are in darkness, and a firmer faith in the light which is from heaven. A Church which hesitates as to whether or not it possesses the truth, and has a gospel for mankind; a Church which can look with unconcern upon the prevalence of sin and misery in the world, is not likely to send forth heralds of Christ and tidings of salvation. Faith in the Redeemer, pity for those whom he died to redeem, forgetfulness and denial of self,these are the conditions of true evangelization. It is for us, then, to look up for a renewed baptism of the Holy Spirit, as a Spirit of life and of power. How otherwise can we rise to fulfil responsibilities so sacred, to discharge duties so momentous? Hearers of the gospel, seek the Spirit of faith and prayer, that you may be not hearers of the Word only, but doers also! Preachers of the gospel, seek the Spirit of wisdom and fervour, that your words may be with demonstration of the Spirit and of power! Churches of Christ, seek the Spirit of your Master, that you may, feeling your own debt to the Divine, immortal Saviour, act in the spirit of his lesson, “Freely ye have received, freely give”!

Rom 10:16-21

Israel’s unbelief.

The more highly the apostle prized the gospel, the more sincerely and compassionately did he lament the folly and the guilt of those who deliberately or carelessly rejected it. Especially was his heart stirred to sorrow, when he observed how generally the glad tidings of life in Christ were rejected by his “kinsmen according to the flesh.” Both upon the personal ground of relationship and association, and upon the general ground that Israel’s greater privileges involved greater responsibilities, Paul grieved over the want of faith in Christ manifested by so many of his countrymen.

I. THE FACT OF ISRAEL‘S UNBELIEF.

1. It had been predicted. In that remarkable anticipation of the sufferings and the glory of the Messiah which has won for Isaiah the designation “the evangelical prophet,” there occurs an intimation that the Messiah should himself be despised and rejected of men, and that the news of his salvation should be disregarded by many for whose benefit it was intended.

2. Fact agreed with prophecy. Many sons of Abraham manifested Abraham’s faith. Of the early professors and preachers of Christianity, a large proportion were Hebrews. Yet, although individuals welcomed the gospel, the nation as a whole, who by their leaders and representatives had crucified and slain the Lord Jesus, certainly turned away from the message of salvation, which, after his ascension, his apostles urgently and faithfully proclaimed. They did not all hearken to the report and obey its summons.

II. THE INEXCUSABLE GUILT OF ISRAEL‘S UNBELIEF. This is made apparent by several considerations. It appears:

1. From the terms of salvation. “Belief cometh of hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ.” No terms could be more righteous, more reasonable, more in accordance with the character of God or the necessities of men. Compliance with them involves no mental or social eminence, and is equally possible to those of all nations among men.

2. From the general diffusion of the tidings. Like the very light of the sun, like the voiceless witness of the heavens, the good news of salvation soon penetrated into the remotest and darkest places. Even the distant “sons of the dispersion” could not complain that they had been neglected. For the disciples of Christ, so far from keeping the good news to themselves, made it a point of conscience and religion to communicate to their neighbours the tidings of the advent and the mediation of the Son of God; whilst many, devoting themselves to the work of evangelization, deemed no journey too long to undertake and no perils too formidable to endure in the fulfilment of this sacred commission.

3. Even from the fact that many of the less-favoured Gentiles came to believe. It had been foretold by Moses and by the prophet Isaiah that the privileges which the Jews would despise and refuse should be offered to and accepted by the Gentiles. This came to pass, And it cut the apostle to the heart to remark that his kinsmen were rejecting blessings which the heathen to whom he preached were eagerly welcoming and receiving.

4. From the forbearance and gracious invitations of a heavenly Father. Again the apostle has recourse to the language of prophecy. How affecting is the representation here given of the patience, long-suffering, and kindness of God! He “willeth not that any should perish.” Although the people oppose themselves, he does not soon weary of his invitations. He spreads forth his arms, as willing to welcome those who will return from their wanderings and be reconciled to him. So he stands, as it were, all the day long. Still, though he has long proffered grace in vain, the hands which might have been raised to smite are extended to rescue and to bless.

HOMILIES BY C.H. IRWIN

Rom 10:1-4

Israel’s strength and weakness.

The apostle returns again to the tender solicitude for the spiritual welfare of Israel which he had already expressed in the beginning of the ninth chapter. He was no blind bigot. He could recognize the good qualities even of those from whom he differed. He knew how far Israel had departed from the truth of God, and yet he is quick to perceive that, even amid their errors and sins, there is much that is commendable in their character. What an example for every Christian, and especially in these days, when ecclesiastical divisions are so numerous and so sharply defined, to recognize what is good even in those from whom we differ most widely!

I. ZEAL WITHOUT KNOWLEDGE.

1. Israel’s zeal was an element of strength. “I bear them record that they have a zeal of God” (Rom 10:2). The apostle does them the justice of recognizing their zeal for God. Here he could speak with sympathy, the sympathy of personal experience. He knew how, before his conversion to Christianity, he himself had been influenced by the same sincere, though mistaken, desire for God’s glory. “I am verily a man which am a Jew, born in Tarsus, a city in Cilicia, yet brought up in this city at the feet of Gamaliel, and taught according to the perfect manner of the Law of the fathers, and was zealous toward God, as ye all are this day” (Act 22:3). Here is the same sympathetic recognition of Jewish zeal. This quality, when rightly applied, was their strength. It well fitted them to be the bearers of God’s message, and the channel of his blessings, to the world. A people without zeal will never accomplish anything permanent or great.

2. Zeal without knowledge was their weakness. They had a zeal of God, “but not according to knowledge.” Zeal is not necessarily an unmixed blessing. Yet there are many who commend earnestness, utterly irrespective of the motives from which it proceeds, the methods it adopts, or the ends it has in view. On this principle the doctrines held or the character exhibited are of small importance, provided only there is earnestness and zeal. Mohammedanism and the Inquisition would therefore be both laudable, because they exhibited zeal. Zeal without knowledge may become the opened floodgate for a torrent of evil. Zeal in religion may lead to any excesses if it is not restrained and tempered by the wisdom which God’s Word imparts.

II. WORKS WITHOUT FAITH. “For they being ignorant of God’s righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God” (Rom 10:3). Thus it is plain that sincerity and morality will not save the human soul or procure acceptance with God. The essential condition of salvation is faith. Faith will lead us to accept God’s plan of salvation, and to be guided by his Word in our efforts to obtain it. St. Paul’s description of the Jews here might be appropriately applied to our Roman Catholic and ritualistic brethren. They too have a zeal for God. Their zeal and earnestness cannot be questioned. But their zeal is often not according to knowledge. They too are “going about to establish their own righteousness.” They substitute works for faith, and by legal observances, by rites and ceremonies, by lastings and penances, they seek to work out s righteousness for themselves. Christ and his Word are too much set aside, and Church and priest and the commandments of men are set up in their place. Let us admit their strength, let us imitate their zeal, while affectionately “speaking the truth in love” we point out and avoid their weakness.C.H.I.

Rom 10:5-13

The simplicity of the gospel.

The apostle here contrasts the simplicity of God’s plan of salvation with the efforts which men have made to work out a righteousness for themselves. Salvation is gained

I. NOT BY OUR OWN GOOD WORKS. “Moses describeth the righteousness which is of the Law, That the man who doeth those things shall live by them” (Rom 10:5). If this were the condition of salvation, how hopeless would our condition be! None of us could say that we had made ourselves free from sin, or that our works were perfect and faultless, or that we had fully and faithfully kept all the commandments of God.

“Not what these hands have done

Could save this guilty soul;

Not what this toiling flesh hath borne

Could make my spirit whole.”

II. NOR BY MIRACULOUS INTERVENTION. “Say not in thine heart, Who shall ascend into heaven? (that is, to bring Christ down from above:) or, Who shall descend into the deep?” (Rom 10:6, Rom 10:7). The desire which is here expressed still survives. Not content with the Word of God and the invisible, but real, spiritual presence of Jesus with his Church, and the power of the Holy Spirit, many zealous Christians think it is necessary to have a more visible manifestation of the supernatural. Hence we have the doctrine of the real presence; alleged appearances of the blessed Virgin at Lourdes and at Knock; and, on the other hand, an undue stress laid upon the second coming of the Lord Jesus Christ. “If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.”

III. BUT BY THE PERSONAL RECEPTION AND CONFESSION OF JESUS CHRIST,

1. The Holy Scriptures are the means used to bring this salvation near to us. “The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach” (Rom 10:8). In contrast with ceremonial or legal observances, in contrast with all miraculous appearances, the apostle here magnifies the reading and preaching of the gospel as the Divine method for the salvation of souls. “The Spirit of God maketh the reading, but especially the preaching of the Word, an effectual means of convincing and converting sinners, and of building them up in holiness and comfort, through faith unto salvation.”

2. Faith, which is the condition of salvation, is an act of the human mind. Not by bodily labours or sufferings, not by appearances to our bodily senses, but by the Spirit of God and the Word of God working upon our spirits, and producing faith in us, do we receive salvation. “With the heart man believeth unto righteousness” (Rom 10:10). It is to the spiritual and not to the bodily nature that the appeal of religion is to be made. It is the spiritual and not the bodily nature that we must cultivate if we would see the kingdom of God.

3. Yet this faith will have an outward manifestation,. “With the mouth confession is made unto salvation” (Rom 10:10). If our faith in Christ is real, it will show itself. We shall not be ashamed to make public acknowledgment of him.

4. Thus salvation is brought within the reach of every one. “The same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him. For whosoever shall call upon the Name of the Lord shall be saved” (Rom 10:12, Rom 10:13). This plan of salvation brings the gospel to the Gentile as well as to the Jew. “For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek” (Rom 10:12). Wherever there is a heart seeking after God, that soul need not wait to work out a righteousness for itself. “Whosoever shall call upon the Name of the Lord shall be saved.” What a contrast the simplicity of the gospel is to all human systems of religion and all man-made methods of salvation! The more we keep to the Word of God, and the less we mingle with it human tradition and ecclesiastical shibboleths, the more shall we be blessed in bringing souls to Christ.C.H.I.

Rom 10:14, Rom 10:15

Four questions for every Christian.

When the great heart of the Apostle Paul burned within him as he wrote his Epistles to the Churches, he threw aside, as it were, the calm and stately prose of the quiet thinker and careful writer. He became an orator. He saw before himeven in his prison cellimmortal souls, whom he wanted to awaken and arouse. He asked questions, as if he expected an answer to them all. Such questions are frequent in this Epistle to the Romans, and on looking carefully over them we see that they are not only full of eager earnestness, but also of profitable instruction. In the four questions before us the apostle seeks to press home upon Christians the absolute necessity of mission work. In the previous chapter he is sorrowing for the unbelief of the Jews, and he begins this chapter by saying that his heart’s desire and prayer to God for Israel is that they might be saved. Then, as he goes on, he is led to think of the salvation, not only of the Jews, but also of the whole world. He says, “There is no difference between the Jew and the Gentile: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him. For whosoever shall call upon the Name of the Lord shall be saved.” And then, as he thinks of the heathen world lying in darkness, he asks these four questions.

I. “HOW SHALL THEY CALL ON HIM IN WHOM THEY HAVE NOT BELIEVED?” In the ordinary dealings of daily life a certain amount of faith in another person is necessary before we can make any request of him. Unless we believe that he hears us, unless we believe that he is both able and willing to give us what we want, we are not likely to ask anything of him. So in spiritual matters, faith in Godthe belief that he is, that he hears us, and that he is able and willing to help usis necessary to successful prayer. It is necessary to salvation. But the heathen cannot call upon this gracious God of ours. As a matter of fact, they do not. No doubt, even amid heathen darkness, there are some earnest seekers after God. Certainly, if they call upon him, they shall be saved. But the vast majority of the heathen are without the knowledge of the true God. They are bowing down to pieces of silver and gold, of wood and stone, which cannot hear, or help, or save. Their very worship is a degradation in itself. Their religious rites are for the most part horrid cruelties, or foul and unspeakable lusts. And as for Buddhism, to quote only one authority, Sir Richard Temple, lately Governor of Bombay, tells us that however excellent and attractive the poetic accounts of it may be, as in the well-known poem, ‘The Light of Asia,’ the actual Buddhism of India is as degrading as can well be imagined. What they need to know is that there is a God who will hear them when they call upon him. They need to know that God is of purer eyes than to behold evil, that the abominations of their land may be put away. They need to know of the Lamb of God who beareth away the sin of the world, that they may turn from their useless ceremonies and cruel penances. They need to know of a Saviour who gives to all who call on him salvation, holiness, everlasting life. But “how shall they call on him in whom they have not believed?“

II. “HOW SHALL THEY BELIEVE IN HIM OF WHOM THEY HAVE NOT HEARD?” Even Christians need to have the importance of hearing about God more impressed upon them. Some professing Christians seem to imagine that the heart instinctively turns to God, and that in some mysterious way the heathen who have never heard of God will come to him. This mistake is fallen into because in Christian lands we have been so accustomed to hear about God from our childhood that we can hardly imagine it possible not to know about him. But the simple refutation of this idea is the actual state of heathen nations. St. Paul, in this very Epistle (Rom 1:21, Rom 1:25, Rom 1:28), assures us that though the heathen had at one time a knowledge of God from his works of nature, yet they glorified him not as God, but changed the truth of God into a lie, and therefore lost the knowledge of God. This is confirmed by the testimony of travellers in heathen lands. Missionaries often find it very difficult to convey to heathen minds an idea of what God is, so degraded have been their notions. It is a long time before a heathen can grasp the ideas of God’s holiness and truth and purity, so accustomed is he to think of gods whose qualities are the very opposite of these. Even in our Christian land, unhappily, there are places in our large cities so neglected and degraded that children have grown up without hearing about God. And in such cases it has been found very difficult to convey at first an idea of God’s beinghis greatness, his holiness, his mercy, and his love. “How shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard?“ Hence, when the heathen learn of the love of God and the salvation which is in Christ Jesus, they often ask the question, “Why did you not send and tell us sooner?” No wonder that with sorrowful hearts they ask the question, as they think of loved ones who have passed away without hearing the glad tidings. How sad is the condition of millions of the heathen without the knowledge of the crucified Saviour!

III. HOW SHALL THEY HEAR WITHOUT A PREACHER?” Yes, the preaching of the gospel is still the agency that is to regenerate the world. It was the preaching of the gospel that was the means of converting thousands upon the Day of Pentecost. It was the preaching of the gospel which overthrew the idols of ancient Rome. It was the preaching of the gospel which brought about the Protestant Reformation. “The Word,” said Martin Luther over and over again, “it was the Word that did it all.” It was the preaching of the gospel that overthrew the idols of Madagascar, and that has already brought civilization and peace and contentment into many of the islands of the sea. It is good to circulate the Word of God in every language. But it is necessary also to have the living preachers. “Go ye therefore into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.” It needs the living preacher to be a living witness to the truth and power of the gospelthe full heart overflowing with love to Christ and love to souls; the ripe experience; the fulness of the Spirit. The Ethiopian treasurer had the Word of God in his hand as he returned in his chariot from Jerusalem. But he was not savingly converted until Philip began at the Scriptures which he was reading, and “preached unto him Jesus” (Act 8:36). But the number of missionaries is still very small in comparison with the millions of heathen who have not yet heard the gospel message. “How shall they hear without a preacher?”

IV. “HOW SHALL THEY PREACH, EXCEPT THEY BE SENT?” This is the intensely practical question. If we realize the darkness and misery of heathen lands, if we are really thankful for the unspeakable blessings which the gospel has brought to us, what are we doing to send the message of salvation to those who sit in darkness?

1. We can help to send out missionaries by our prayers. “The harvest truly is plenteous, but the labourers are few; pray ye therefore the Lord of the harvest, that he will send forth labourers into his harvest.”

2. We can help to send out missionaries by our gifts. We need to understand, not merely the duty of giving, but the privilege of giving. Surely it is a glorious privilege to be a labourer together with God. Upon the Christian Church is laid the responsibility of preaching the gospel to all nations. And there is this blessed encouragement:

3. If the last of these parts of mission work, of which the apostle speaks, is fulfilled, the rest are all sure to follow. If missionaries are sent, then there will be the preaching, the hearing, and, in God’s own good time, the believing and the salvation of souls. His Word shall not return unto him void. Thus by our sending we may be the means of saving.C.H.I.

Rom 10:15

The beauty of the gospel.

The words, “How beautiful are the feet!” are plainly a figurative expression. This expression signifies the delight with which the messenger of peace is hailed, or, in other words, how welcome is the message which he brings. In Isaiah (Isa 52:7) it reads, “How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of him that bringeth good tidings, that publisheth peace, as if the reference was to the inhabitants of some beleaguered city looking out for the messengers of peace, and as they behold them appearing, fleet of foot, upon the mountain-top, they exclaim, “How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of him that bringeth good tidings, that publisheth peace!” Such a description the apostle here applies to the messengers of the gospel

I. THE GOSPEL IS BEAUTIFUL IN THE TRUTHS IT TEACHES. The truths of the gospel are here called “glad tidings of good things.” This, in fact, is the very meaning of the word “gospel”glad tidings or good news.

1. Think what the gospel teaches us about the one true God. What a contrast to the helpless idols of heathenism! How beautiful to think that God is a Spirit who is everywhere present, who knows all our circumstances, and to whom we can always draw near in the assurance that he hears us, and is able and willing to help us! What a contrast to the unknown god of even the best forms of heathenism, to the unconscious and unsympathetic Brahm, the god of Hinduism! I heard a missionary to the Red Indians, speaking in Dr. Storrs’ church in Brooklyn, mention how the chief of an old Indian tribe, seven thousand in number, had come seven times in fifteen months a distance of a hundred and fifty miles to a mission station, to ask that a missionary might be sent to tell them of “the white man’s God.” How beautiful to them that sit in darkness is the glad tidings of the true God, the loving and merciful Father in heaven!

2. Think what the gospel teaches us about the human soul. The gospel does not permit us to regard man as one of the beasts that perish, as he is under so many of the heathen religions. Some of these have no idea of the existence of a soul at all; but in the best of them the soul is either annihilated at death, or transferred to some other creature, or absorbed into the universal being as a drop into the ocean. The gospel, on the other hand, teaches that man was made in the image of God; that he has an immortal destiny; and that, when he had destroyed his own present happiness and future prospects by his own sin, so great value did God place upon him, so great love did his heavenly Father cherish for him, that he sent his own beloved Son to live and die for man’s salvation. The gospel which proclaims the greatness, the majesty, the holiness, the glory of God, proclaims also the dignity and the immortality of man

II. THE GOSPEL IS BEAUTIFUL IN THE INFLUENCE IT EXERCISES. This we might expect from the beauty and grandeur of the truths it teaches. There is nothing very elevating about the worship of an idol of wood or stone. There is nothing very inspiring. in the thought that life must end at the grave, or that I shall be absorbed into the universe. It may be very poetic to sing, as Shelley did of his departed friend Keats

“He is made one with Nature. There is heard

His voice in all her music, from the moan

Of thunder to the song of night’s sweet bird.

He is a presence to be felt and known
In darkness and in light in herb and stone;

Spreading itself where’er that Power may move

Which has withdrawn his being to its own.”

But such a thought would bring little comfort to the bereaved parent or sorrowing widow; and how very slight would be its influence upon character and life, compared with the thought that I am a responsible being, that I must appear before the judgment-seat of Christ, and that my life as an immortal being hereafter will be determined largely by my life as an individual now! As a matter of fact, the gospel of Jesus Christ has exercised an elevating, purifying, beautifying influence wherever its power has been felt. Take, for instance, the treatment of woman. Mohammedanism and heathenism have both kept woman in humiliation and degradation. By keeping her in seclusion, they have at once injured her own moral and spiritual being, and deprived the community of the healthful influence which good women can exercise. Christianity has raised woman to respect and honour; it has promoted her own personal happiness; and it has enabled her to exercise a mighty power for good in the family, and in society at large. Mohammedanism and heathenism are the props of slavery. It was Christian missions that first aroused the Christian conscience on this subject. Sir William Hunter, one of the most distinguished scholars and statesmen of our day, speaking at the great Missionary Conference in London, June, 1888, said, “I recognize in missionary work a great expiation for the wrong which the white man has done to the dark man in the past; and I recognize also a pledge of national fight-doing in future. During the past century missionaries have marched in the van of all our noblest national movements. When the time came for the great wrong of slavery to be redressed, it was the missionary voice which first stirred up the nation against the slave trade. That voice is now awakening the national conscience against the terrible evil which is being done by our liquor traffic among the darker and less civilized races.” How long shall the Christian public of mighty England stand meekly by, while slavery’s chain is still clanking, and slavery’s lash still falls? How beautiful is that gospel which has lifted woman out of her degradation; which has emancipated already so many millions of slaves; which has abolished cannibalism in so many islands of the sea; which has put an end to the suttee and other cruel ceremonies in India; and which is drawing the nations of the earth together in a universal brotherhood of good will and peace!

III. IT IS A BEAUTIFUL THING TO BE A BEARER OF THIS MESSAGE. “How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace!” What share are we taking in this glorious work? “Consecrated capital,” says Dr. A. T. Pierson, “is not only potent; it is well-nigh omnipotent. To have and to use money well is to multiply personal power a thousandfold, nay, to multiply one’s self a thousandfold.. The giver is potentially wherever his gift is. Sarah Hosmer’s frugal savings educated six young men to preach the gospel in Oriental lands, and where they were, she had her representatives and preached through them. A man recently died in New York whose noble benefactions had spread so far, that in not less than two hundred and fifty different places he was represented by a mission Sunday school, a church, an asylum, a hospital, a college or seminary, or some other form of beneficence: his money made him virtually omnipresent as a benefactor.” Oh that individual Christians would awake to their opportunities! Oh! that they would realize the moral grandeur and glory of being a bearer of the gospel message, and a helper in the gospel cause!C.H.I.

Rom 10:16-21

The lesson of neglected opportunities.

I. IT IS GOD‘S PART TO PROVIDE THE OPPORTUNITIES. “Faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the Word of God” (Rom 10:17). The apostle recognizes that men cannot be condemned for unbelief, if they have not had the opportunity-of hearing the gospel, No person will be condemned in the day of judgment who has not had the opportunity of salvation. And lest any one, applying this rule to the case of Israel, should suggest that they had not such an opportunity, he asks the question, “But I say, Have they not heard?” Can the plea of ignorance be put in on their behalf? Nay. “Their sound” (that is, the voice of God’s messengers, referred to in Rom 10:15) “went into all the earth, and their words unto the ends of the world.” God has done his part for the enlightenment and salvation of men. He has revealed himself in his works of nature. He has revealed himself in his Word. He has revealed himself in his Son. Jesus is the Emmanuel, “God with us.”

II. IT IS MAN‘S PART TO AVAIL HIMSELF OF THEM. The mere possession of gospel privileges is no guarantee of salvation, “But they have not all obeyed the gospel (Rom 10:16). Israel had the Law, with its types and ceremonies, pointing to Christ; their prophets, who spoke of him. Yet, with all their privileges, they rejected Christ. “He came unto his own, and his own received him not.” It will not profit us that we have been brought up in a Christian home, in a Christian Church, or that we have had the Bible in our hands, unless we ourselves “obey the gospel,” accept its invitations, respect its precepts, and submit ourselves to Jesus as our Saviour and our King. Yet there are many who are resting entirely upon their privileges, without exercising that living personal faith in Jesus Christ for which these privileges afford the opportunity and the help.

III. OPPORTUNITIES NEGLECTED WILL BE TAKEN AWAY. Israel had been from the beginning forewarned of this. So long ago as the time of Moses it had been said to them, “I will provoke you to jealousy by them that are no people, and by a foolish nation I will anger you” (Rom 10:19). Then Isaiah repeated a similar warning,” I was found of them that sought me not; I was made manifest unto them that asked not after me” (verse 20). The same lesson in the history of Israel is repeated by Christ more than once in his parables. In the parable of the wicked husbandmen, the lord of the vineyard is represented as letting out his vineyard “unto other husbandmen, who shall render him the fruits in their seasons” (Mat 21:41). The same lesson is taught in the parable of the wedding-feast, where the invitation, rejected by the regularly invited guests, is sent out to the highways and hedges. We have the same truth in the parable of the talents. “Unto every one that hath shall be given but from him that hath not shall be taken away even that which he hath” (Mat 25:29). The history of the Jews is a solemn warning against the neglect of opportunities. It is a solemn warning to all those who, though brought up in Christian homes and in a Christian land, make light of the blessings of the gospel, resist its invitations, and set at naught its counsels.C.H.I.

HOMILIES BY T.F. LOCKYER

Rom 10:1-11

The freeness of salvation.

The apostle’s heart yearns for his people. For he recognizes their sincerity in much of their grievous mistaking of the ways of God. They had zeal for God, though the zeal was unreasonable and irreligious. Unreasonable; for how can man make himself just before God, guilty and sinful as he is? and why should the Jew think that, if this were possible, only one small portion of the race should be suffered to work out its righteousness? Irreligious; for instead of the humility as regards one’s self, and the charity as regards others, which are two essentials of the life in God, there was a proud self-assertiveness, and a narrow bigotry. They must learn that God’s favour is by grace (Rom 10:5-11), and for all (Rom 10:12-21). We have here-the freeness of salvation.

I. THE ERROR OF THE JEWS.

1. Ignorance. “Of God’s righteousness.” That is, of the fact that the justification of a sinner can only come of God’s free grace. Surely their Law might have taught them this: negatively, for it should have made them realize their own utter imperfectness and impotence; positively, for had they not read (Gen 15:6) that Abraham was counted righteous through faith in God? and (Hab 2:4) that all just ones shall live by faith?

2. Self-sufficiency. “Seeking to establish their own.” That is (see Godet), as a monument, raised, not to God’s glory, but to show forth their own achievements. Here was the pride of man, which must be brought down before any way can be made towards God (Mat 5:3).

3. Disobedience. “Did not subject themselves.” For the very faith whereby we receive God’s free forgiveness is an act of submission, an abnegating of our false pride, a yielding to a way which is higher and better than our own (see Rom 1:5; Rom 6:17).

4. Frustration of the very purport of their own Law. “For Christ is the End of the Law.” All was designed to lead to him; the holy commands were to make them know their guilt and weakness, and crave for pardon and grace; the sacrifices and ceremonies were at once to stamp the fact of sin more deeply into their consciousness, and to give them a glimmering hope of propitiation and purifying. To Christ all these things directly and indirectly tended; but the veil was on their eyes, that they “should not look steadfastly on the end of that which was passing away” (2Co 3:13).

II. THE TRUTH OF GOD.

1. “The righteousness which is of the Law“ was, that it should be done by man’s efforts, conjoined with the grace of God. For, according to God’s intent, grace was with the giving of the Law: pardon, for realized imperfection; help, for realized frailty; the coming of Christ, as the end of all its precepts and ceremonial. But if man would ignore this element of grace, there was nothing for him but a perfect fulfilling of an impossible righteousness! Doing it, he should live by it. They tried; the world has tried: the end thereof is death!

2. “The righteousness which is of faith“ hath taught us better things.

(1) Not the severe effort of the soul, by ecstatic contemplation, to attain to communion with Heaven: the Buddhist, the Christian mystic. For Heaven has come down to earth; we have but to confess the Sonship of Jesus, and live a life in him who has hallowed all life. (Consider the Incarnation, and the gift of the Spirit, as illustrating “the Word is nigh thee.”) So, “the trivial round,” etc.

(2) Not the painful anguish of the soul, as by a crucifixion, to make atonement for its guilt: the devotee, the ascetic. For the atonement is made, and, to testify its completeness, he has risen from the dead. We have but to believe this in our heart, and then, “there is now no condemnation.”

Yes, the faith which works by love: accepting with all our heart the free forgiveness which is through Christ’s death, and acknowledging him with our whole life as our true Lord and King. So no shame, but perfect liberty and perfect love.T.F.L.

Rom 10:12-21

The universality of the gospel.

The favour of God is free. But the apostle has already indicated another antagonism to the ignorant zeal of his people: the favour of God, being free, is free for all (Rom 10:4, Rom 10:11). As Godet says, “Paul has justified the matter of his preaching, salvation by grace; he now justifies its extension” He here sets forth the universality of the gospel as evident from its very freeness, as anticipated by the Law, as consistent with the exclusion of Israel from its blessedness.

I. THE UNIVERSALITY OF THE GOSPEL IS EVIDENT FROM ITS VERY FREENESS. If the Law had been able of itself to justify, it might have seemed as though the Gentiles were without hope. But when it is perceived that the Law only leads to Christ, and that in Christ a free forgiveness is granted to sinful man, at once the conclusion is forced upon usthen to every sinful man. And the conclusion is just; even as Joel had foreseen, “Whosoever shall call upon the Name of the Lord shall be saved.” There needs but that faith which is involved in true repentance, a willingness to be saved by grace alone, and the salvation is ours. Let, then, the true cry for help go up from any human heart, and it is answered. But it follows that if, according to God’s grace, salvation is such that it is, in itself, possible to every man, he must design that it shall be brought within the reach of every man. Hence the succession of questions which Paul asks, arguing that God’s design to save sinful man, when calling upon him in truth, implies a design that it should be possible for man to believe in him as God the Saviour, which again implies the hearing him proclaimed, which again implies a preacher of the glad tidings, which again implies the sending of the preachers. Yes, if such is the salvation for sinful man, God must have instituted a universal apostolate for the nations. This indeed was so (Mat 28:19; Act 1:8). But Paul argues it, that he may justify his own mission, partly; and partly also, we may suppose, to remind them that they, the Jews, should have been the nation of apostles, that this was indeed the very intent of their election, had they not made the counsel of God of none effect. O glorious calling! O grievous forfeiture of high blessing!

II. THIS UNIVERSALITY OF THE GOSPEL WAS ANTICIPATED BY THE LAW. What had Moses said to them? “I will provoke you to jealousy,” etc. They had provoked God by following after other gods; God would provoke his people by seeking other peoples (see Deu 32:21). Isaiah stated boldly what in the earlier words was more obscurely hinted at, “I was found of them,” etc. (see Isa 66:1-24.). Here also a repetition of Rom 9:30-33. These, however, are but samples; there was enough in their Law, had not the veil been on their eyes, to show that they were but trustees for the world, and that one of their peculiar glories was that the Gentiles should come in the fulness of time to do homage to their God (see Isa 60:1-22). Israel “did know,” or at least might have known.

III. THIS UNIVERSALITY OF THE GOSPEL WAS NOT INCONSISTENT WITH THE EXCLUSION OF ISRAEL FROM ITS BLESSEDNESS. The terms were, for them as for all, “Whosoever shall call,” etc. And, it being impossible to call on One whom they had not heard, the hearing was certainly not withheld from them. It was true even of gospel preaching, as of the voices of the heavens (Psa 19:1-14.), that the sound had gone into all the earth. For everywhere the gospel had been preached “to the Jew first.” Yes, God had not cut them off from the blessing, but they had cut themselves off. It was true, as Isaiah had said, “All the day long,” etc. So the parables of Jesus (Mat 21:1-46., 22.). They might have been the chosen people for the glorious work of the world’s salvation; but the election was broken by their unbelief.

So, then, though God might surely choose or lay aside instruments as he would, in the carrying on of his work, he did not act without reason. It was because the Jews, being exalted to heaven, cast themselves down to hell, that they might not be the heralds of his grace. They would not receive it; therefore they could not show it forth.T.F.L.

HOMILIES BY S.R. ALDRIDGE

Rom 10:1

Anxiety for the salvation of our fellows.

It is the lot of reformers to be twitted as renegades, and to be exposed to the taunt of indifference to the welfare of their old companions. So the apostle was charged with noxiously subverting ancient customs, and he found it necessary to justify himself even to Jewish Christians against the reproach of wanton molestation of the hopes of Israel. It is difficult for prejudice in its blind conservatism to see that the change proposed is intended for the furtherance, not the injury, of what is held most dearthe emancipation of the spirit by the transformation of the body. The apostle lays bare his heart to attest his intense yearning for the spiritual good of his traducers.

I. WHY DID THE APOSTLE LONG SO ARDENTLY FOR THEIR SALVATION? He could not forget that the Saviour died to draw all men unto himself. A sinner unsaved lessens the reward of the “travail of his soul” and detracts from the possible glory of the atonement. But further, these men were his fellow-countrymen. Surely the condition of our “kinsmen according to the flesh” must be uppermost in our thoughts, and each man’s efforts naturally commence at his own house, his own neighbourhood, his own nation. Then, they were the descendants of men signally honoured in the past. Their lineage was so distinguished, that Paul could not calmly witness the exclusion from the kingdom of God of these sons of patriarchs and prophets. They were in a special sense the “brethren” for whom Christ died. What more affecting today than to witness religious apathy in the families of the godly, to see the place of the fathers unoccupied by the children in the house of faith? And the apostle had visions of the splendid results that would ensue if the veil were removed from their hearts, and they should recognize in the Nazarene their wished-for Messiah. What should the receiving of them into the Church be but “life from the dead”? The same reason impels us to seek the conversion of many around, whose talents and earnestness might be of such signal service in our ranks. As Saul the persecutor became Paul the missionary, so we may look upon a bigoted opponent as a potential future enthusiast in the cause of Christ.

II. HOW DID THE APOSTLE‘S CONCERN EXPRESS ITSELF? We answerIn his preaching. He ever visited first the Jews and the synagogue in his tours. It was God’s design that the gospel should be first preached to his ancient people, that by rejecting or receiving the message they might either fill up the measure of their iniquity and crucify the Saviour afresh, or free themselves from the guilt of their nation and welcome the breaking down of the partition wall between Jew and Gentile. And the writings of the apostle evince his unabated regard and anxiety for the Jews. He declared that he could wish himself “anathema” from Christ, if that self-sacrifice could procure their redemption. We are reminded of the supreme act of self-abnegation by Moses on the mount, when rejecting Jehovah’s offer to create from him a new people in the stead of that corrupt and obstinate generation. The apostle’s language breathes the spirit of the cross of Christ it is an emanation to the disciple from the Master’s self-immolation for the good of men. The prayers of the apostle showed the genuineness of his affectionate solicitude. Prayer is a thermometer that gauges the warmth of our desire to save men from misery and ruin. Does not the teacher bring the members of the class before God in earnest petitions, and the parent his children? We care little for those who are never mentioned in our supplications. Let us remember them where it most avails.

III. WHAT CONTRIBUTED TO MAKE THIS DEEP CONCERN SO NOTEWORTHY? It was prayer for men who hated and maltreated him. With rancorous unceasing enmity did the Jews pursue the apostle. They were the chief cause of his imprisonments and tortures, they did their utmost to mar his success and embitter his labours, and at last secured his death. Thinking of their attempts to overthrow the faith of Christian converts, the apostle could use strong language for their discomfiture; but on his knees, in the solemn presence of the God and Father of all, larger and more generous thoughts possessed his soul, and he forgot all his personal annoyances in the o’ermaster-ing impulse to seek their salvation. If wronged by any, take the matter to the throne of grace, and you shall begin to pity and then pray for him that did the wrong. It was prayer for those who had proved obstinate, and whose salvation seemed little likely. No acquaintance with the decrees of God, nor the fact of God’s forethought and foreordination, could hinder the apostle’s entreaties. What a lesson for us not to despair, not to faint! Our mistrust too often paralyzes our intercessions, our human reasonings “limit the Holy One of Israel.” This was a benefit conferred which they had no power to refuse. Prayer is a kind office which we may render to men who would accept nothing else at our hands. This they cannot hinder.S.R.A.

Rom 10:4

The end of the Law.

The desire for righteousness has embodied itself in diverse and some of them grotesque forms. Gather together the Pharisee with his phylacteries and ablutions; the Chinaman burning his bits of paper for ancestral worship; the Hindoo bathing in the sacred river, or prostrating himself under the idol-car; the Roman Catholic telling his beads and performing his penance; and the moral youth, who never omits his daily portion of Scripture, or his morning and evening prayers, and would scorn to tell an untruth; and one would scarce imagine that the same motive actuates all these. Yet they all bear witness to man’s anxiety to be righteous in the sight of the Supreme Being, and those are abnormally Constituted who are never conscious of this yearning. It was not this strong desire for righteousness which the apostle tried to alter in the Jews, but the antiquated imperfect method to which they still clung after the one sure way of justification through faith in Christ had been proclaimed.

I. CHRIST THE TERMINATION OF THE LEGAL ECONOMY. The rending of the veil at the Crucifixion indicated the passing away of the old dispensation, with all its gorgeous rites and external splendour. There arose another order of priesthood, from which the exclusiveness of the former caste was absent. Jesus the High Priest came not of the tribe of Levi. It is no longer necessary to become a Jew in order to reap the privileges of access to God. Christ has released men from the yoke of the Law, with its fasts and feasts, its observance of days and seasons. He has changed our state from pupilage to manhood; from slavery to a “reasonable service.” Wherever a Christian is found, there is a spiritual priest and a living temple; wherever Christians meet, there is a holy convocation. The tabernacle disappeared when the temple was erected, and the earthly temple is no longer needed when the glorious building rises, reared without hands. The Jews who would not receive this teaching had to be convinced, by the capture of Jerusalem and the burning of their “beautiful house,” that “the old order changed, giving place to new.” The forerunner of Christ was the last of the Old Testament prophets.

II. CHRIST THE DESIGN AND SCOPE OF THE LEVITICAL DISPENSATION. We cannot understand the Law unless we regard it as pointing unmistakably to the coming Messiah, preparing his way; a preliminary education of mankind and of one nation in particular; like a stock on which a new rose is to be grafted. The sacrifices, the moral and ceremonial precepts, were predictive, were prophecy acted in symbol and type. The chrysalis displays tokens of the winged perfect insect. “The Law hath been our tutor to bring us unto Christ.” So that when men inquire, “To what purpose was all this cost of legislation and ritual?” the reply is that it paved the way for something better; it was the “shadow of good things to come.”

III. CHRIST THE REALIZATION OF THE MOSAIC IDEAL. The holiness which the Law ever kept in view, endeavouring to raise men to its standard of righteousness, has been exemplified in Jesus Christ. Wherein the Law was weak, Christ was strong. His condemnation of sin was thorough and effective, and the perfection of his sacrifice renders any subsequent atonement needless. To enter into the spirit of his offering is to “purge the conscience from dead works” and to give rest and peace to the troubledthe region in which the Law was inoperative. The message of Divine love sounding from the cross has a constraining influence over the affections and life of the Christian, which the Law aimed at and failed to achieve. New Testament saints have frequently attained to an enlightenment of mind and conformity to the Divine will which was sighed after in vain by patriarch, psalmist, and prophet. Christ bring his followers into communion with God, and by faith in him are they sanctified. Love is proved a stronger principle than terror, knowledge than ignorance, example than precept. In abrogating, Christ fulfils the Law.

CONCLUSION. See, then, what faith does. It looks at Christ instead of a Law of ordinances. It is no longer tied by enactments and fearful of non-compliance, for it beholds the face of Jesus, “the Lamb as it had been slain.” We may trust Christ as our Redeemer and Guide, without understanding or acknowledging all these points of superiority over the former covenant; as a woman knows she will be benefited by a certain medicine, though she could not name its ingredients, nor state the method of its working; or as a man may journey on the railway who comprehends little of the application of steam to locomotives, etc. And faith is content to submit to God’s righteousness, instead of seeking to establish its own. It relies not upon personal desert, but upon the provisions of mercy furnished in Christ. It is humble, and tries not to patch together a human garment to hide deformities and deficiencies. Accepting the gracious offer of God, faith discovers new elements of strength and joy in the very position assumed.S.R.A.

Rom 10:8-10

The word of faith.

Men are quick to excuse their non-acceptance of Christianity. In order to obviate the pretence of the gospel being a system complicated to examine and conform to, the apostle quotes from Deuteronomy (using the passage in a justifiable, though altered signification) to exhibit the simplicity and brevity of the gospel requirements. Nothing impracticable is demanded of would-be converts. The “word of faith” is close at hand and intelligible, ready to be uttered and trusted.

I. THE TWO ESSENTIALS TO ENJOYMENT OF THE BENEFITS OF THE GOSPEL. Belief and confession.

1. Belief naturally precedes confession, if the latter is not hypocrisy. Speech on religious questions that is not the utterance of a deep-seated conviction is like Ahimaaz running without tidings to deliver. An untimely avowal should be deprecated; the confession should stream forth from the fountain of belief; otherwise the want of correspondence between the outward declaration and the inward assurance will work deadly mischief. Let not the child’s Catechism be heavily laden. To sensitive minds the gap will seem to widen with growing intelligence, and they will deem the alienation from the early standard greater than it is, leading perhaps to a position of ultimate antagonism.

2. The essentials are few in number. Unlike the minute details of the Mosaic ritual, the law of Christ is short and easily comprehended. This apostolic declaration judges our own preaching and creed, showing that we are in danger of making the gate narrower and the road longer to the kingdom than Christ ordained them. The tendency of hoary Christianity is to multiply the requisite articles of doctrine and observance, making the initiation burdensome, the novitiate cumbrous.

3. On the other hand, less than the apostle insists on cannot prove a bond of Christian fellowship. Occasional communion there may be between those who differ respecting the fact of Christ’s resurrection, each recognizing the other’s sincerity and desire to press forward to the light; but experience attests the impossibility of enduring religious co-operation on a slighter basis than that laid down in the text. Fundamental divergence of opinion curbs free utterance, checks the fervour of prayer, makes all parties uncomfortable in their association.

II. THE PRODUCT OF FAITH. “Righteousness.” Distinguish between the assent of the understanding and the trust of the heart. “Believing with” or “in the heart” not only accepts the resurrection of Christ as an historical fact, but sees in this a spiritual truth, that Christ is the Mediator, the Redeemer, able and willing to work an ethical resurrection in all who commit themselves to his care and tuition. Such a faith rejoices in the great verity; the will gladly submits to Jesus Christ as God’s approved Agent of reconciliation. And thus faith imparts righteousness, connecting the sinner with the Saviour, the weak with the Strong One, the ignorant with the All-wise.

III. THE RESULT OF CONFESSION. “Salvation” As human nature is constituted, the expression of a sentiment in word or deed lends it distinctness and potency. What the orator does for the multitude, when he translates into growing language their vague aspirations and inarticulate feelings, clothing, fixing, clarifying, and intensifying them, is what an open avowal of his religious faith often effects for the individual. It discloses what was wrapped up in the inner being, and the embodiment gives place and form to the idea. Sentiment unexpressed is liable to fade away like vapour uncondensed. Confession is a real act; it makes the man commit himself definitely to a certain course of behaviour, and assists him to realize his ideal. Most are deficient in moral courage, and all that strengthens determination makes for salvation, it is easier for an avowed than for a secret disciple of Christ to refuse to yield to the solicitations of the worldly, to join them in unprofitable amusements and practices. Then, too, confession redounds to the glory of God, who honours them that honour him. In heaven it will be no signal tribute to own him, for all there sing his praise. On earth is a sphere of distinction possible by standing up for the true, the right, the good. And so Christ promises to confess those who have confessed him. A manly declaration may confirm the faith of wavering brethren, and thus save ourselves and others. Timidity which seals the lips is a sower retaining the seed in his bag, and allowing the waiting soil to go unblessed with golden crops.S.R.A.

Rom 10:12

The nature and beneficence of God.

Many surface-distinctions between the Jew and Greek may be drawn by men, but none are recognized by God in such wise as to incapacitate some members of the race for seeking salvation at his hands. The text furnishes the basis for such a statement of universal salvability, in its clear enunciation of the nature of God. By implication it negatives many theories when it asserts that “the same Lord is Lord of all,” and the following clause contains measureless comfort for every anxious praying heart. He is “rich unto all that call upon him.”

I. SOME ERRORS CORRECTED.

1. Polytheism. We might infer the truth of monotheism from the unity of structure visible in the worldits inhabitants, animals, and plants; from the analogy observable in different kingdoms of nature; and from the existence of the same laws operating to the remotest star. And the Mosaic Law distinctly enforced the truth, “The Lord our God is one Lord.” Nor is the doctrine of the Trinity in unity contradictory. There is the historical fact that wherever Christianity has prevailed, idolatry has been doomed. The preaching of the fishermen effected what the most potent arguments of Greek philosophy and the keenest shafts of ridicule failed to accomplish.

2. Atheism. This is the other extreme; instead of many gods, no God. To attribute to blind force and fortuitous collocation of atoms the order and beauty of design evident in nature and history, is to posit an inefficient cause for the effects noted. So clearly is this seen, that the favourite attitude of many is to avoid definite assertions, and content themselves with saying, “We cannot be sure; we cannot attain to sufficient knowledge of the Unknowable to prompt our worship.” This is practical atheism, imitated by multitudes who do not deny the authority of the Scriptures, or reject religion on speculative grounds, yet live “without God in the world.” Remember that the non-recognition of the Deity does not absolve from religious responsibility. If there be a “Lord of all,” he has claims upon your service which will not vanish because of your pleasant dreams and guilty unconcern.

3. Pantheism. He is Lord “of,” i.e. “over“ alla living, personal God, above as well as in nature. He is not to be identified with the universe, nor with his operations. He is different from his acts, as we are not our limbs, our deeds, but are conscious of a living will behind these manifestations. The instinct of prayer would be checked at once by the thought of “calling upon” an abstraction of humanity or unintelligent matter.

4. Socinianism, or the denial of the Deity of Christ. Few stronger passages could be adduced than those in the context to assure us of the apostle’s conviction of the dignity of the Saviour. In the ninth verse we are taught to “confess Jesus as Lord,” and following the emphatic language of the text comes the thirteenth verse, where the prophecy of Joel and the title Jehovah are applied to Christ, the express subject of this chapter. All doubt as to the reference is removed by the question, “How shall they call on him in whom they have not believed?” since the object of our faith is ever represented as Christ, the manifested God. The only refuge is to deny the competency and inspiration of the apostle, and then we do not get rid of the other Scripture texts which speak of him as the Creator “by whom all things were made,” and the Judge “to whom all authority is committed.” No declaration of the relationship of the Son to the Father, more available for explanation of the mystery, can we have than “he is the Image of the invisible God.”

5. Sectarianism, or Judaism as a system of rites, the embodiment of the narrow bigoted spirit which will admit only certain classes within its pale. Most scornful epithets did the Jews employ with respect to the unprivileged state of the rest of mankind; they were “the drops of the bucket, the offscouring of all things.” But if the whole world may claim the same Lord, one family dares not arrogate to itself all the Divine love and blessing. What is the miserable superiority of the giant to the dwarf in the view of him who gazes from the mountain-top? The regard of God is to quality, not quantity; he wants the pure gold of repentance and obedience, no matter with what ingredients or amid what surroundings it may be found.. Jesus Christ taught us to abolish caste by the petition, “Our Father.” In the present condition of religious knowledge and feeling, sects may be convenient, almost necessary, but we need not unchristianize those without our borders, nor confine our view of salvation to those who utter the same party shibboleth.

II. A TRUTH OF COMFORTABLE IMPORTTHE BENEFICENCE OF GOD.

1. His wealth permits him to do good to all. The slowly passing centuries have not enabled men to find out the extent of the Divine riches. The catalogue is exhaustless that is being compiled of the adaptations, combinations, resources, with which the Creator has furnished man’s home. Then, whilst the microscope reveals innumerable infinitesimal wonders, the telescope discovers countless worlds. And the apostle delighted in the use of the word “riches” to describe the mercies of God in redemption. He felt he had to publish a purpose of God rich in wisdom, love, and power, dwarfing all human systems of reform. The Lord of Christianity is so supremely glorious, that it was a relief to turn away from human poverty in thought and means, to contemplate “the treasures of wisdom and knowledge hidden in Christ.”

2. He is rich in all that his creatures need. Circumlocution offices abound on earth. The king cannot heal the leper, nor the doctor give legal information to the suitor, nor the lawyer be expected to head the subscription list. But none can seek Christ in vain for spiritual wants. He is rich in mercy to the penitent sinner, and to the believer forgetful of his early vows he is rich in the assurance of forgiveness and succour. The disappointed may find him an unfailing Hope, the bereaved a “God of all consolation;” to the tempted he is the “Way of escape,” and to the heated with the struggle of life, “the Shadow of a great rock.”

3. A benevolent Lord. “Rich unto all.” Many a wealthy man is not “rich unto” anybody elsenot even unto himself, poor niggardly soul. God sits not as a miser gloating over his goods, or as a king ensconced in the palace, where no cry of the poor or of the anguished can reach him. He delights to give; the glory of God is revealed in blessing his creatures. Love created, sustains, enriches, the universe. We need not fear coming too often or asking too largely. We shall not weary his generosity, or appeal too late to his exchequer because a more fortunate applicant anticipated our request. Invited to his banquet, he will not thank you for partaking scantily of the rich fare, lest you should trespass on his bounty.

4. The one restriction. Only one condition is to be fulfilledthat we “call upon him.” This is but reasonable. We receive daily benefits unasked, but in the concerns of the soul we are treated as intelligent beings, as children whose voice the Father loves to hear. The prayer of mingled contrition and trust purifies and exalts the suppliants, honours and gratifies the Donor of good. The character of the petition manifests the spiritual state of the petitioner. Set the desires not so much upon the promises of physical relief as of spiritual blessing, not so much the removal of the trial as strength to bear it, not so much the extraction of the thorn as grace to submit patiently and to see wise purposes subserved by the infliction. What simpler counsel could be given to the heavy-laden sinner than this, “call upon him”? Like Peter amid the waves, cry out, “Lord, save me!” and Divine help shall respond, and you “shall be saved.” And when the hour of death draws nigh, though we may not be surrounded by taunting foes, and no cruel blows may hasten our departure, yet, like the dying martyr, we may pass “calling upon the Lord, and saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.”S.R.A.

HOMILIES BY R.M. EDGAR

Rom 10:1-11

Confession of a risen Saviour.

In the previous chapter we saw a Christian patriot lamenting that so many of his fellow-countrymen, through rejecting God’s mercy manifested in Christ Jesus, were becoming mere vessels of wrath fitted for destruction. At the same time, he sees in Divine sovereignty, its incidence and its justice, the real clue to the philosophy of history and the progress of the world. In the present chapter he discusses the rejection of Israel and its reasons, and the nature of that acceptance and salvation which the Gentiles received after the Jews had despised them. In the verses now claiming attention we have the apostle leading his readers up to faith in and confession of a risen Saviour.

I. THE MISDIRECTED ZEAL OF THE APOSTLE‘S COUNTRYMEN. (Rom 10:1-3.) The apostle’s desire and “supplication” (so Revised Version) for the Jews was that they might be saved. But, alas! their misdirected zeal was preventing their salvation. For instead of submitting to the righteousness which is of God, instead of making their way to Christ, who is the End to whom the Law when properly understood leads, they were going about with the one object of establishing their own righteousness. This zeal Paul knew himself experimentally. For years he also had aimed at Law-keeping, and in his self-ignorance he thought that “touching the righteousness which is in the Law” he was “blameless” (Php 3:6). But the Law-keeping may be in the letter and not in the spirit. The spirit of the Law is love; yet Paul and the Pharisees tithed mint and anise and cummin, while they lived lives of hate, and hesitated not to persecute Christ-like people even to the death. To keep self-righteousness before the soul as the end of life is simply misdirected zeal. It keeps us away from Christ and all the bliss which his fellowship implies. And so a day came when Paul saw that his roundabout way, going about to establish his own righteousness, was a delusion, a snare, a loss, and not a gain, for it kept him long years from Christ. Let us be clear that we are not under a similar delusion. Let us give up self-righteousness and take God’s better way.

II. A RISEN SAVIOUR IS THE END OF THE LAW AND OBJECT OF FAITH. (Rom 10:4.) Now, the moment we are led to take a spiritual view of God’s Law, to see that it demands perfect motive as well as decent outward morality, we see that we cannot keep it in its length and breadth; and therefore, instead of living by Law-keeping, we are condemned by the Law as its transgressors. Self-righteousness is seen to be self-deception. Condemnation is seen to be our natural state. Then is it that Christ and his perfect righteousness dawn upon our condemned and polluted souls. We see that he has done for us what we cannot do for ourselves, and so the Law serves its purpose when it lays us down at the feet of Christ, to be justified by faith. Instead of trusting our own righteousness, we see in our risen Saviour the true Object of faith and Source of righteousness. We pass out of shame into confidence in his finished work.

III. THIS RISEN SAVIOUR IS EASILY FOUND. (Rom 10:6-9.) The idea of the human heart is that by some prodigious effort salvation must be secured. Abana and Pharpar are further off, as well as likelier rivers, than this brawling Jordan hard by, and so Naaman cries out, “May I not wash in them, and be clean?” Only ask us to do some great thing in order to salvation, and our self-righteousness will be secured, and we shall be satisfied (cf. 2Ki 5:12, 2Ki 5:13). A far-off salvation suits man’s taste the best. Set it in heaven, and he will rack his brains for some ingenious device by which he will fly away and be at rest. Set it beyond the sea, and boats will be built and the voyage undertaken with alacrity (cf. Deu 30:11-13). Make salvation to consist in a bringing of Christ down from above, and men like Titans will try to scale Olympus. Make salvation to consist in a descent to the lower world to bring Christ up from the dead, and many will try a journey like Orpheus after the lost Eurydice, to bring the Saviour from the shadows. But we have got to see that the risen Saviour is not so far away or so hard to find as this. As Charles Kingsley once wrote to a lady, “My object has been and is, and I trust in God ever will be, to make people see that they need not, as St. Paul says, go up into heaven, or go down to the deep, to find Christ; because he, the Word whom we preach, is very near them, in their hearts and on their lips, if they would but believe it; and ready, not to set them afloat on new and untried oceans of schemes and projects, but ready to inspire them to do their duty humbly and simply where he has put themand, believe me, the only way to regenerate the world is to do the duty which lies nearest us, and not to hunt after grand, far-fetched ones for ourselves.” In the Word of the gospel the risen Saviour comes near to every one of us. We do not require any prodigious effort to reach him. We have simply to open the eye of faith, and there he is.

IV. THE RISEN SAVIOUR MUST BE CONFESSED WHEN FOUND. (Rom 10:10, Rom 10:11.) Faith in a risen Saviour who is waiting to be found of us must prove its genuineness by the confession of his Name. It is when we take the Lord’s side deliberately that we have tested the reality of our faith. There is a cowardly tendency to believe, but not confess; to get the benefits of salvation without running a single risk for our Saviour. But such a selfish, easy-going faith is mere delusion. Whoever really believes in Jesus will not be ashamed to confess him. And consequently we are encouraged first to believe that God raised Jesus from the dead, and then to confess him as our risen Saviour before men. There is undoubtedly a disposition to separate salvation from confession of Christ. It is thought to be wise and prudent to accept of the benefits Christ can offer, and at the same time to be silent about them. “Secret discipleship” is thought to be a masterpiece of wisdom. Everything is thus gained, and nothing risked or lost. But is everything gained? Is nothing risked or lost? Is the secret disciple ever likely to become a man of nobility and courage? Does he secure even self-respect? Must he not feel very much as a debtor who is always trying to shirk his obligations and ignore the debt? Or take the matter in the concrete. Was Nicodemus noble as he visited Jesus by night, and kept his discipleship a secret from the Sanhedrin? Was Joseph of Arimathaea noble as he gave his heart to the despised Saviour, but continued afraid to confess him? Neither man became noble until the Crucifixion brought decision, and they vied with each other what respect they could show to the remains of their great Master. Or would Saul of Tarsus have ever become the noble apostle of the Gentiles if he had sneaked into Damascus after his conversion, and resolved to risk nothing for his new-found Saviour? The manly character which Saul cultivated by confessing Christ was an infinite gain. It thus appears that confession of Christ is the wise test of the reality of our faith in him. May we all stand the test, and not be ashamed of him!R.M.E.

Rom 10:12-21

The natural history of faith.

From an account of the plan of salvation as faith in and confession of a risen Saviour, the apostle, in the verses now before us, proceeds to consider the natural history of the faith which Jew and Gentile are led to place in the one Lord. For it is most important to know how faith is induced. And here we notice

I. THE RISEN LORD IS WITHIN EVERY ONE‘S CALL. (Rom 10:12, Rom 10:13.) There is no difference in his accessibility to both Jew and Gentile. “He is rich unto all that call upon him.” With the sovereigns of this world court-favourites are the rule, and I suppose there is no exception. Only certain individuals get near the king, and are favoured with an audience. But this risen Lord over all can be rich unto every one that cares to call upon him. Let Jew or Greek only cry to him, and the needful help will come. This suggests the following comforting thoughts.

1. The throne on which our Lord now sits is a throne of grace. He is to sit, indeed, one day on a throne of judgment; meanwhile let us rejoice that he sits on a “throne of grace.” It is to help the needy and the lost that he now sits enthroned. We are now under a “reign of grace.” We hear a good deal in the present day of a “reign of law:” what consolation it is to think that, so far as Christ is concerned, we are all under a “reign of grace”!

2. He can hear directly every one that calls upon him. Of course, such a fact implies that our risen Saviour is indeed Divine. By virtue of his Divinity, he can hear everybody, whether Jew or Gentile, who cares to call upon him, and can deal directly with them. The many-voiced cry of lost and tempted souls reaches his ear and is all interpreted. It is easy to state the case of Christ hearing prayer, but it is overwhelming to imagine what such an arrangement demands from the blessed Being upon the throne. Yet it is sober factthe whole cry of the race, the bitter cry of lost and tried souls, enters the sympathizing mind of our Divine Saviour and King.

3. He is rich to all the petitioners. Just as when on earth he allowed no one to go empty away, so from his throne of grace on high there is no real petitioner dismissed without relief. He encourages Jew and Gentile alike to call upon him, and then treats us in a way that becomes a King. He does far more “exceeding abundantly for us above all that we ask or think, according to the power that worketh in us.” If we ask him to save us, he does so with an everlasting salvation. If we ask him to pardon us, he does so with overflowing love. If we ask him to sanctify us, he enables us to die daily unto sin and to live unto righteousness. If we ask him to make us useful, he opens doors of usefulness for us of the most surprising character. In short, “Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him. But he hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit” (1Co 2:9, 1Co 2:10).

II. BUT AN OMNIPRESENT SAVIOUR NEEDS THE BEAUTIFUL FEET OF HIS HERALDS TO BE UPON ALL THE MOUNTAINS IF MEN ARE TO KNOW HIS NEARNESS. (Rom 10:14, Rom 10:15.) We have seen that the risen Saviour is within every one’s call. But he is not palpable to sense. He is unseen. His presence is spiritual. Only by heralds going forth to proclaim the glad tidings of his presence are men led to call upon him. And the heralds address the ears of men. By this particular avenue of hearing does the message come. If men never hear of Jesus, they cannot be expected to realize his presence or to trust him. And so a propaganda is necessary, and the missionary enterprise is just such a propaganda to bring before Jew and Gentile the splendid fact that a risen Saviour is within each man’s call. The natural history of faith is, then, this: “‘Faith’the faith which, overcoming the world, justifies and purifies and saves’cometh by hearing,’ cometh in the way of communication from man to man, as distinguished from any natural reflective enlightenment; while that ‘hearing cometh by the Word of God,’ ariseth out of an express revelation uttered from heaven, in contrast to every system, device, or imagination of unassisted human reason,” This being so, we can understand how the apostle quotes the rapturous words of the prophet about the beautiful feet of the heralds of glad tidings. The institution of the preaching of the gospel is the most beautiful now existing among men.

III. THE GLAD TIDINGS HAVE NOT HAD A UNIVERSAL RECEPTION. (Rom 10:16-18.) In some cases the heralds have had small success. As Esaias cries, “Lord, who hath believed our report?” so has many a minister lamented his scant success. For, amid the multitude of competing things and persons palpable to sense, an unseen Saviour gets ignored by many. The problem was not, in the missionary age of Paul, as to many not hearing of a Saviour at allrather was it that so many heard of him, yet gave no heed. For the apostle in this passage quotes what in the nineteenth psalm is applied to nature, as if the gospel message, at least in his day, had been as widely proclaimed as the limits of the world allowed. And when we consider the population of the world in Paul’s time, and how it was practically within the grasp of the Roman empire, and that information filtered clown to the distant colonies more surely perhaps than, though not so speedily as, news does nowadays; and when we add to this the magnificent missionary spirit which animated Paul and his associates, he had reason to take up the universal terms and apply them to the propagation of the gospel. So that the gospel was more widely proclaimed in the first century in proportion to the population of the globe than it is as yet in the nineteenth. The contrast which now obtains between the revelation of God in nature and the revelation of God in the gospel in their respective relations to mankindthe one being universal, the other partial in its applicationhas been largely, if not entirely, due to the lack of enterprise and missionary spirit on the part of the Church. And yet too much may be made of this contrast, and men may fail to see that the proclamation of a revealed religion is the one way in which God is likely to receive attention from his creatures. The following quotation from Archer Butler upon the point will be welcome. “If God were to interfere at all, they [the deists] maintain, it would be by some universal agency, simple, general, and obvious, as the laws of his visible creation. They smile at the notion of God’s greatest exhibition of his will to man being acted upon the reduced theatre of a petty province, and made dependent on the chances of human testimony. ‘In the moral as in the physical world,’ exclaims the leader of the sentimental school of deism, ‘it is ever on a great scale, and by simple means, that Deity operates.’ But what if we retort that it is those very laws of nature ‘on a great scale’those very ‘simple means’that have caused God to be forgotten? Not justly, we admit; for they ought eminently to have convinced men of his presence and power: but what of that? We are not now speaking of argumentative propriety, but of actual fact; not of man as he ought to be, but of man as he is. And it is an undeniable fact that it is the permanence and uniformity of the natural laws of the creation that have beguiled men into speculative, and, still more, into practical atheism; that it is the very perfection of the laws which has hidden the Legislator. The hand that God has constructed so wondrously can write, ‘There is no God;’ let it be smit with sudden paralysis, and the notion of an intervening Avenger will arise; nay, let us at any time behold some strange unique in any of the departments of experience, and it startles our habitual slumber. That is to say, as long as the work is perfect, we recognize no worker; but the moment it becomes deficient (the very thing which ought logically to produce the doubt), we begin to conceive and admit his reality. The more apparently capricious the works of nature, the more they resemble man’s; and the more they remind us of direct agency analogous to the human. Now, if this be so, could it be expected that, to produce an acknowledgment of his being and attributes, the Deity would continue to employ the same medium of regular and ordinary laws, the same vast and uniform processes in the physical and moral world, which in all ages have tended (such the miserable subjection of man to an unreasoning imagination) to render his agency suspected by some, and practically forgotten by the many? To make himself felt he must disturb his laws; in other words, he must perform or permit ‘miracles.’ But then he must likewise exhibit them sparingly, as, if they continued to appear on assignable principles of stated recurrence, and in definite cycles, nay, if they appeared frequently, though unfixedly,they would enter, or seem to enter, into the procession of the laws of nature, and thus lose their proper use and character. What follows? It follows that miracles cannot be presented to every successive age, far less to each individual person; they must, then, be presented only to some particular age or ages, and to some particular personal witnesses. But we have seen that they ought to be publicly and continually known; therefore (there being but one way of transmitting past events to present times) revealed religion and the knowledge of God, which we have seen is only thus to be practically and influentially attained, must he dependent upon human testimony. There is no step of this deduction which might not be made by a man who had never heard of any actual revelation having been given to man; it is purposely built upon the simplest principles of our common nature This seems to me to amount to something not unlike demonstration, that a traditional revelation, built on testimony transmitted from man to manthat is, of a Bible and sermon religionfar from being improbable (as the impugners of an ‘historical creed’ so eloquently insist), is actually the form of religion imperatively demanded by the very structure of human nature.”

IV. THE RECEPTION OF THE GOSPEL BY THE GENTILES HAS BEEN PROVIDENTIALLY ORDERED AS A STIMULUS TO THE JEWS. (Rom 10:19-21.) The faith which has come by hearing the gospel to the Gentile nations was intended to rouse to holy jealousy the unbelieving Jews. The one section of mankind has been and is being played off against the other in the all-wise providence of God. And nothing is more certain than that the Jews shall yet surrender to the claims of our risen Saviour, and enter the Christian Church as obedient followers of the once crucified but now exalted Messiah. Let us, then, have confidence in our Lord, not only regarding our personal salvation, but also regarding the ingathering of the nations.R.M.E.

Fuente: The Complete Pulpit Commentary

Rom 10:1 . ] Address to the readers, expressive of emotion. Comp. 1Co 14:20 ; Gal 3:15 .

] without a corresponding ; the thought following in Rom 10:3 loomed before the apostle, as standing in the relation of opposition to his heartfelt interest, of which the solicitude thus remained unfulfilled through the perverted striving after righteousness of the people.

] does not denote the wish , the desire (Chrysostom, Theodoret, Theophylact, and many, including Rckert, Reiche, Kllner, de Wette, Olshausen). It may mean pleasure, delight (Bengel: “lubentissime auditurus essem de salute Israelis;” comp. Philippi), Mat 3:17 ; Mat 11:26 ; or goodwill (Phi 1:15 ; Phi 2:13 ), i.e. propensa animi voluntas . See generally Fritzsche. The latter signification is that most immediately suggested by the connection here; comp. van Hengel, “ benevola propensio .” It is indeed the intention of the will (Hofmann), but conceived of and designated as the being well-disposed of the heart, as it was such.

is joined to , hence there was no need of the (not genuine) article (Act 8:24 ; Winer, p. 128 f. [E.T. 169 f.]); to the connection with to be understood, would not be suitable. Hence: The goodwill of my heart and my petition to God are on their behalf towards this end, that they might obtain salvation; is the goal which my wishes for them, and my prayer entreats for them. In this view belongs so necessarily to the completeness of the thought, that we are not to assume a tacit contrast to a (Hofmann). The article before represents, according to the context, the personal pronoun ( .); Winer, p. 103 [E. T. 135]; Khner, II. 1, p. 515.

On the distinction between and , petition and prayer , see on Eph 6:18 . Bengel aptly remarks: “Non orasset Paulus, si absolute reprobati essent.”

Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary

Rom 10:1-13 . More particular discussion of the guilt of the Jews specified in Rom 9:32 ; introduced (Rom 10:1-2 ) by a reiterated assurance of the most cordial interest in their salvation .

Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary

Second Section.More decided explanation of the mysterious fact. The faith of the Gentiles and the unbelief of Israel

Rom 10:1-21

A. Self-righteousness, and the righteousness of faith (Rom 10:1-11)

1Brethren, my hearts desire [or, good-will, ] and prayer1 to God for Israel [on their behalf]2 is, that they might be saved [for their salvation]3: 2For I bear them record [witness] that they have a zeal of God, but not according 3to knowledge. For they, being ignorant of Gods righteousness [not knowing (i. e., mistaking) the righteousness of God], and going about [striving] to establish their own righteousness,4 have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness 4of God. For Christ is the end of the law for [unto] righteousness to every one that believeth.5 5For Moses describeth [writeth concerning] the righteousness which is of the law, That the [saying, The]6 man which doeth those things 6[who hath done them] shall live by them [or, in it].7 But the righteousness which is of faith speaketh on this wise [thus],8 Say not in thine heart, Who shall ascend into heaven? (that is, to bring Christ down from above [omit from above]:) 7Or, Who shall descend into the deep? (that is, to bring up Christ again [omit again] from the dead.) 8But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even [omit even] in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which 9we preach; That [Because] if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus [or, Jesus as Lord],9 and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath [omit hath] raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. 10For with the heart man believeth. [faith is exercised]10 unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. 11For the Scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed [put to shame].

B. The equal claim of Jews and Gentiles to faith. Hence the necessity of universal preaching. The unequal results of preaching (Rom 10:12-18)

12For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek [distinction between Jew and Greek]:11 for the same Lord over all is [is Lord of all,]12 rich 13unto all that [who] call upon him. For whosoever [every one who]13 shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. 14How then shall [can] they call14 on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall [can] they believe15 in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall [can] they hear16 without a preacher? 15And how shall [can] they preach,17 except they be sent? as it is written,18 How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel [those who bring glad tidings] of peace,19 and bring glad tidings of good things! 16But they have not all obeyed the gospel [did not all hearken to the glad tidings].20 For Esaias [Isaiah] saith, Lord, who hath [omit hath] believed our report?21 17So then faith cometh by [of] hearing, and hearing by [through] the word of God.22 18But I say, Have they not heard [Did they not hear]? Yes [Nay] verily, their sound went [out] into all the earth, and their words unto the ends of the world.

C. The unbelief of Israel and the faith of the Gentiles already prophesied in the Old Testament (Rom 10:19-21)

19But I say, Did not Israel [Israel not]23 know? First Moses saith, I will provoke you to jealousy by them that [with those who] are no people, and by 20[with] a foolish nation I will anger you. But Esaias [Isaiah] is very bold, and saith,24 I was found of them that [by those who] sought me not; I was made 21manifest unto them that [those who] asked not after me. But to [of] Israel he saith,25 All day long I have [omit have] stretched forth my hands unto a disobedient and gainsaying people.

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

Summary.The fact of the partial rejection of Israel, &c. The fact is not a fatalistic decree, for the Apostle prays for Israel, and bears record to their zeal; Rom 10:1-2. It rests rather on the antithesis between self-righteousness as the presumed righteousness which is of the law, and the righteousness which is of faith; Rom 10:3-4. The righteousness of faith, although rising from Israel, is proved by the prophecy of the Old Testament to be, according to its nature, accessible to all men, and not confined to the Jewish nation. It is universal; that is, accessible to all in its internal character, because it is allied to the inward nature of man; Rom 10:5; Rom 10:9. Its universality is confirmed by experience; Rom 10:10-11. It is proclaimed by the Old Testament Scriptures, which promise, in Christ, salvation to every man. There arises therefrom the universality of faiththe freedom of faith to Jews and Gentiles; Rom 10:12-13. This freedom of faith is made actual by the universality of the preaching of the gospel and of the apostolic mission; Rom 10:14-15. Unbelief is voluntary, like faith. The gospel is conditioned by faith; Rom 10:16-18. But the faith of the Gentiles is prophesied in the Old Testament, as well as the unbelief of the Jews; Rom 10:19-21.

[There is little difference of opinion among commentators respecting the meaning of this chapter as a whole. Dr. Hodge coincides most nearly with Dr. Lange in his divisions. Tholuck, Philippi, Meyer, Alford, make two sections. (1) The further exposition of the fact that the exclusion of Israel is founded on their own unbelief; Rom 10:1-13. Alford: The Jews, though zealous for God, are yet ignorant of Gods righteousness (Rom 10:1-3), as revealed to them in their own Scriptures (Rom 10:4-13). (2) Proof from Scripture of the same fact; Rom 10:14-21. Tholuck: They could not excuse themselves by this, that God had not done His part to make humanity know the gospel, or that it had not reached them, or that they could not have seen what their conduct with regard to it and Gods dealings with the Gentiles would be. The connection with Rom 9:33 is very close; and as the Apostle is accustomed to repeat, at the close of an argument, the proposition from which he started, the repetition of the quotation of Rom 9:33, in Rom 10:11, favors the division of Dr. Lange.R.]

A. Faith, Rom 10:1-2. The fact described is no fatalistic decree.

Rom 10:1. Brethren [. Bengel: Nunc quasi superata prcedentis tractationis severitate comiter appellat fratres. Comp. 1Co 14:20; Gal 3:15.R.] Though this is an address to all readers, yet it is directed with special feeling to the Jewish Christians. Repetition and carrying out of the personal reference in Rom 9:1 ff.

My hearts desire, or, good-will [ n ]. A real antithesis to the is contained in the judgment passed in Rom 10:3. [See Winer, p. 535; who thinks the antithesis was too painful to be expressed. All admit that the thought is found in Rom 10:3.R.] Meyer, contrary to Chrysostom, Theodoret, and most of the early writers, as well as De Wette and Olshausen, holds that mean wish, desiderium, but only benevolence (Vulgate, voluntas; Augustine, bona voluntas; Calvin, benevolentia). Tholuck: There is, indeed, no example as yet in which is exactly equal to wish. But how could the Apostle have said, My good pleasure and my prayer for them to God are directed to their salvation. Yet he regards it advisable to adhere to the translation: My good-will for them. [The lexical objection to rendering , desire, is weighty. On the other hand, the rendering good-will severs it from the context. The insertion of after Was probably an attempt to avoid this difficulty. Alford suggests a a mixture of constructions: the Apostles would be their salvation itselfhis , …,, was . We hold to the more usual meaning of the word. Wordsworth pushes it as far as this: Probably he uses this word because he wishes to represent the salvation of the Jews as a thing so consonant to Gods wishes and counsel, that, as far as He is concerned, it is as good as done; and the Apostle delights in looking back, in imagination, upon that blessed result as already accomplished. There is little warrant in the word or context for such an interpretation.R.]

And prayer to God [ . The latter phrase can be limited to without adopting the poorly supported The prayer was undoubtedly of his heart, but there are no grammatical reasons for connecting that phrase with these words. is, strictly, petition, request.R.] We refer back to , and then exclusively to . My heart is not only full of good-will toward the Jews, but it can also venture to intercede for them before Goda proof that they falsely regard me as their adversaryand I have not yet given up the hope of their salvation. This also comprises a pledge of Divine compassion. [So Bengel: Non orasset Paulus, si absolute reprobati essent.R.]

[On their behalf is for their salvation, . The correct reading shows how close the connection with chap. 9 is. Meyer: is the end which my would have for them, and my prayer asks for them. The E. V. gives the correct sense, though in a paraphrase.R.]

Rom 10:2. For I bear them witness [ . introduces the reason for the preceding declaration.R.] He still sees, even in their error, something good: they have a zeal of God [ . Zeal for God, not great zeal, or godly zeal]. (Act 21:20; Act 22:3; Gal 1:14; Joh 2:17.) This will, indeed, not be the only ground of his , but is the ground of the cheerfulness of his intercession for them.

But not according to knowledge [ . Comp. Rom 3:20, p. 123; Col 1:9 (Langes Comm., p. 17).R.] The is the knowledge which, being the living principle of discernment, impels far beyond the mere historical . Meyers definition: in consequence of the ., is incorrect. The antithesis: , Act 3:17. The Apostles statement may, at all events, be designed to alleviate his charge. The bright as well as the dark side of the religious zeal of the Jews was and is a peculiar phenomenon in the history of the world. [The objective advantages of the Jews were given in Rom 9:1-5; here we have the subjective religiousness, which corresponds, although degenerating into blind fanaticism. Yet religious fanaticism, we infer from this passage, is preferable to religious indifferentism. There is something to hope for, a ground for good-will, where there is earnestness.R.]

Rom 10:3-4. Self-righteousness, and the righteousness of faith.

Rom 10:3. For they, not knowing (mistaking) the righteousness of God [ ]. We take ground, with De Wette, and others, against Meyer, who does not see in the idea of the element of mistake, but merely the declaration of ignorance. [Meyer justifies his position, by saying that Paul was only proving the not according to knowledge.R.] But simple ignorance, without guilt, could have no meaning whatever in the present instance; and still less could it be the cause of wicked results. The same holds good of Rom 2:4; 1Co 14:38; see also Tholuck, in loco. Their is the cause of their seeking to establish their own righteousness, and consequently they did not submit themselves to the Divine righteousness revealed in the gospel for faith.26

And striving to establish their own righteousness [ . See Textual Note4]. Essentially, it is the same as the righteousness of the law, according to Php 3:9. Formally, this expression is stronger, because it not only signifies acquired righteousness in distinction from that which is bestowed, but as the real principle of this acquired righteousness, it denotes ones own choice, power, and will, as well as mans own will in opposition to Gods choice, grace, and order. [The point of this distinction is lost, if the phrase be construed as = their own justification.R.] Therefore this effort remains a nugatory , (Rom 3:31; Heb 10:9). The expresses the element of pride in their effort.

[Have not submitted themselves, &c., .] Meyer regards the as passive, as in Rom 8:20; 1Co 15:28. Tholuck, on the other hand, correctly regards it as reflexive.27

Rom 10:4. For Christ is the end of the law [ ]. First, must be left in its full signification, and not be considered merely as the negative end by which the is made void; second, is = Christ himself, not simply the foundation, the fundamental law of His theocracy (Meyer), or the doctrina Christi (Socinians, and others). In both cases, Meyers explanation28 would destroy the full meaning of the text. The same thing is declared in reality by the passages, Mat 5:17; Rom 13:10; Gal 3:24; Eph 2:15; Col 2:14. The end of the law was Christ, because Christ was, in a positive form, the fulfilment of the spiritual, essential import of the law, and therefore He was, at the same time, the making void of the imperfect Old Testament form of the law. Comp. 1Ti 1:5; 1Pe 1:9; Rev 21:6; Rev 22:13. The centre of the idea is therefore final aim, purpose, and end (Chrysostom, Melanchthon, Calvin, and others). There is no good ground for dividing this explanation into two different ones. On one hand, Erasmus, Wolf, and others, have brought out the positive view: Fulfilment of the law. The alternative here: obedientia activa, or obed. activa and passiva (see Meyer), must be removed. As for the negative view of the idea, Meyer cites a large number of authorities who harmonize with him in limiting it to this; yet he can hardly prove this by Augustine, Olshausen, and many others.29 Even Rom 10:4 plainly says that Christ is in so far as He is unto righteousness toevery one that believeth, , and the introduces just the proof that the Jews did not submit themselves to the righteousness of God, which, however, was manifested in Christs fulfilment of the law (comp. Rom 9:31). The question of the extent of prominence here given to the negative side of the , is connected with the explanation of Rom 10:5-6. [Stuart, following Flatt, renders , with respect to. It is better to take it as indicating result or purpose. The former will be preferred, if be rendered aim; the latter, if it be rendered termination. The sense will then be, either: Christ is the aim of the law, so that righteousness may come to every one, &c.; or: Christ abolished (or fulfilled) the law, in order that, &c. The word righteousness has here the full sense, righteousness of God; but the emphasis rests on believeth.R.]

Rom 10:5-9. The universality of the righteousness of faith is proved by the Old Testament also.

On the citations. It is evident that Rom 10:5-6 present an antithesis between the idea of the righteousness which is of works and the inward essence of righteousness. But it is clear from the place of the citations, that this antithesis means no contradiction between the Old and New Testament. The quotation in Rom 10:5 is taken from Lev 18:5; the quotation in Rom 10:6 from Deu 30:11-14. It is evident, therefore, that the Apostle places the two sides of the law in contrast, one of which is an external Jewish law of works, and the other is an inward law of the righteousness which is of faith, or a law designed for the inward life; the one is transient, the other permanent. Therefore, he takes his first statement from Leviticus, and from that part of it where the laying down of the Mosaic obstacles to marriage is introduced; the second, on the other hand, is taken from Deuteronomy, which early imparts a profoundly prophetical meaning to the law. Therefore we read, first: Moses describeth, or writeth (and what he writes is a command); but then, The righteousness which is of faith speaketh (and what it says is a proclamation). Though the Apostle holds Deuteronomy to be as fully Mosaic as Leviticus, yet, in the former, Moses administers his office as the Old Testament lawgiver of the Jews; while, in the latter, the prophetic spirit of the righteousness of faith speaks as decidedly through him as if it altogether took his place.

Rom 10:5.30 For Moses writeth respecting the righteousness, &c. [ , …. The accusative after is either governed by the verb in the transitive sense: to write of, to describe, or is the remote object, that concerning which it is written. The rendering: describeth is perhaps too strong, though lexically admissible.R.] , Joh 1:46. The citation is from Leviticus, according to the LXX., but of the same purport as the original text.

We further read: Moses writeth down, or commands: The man who hath done them [ ]. The is emphatic, yet it is significantly connected with , that which is written, the commandments; the law, in the analytical form of commandments. The emphasis here rests on the doing. But the righteousness which is of faith says: The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart; only confess with thy mouth, and believe in thy heart.

Shall live by them [ See Textual Note7. If be adopted as the correct reading, it refers to the righteousness accruing from the doing of the commandments (Alford). Dr. Lange renders , durch, but this is too strong; in the strength of, is better.R.] The different readings appear to have arisen from an apprehension that the Apostles expression might cause a misunderstanding, perhaps an acceptation of the possibility of righteousness by works. Hence the omission of , and the reading (He shall live by righteousness itself). Cod. A. even reads: . . A proof how decidedly the early Church rejected the righteousness of works. The assurance of life has been referred to the life in Palestine. But the historical standpoint of the Mosaic economy indicates something further than the vita prospera. Proof: 1. The vita prospera in the real sense, or as the welfare of the people, is a special promise for obedience to parents; Exo 20:12. 2. The most direct meaning of the passage in Leviticus is, that the transgression of the following statutes is connected with the punishment of death; exo 18:29. 3. The passage in Deu 30:16, not to mention Eze 20:11, indicates something further than the mere vita prospera.31

There are here two antitheses: first, that of the externality of the law and the inwardness of the gospel; second, that of doing and experiencing. In the first case the promise reads: shall live by them; and in the second case there is the assurance: he shall be delivered, shall be saved. We have already observed that the Apostle did not wish to say that there is a contradiction between the Moses of Leviticus and of Deuteronomy; we may now ask, whether he has instituted an irreconcilable contrast between the two passages. This is very supposable, if Rom 10:5 be regarded as a purely hypothetical and almost ironical promise: If one fulfil all the commandments of the law, he would certainly live by them; but since no one is capable of this, no one can find life by the commandments. Therefore, after Rom 10:6, the gospel now takes the place of the law. [So Hodge, and others.] But this cannot be the Apostles meaning. For, first, in that case the law would have been useless from the beginning. Second, an analytical fulfilment of the law would be designated as analytical, or at least as a theoretical way of life, by the side of the practical, and thus two kinds of righteousness would be conceivable, as well as two kinds of life. But, in our opinion, Rom 10:5 is not merely designed to prove that the law is at an end, but that its end has come because Christ has come. Therefore the expression in Rom 10:5 has an enigmatical form, as that in 1Ti 3:16. Moses inscribes his precepts thus: The man which doeth those thingsthat is, who truly fulfils themshall live by them. To be sure, the most direct Jewish social sense of this declaration was, that the observer of the commandments should not be subject to death, but live. But in its religious meaning, the law was as a sphynx, whose riddles every Israelite should attempt and try hard to solve until he came to self-righteousness, until the people became matured, and until the Man came who solved the riddle.32 In Leviticus the significance of the form of the passage under consideration, the man which doeth those things shall live by them, appears in the addition: I am the Lord. The Lord holds up the prize, and pledges it; Christ has won it. Thus Rom 10:5 means not only the fact that Christ has made void the law by the fulfilment of the law, but also that he has transposed and transformed it from the whole mass of external precepts to a principle of the inward life. Therefore the Apostle can immediately assume, in Rom 10:6, that Christ is known and is near to all, and accordingly apply the statement of Deu 30:11-14.

Rom 10:6. But the righteousness which is of faith [ ]. Just as Moses has referred prospectively to Christ by the law, so does the righteousness which is of faith, or the gospel, refer retrospectively to Him.33 The connection of the declaration in Deuteronomy is as follows: in chap. 29 the curse is threatened the people if they become apostate; and in chap. 30 mercy is promised them if they be converted. Rom 10:10 : (The Lord will bless thee) if thou turn unto the Lord thy God with all thine heart and with all thy soul. Then, the ground of the possibility of such a conversion consists in the heartiness in the real spiritual nature of the law, which will always reassert and prove itself. The Apostle fully develops this christological germ by applying the promise of the righteousness of faith from the law to the gospel. The development is as follows:

1. As the inward character of the law was nigh and intelligible to the Jews at that time, or during the previous period in general, so nigh and intelligble must Christ, as the end of the law, now be to them.
2. As Moses, at that time, referred to an unbelief which regarded the law as merely external, arbitrary, and therefore foreign, far-fetched, so does there now stand in the way an unbelief, which mistakes and regards as an odd and peculiar phenomenon the near Christ, the nearness of Christ, which lies in His affinity to the inmost necessities of the heart.
3. If, at that time, the unbelieving Jew could say, Who shall bring down the law?namely, that which was once neglected and lost;from above, that means, in the language of the present, Who shall bring Christ down from above? although He has come upon the earth, and has here finished His life, and incorporated himself with humanity.
4. If, at that time, the unbelieving Jew said: Who shall go over the sea for us, and bring the law to us?that is, as much as to say from the future world, the lower regionsthat question is now: Who shall bring Christ to us from the dead? although Christ has risen from the dead, and has sealed His resurrection by the outpouring of His Spirit.
5. But just as, at that time, the essence or word of the law was infinitely near to Israel as an outline of its most personal and inward nature, so is now Christ, or the gospel by Him, still more than the fulfilment and completion of the most inward nature of man to righteousness and salvation. For if the law was already glorious, how shall not the gospel exceed in glory? 2Co 3:7-11.

Speaketh thus [ ]. The Apostles decided intention of finding in the passage in Deuteronomy itself the real sense which he further expounds, is evident; from the fact that he allows the righteousness which is of faith, personified in that passage, itself to speak. The multifarious surprise expressed by expositors on the Apostles citation is chiefly traceable to a defective construction of the passage in Deuteronomy. According to Meyer, the meaning of the Mosaic passage is: The commandment is neither too hard nor too far; the people speak of it, and it is impressed in their hearts, in order that it may be performed. De Wette adopts the same view. According to Tholuck, the words would say: The faithful observance of the law is made so easy to man after the revelation that has taken place. But how can Moses say to the people, whose apostasy he hypothetically assumes, in their apostasy: Thy God will again accept thee if thou turn to Him, for thou hast the law in thy mouth and in thy heartin the sense that the people are still living in the knowledge of the law, that the law is still in their hearts, and that they only need to perform it? The explanation of Rom 10:14 lies rather in Rom 10:15 : The law is the true life of man himself; it is his real good. The transgression of the law is death and evil. God can therefore deliver man from the transgression of the law, because the law is as an inalienable appointment in his heart, and because he returns to his God when he comes to himself (Luk 15:17). Because of this inwardness of the law in itself, it can be written upon mans heart (see Deu 30:6); it can always revive afresh in him. The law is therefore not merely concealed from, or foreign to, man; it is not simply something positive from heaven, which may again altogether vanish to heaven; and it is no simple promise or threat from the future world, or from the realm of the dead, from over the sea, which may be forgotten until death. Rather, it is still with Christ. For undoubtedly the Apostle will not merely say, in Rom 10:8, Faith is so nigh to men, because Christ is preached to them as the One who has become man, and is risen from the dead; but because the truth of Christs incarnation and resurrection can unite, in the faith of their heart and in the confession of their mouth, for the completion and salvation of their inmost nature. The typical prophecy of the Mosaic passage, which Paul, the great master, has strikingly brought out, lies in thefact that conversion to the law is the beginning of its hearty reception, but that faith in the gospel is its completion; or, objectively defined, that the law is the shadow of the inward life, and that Christ is the life of this life itself.

On the different misunderstandings of this typical prophecy, see Tholuck, who speaks of a profound parody, p. 557 ff. Explanations: Only an application of the words of the law in the Old Testament (Chrysostom, Theodoret, &c. down to Neander); accommodatio (Thomasius, Semler); (Grotius); allusio (Calixtus); suavissima parodia (Bengel, and others).34

The explanations divide themselves into two principal classes. According to one, Paul has made use of the words of Moses for clothing his thoughts, with the knowledge that they, considered in themselves, expressed something altogether different. Philippi calls it a holy and lovely play of Gods Spirit upon the word of the Lord. But would not that be a very unlovely play of the Apostle upon the word of the Lord? Likewise Tholuck is of the opinion, that there has been a failure to prove an application corresponding to the meaning of the text, and, still less, the identity of the historical meaning with the Pauline interpretation. Naturally, the constructions of this class are partly of a critical (Semler) and partly of an apologetical nature (Bengel).
The other class accept, that in the declaration of Moses the Apostle has really found the prophecy declared by him. But this again divides into two subdivisions: 1. He was the expositor of that passage in his spiritual illumination as an Apostle; 2. Rather, one intimately acquainted with the rabbinical hermeneutics. Calvin, and others, who belong to the first subdivision, hold that universa doctrina verbi divini is meant; Knapp, the commandment of love toward God; Hackspan, and others, the messianic promise; Luther, who is frequently hesitating, belongs to both of the principal classes (Tholuck, p. 558). The expositors of the other subdivision regard Pauls interpretation as an allegorical exegesisthat Paul, using the Jewish expository art, has allegorized the passage, and has found in it a Midrash, or secret meaning. Meyer regards the sum of the oracular meaning to be this: Be not unbelieving, but believing! A Midrash, indeed, which might well be drawn from every verse of the Bible.

[The majority of commentators adopt the view, that Paul does not cite the words of Moses as such, but merely adapts them to his purpose. But the position of Dr. Lange seems preferable, not only because this adaptation or accommodation is not what we would expect from such a writer as Paul, but because the other view is more in accordance with the context. As Forbes well says: St. Pauls great object in reasoning with his countrymen is to prove to them, out of their own Scriptures, that Gods mode of salvation, from the first, had been always the same (simple faith in Him), and that their Law was but a provisional dispensation, designed to prepare for the universal Gospel, which was to embrace all equally, Gentiles as well as Jews. Is it likely that the arguments adduced to persuade the Jews of this from their own Scriptures would, even in part, be words turned from their true meaning in the Jewish Scriptures? Rom 10:2-3 show how necessary this proof is. This view accords, too, with Rom 10:4, and the real position of the law. Alford: The Apostle, regarding Christ as the end of the law, its great central aim and object, quotes these words not merely as suiting his purpose, but as bearing, where originally used, an fortiori application to faith in Him who is the end of the law, and to the commandment to believe in Him, which is now Gods commandment. If spoken of the law as a manifestation of God in mans heart and mouth, much more were they spoken of Him, who is God manifest in the flesh, the end of the law and the prophets. In this passage it is Pauls object not merely to describe the righteousness which is of faith in Christ, but to show it described already in the words of the law. Thus the connection as well as the contrast of law and gospel are preserved. This view suits the precise circumstances of the original utterance (see Forbes, pp. 356 ff.). That the variation (in Rom 10:7) and the omission of parts of the original, do not interfere with it, is obvious.R.]

Say not in thine heart [ . LXX.: ; Hebrew, . The passage is taken out of its grammatical connection, and in thine heart added, as might well be done. The phrase is = think not (Alford).R.] This is the ever-recurring secret or expressed language of the unbeliever: Revelation is something thoroughly heterogeneous and strange to, and in disagreement with, my nature. To the words say not, Paul has added in thine heart, perhaps to bring out the contradiction, that a witness of faith can assert itself in the same heart in which unbelief speaks negatively.

Who shall ascend into heaven? [; The of the LXX. is omitted.] This formerly meant: It is impossible to bring down from heaven the law (that which we have lost, because it was foreign to us); but it now means: Who shall bring Christ down from heaven, that He may become man? the incarnation of the Son of God is inconceivable. Thus the actual incarnation of Christ is, to Paul, the full consequence of the moral truth of the Mosaic law.

[That is, to bring Christ down, ]. The lays down the meaning of the Old Testament language in the New Testament sense. On the different explanations of it, see Tholuck, p. 565. [The two leading interpretations are (1) That is to sayi. e., whoever asks this question, says, in effect, Who will bring Christ down? thus he denies that He has come alreadymakes of the Incarnation an impossibility. (So Erasmus, Calvin, Philippi, and others.) (2) That is, in order to bring Christ down. This gives the purpose of the ascending. In this view, is = the rabbinical . This implies also a denial of the Incarnation. See Meyer. In its favor is the fact, that a final clause follows in Deuteronomy. The reference to the present position of Christ at the right hand of God (Calvin, Reiche, and others) is out of keeping with the context,especially the order in Rom 10:9. The passage has been tortured into a variety of special applications, but the majority of commentators now support the reference to the Incarnation, though differing as to the precise character of the questions (see below). It should be noticed, that this view assumes the certainty of the prexistence of Christ.R.]

Who shall descend into the deep? [ ; LXX.: ]. An explanation of the Mosaic passage: Beyond the sea! According to Schulz, (Deuteronomium), Beyond the sea refers only to the vast extent of the sea. This would be tautology in relation to the fore-going. To bring from beyond the sea, can also not mean (according to Vitringa), to bring over from the Greeks. That the sea may be considered as , , is proved by the harmony of the Septuagint. But is not , and over the sea is altogether a different idea from into the deep. The probable solution of the difference is, that the ideas over the ocean and beneath the earth coincide as designations of the realm of the dead. The Greek Tartarus is, indeed, under the earth, but not a real cavern under the earth. The Greek Elysium lies far out in the ocean, on the Isles of the Blessed. Also, in the present passage, Paul has evidently found the realm of the dead to be indicated by the words beyond the sea. Similar notions existed among the Celts and Germans. Meyer dismisses the question in a very untenable manner, when he says: The view of Reiche, Bolten, and Ammonthat the place of the blessed (over the sea) is also meant in the Hebrewconfounds a heathen representation with the Jewish one of Sheol (see Job 26:5-6).

[Dr. Lange (following Chrysostom, De Wette, Meyer, and others) assumes throughout that these questions are questions of unbelief, although finding in the passage something more than Meyers brief statement: Be not unbelieving, but believing. Alford gives a full discussion of the three views: questions of unbelief, of embarrassment, of anxiety. He combines all three: The anxious follower after righteousness is not disappointed by an impracticable code, nor mocked by an unintelligible revelation; the word is near him, therefore accessible; plain and simple, and therefore apprehensibledeals with definite historical fact, and therefore certain; so that his salvation is not contingent on an amount of performance which is beyond him, and therefore inaccessible; irrational, and therefore inapprehensible; undefined, and therefore involved in uncertainty. Thus, it seems to me, we satisfy all the conditions of the argument; and thus, also, it is clearly brought out that the words themselves could never have been spoken by Moses of the righteousness which is of the law, but of that which is of faith. Dr. Hodge does not clearly define which view he adopts, although objecting to the thought, that the object is to encourage an anxious inquirer.R.] The reference of unbelief to an unbelief in the sitting of Christ at the right hand of God (by Melanchthon, Calvin, and others), removes the centre of the object of faith; this centre is the resurrection.

Rom 10:8. But what saith it? [ ] After the Apostle has shown what the righteousness which is of faith forbids saying, he brings out what it says itself to unbelief. Rckert and Philippi [Hodge and Stuart] have intensified too much the antithesis between Moses and the righteousness of faith; Meyer obliterates it by formally referring even the expression concerning the righteousness of faith to For Moses writeth. [The former position is almost inseparable from the view of Rom 10:4, and of the use of Old Testament language, which these commentators hold.R.]

The word is nigh thee [ ]. The is stronger than if it were . It is one next to thee, a neighbor, a relative of thine. The opinion of Chrysostom, Grotius, and others [held to some extent by Stuart, Hodge, and others], that this verse is an assurance how easy it is to become righteous, is foreign to the context. We must not suppose that this is an expression of merely the historical acquaintance with Christianity. If this were the case, how could it be said to the doubter and unbeliever: It is in thy mouth and in thy heart? [The Apostle evidently here says, not what is, but what may be, just as Moses had done (Tholuck).R.] But as the word of life, which, should be peculiarly in the mouth and in the heart, it is attested in a twofold way. First, it is the word of faith,35 which we, the apostles, as Gods heralds and Christs witnesses, preach. Second, its effect is, that he who confesses Jesus with the mouth as his Lord, and believes in his heart that He is risen from the dead to a blessed life, shall be saved.

Rom 10:9. Because [. The E. V. follows Beza, the Vulgate, &c., in rendering , that, indicating the purport of the word preached. Dr. Hodge gives, besides, a view which connects this verse directly with the former part of Rom 10:8 : it says that, &c.; but this is opposed by any proper view of the citation from Deuteronomy. The sense, as now generally agreed (Tholuck, Stuart, De Wette, Meyer, Alford), is that of because, or for, giving a proof of what precedes. To mouth and heart correspond confession and belief. This purport of the preaching would scarcely be stated in this form.R.]

[If thou shalt confess with thy mouth, . Confession is put first here, on account of the connection with the words quoted in Rom 10:8. This is a further proof of the meaning because. In Rom 10:10, belief comes first.R.]

Jesus as Lord [ . The mass of commentators are disposed to take as a predicate placed first for emphasis, and render as above. So Tholuck, Stuart, Hodge, De Wette, Meyer, Schaff, Webster and Wilkinson, Noyes, Lange. Alford doubts this interpretation; comp. his note in loco. See Textual Note 9. Hodge: To confess Christ as Lord, is to acknowledge Him as the Messiah, recognized as such of God, and invested with all the power and prerogatives of the mediatorial throne. Used in such close connection with a citation from the LXX., which translates Jehovah by the same word , it certainly means more than an acknowledgment of power and moral excellence; especially as this part of our verse corresponds with the coming down from heaven alluded to in Rom 10:6.R.] Just as the words Lord Jesus correspond with to bring down from heaven, so raised himfrom the dead corresponds with to bring up from the dead.[Thou shalt be saved, . Belief, with the heart, in the central fact of redemption, the resurrection, not as an isolated historical event, but as linked indissolubly with the coming down of the Son of God, now the ascended Lordand hence confession of Him as suchthese are the requisites for salvation. A dumb faith is no faith (Olshausen).R.]

Rom 10:10. The experimental proof of the righteousness which is of faith.

For with the heart faith is exercised unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. The Apostle presents, in this verse, the parallelism with reference to Rom 10:9, and the underlying passage of Deu 30:14. Yet he now reverses the order of heart and mouth, in harmony with the genesis of the life of faith, especially in the New Testament. As a matter of course, faith and confession are connected with each other, just as the heart and the mouth, or as the heart and speech; that faith without confession, would return to unbelief, but confession without faith would be hypocrisy. However, the distinction is correct: first, faith in the heart, then, confession with the mouth. There is the same distinction of effects. Faith in the heart results in justification; confession with the mouththat is, the decided standing up for faith with word and deedresults in in its final signification, deliverance from evil to salvation, with the joy and freshness of faith.36 It is natural to man that only that first becomes his complete possession and his perfect joy which he confesses socially with his mouth, and which he maintains by his life. See Tholuck, p. 571, on the apprehension of the early Protestant orthodoxy, that by a distinction of the two parts and prejudice would be done to the doctrine of justification.37 The doctrine of the righteousness which is of faith has, indeed, been carried to such excess, that it has been regarded as prejudiced by the requirement of the fruits of faith in the final judgment. This reduces it to a dead-letter affair, and is a failure to appreciate the necessary elements in the development of life. The Apostles testimony is so decidedly one of experience, that it expresses the permanent force of the law of faith by the passive forms: , . This is its custom; thus is the kingdom of heaven taken by force.

Rom 10:11. The testimony of Scripture for the righteousness of faith.

For the Scripture saith (Isa 28:16). , says Meyer, is neither in the LXX. nor in the Hebrew, but Paul has added it in order to mark the (to him) important feature of universality, which he found in the unlimited .38 This is, in meaning, certainly contained in the . The weight of the clause lies in the fact that only faith is here desired. The Apostle has very justifiably referred the to Christ.

Shall not be put to shame. That is, shall attain to salvation (see Rom 5:5; Rom 9:33).

B. The universality of faith. Rom 10:12-13 : The testimony of Scripture for the universality of faith.

Rom 10:12. For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek [ . This rendering is more literal than that of the E. V. See Textual Note11. Greek stands here for Gentile. Comp. Rom 1:18; also in Rom 3:22.R.] No difference in reference to the freedom of faith; in reference to the possibility and necessity of attaining to salvation by faith. The right of faith is the same to Jews and Gentiles. Proof:

For the same is Lord of all [ . See Textual Note12.] Strictly speaking, we must suppose a breviloquence also here: One and the same Lord is Lord over all. The one Lord is Christ, according to Origen, Chrysostom, Bengel, Tholuck, and most other expositors (see Rom 10:9). Others refer the expression to God (Grotius, Ammon, Kllner, &c.); Meyer, on the other hand, has good ground for observing that it was first necessary to introduce the Christian character,39 as Olshausen has done (God in Christ); see Act 10:36; Php 2:11.

Rich. [Lange: erweisend sich reich.] (see Rom 8:32; Rom 11:33; Eph 1:7; Eph 2:7; Eph 3:8).

Unto all [ . Alford: toward all; Lange: ber Alle; Meyer: fr Alle, zum Beston Aller; Olshausen: By is signified the direction in winch the stream of grace rushes forth.R.] This is both the enlargement and restriction of Christs rich proofs of salvation. Only those who call upon him [ ], but also all who call upon him, share in His salvation. The calling upon Him is the specific proof of faith, by which they accept Him as their Lord and Saviour.

Rom 10:13. [For every one whosoever, &c., , …. See Textual Note13. Scriptural proof: Joe 3:5. [LXX. and E. V., 2:32.] Tholuck: The omission of the exact form of the quotation occurs either in universally known declarations, as in Eph 5:31, or where the Apostle makes an Old Testament statement the substratum of his own thought, as in Rom 11:34-35. Paul has specified the name in Joel as the name of the God of revelation, in harmony with the messianic passage. [If we accept a reference to Christ in Rom 10:12, we must do the same here, as, indeed, the next verse also requires. Alford well says: There is hardly a stronger proof, or one more irrefragable by those who deny the Godhead of our Blessed Lord, of the unhesitating application to Himby the Apostle of the name and attributes of Jehovah.R.]

Rom 10:14-15 : The realization of the universal righteousness of faith through the universality of preaching and the apostolic mission.

Rom 10:14. How then can they call on him? [ , …. See Textual Note14, and below.] The proof, clothed in the vivacious form of a question, of the necessity of the universal apostleship and of his preaching, is a sorites. Faith in the Lord precedes calling upon Him (in order to be saved); the hearing of the message of faith precedes faith; but His message presupposes preachers, and preaching presupposes again a corresponding mission. From this it then follows, that the apostolate urges forward the preaching in the name of the Lord, and that unbelief in the apostolic message is disobedience to the Lord himself.40 The view of Grotius and Michaelis, that Rom 10:14-15 are a Jewish objection and excuse, complicates the Apostles perspicuous train of thought. But Chrysostom and others have correctly observed, that he here establishes the universal apostleship by virtue of the institution of faith, even in respect to the Jews, and to the narrow Jewish Christianity; but, according to Meyer, he does not reach this point until Rom 10:18 ff., where, indeed, he first makes full application of its establishment. Meyer: Important Codd. have the conjunctive (deliberative) aorist instead of the future, which Lachmann has accepted. But the testimony is by no means decisive. [See Textual Note14. On the future, see Winer, p. 262.R.] The subjects of those who call are all who are called to salvation, Jews and Gentiles, in the universal sense. [Or, as Alford suggests, men, represented by the of Rom 10:13.R.] Thus the preachers, in Rom 10:14-15, are still indefinite (De Wette, and others, against Meyer).

[How can they believe, &c., . On the construction of the genitive , see Meyer; comp. Eurip., Medea, p. 752. Meyer seems scarcely justified in insisting upon the correctness of the Vulgate: quomodo credent ei, quem non audierunt. The E. V. gives the proper meaning.Without a preacher, . Tittmann, Syn. N. T., p. Rom 93: ad subjectum, quod ad objecto sejunctum est, refertur, autem ad objectum, quod a subjecto abesse cogitatur. Dr. Lange may be correct in claiming that the preachers are as yet indefinite, but the beautiful precision of the Greek requires us to find an intimation of the certainty of the universal gospel proclamation. In the first two questions, there is an absolute negative; in the third, occurs, implying the probability that one will preach; in the last, we have , which indicates that, however men may fail to call and hear, those who will preach will certainly be sent forth. This turn of expression seems to have escaped the notice of commentators, but it points directly toward the position the Apostle is establishing: the universality of the means provided by God for the salvation of men, whether they hear or forbear.R.]

Rom 10:15. [And how shall they preach, except they be Sent? ;] The definite preachers spring first from the divine mission. But the Apostle proves, by Isa 52:7, that there must be such sent (apostolic) preachers.

As it is written, How beautiful, &c. The Apostle here repeats the prophets announcement in an abridged and free manner, but yet in strict conformity with the sense; following the original text more closely than the LXX. According to Meyer, the prophetic passage in question speaks of the happy deliverance from exile, while the Apostle has very properly interpreted it in its messianic character as a prophecy of the gospel preachers of the messianic kingdom. But the full, mysterious messianic import of the prophetic passage extends beyond the meaning of a typical prophecy as verbal prophecy. The beauty of the feet of the messengers of peace is hardly spoken of, because the feet of the one who approaches become visible (Tholuck), but because they, in their running and hastening, in their scaling obstructing mountains, and in their appearance and descent from mountains, are the symbolical phenomena of the earnestly desired winged movement and appearance of the gospel itself. Paul has left out the mountains, and has given the collective singular a plural form, according to the sense; peace has to him the full idea of the gospel salvation; the good things are the rich, displayed, saving blessings which proceed from the one salvation.

Rom 10:16-18 : But as the gospel is, on the one hand, naturally free and universal in relation to the antithesis of Jews and Gentiles, so, on the other, it is, according to its inward nature, conditioned by the antithesis of faith and unbelief.

Rom 10:16. But they did not all hearken to the glad tidings [ . The aorist is historic; during the preaching (Alford). Hence the general reference is to be admitted, especially as the contrasts with the preaching to all, the limited result.R.] Theodore of Mopsvestia and Reiche do violence to the connection in reading these words as a question. Fritzsche holds that they refer to the Gentiles; and Meyer, to the Jews. But they refer chiefly to the difference between believers and unbelievers in general, for there were also unbelievers among the Gentiles; and, above all, the question was the general establishment of the antithesis: believers and unbelievers, and then its application to Jews and Gentiles.

Lord, who believed our report? [, ; An exact quotation from the LXX.] This citation from the prophet Isaiah, Isa 53:1, is mainly a strong proof of this: that the preaching of salvation does not meet with faith on the part of all to whom it is preached, although in this citation the reference to the Jews comes out more definitely. The hyperbolical expression of the prophet means: Only a few believe. The entire contents of Isaiah 47 prove that here we have not only to deal with a typical prophecy, but also with a verbal one.

On the different interpretations of , see Tholuck, p. Rom 577: That which is preached, to preach what is heard from God. Meyer: The preaching which is apprehended; or, in which the stress rests upon the right apprehension (the words of obedience).Not all. That is, not all within the reach of preaching () preaching (, ). [The word has occasioned much difficulty. For, if rendered report, preaching, here, then it would seem natural to give it the same sense in Rom 10:17. But if this be done, then word of God must receive an unusual meaning (see below). Generally the commentators have admitted this meaning here without question, and then in various ways met the subsequent difficulty. Forbes, however, strikes at the root of the matter, and claims that there is no ground for rendering , reporti.e., what we cause others to hear. His view has been adopted by Hengstenberg, and is the most satisfactory solution yet offered, , like the Hebrew equivalent, he claims with reason,41 refers to the message viewed from the side of the hearer, not from that of the preacher. The prophet is speaking in the name of his countrymen, as he does throughout the chapter: Who (of us) hath believed that which we heard? (See Forbes, pp. 362 ff.) This view is more literal; it does not disturb in the least the general drift of the argument, while it relieves Rom 10:17 of a great difficulty. In fact, Meyer, Alford, and others, approach this sense, but too indirectly; this is as simple as it is satisfactory.R.]

Rom 10:17.42 So then faith cometh of hearing [ ]. From the . Explanations: The message preached (Tholuck, Meyer [Hodge, and most]); the act of hearing (Calixtus, Philippi, and others); hearing with faith (Weller, and other Lutheran expositors). As this preaching does not meet with universal faith, only the announcement itself can be meant. [Accepting Forbes explanation of in Rom 10:16, we apply it here: Faith comes from what is heard, not the act of hearingwhich gives a different sense from Rom 10:16; nor what is preachedwhich confuses this word and .R.]

And hearing through the word of God [ . See Textual Note22on the reading .] Different explanations of the : 1. Gods revealed word (Tholuck, and others); 2. Gods order, commission (Beza, Meyer [Hodge], and others). The ground: Because otherwise would not be different from ). But strictly speaking, both definitions are indissolubly united in the revealed word with which prophets and apostles were entrusted. The Divine message, as such, is a formal sending, or a commission and a material sending; or, with these, also a preaching. Therefore Tholuck does not appear to be correct, when he says that denotes not Gods order, but His oracles; Jer 1:1, &c. Nevertheless, there does exist a difference between this and the ; is every message of salvation to the end of the world; but the denotes the Divine sources of revelation, on whose effluence the authority and effect of every message depend: The word, and the fact, and the effect in life taken together. Therefore . [The thing heard is through or by means of the revelation of God. This is the sense, if we adopt the usual meaning of ; and, indeed, it gives a simpler sense. De Wette suggests that prepares for in the next verse.R.]

Rom 10:18. But I say, Did they not hear? [ , ;] The indefinite it [which Dr. Lange supplies] is regarded by Meyer as denoting the ; and, according to Tholuck, as that which has heretofore been the subject under consideration; which is sufficient. [All the difficulty about the verb here disappears, if Forbes view be accepted. There is no necessity for going back to Rom 10:14, or making the matter indefinite. The Apostle has been speaking of the necessity of hearing, of the thing heard; now he says: did they not hear? The universality of the privilege is affirmed.R.] Although reference is constantly made to the Jews, the question is nevertheless, principally and formally, concerning unbelievers in general. If unbelievers, as unbelieving people, can excuse themselves by saying that they have not heard Gods message, the most direct answer would be: Then they would not be unbelievers in the specific sense. But the Apostle rather brings out the fact of the incipient universal propagation of the gospel, by clothing it in the language of Psa 19:4, from the LXX.

[Nay, verily, . Comp. Rom 9:20. So far from this being the case, their sound went out into all the earth, &c., , … An exact quotation from the LXX. (Psa 18:5; Psa 19:5; Eng., Psa 19:4.R.] In the Psalm, the question is undoubtedly the universal revelation of God in nature; therefore we cannot regard it as a real prophecy, and as an argument in the usual sense. However, the Apostle seems to clothe his view of the incipient universality of the gospel in those words of the Psalms, because he perceived in the universal revelation of nature the type and guarantee of the future revelation of salvation. Then, his having given to the 43 another reference, also corresponds to this freer application of the passage (there, the sound of Gods works; here, the preacher). [Dr. Lange here follows the mass of commentators (including Stuart, Hodge). But Calvin, Stier, Hengstenberg, Alford, Forbes, regard these words as possessing a real argumentative force, when interpreted according to their genuine meaning as designed at first by the Psalmist. Alford urges the fact: that Psalms 19 is a comparison of the sun, and the glory of the heavens with the word of God. Calvin: As He spoke to the Gentiles by the voice of the heavens, He showed by this prelude that He designed to make himself known at length to them also. Dr. Lange, it is true, approaches this view, yet does not find it in the Psalm, but in the Apostles use of it. Was the Apostle likely to convince his countrymen by putting a new meaning on their Scriptures?R.]

On the gross misconstruction of this passage, that the gospel should extend everywhere, even at Pauls time, see Meyer [p. 408, 4th ed.]; Tholuck, p. 580. As for the ecstatic salutation of the universality of Gods kingdom, then first appearing, which often occurs in Paul (see Col 1:23), compare the two statements of Justin Martyr and Tertullian; Tholuck, p. 380. That which appears surprising in the hyperbolical form of the Apostles statement of the universal propagation of the gospel, disappears just in proportion as that propagation is regarded not quantitatively, but qualitatively. Jerusalem and Rome were the centres of the ancient world. But, in addition to them, there were many other general centres. The error of expounding the passage in the sense of a quantitative universality could not hold good, even if we admit that the gospel had at that time reached America; the whole of the fifth grand division of the world, as well as all Africa, would also have to come into consideration.

C. The faith of the Gentiles and the unbelief of Israel. Rom 10:19-21 : Prophesied already in the Old Testament.

Rom 10:19. But I say, Did Israel not know? [ ;] The Apostle now passes over to the long-prepared antithesis of unbelieving Israel and of the believing Gentiles. But yet, in his representation of this fearful inversion (which stirred up unbelieving Judaism) of the old theocratic relationaccording to which the Jews were Gods people, and the Gentiles were given up to themselveshe has recourse to the witnesses of the Old Testament respecting the beginning and prospect of this inversion. After the first question: Have unbelievers not heard the gospel? there follows the second: Did not Israel know it? We may now ask: What is referred to? Explanations:

1. That the gospel should pass from the Gentiles to the Jews (Thomas Aquinas, Calovius, Tholuck [Stuart, Hodge, Jowett], and others). But that threat was only conditionally uttered, and is not contained in the foregoing.

2. The gospel (Chrysostom, and others). [Here must be classed Calvin and Beza, who supply: the truth of God; Philippi and Forbes: the word or message of God (from Rom 10:17). The last named defend their view, from the emphasis which seems to rest on Israel (in the correct reading), and from the parallelism with Rom 10:18. Meyer opposes, with reason, the -, which anticipates an affirmative answer; nor is this objection met, by saying that an affirmative might be expected, that Israel ought to have known the gospel. Paul knew too sadly that the reverse was the fact.R.]

3. That the gospel should become universal, according to the preceding language of the Psalm (Fritzsche, De Wette [Alford], Meyer).44 Meyer places Tholuck also in this category. Tholuck, however, now declares for (1), as follows: But yet the following prophetic declarations do not contain so much the universality of preaching, as explanations of the inverted relation which God will assume toward Gentiles and Jews.

At all events, the citation immediately following is not simply a proof of the universality of the gospel. But it only follows therefrom, that a new statement is made with the proof. This also holds good of the last quotation. The progress is as follows: a. Universality; Psalms 19. b. The faith of the Gentiles for the awakening of the faith of the Jews; Deu 32:21. c. The faith of the Gentiles; Isa 65:1. d. The unbelief of the Jews; Isa 65:2. Therefore we regard the explanation of Fritzsche, &c., as correct, and all the more striking, as the fulfilment of this very ancient prospect just now became an offence to Israel.Proof:

First Moses saith [ . First, in the order of the prophetic roll (Alford), with reference to Isaiah, as one among the many who spoke afterward to the same effect. Wetstein, Storr, Flatt, join with , but on insufficient grounds.R.] The future universality of the Abrahamic blessing had been declared earlier, but it was Moses who first declared that there should be no difference between Jews and Gentiles before Gods righteousness; indeed, that possibly the Gentiles, in their good conduct, might be preferred to the Jews in their bad conduct. Thus the same Moses who communicated to Israel its economic advantages over the Gentiles, was he who had set up the rule of faith by which this relation could possibly be inverted in the future.

I will provoke you to jealousy [ . The only variation from the LXX. (which closely follows the Hebrew) is the substitution of , in each clause, for .R.] Thus Moses speaks to Israel in the name of the Lord; Deu 32:21.

With those who are no people [ . The precise force of the preposition is with difficulty conveyed by any English word. It is not = against, although that is implied; nor = by means of, but rather, on account of. With expresses the weaker shade of instrumental force sufficiently well, but the real sense is: aroused on account of and directed toward a no-people.R.] . The Gentile nations were not recognized as true nations in the idea of the people, because they were devoid of that religious and moral principle which transforms nature into a moral nationality; see Rom 9:25; 1Pe 2:10. , from , denotes, strictly speaking, the increasing mass of natural human beings; , from , a connection, assembly, community. [The words people, nation, are used in the E. V. to preserve the distinction between the Hebrew words. Despite the fact that the LXX. has used the same word to render both, it has not been overlooked in the E. V. in this passage.R.] The explanation of the no-people (the denies the idea contained in a nomen connected with it), is found in the following parallel:

By a foolish nation [ ].45 The religious and moral folly of the Gentile consisted in his not seeking Gods signs with resignation; for which reason they also could not seek Him. Paul, with good ground, sees in the thoroughly prophetic song of Moses, which looked far beyond Israels history in the wilderness and its relation to the Canaanites (Deut. 22:43), a typical, and still more than a typical prophecy, which should be fulfilled in many ways in preludes, and which has finally been fulfilled in the almost complete changes of the relation between Israel and the Gentiles in relation to the gospel. In Rom 10:21, neither Israels idolatry in the wilderness, nor the Canaanite people, is meant alone. On the different untenable explanations, including those of Philippi, see Tholuck, p. 583 [given above].

Rom 10:20. But Isaiah is very bold, and saith [ . Lange: But Isaiah even ventures to say; which is the spirit of the Greek. Bengel: Quod Moses innuerat, Esaias audacter et plane eloquitur.R.]. The Apostle regarded it as great boldness in Isaiah to say the words of Isa 65:1-2 in the hearing of the Jews, as the first verse, according to his explanation, expressed mercy to the Gentiles, and the second the hardness and apostasy of the Jews.

[I was found by those who sought me not, , …. See Textual Note24, for the text of the Hebrew original and the LXX., to the former of which Dr. Lange refers so frequently. The Apostle has transposed the clauses.R.] The question is now raised first of all by the later exegesis, whether Pauls explanation of Isaiahs passage is correct? Meyer says: In its strict sense, Isa 65:1 (freely from the Septuagint, and with an inversion of both the parallel members) treats of the Jews; but in a typical sense, which Paul clearly perceives in it, they are types of the Gentiles, &c. But in this case, Paul would have made an exegesis without any evidence, and would have exposed himself to the legitimate contradiction and censure of the Jews. Tholuck also remarks, that if the Apostle, in Isa 10:1, referred directly to the Gentiles, his application would have to be regarded as having missed its object. In the first place, namely, Tholuck says that rabbinical expositors (Jarchi, &c.) have simply and satisfactorily explained Isa 10:1-2 as relating to the same subjects. He further says: Independently of these rabbinical predecessors, the same explanation has been adopted by Gesenius, Ewald, Hitzig, and Umbreit, which last writer translates: I was to be inquired of. There is just ground for disapproving of Luthers confidence in inserting in Isa 10:20 : to the Gentiles, and in beginning Isa 10:21 with a forfor I speak, &c. Yet the exegetical authorities cited are utterly refuted, not only by Pauls authorityalthough we cannot even admit that in one of his last sword-thrusts he has made not merely a random stroke, but even wounded himselfbut also by the connection of the whole of Isaiahs passage, Isa 63:7 to Isa 66:1. The antitheses in general between the strongly Old Testament Jewish prayer in Isa 63:7 ff., and the prophetical New Testament answer of God in chaps. 15. and 16., are first to be considered. It is said that the prayer is undoubtedly designed to express Israels state of mind; that it contains angry and passionate elements; and that the Lord must so reveal himself that the Gentiles will tremble at His name (Isa 10:17; Isa 66:1). The prayer is a conflict between the profoundest contrition and the most painful dejection, and it dies away in a question which sounds like a reproach. The Lord now answers, it is said, in the cold reproach: I was to be sought. And this is claimed to be the simplest rendering of . But what does the Lord answer in relation to the people of Israel, and in relation to the Gentiles? In Isa 64:8 ff. we read: Thou art our Father; we are the clay, and thou our potter, &c. Finally: O Lord, wilt thou hold thy peace, and afflict us very sore? Compare here the answer in Isa 65:2, and further. In Isa 10:8 the familiar thought again recurs to the prophet: A remnant of the people will be saved; from Isa 10:18 onward he explains by a grand antithesis. From this antithesis there then arises the description of the new Israel, which was to be called by another name (Isa 10:15). On the Gentiles, see Isa 66:12; Isa 66:18-19; Isa 66:21. But the antitheses between Isaiah 65, Isa 10:1-2, come still more into consideration. In Isa 10:1 we read, ; in Isa 10:2, . The , in Isa 10:1, is , which could not very well denote the Israelites, whether the people be considered passive or active (see Tholuck, p. 586), as the question in both cases is the official form of their religion; , on the other hand, in Isa 10:2, is designated as ; it is a people pledged to the Lord, but is now an apostate people. The antithesis is still stronger, that the Lord is now a subject of search on the part of a people (Goi) which had never inquired after Him; that He is found by those who did not seek Him, and must merely be found with the words , while He had to spread out His hands in vain the whole day to a rebellious people. In Isa 10:1, a people is spoken of which now not only inquires after the Lord, but even searches after Him; but, in Isa 10:2, it is a people which has so fully turned away from Him, that He seeks it the whole day in vain. Thus the , in Isa 10:2, rather than at the beginning, must be read as a strengthened preterite. The Lord answers the question, whether He would afflict very sorely, by referring to His compassion to the Gentiles (Jerome). Then He explains, in Isa 10:2, how this turning from them has occurred. I have spread out my hands (in vain), &c. The exegetical abridgment of this last chapter is connected with an abridgment of the whole of the second part of Isaiah. Tholuck, not satisfied with the defence of the older interpretation of this passage by Hengstenberg, Hofmann, and Stier, takes a middle position between Paul and the expositors cited, by remarking that the prophet did not speak, in Rom 10:1, of the Gentiles, and yet that Paul did speak, in Isa 10:2, of the Jews. But what would the then mean? Paul could, indeed, have good ground for not naming the Gentiles, because a consequent exclusion of the chosen substance of Israel could have been inferred. Stiers explanation is therefore so far correct as it holds that, in Isa 10:1, Israel is added, yet not after its first call, but after its dissolution into the no-people of the Gentile world.46 [There is no other view of the passage, except that which refers it, as originally used, to the Gentiles, that consists with Pauls prudence as a reasoner, much less with his apostolic authority and inspiration. To the argument of Dr. Lange nothing need be added.R.]

Rom 10:21. But of Israel [ ]. Erasmus, adversus; De Wette, [Philippi, Alford (Meyer, an)], and others, with respect to Israel; Vulgate and Rckert, to Israel. We adopt with respect to, since the prophet had already made the foregoing declaration to Israel.

He saith []. Namely, Isaiah, in the name of God.[All day long I stretched forth my hands, .] The spreading out of the hands, say Tholuck, is not (as Fritzsche would have it) the gestus of the one inviting to his embrace,47 but, according to Chrysostom, the gestus of the suppliant. Between the two meanings of this gestus there lies also a third; and, after all, one does not preclude the other. The principal idea is the gestus of gracious, importunate, and expressed admonition, of entreaty, compassionate sympathy, and continuous appeal.

And gainsaying []. Meyer holds, contrary to Grotius, and most expositors, that the . must not be understood as stubborn, but contradictory. But contradiction, in the sphere of religion, is the decisive expression of opposition. [Philippi thinks this added attributive expresses the positive side of disobedience; the other, , the negative. If so, both were necessary to convey the full meaning of the Hebrew word used by the prophet. They say to God, offering them salvation: we will not.R.]

DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL

1. The intercession of the believer a sign of hope and salvation to those for whom it is made.
2. The bright and dark sides of religious zeal. If it be not purified by progressive, living knowledge, it becomes peverted into the carnal zeal of fanaticism. On the first appearance of Jewish fanaticism, see the Commentary on Genesis [p. 564, Amer. ed.].

3. Self-righteousness has many forms. The starting-point is the effort for the righteousness of the law, not as it is attained inwardly by simplicity and humility, but as it, by self-complacency and impurity, falls into externality. In this direction the righteousness of the law becomes the righteousness of works; and from this there results self-righteousness, which branches out into many formsinto the ecclesiastical and political form of confessional and partisan righteousness; into the ecclesiastical and scholastic form of doctrinal righteousness (orthodoxism); into the worldly form of moral righteousness; into the pietistic form of righteousness of feeling; and into the philosophical and brutal forms of the denial of all personal guilt. In all forms it inverts the relation between God and manbetween the Creator and the creaturebetween Gods sovereignty and mans own willbetween Gods law and the self-made service and lawbetween grace and worksand between the ground of life and the most outward false show. Its real want is the want of the hearts upward look at the throne of Gods eternal majesty; and this want is also the first guilt; the positive ruin connected therewith is the baseness of the minds look at things below; the lost state of the minds look in the abject beholding of self. But as this self-righteousness is so thoroughly selfish that it misunderstands and scorns the proffer of Gods freely-given righteousness, the gospel of grace, so is it likewise selfish in connecting itself inseparably with fanaticism.

4. Christ is the end of the law, because He is the fulfilment of the law; therefore He is, on one side, the end where the law is changed into the collective principle of the new birth; and, on the other, He is the end in which it lays off its eternal Old Testament form and meaning; just as ripe fruit becomes freed from its bondage in the husk. See Exeg. Notes.

5. Rom 10:5. The doctrine of eternal life has developed itself embryonically by stages: In this life, Gods blessing, Gods glorious deliverance from the manifold danger of death, and, in the future, the peaceful slumber of those delivered from beds of earthly suffering, their celebration of the marriage-supper of the Lamb, and their safety in Abrahams bosom, &c. This development, just as every biblical doctrine, has taken place in organic conformity to the law. According to Tholuck, p. 557, the eschatology of the Jews of Palestine at the time of Christ had already attained to the idea of eternal life. Yet they hardly attained to the idea of eternal life in the Christian sense. [It must ever be remembered that the ideas, immortality and eternal life, are not identical. has a new meaning in the New Testament. Comp. the thoughtful remarks of Trench, Syn. N. T., xxvii.R.]

6. The righteousness of faith speaks even in Moses, if Moses be properly understood and explained. [Comp. Exeg. Notes on Rom 10:7-9.R.]

7. The truth of the inward essence of the law, like that of the gospel, and therefore the truth of the whole saving revelation of God, is based on its inward characteron its inward union with the most inward nature of man. Its impregnability and incorruptibility also rest upon the same basis. Just as man must return from all by-ways (for his salvation or for his judgment) to the idea of God, so also must he return to the idea of the God-man, of guilt, the atonement, deliverance, the new birth, and the new and eternal life. The objection urged against revelation, and especially against Christianity, that this religion beclouds the earthly life by an exclusive representation of heaven, and the present by an exclusive assertion of the future, the realm of the dead, and duration after death, is removed by a passage which the Apostle cites and elaborates from Deuteronomy. Christ is on the earth in so far as He has become inseparably incorporated with it by His historical presence and union with humanity; and He is just as much in this life, and present in His judgments and bestowals of salvation, as He is in the eternal world, as the future Finisher of all things.
8. Faith and confession; see Exeg. Notes. The delivering power of confession. Because it: 1. makes inward faith irrevocable; 2. Breaks loose from unbelief; 3. Unites with believers, becomes flesh and blood, and, in a good sense, acquires worldly form, worldly power, and the power of manifestation; 4. Pledges itself to full consistency in word and deed, life and death. Christians have had good ground for holding martyrdom in such high honor. But if martyrdom can be exaggerated and overvalued, how much more can a confessional righteousness be overvalued, which seeks its protection and peace under the shadow of formulas!

9. The centre of faith and the centre of confession; see Rom 10:9. The centre of faith is Christs resurrection, with all that it comprises; the centre of confession is Jesus as the Lord, and therefore not the Christianity of Christ, but the Christ of Christianity. [Hence the Apostle does not say: If thou shalt confess with thy mouth my doctrine, and believe in thine heart in justification by faith, thou shalt be saved; yet how often he is represented as saying this, and no more. The living Christ is not in such a gospel.R.]

10. With the complete freedom of revelation and of Gods people there has also come the full protection of faith against unbelief.
11. The riches of the Lord to a praying human world.
12. The order of the gospel message. Its necessity, its promise, its authority, its condition (the Divine mission; direct or indirect). See the interesting statements which Tholuck makes, p. 580 ff., on the assertion of the Lutheran theologians of the seventeenth century, as well as of their latest companions in adherence to the letter, that this text (and the article of the general call) forces us to accept the position that the gospel had been preached in all the world at Pauls time.

13. We must be careful to distinguish, that the question here is the necessity of the official bearers or messengers of Gods word, but not of them exclusively. Or, more strictly speaking, the sending has two sides, and does not consist simply in official arrangements and forms. [This is even more apparent, if we understand Rom 10:17 to refer to what is heard, rather than what is preached, and then consider how the Apostle proves from an Old Testament description of the voice of God in nature (Rom 10:18), the universality of this privilege.R.]

14. The feet of the messengers on the mountains, or the beauty of the progressive course of the gospel.

15. Unbelief in the gospel is disobedience, specific disobedience and rage; Psalms 2. The more grossly and roughly human nature is apprehended, the more external become the ideas of obedience and disobedience; the more profoundly, purely, and inwardly they are viewed, the more profoundly, purely, and inwardly is this antithesis defined; and, finally and fundamentally, faith in Gods word is specific obedience, while unbelief is specific disobedience, specific rebellion. [The LXX. form of Isa 65:2 (Rom 10:21), by dividing the idea of rebellion into disobedience and gainsaying, only recognizes the connection between refusing Gods commands and contradicting His words: disobedience and unbelief, acting and reacting upon each other continually.R.]

16. The prudent advance of the Apostle in his judgment, that Israel has changed its part with the Gentiles by its unbelief, and has become an apostate people, is here a characteristic of his masterly apostolic wisdom of instruction, as well as of his apostolic heart, as, with a shudder of inmost sorrow, he gradually draws aside the curtain from the ghastly picture of Israel. The argument from the Old Testament is in conformity with the law that every apology must be discussed from the acknowledged sources, statements, or principles of the opponent, and that its possibility ceases where there cease to be positions in common.

HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL

a. Rom 10:1-2. The benevolent disposition of the Apostle toward Israel. It is clear: 1. From his wish and prayer that they might be saved; 2. From his record that they have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge.A zeal for God is good, but it should not exist without knowledge (Rom 10:2).How often ignorant zeal occurs: 1. In domestic; 2. In civil; and 3. In ecclesiastical affairs; and, unfortunately, it occurs most frequently in the last (Rom 10:2).The folly of ignorant zeal. It is foolish: 1. In regard to its starting-point; 2. Its end; 3. The choice of means (ver 2).Wise and ignorant zeal.

Starke: Oh, how can men so transgress as to be led by a blind religious zeal to oppose the dearest truths of the gospel by an imaginary defence of orthodoxy; and thus hate, calumniate, and reproach Christ in His members, and always think, with those ancient enemies, that, by so doing, they do God service (Joh 16:2).Hedinger: The zeal of the Jews crucified Christ.

Spener: All the persecutions which have been, and still will be inflicted on pious Christians, are committed by those who do not know the truth and doctrine of godliness; who regard others who are attached to it as false and wicked people; and who think that they render God a service when they persecute them (Joh 16:2); but yet, by this very means, they thrust themselves into Gods judgment, and are not at all excused for their error (Rom 10:2).

Heubner: What is blind zeal in religious matters? Whence does it come? If it be wholly unclean, it is self-love, selfishness; if it be merely joined with perverse measures, then it arises from a weakness of understanding, and, in that case, has also a mixture of egotism! True zeal is pure and clear.Compare Pauls early Jewish and later Christian zeal.

Besser: When Paul cherishes, and expresses in praying to God, the hearty wish that they who have stumbled against the stone of offence may yet be saved, he certainly has no knowledge of any absolute decree of condemnation on any man, not even on the most stiff-necked Jews (Rom 10:1).One of our older teachers laments: The Jews had, and still have, a zeal without knowledge; but we, alas, have an understanding without zeal (Rom 10:2).

b. Rom 10:3. Our own righteousness, and righteousness which is of God (Luk 18:9-14). 1. The former is proud, and leads to humiliation; 2. The latter, on the contrary, is humble, and leads to exaltation.

Starke, Lange: No persons are farther from Gods kingdom, and more difficult to be converted, than those who, when they hear of the method of salvation, have so much of their own righteousness as to think that they have long conformed to it.

Heubner: They are therefore devoid of an humble recognition of their unworthiness before God; they would themselves be something, and carry weight. Where this pride and fancy exist, there is always blindness.

c. Rom 10:4-11. The righteousnesss which is of faith is: 1. A righteousness in Christ, who is the end of the law; 2. And therefore can be obtained only by faith in Him (Rom 10:4-11).The unbeliever asserts that Christ is far from and unapproachable by man; but the believer, on the contrary, knows that He is near us by the word of faith (Rom 10:5-9).In order to avoid believing, men make use of empty evasions (Rom 10:5-9).As the law was near to Israel, so is the gospel near to us: 1. In the mouth; 2. In the heart (Rom 10:8).What do we preach? 1. Not a remote, and therefore incomprehensible word; but, 2. A near, and therefore a very easily understood word (Rom 10:8).The conditions of salvation: 1. The confession of the mouth that Jesus is the Lord; 2. The belief in the heart that God has raised Him from the dead (Rom 10:9-11).The inward interdependence of confession and faith: 1 There is no true confession of the mouth without faith in the heart; 2. But there is also no living faith of the heart without the confession of the mouth (Rom 10:9-11).Faith in the heart must ever precede the confession of the mouth; which, unfortunately, is not always the case, and therefore so much is said of confession, and so little is inwardly believed (Rom 10:9-11).The great confession of the Christian Church, as expressed: 1. In the apostolic confession of faith; 2. In the hymns of the church; 3. In its prayers; 4. In its celebration of the Lords Supper (Rom 10:10).The confessors of the Christian Church: 1. In the beginning (the time of the first persecutions); 2. In the period of the Reformation; 3. At the present time (the martyrs in Madagascar, on the South Sea Islands, in Borneo, Syria, &c.; Rom 10:10).

Luther: He who does not believe that Christ has died, and risen, in order to make us righteous from our sins, says: Who shall ascend into heaven, and who shall descend into the deep? But this is done by those who would be justified by works, and not by faith, when they speak thus with the mouth, but not in the heart. Emphasis est in verbo: in the heart.

Starke: Christ is the essence of the Old Testament Scriptures also; he little understands them who does not find Christ in them. The entire life of the saints of the Old Testament is a prophecy of Christ; Joh 5:46 (Rom 10:5).Say not, Who has been among the dead, and has returned again, and has told us of the condition of the dead? Stand by the gospel truth, and you will be righteous and saved; Luk 16:31 (Rom 10:7).Be comforted, troubled soul; though you do not have the joy of faith just in the hour of temptation, you will nevertheless be saved, so long as you depend on Christ; for God, who does not lie, has often given you the assurance that you shall be saved (Rom 10:11).Cramer: The mouth and the heart cannot be separated; Psa 116:10 (Rom 10:9).Faith must not grow on the tongue, but in the heart; Act 15:9 (Rom 10:10).Hedinger: The heart without the mouth is timidity; the mouth without the heart is hypocrisy (Rom 10:10).

Spener: We read that the word is nigh us, namely, that it is declared to us; that we have it in the heartwhere the Holy Spirit has impressed it; and in the mouth, by which we declare it. Therefore, it is not something concealed in heaven, or in the deep, but we have it with us, and in us. Verily, we may say that the word means not only the word itself, but also the blessings which that word presentsChrist, with all His gospel treasures. Christs merit, grace, Spirit, and life are not far from us, and cannot first be brought down from heaven, or brought up from the deep; they are not first to be acquired, but are nigh us, and, if we will accept them, in the mouth and in the heart. Thus, though the language of the Old Testament was not on this wise, since the knowledge of grace was of a less degree, more obscure, and more difficult to be obtained, yet it is now very near to us, for it is imparted by the greater and stronger measure of grace which is now declared to us (Rom 10:8).

Gerlach: Christ is in so far the end of the law as He, 1. Is its final object, the one to whom it leads (Gal 3:24); 2. Is its fulfilment (Mat 5:17); 3. Puts an end to the dominion of the law (Luk 16:16) (Rom 10:4).To become acquainted with Gods gracious counsel, to deprive death of its power by the manifestation of a divine and holy life in the fleshwhich the carnal man was incapable of, since he knew nothing except the righteousness which is of the lawcan be effected by the righteousness which is of faith, which establishes him in Christs right, and freely gives him as his own what the Son of God is and has. The heart need only believe, and the mouth only confess, in order to be righteous and saved (Rom 10:8-11).

Lisco: The Divine order of salvation is, therefore: Justification succeeds faith, Gods assistance is obtained, and he who courageously and perseveringly confesses his faith, obtains salvation (Rom 10:10).Heubner: Righteousness is introduced as speaking; and is regarded as proffering itself. No superhuman knowledge, or profound learning, or ascending to heaven to see Christ, is necessary to convince us of Christs resurrection and His sitting at Gods right hand; neither is it necessary to descend into the kingdom of the dead, to ask whether Christ is with the dead, or risen? In short, no view of the history of Jesus Christ himself, and no laborious and learned research, are necessary for us to believe. Faith is an affair of the heart. No one can, therefore, excuse his unbelief on the ground of the difficulty or impossibility of faith (Rom 10:6-7).Paul brings out prominently the faith of the heart against hypocrites and lip-Christians; and against the fainthearted and desponding confessionthat is, the expression, the demonstration of Christianity by word and deed (Rom 10:9-11).

Besser: Faith and confession are related to each other as essence and manifestation, as light and rays, as fire and flame. Salvation is the manifestation, the present and finite revelation of righteousness; and righteousness is salvation under cover, though the covering is transparent and fragrant, just as Christ is concealed in prophecy, and the enduring tabernacle of God in the Church on earth (Rom 10:10).

d. Rom 10:12-17. The gospel as a saving message for all, Jews as well as Greeks: 1. It is preached to all; but, 2. It is not believed by all (Rom 10:12-17).There is no difference in nations before the one Lord, who is rich unto all that call upon Him; but whosoever calleth upon Him shall be saved (Rom 10:12-13).How the calling upon the true Godwho is perfectly revealed in Christand faith and preaching, are connected (Rom 10:13-16).Lord, who hath believed our report? Thus Isaiah once lamented, and thus we, too, lament frequently; but we can only do it when we are conscious that we have performed our ministerial duty to the best of our knowledge and conscience; that is, if our sermons have proceeded: 1. From thoroughly searching into the Holy Scriptures; 2. From hearty prayer; 3. From a full acquaintance with the necessities of our congregations (Rom 10:16).Christian preaching: 1. What does it effect? Faith. 2. By what means does it come? By the word of God (Rom 10:17).Preaching stands midway between faith and Gods word. 1. It produces the former; 2. It draws its supplies from the latter (Rom 10:17).The appealing power of preaching (Rom 10:17).

Starke: All kinds of people can have free access to God, and so pray that their petitions may be answered (Rom 10:12).Hedinger: Oh, if a man would be saved, how much depends on hearing, teaching, and calling! A beautiful chain; but what is wanting in it? Hearing is defective; proper and thorough preaching is wanting; and many thousands are needed for preaching. Dreadful harm thereby ensues, &c. (Rom 10:14).Cramer: The world ever remains the sameas in Isaiahs day, so at the time of Christ and the Apostles, and even at this very hour. What a pity that the old lamentation must still be repeated! (Rom 10:16.)Lange: Preacher, see that your discourses be delivered in simplicity and Divine power; and hearer, see that your attention is of the right kind (Rom 10:17).

Spener: 1. They must call upon Christ if they would be saved; 2. But if they would call upon Him; they must believe on Him; 3. If they would believe on Him, they must hear His word; 4. But if they would hear His word, it must be preached to them; 5. But if they would have preachers, people must be sent to them for that purpose. These are the successive links in the chain of Divine beneficence (Rom 10:14).Roos: Here, as was always the case with the Apostle in his charges against the Jews, he cites passages from the Old Testament Scriptures; the first of which is Isa 28:16, where the making waste has the same force as being ashamed. The second passage is in Joe 2:32, and comes down lowest to the weakness of men. Our advice to the greatest sinner who stands on the brink of hell is: Call upon the name of the Lord, and thou shalt be saved. The third passage is in Isa 52:7, and is a prophecy of the friendly and beautiful heralds whom the Lord, having previously spoken himself, would send out at the time of the New Testament, in order to preach peace and good-will to men. But why? Undoubtedly in order that men might lay hold of the peace declared to them, and appropriate and enjoy Gods good-will toward them. But because this should take place by faith, these heralds lament, in the fourth passage, Isa 53:1 : Lord, who hath believed our report? (Rom 10:11-16.)Bengel: Any man is worth more than the whole world.

Gerlach: God wills the salvation of all, but all do not wish the salvation of God; unbelief is the cause of the ruin of all who are lost (Rom 10:16).It is Gods will that all should believe; and for this reason He has sent preaching, whose import is His own word (Rom 10:17).

Lisco: It is Christian duty to send teachers to the heathen world; missions are necessary, and according to the Lords will (Mar 16:15); and it is a glorious calling, to declare the message of Jesus, deliverance of the captives, and the new kingdom of God.Preaching takes place by Gods word; that is, by virtue of the Divine call and a doctrine revealed by God (Rom 10:17).

Heubner: Living preaching is Gods chosen means of instruction (Rom 10:14).God must send preachers; they cannot go of themselves (Rom 10:15).All the effects of grace are connected with the word; this applies to fanatics, enthusiasts, and those who despise the word and preaching (Rom 10:17).

Besser: The Divine order of salvation admits of no personal or national distinction (Rom 10:12).The help of the rich Lord, as He passes by, is invited by calling upon Him, though it be not with strong faith, yet with a hearty desire to believe; by calling upon Him, though we do not pray as we ought, yet are supported by the unutterable groans of the Spirit (Rom 8:26); by calling upon Him, if not with advanced knowledge, yet with the loud confession of Bartimeus: Jesus, thou Son of David, have mercy on me! (Mar 10:47) (Rom 10:12.)Bengel. says: He who desires the end, will also contribute the means. God desires that all men call upon Him for salvation.; therefore He wishes them to believe; therefore, to hear; and, therefore, to have preachers. Hence He has sent preachers. He has done every thing necessary for our salvation. His antecedent gracious will is universal, and is clothed with energetic power (Rom 10:14).It is not only necessary for the real preacher in Gods name that the word preached be real, but also that the preacher say: Here is the staff in my hand; the Lord has sent me (Rom 10:15).

e. Rom 10:18-21. The relation of the Jews and Gentiles to the preaching of the gospel: 1. The former did not wish to understand the gospel, although they could understand it; 2. But the latter, although they Were ignorant, have understood it, because they wished to do so.The conclusion of the whole chapter: The Jews are themselves guilty of their wretched fate, which took such a lively hold upon the Apostles sympathy. For, A. The gospel was: 1. Not far from them; 2. It was preached to them; 3. They could lay hold of it; but, B. Theythe Jewssought it; 1. Far off; 2. Did not like to hear it; 3. Would not understand it.

Starke: Who will blame God that so many people remain children of Satan, and are condemned? Behold, they are themselves the cause (Rom 10:21).Roos, with reference to chaps. 9. and 10.: From all this it is plain that the word grace is the most comforting and most severe, the clearest and the darkest word in the Bible. It is the most comforting word, because it assures salvation to the creature (to whom his Creator is in nowise indebted), the sinner who deserves punishment. It is also the most severe word, because it utterly prostrates pride, slays defiance, and completely destroys the notion of self-righteousness, which is so natural to man. It is the clearest word, because it needs no description; but it is also the darkest word, because its simple meaning is understood by only a few humble souls. Many men, who think that they understand this word, conceive Gods grace very much as a princes favor, which always has regard to service, and is never disconnected from utility. But God needs no service. His will alone is free. No one can recompense Him. And yet He is righteous, and acts according to knowledge. Whoso is wise, and he shall understand these things? Prudent, and he shall know them?

Heubner, on Psalms 19 : The gospel and creation are Gods two voices that recho about us.

Besser: Quotation of an expression of Luther, who compares preaching to a stone thrown into the water. The circles ever enlarge, but the water in the middle is still.

Lange: The intercession of Paul, who was persecuted by the Jews, for Israel.His witness for Israel: 1. High praise; 2. Great censure.The different forms of self-righteousness.Self-righteousness is always opposed to Gods righteousness, which is: 1. Legislative; 2. Penal; 3. Merciful, justifying; 4. Awakening to new life.The self-testimony of the law and the gospel to the inward nature of man: 1. The law, the ideal of his life; 2. The gospel, the life of his ideal.The twin form, faith, and confession: 1. Is positively different; yet, 2. Inseparable.The riches of the Lord to praying heartsto the praying, sinful world.The universality of the gospel.The freedom and limitation of the message of salvation: 1. It is free to all in the world who call upon the Lord; 2. It is confined to faith, because unbelief contradicts it.

[Burkitt (condensed): Christ is the end of the law: 1. As He is the scope of it; 2. As He is the accomplishment of it; 3. As He is to the believer what the law would have been to him if he could have perfectly kept itnamely, righteousness and life, justification and salvation.The natural man is a proud man; he likes to live upon his own stock he cannot stoop to a sincere and universal renunciation of his own righteousness, and to depend wholly upon the righteousness of another. It is natural to a man to choose rather to eat a brown crust, or wear a coarse garment, which he can call his own, than to feed upon the richest dainties, or wear the costliest robes, which he must receive as an alms from another.Doddridge: Let us rejoice in the spread which the gospel has already had, and let us earnestly and daily pray that the voices of those Divine messengers that proclaim it may go forth unto all the earth, and their words reach, in a literal sense, to the remotest ends of the globe.Lord, give us any plague rather than the plague of the heart!Scott: Ministers who are faithful bear the most affectionate good-will to those from whom they receive the greatest injuries; and they offer fervent and persevering prayers for the salvation of the very persons against whom they denounce the wrath of God if they persist in unbelief.Clarke: Salvation only by righteousness: 1. The righteousness, or justification which is by faith, receives Christ as an atoning sacrifice, by which all sin is pardoned; 2. It receives continual supplies of grace from Christ by the eternal Spirit, through which man is enabled to love God with all his heart, soul, mind, and strength, and his neighbor as himself; 3. This grace is afforded in sufficient degrees, suited to all places, times, and circumstances, so that no trial can happen too great to be borne, as the grace of Christ is ever at hand to support and save to the uttermost.Hodge: It is the first and most pressing duty of the Church to cause all men to hear the gospel. The solemn question, How can they believe without a preacher? should sound day and night in the ears of the churches. The gospels want of success, or the fact that few believe our report, is only a reason for its wider extension. The more who hear, the more will be saved, even should it be but a small proportion of the whole.J. F. H.]

Footnotes:

[1]Rom 10:1.[After , K. L. Rec. insert , defended by Philippi; omitted in . A. B. D. F. G., by Lachmann, Tischendorf, Meyer, Tholuck, Alford, Tregelles. Probably inserted to limit to , since it seemed improper to connect it with . On the meaning of the last-named word, as involved in the critical question, see Exeg. Notes.

[2]Rom 10:1.[. A. B. D. F. G., all modern editors, read , instead of (K. L. Rec.). The latter was substituted as an explanatory gloss, which was the more necessary, as this verse began a church lesson (Lange). (to complete the sense) is inserted before . in Rec., on the authority of 3. K. L.; rejected by modern editors generally.

[3]Rom 10:1.[Rec. (.3. K. L.) insert before . This probably led to the paraphrase of the E. V.

[4]Rom 10:3.[A. B. D., a number of versions and fathers, omit after . (So Lachmann, Tischendorf, Wordsworth, Tregelles.) It is found in 3. F. K. L., Syriac, &c.; also after in one cursive. It is retained by Meyer, Lange; bracketted by Alford, who, in his notes, agrees with the authors just named, in thinking the repetition to be original and emphatic, but easily deemed superfluous; hence the omission.

[5]Rom 10:4.[Dr. Langes rendering is striking: Denn das Endziel des Gesetzes ist: Christus zur Gerechtigkeit fr Jeden, der glaubt (For the end of the law is: Christ as righteousness for every one who believes). Luthers version is really a paraphrase: Denn Christus ist des Gesetzes Ende; wer an den glaubt, der ist gerecht.

[6]Rom 10:5.[The E. V. has translated , which is here merely a quotation-mark ( recitantis). The above emendation is from the Revision by Five Anglican Clergymen. The is found before . in 1. A. D1.an alteration, on account of the accusative after .The quotation is from Lev 18:5. If the reading of the Rec. be adopted, the only variation is , instead of ; a change necessary to adapt the citation to its position here. See next Note.

[7]Rom 10:5.[The correct reading is difficult to determine. Most editors now retain (Rec., 3. B. F. G., most versions and fathers). Instead of (Rec., 3. D. F. L., some versions and fathers, Meyer, Wordsworth Lange), the reading is found in 1. A. B., many versions, and is accepted by Lachmann, De Wette, Alford Tregelles. The singular would be a variation from both the LXX. and the Hebrew; yet this but renders an alteration to the plural (for the sake of conformity) the more probable. On the other hand, Meyer urges strongly that the plural stands or falls with , which is now generally accepted. The change to the singular may have been made to guard against the validity of the righteousness of works, as indeed A. substitutes for . With some hesitation, I hold to the reading of the Rec.

[8]Rom 10:6.[From this point to the middle of Rom 10:8, we have a free citation from the LXX., Deu 30:12-14. Parts of the verses are quoted, but there is only one considerable variation (at the beginning of Rom 10:7). As the LXX. does not differ materially from the Hebrew, we give only the text of the former: (Rom 10:11, , , , .) 12. . ; 13. 14. . , . The New Testament text is remarkably well established throughout. The variations from the LXX. are noticed in the Exeg. Notes.

[9]Rom 10:9.[B. has , some fathers; others add . These readings are doubtless explanatory glosses, and, as such, tend to confirm the interpretation given in the brackets above: Jesus as Lord. See Exeg. Notes; also on the rendering because.The E. V. improperly translates , hath raised. It is the historical aorist.

[10]Rom 10:10.[The E. V. has made this verb active, and the second one passive. Both are passive. It would seem as if this rendering was borrowed from the German: man glaubt, which exactly expresses the force of the Greek.

[11]Rom 10:12.[Literally: there is no distinction of Jew and Greek; but this sounds too abstract, as if the distinctions were obliterated, as in Gal 3:28. Here it is better, then, to preserve the concrete idea, by using between. So Rev. Five Ang. Clergymen.

[12]Rom 10:12.[Lange renders: Denn Einer und derselbe ist Herr von Allen. So Noyes: For one and the same is Lord over all. Five Ang. Clergymen: The same is Lord over all. The Amer. Bible Union as above. This is most literal. Alford, indeed, objects, on account of the strangeness of thus standing alone; but this is met by Dr. Lange in the Exeg. Notes, where he expands the phrase into: One and the same. Lord is Lord over all. Stuart: There is the same Lord; which is harsh. On the whole, it is best to find the predicate here, and not supply is with rich, as is done in the E. V.

[13]Rom 10:13.[This is almost word for word from the LXX., Joe 2:32 (Heb 3:5): , … The is inserted to introduce the proof. In Act 2:21, the citation is made even more exactly. The strong form of the Greek is retained by rendering, every one whosoever (Alford, Five Ang. Clergymen); Amer. Bible Union, Noyes: every one who.

[14]Rom 10:14.[In each of the four interrogative sentences of Rom 10:14-15, the exact form of the leading verb is doubtful. The Rec. in every case gives the future indicative, but the uncial authority supports the aorist subjunctive, the deliberative or conjunctive aorist. The MS. authority is given in the separate notes. Here the Rec., with K. L., and some fathers, reads: ; . A. B. D. F. G.: . The future is supported by Meyer, and apparently accepted by Dr. Lange. The aorist is adopted throughout by most critical editors. (So Tregelles.) As the variation here involves only the change of into , it is readily accounted for. The E. V. gives a correct rendering of the future, which, indeed, in these cases differs little in meaning from the conjunctive. Can is substituted to express the force of the correct reading, although it is perhaps a shade too strong. The Amer. Bible Union omits have in the relative clauses throughout; but, although this is a literal rendering of the aorist, it here obscures the meaning by destroying the litotes. All other later versions properly retain the English perfect.

[15]Rom 10:14.[Rec., A. K. L.: . 1. B. D. F. G. . The last two prefix the argument.

[16]Rom 10:14.[Rec. L.: ; 1. D. F. G.: ; 3. A2. B. ; the latter, though not so well supported as the other aorists, is probably correct, since there is no reason for a change of tense.

[17]Rom 10:15.[Rec. (no MSS.): ;. . A. B. D. K. L.: . This well-supported aorist seems to decide the other cases.

[18]Rom 10:15.[Isa 52:7. The quotation is not exact, though giving the sense of the Hebrew. The LXX. is scarcely followed at all. See Exeg. Notes.

[19]Rom 10:15.[The words: , , are omitted in 1. A. B. C., by some versions and fathers; rejected by Lachmann, Tischendorf, Tregelles; bracketted by Alford. They are found in 3. D. F. K. L., many versions and fathers; retained by Meyer, Wordsworth, Lange, on the ground that the repetition might easily lead to the omission. This view will readily be allowed by any one who examines the passage, since it is easy to mistake the first occurrence of so long a word for the second. The original passage, of course, favors the retention.The uncial authority against (Rec) before , is decisive. The E. V. takes away the exact parallelism by rendering by a different phrase in each clause. A paraphrase is necessary in any case, from the poverty of our language.

[20]Rom 10:16.[Here also gospel is too restricted. The above emendation is adopted by Amer. Bible Union, Noyes, Five Ang. Clergymen.

[21]Rom 10:16.[As none of the modern versions have altered this citation, it is allowed to remain, but the reader will find, in the Exeg. Notes the view of Forbes, which would be thus expressed: Who (of us) hath believed what we heard?

[22]Rom 10:17.[1. B. C. D1., many versions (including the Vulgate) ; adopted by Lachmann, Alford, Tregelles. The great majority of the fathers, of modern commentators sustain the reading of the Rec. (. corr. A. D23. K. L., some versions). Bede: Dei Christi. Alford deems the received reading a rationalizing correction, while Meyer, De Wette, and most, think the other was a later gloss, which is more probable.

[23]Rom 10:19.[The order of the Rec. is poorly supported. . A. B. C, and others: , adopted by critical editors. The alteration in the order of the English text is sustained by modern versions.

[24] Rom 10:20.[The Hebrew text of Isa 65:1, as far as cited by Paul, is:

The LXX.: , . The variations are a transposition of the clauses, and , instead of . The Hebrew is followed with exactness. is inserted after , in B. D1. F.; bracketted by Alford and Tregelles.

[25]Rom 10:21.[The order of the LXX. is: . . . ; otherwise the citation is exact. The is an addition of the LXX. The Hebrew gives but one adjective, , rebellious.To Israel, is not correct; with respect to, concerning, is the meaning, which, however, is sufficiently indicated by of; so Five Ang. Clergymen, Amer. Bible Union.R.]

[26][Stuart, and others, take the phrase righteousness of God here as = Gods method of justification. How incorrect this is, will appear from a reference to p. 74 ff. Dr. Hodge says, very properly: It is that on which the sentence of justification is founded. Alford: that righteousness, which avails before God, which becomes ours in justification.R.]

[27][Alford defends the passive sense, as expressing the result only, it might be themselves, or some other that subjected themthe historical fact was, they were not subjected. But as this verse presents an antithesis to (Rom 10:1); and as the whole current of thought implies their personal guilt, the middle sense is preferable, and is adopted, by the majority of commentators.R.]

[28][Meyer thus paraphrases: For in Christ the validity of the law has come to an end, that righteousness should become the portion of every believing one.R.]

[29][Dr. Langes view is, on the whole, to be preferred; but he does not clearly state those of other commentators. We append, therefore, the three opinions most in faver. (1) Christ is the aim (Endziel) of the law. (So Chrysostom, Calvin, Beza, Bengel, Alford, Webster and Wilkinson, and others.) This view means either (a.) the end of the law was to make men righteous, and this end is accomplished in Christ (Chrysostom, Stuart, and others); or, (b.) the law led to Him, as schoolmaster (Calvin, and others, Tholuck reaches this from another point of view). (2) Christ is the fulfilment of the law ( = ). This is, indeed, true, but scarcely meets the requirements of this passage, especially if law be limited to the ceremonial law. (3) Christ is the termination of the law (Augustine, Luther, Tholuck, Meyer, Hodge). This is the chronological view, which Dr. Lange calls the negative one. In what sense he is the termination of the law, is also a matter of dispute (ceremonial, or moral?). Some confusion exists in most commentaries in the citing of authorities. In fact, these meanings largely run into each other. In favor of the last, it may be urged that the Apostle is drawing such a contrast here between the righteousness of the law and the righteousness of faith (Rom 10:5-6), as requires a strong antithesis between the law and Christ; but unless we interpret: When Christ came, the old legal system was abolished, and a new era commenced (Hodge), this antithesis will not be correct. Yet the fact that Paul quotes from the law itself to support the claims of the righteousness of faith, seems inconsistent with this view. (See below.) Nor will it be evident how this verse introduces a proof of the non-submission of the Jews to the righteousness of God (Rom 10:3), unless it asserts that the law led to Christ, rather than that Christ abolished the law. All three views may be included, but the first is the more prominent one.R.]

[30][The translator found it necessary to make some changes in the order of the original. In making the additions, it was found to be impossible to avoid confusion, without further transpositions. Nothing has been omitted, but it has been an unusually difficult task to present Dr. Langes notes in a shape that would correspond to the order of the Apostles words.R.]

[31][To this may be added the exalted sense which has in the New Testament. Comp. Tholuck, Trench (referring to Christs calling himself ): No wonder, then, that Scripture should know of no higher word than to set forth either the blessedness of God, or the blessedness of the creature in communion with God. Syn. New Testament, 27R.]

[32][Dr. Lange thus attempts to avoid the two opposing views (1) that an actual outward obedience was followed by actual temporal blessings, and that this was all the saying of Moses meant; (2) that the law belonged to a covenant of works, the conditions of which could not be fulfilled. The first is altogether out of keeping with the Apostles argument. The second seems to put the law in a wrong position; for the law, although made a mere expression of the condition of a legal righteousness, is really something far more; it is the schoolmaster, &c. comp. chap. 7 and Gal 3:19-25. The antithesis between Rom 10:5-6 is not absolute, but relative. Even the doing and living, pointed to Christ, was fulfilled in Christ; who, by His vicarious doing and living, makes us live and do.R.]

[33][Stuart: But justification by faith speaketh thus. The sense is the same as to say: one who preaches justification by faith, might say, &c. This is scarcely allowable, for it transfers the whole passage altogether out of the period of Moses words, besides putting a limited and inexact meaning upon.R.]

[34][So Hodge: Without directly citing this passage, Paul uses nearly the same language to express the same idea. Stuart: It is the general nature of the imagery, in the main, which is significant to the purpose of the writer. Paul means simply to affirm that, if Moses could truly say that his law was intelligible and accessible, the doctrine of justification by faith in Christ is still more so. But this method of regarding the passage is open to very grave objections. It regards Paul as sanctioning that dangerous use of Scripture, by way of accommodation, which is evidently wrong, judged by its evil effects on preacher and people at the present day.R.]

[35][Either the word respecting faith, or, which forms the substratum and object of faith (Alford). The latter is to be preferred, since word, just before, must be taken in a very wide sense, as including the whole subject-matter of the gospel. The personal object of faith is near, is certainly implied in Rom 10:7; but this is not directly expressed here.R.]

[36][Alford thus paraphrases: With the heart, faith is exercised (, men believe) unto (so as to be available to the acquisition of) righteousness, but (q. d., not only so; but there must be an outward confession, in order for justification to be carried forward to salvation) with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. . is the terminus ultimus et apex justificationis, consequent lot merely on the act of justifying faith, but on a good confession before the world, maintained unto the end.R.]

[37][Dr. Hodge is very guarded here: By confessing Him before men, we secure the performance of His promise that He will confess us before the angels of God. But surely we may not fear to interpret salvation as an actual salvation, begun here in us, and to culminate at that time, when we shall be thus confessed.R.]

[38][Alford: The Apostle seems to use it here as taking up , Rom 10:4. At all events, there is a recurrence to the starting-point, Rom 9:33, where the same passage was cited, and this enlargement of it is at once established in the verses which follow. A weighty monosyllable!R.]

[39][Meyer means that, if God is referred to, we must add this definition, God in Christ; which is altogether arbitrary, as he well remarks.R.]

[40][Dr. Hodge: It is an argument founded on the principle, that if God wills the end, He wills also the means. He properly opposes Calvins view, that the Apostle is proving the design of sending the gospel to the Gentiles from the fact that they have received it. Still, Dr. Langes view (which is that of De Wette and Meyer) seems yet more exact, since the providing of the means is more marked in this passage than their success.R.]

[41][This is the classical usage, and all the New Testament passages can be quite as readily explained thus. The Hebrew word is not Hiphil, yet the common interpretation forces a Hiphil sense upon it.R.]

[42][Stuart has a singular view respecting this verse. He finds in it the suggestion of the Jewish objector, whom he has already discovered in Rom 10:14-15, to the effect that many of the Jews are not culpable for unbelief, inasmuch as they have not heard the gospel, and hearing it is necessary to the believing of it.R.]

[43][The LXX. thus renders , which means, first, their line; then, from the string of an instrument, their sound.R.]

[44][Bretschneider and Reiche take Israel as the object of the verb, and supply God as subject. Did not God know Israel! But this is arbitrary, and not in accordance with the context.R.]

[45][Noyes, in his version, preserves the parallelism of the verbs; , , by the paraphrase: I will move you to jealousy, I will excite you to indignation.R.]

[46][Stier, Jesaias, nicht Pseudo-Jesaias, pp. 797 ff.R.]

[47][So Conybeare: The metaphor is that of a mother opening her arms to call back her child to her embrace.R.]

Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange

DISCOURSE: 1888
PAULS LOVE TO HIS BRETHREN

Rom 10:1. Brethren, my hearts desire and prayer to God for Israel is, that they might be saved.

TO seek the salvation of our fellow-creatures is but an unthankful office. The intimations which we are obliged to give them respecting their guilt and danger, are considered by them as uncharitable censures, rather than as friendly admonitions; and thus we call forth only the resentment of those, whose eternal interests we are most anxious to promote. St. Paul, who was most abundant in labours for the salvation of his brethren, experienced, beyond all others, their hatred and contempt. Aware that this would be the effect of his exertions, he was always studious to counteract it; and scarcely ever mentioned an offensive truth, without testifying, by some following observations, that it was dictated by love. Throughout the whole Epistle to the Romans, this appears in a very striking light. Having shewn, in the second chapter, that the Jews, notwithstanding their being in covenant with God by circumcision, were as much in need of salvation as the idolatrous and abandoned Gentiles, he corrects the apparent severity of his remarks, by saying, What advantage then hath the Jew? Much every way [Note: Rom 2:28-29. with 3:1, 2.]. Proceeding afterwards to shew that the law could not justify any man, and fearing that he might on that account be thought an enemy to the law, he removes all ground for that suspicion; Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law [Note: Rom 3:28. with 31.]. Comparing afterwards his connexion with the law to the state of a woman that has lost her husband, who is therefore at liberty to be married to another; and observing, that sin took occasion from the law itself to bring forth fruit unto death; he guards them against imagining that he meant thereby to cast any reflection upon the law, as though it was itself sinful; What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid [Note: Rom 7:1-6. with 7.]. Having yet further, in the prosecution of his argument, asserted, that the incapacity of the law to save men was the reason of Gods sending his own Son to save them, he (after some enlargement on this subject) appeals to God in the most solemn manner, that, instead of speaking these things from any ill will to his Jewish brethren, he could wish himself even accursed from Christ for them, if by that means they might be saved [Note: Rom 8:3. with 9:15.]. Thus also, in the passage before us, having shewn that the Gentiles were admitted into the Church and made partakers of salvation, while the Jews were cast out, he assures them that nothing could be more adverse to his wishes than this awful dispensation; Brethren, my hearts desire and prayer to God for Israel is, that they might be saved.

The same caution would we also use in ministering to you the Gospel of Christ. We are of necessity obliged to declare to you many unwelcome truths: but God knoweth, that our only motive in declaring them is, to benefit and save your souls; and that, while that is the object of our public ministrations, it is also the frequent subject of our secret prayers.

Let us, in elucidating our text, consider,

I.

What it was that the Apostle desired in their behalf

St. Paul had no wish to proselyte men to a party, or to procure followers to himself
His object was to save them
[Salvation comprehends not only a deliverance from all the penal effects of sin, but a restoration to the favour and image of God, and an exaltation to all the glory and felicity of heaven

This is the greatest of all blessings. The concerns of time and sense are of no value in comparison of it: yea, crowns, kingdoms, worlds, are lighter than vanity itself It is a blessing which all equally stand in need of. There is no man that is not a sinner before God, and therefore no man that is not exposed to his everlasting displeasure. Though men may differ with respect to the degrees of their guilt, there is no difference whatever with respect to their liableness to the wrath of God, and their need of his saving mercy It is a blessing, without which existence itself will prove a curse. If those who did not partake of it could be annihilated, or if there were a purgatory, where those who die unprepared for it may be rendered fit to enjoy it, we might account our present life a blessing. But there are two states, in the one or other of which all must be fixed for ever: and they who enjoy not the felicity of heaven, must endure for ever the miseries of hell. Let us consider for a moment what those miseries are, and we shall need nothing more to shew us the value of salvation ]

This object lay near his heart, and called forth his most earnest exertions
[He was not contented to obtain salvation himself: he was anxious for the welfare of his fellow-creatures, and laid to heart their interests, as though they were his own Nor did he rest satisfied with good wishes and desires: he laboured with incredible assiduity and self-denial, suffering all things cheerfully, not excepting imprisonments and death itself, for the advancement of their happiness [Note: 2Co 11:23-29. 2Ti 2:10.] In secret also did he labour fervently for them in prayer night and day. He knew the efficacy of intercession; and therefore besought God, with strong crying and tears, to take the veil from their hearts, and to enlighten them with the saving knowledge of his truth ]

For our own information, it will be proper to inquire,

II.

In what way he directed them to seek it

The whole Epistle to the Romans was written with the express view of setting forth the way of salvation. It shews at large that we are fallen and ruined creatures; that God has sent his only-begotten Son into the world to redeem us; and that all who would be saved, must seek for mercy through his meritorious blood and righteousness. But in a more peculiar and emphatical manner did he urge these truths in that part from whence our text is taken.
He shewed them that they must found all their hopes on Christ alone
[Consult the preceding context. There he states a matter of fact well known to all; namely, that the idolatrous and abandoned Gentiles, who had never thought about salvation, had been prevailed upon to seek after it, and had actually attained it, because they were willing to accept it in Gods appointed way, by faith in Christ alone: whereas the Jews, who had shewn considerable attention to the concerns of their souls, had failed of attaining salvation, because they disdained to seek it in this way. He tells them, that this fact agreed with the prophecies, which actually foretold this very event, and declared (many hundred years before) that Christ would thus become a stumbling-block to that self-righteous people [Note: Rom 9:30-33.].

The same he sets forth also in the following context. He confesses that his Jewish brethren had a zeal to serve God; but it was a mistaken zeal. In three things they fatally erred: they were ignorant of the plan which God had devised for justifying sinnersthey were seeking to establish a righteousness of their own, by which they might be justified before himand when a better righteousness was proposed to them, even the righteousness of the Lord Jesus Christ, they would not trust in it, or submit to be saved in such an humiliating wayThat these were errors, even the law itself might teach them; for Christ was the end of the law for righteousness: He was the very object to whom both the ceremonial and moral law directed them, for the obtaining of such a righteousness as should justify them before God: and this righteousness they were to obtain by faith in him. The moral law shut them up to this method of obtaining salvation, because it denounced nothing but curses against every one that had violated it even in a single instance [Note: Gal 3:10; Gal 3:23-24.]: and the ceremonial law taught them to look to that Great Sacrifice which Christ was in due time to offer for the sins of the whole world [Note: ver. 24.].

Thus plainly did he direct them unto Christ, as their only, and all-sufficient Saviour.]
In pointing them thus to Christ, he did most effectually consult their everlasting welfare
[The way of salvation by faith in Christ is plain, suitable, safe, and glorious. Nothing can be more plain. Suppose a person about to be imprisoned for debt has that debt discharged by a surety; he will see as clear as the light what is the true ground of his deliverance. Such then is the deliverance which we have by Christ And this way of salvation is suitable. If you were to propose any other method whatever, it would be altogether unsuitable for fallen man but this is suited to the greatest of sinners; and that too even in their dying hour How safe it is, must appear to all who consider that Christ is God equal with the Father; that he assumed our nature, and died upon the cross, on purpose to make atonement for us; and that the promise and oath of Jehovah are pledged for the acceptance of all who truly believe in Christ And glorious will it be found to all eternity, inasmuch as all the perfections of the Deity are honoured by it, and the happiness of all that shall be saved is enhanced by it beyond all calculation or conception ]

Address
1.

Those who are careless about their souls

[We are bound to desire and pray for your salvation: and we hope that in some small measure we can adopt respecting you the language of the text. But you must desire salvation, and pray to God for it yourselves; or else it will be in vain ever to expect it. We appeal to you, Whether God will or can bestow it upon those who are too proud to ask for it, and too thoughtless to desire it?]

2.

Those who are seeking salvation, but in a mistaken way

[Do not think it sufficient that you desire to be saved; or that you are zealous in seeking after salvation. The Jews were not only zealous in their way, but confident that they were right; and yet never attained the object of their pursuit. Remember, you must be humbled; you must be contrite; you must rely on Christ alone ]

3.

Those who have obtained mercy of the Lord

[While we desire, and pray to God for, the salvation of others, we rejoice and bless our God for you. We consider the prosperity of your souls as the richest recompence of our labours. Ye have received Christ Jesus the Lord: see to it then that ye walk in him, and abide in him, and cleave unto him with full purpose of heart.]

Fuente: Charles Simeon’s Horae Homileticae (Old and New Testaments)

CONTENTS

The Apostle is here expressing his deep Concern that the Jews were turning from Christ to the Law, He speaks very blessedly towards the Close of the Chapter, that no Believer, whether Jew or Gentile, looking to Christ, shall fail of Grace and Salvation in Christ.

Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

Brethren, my heart’s desire and prayer to God for Israel is, that they might be saved. (2) For I bear them record that they have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge. (3) For they being ignorant of God’s righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God. (4) For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone that believeth.

This chapter, like the former, gives us a very interesting view of the tenderness and affection of Paul’s heart. He knew what the Lord had said, that there was a remnant according to the election of grace; and, therefore, unconscious who they were, in the great mass of the Jewish nation, he testifieth to the whole body of his brethren after the flesh, how eagerly he longed for their salvation by Christ. For the whole Jewish nation differed widely from the world around them in their apprehension of God. They had a zeal for his glory distinguished from all their neighbours. They were not as those nations were, Idolaters. They expected Christ. They honored the law in the external observance of it. But in the midst of all this, they had no consciousness of Christ, and were totally ignorant of Him as a Savior. A righteousness of their own, or a fancied righteousness they were endeavoring to set up, all the mean time unconscious of the Person, and work of the Lord our righteousness.

Reader! it may be well to pause, and consider the subject as it concerns ourselves. An ignorance of Christ’s righteousness, and a supposed preparation for acceptance with God in a righteousness of our own, is the general creed of the present hour. The great mass of those who profess the Gospel, if engaged at all in a concern for salvation, is prosecuting the hope of acceptance, partly by the deeds of the law, and partly by the grace of Christ. But, this is neither law nor Gospel. It is not the law, for a curse is pronounced upon everyone that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them, Gal 3:10 . Neither is it the Gospel, for there we are expressly said to be saved by grace through faith, and that not of ourselves, for it is the gift of God, and not of works, lest any man should boast. Eph 2:8-9 .

I would not wish the Reader to turn away from the subject those few verses contain, before that he hath considered, and that very maturely, the charge Paul brings against those brethren of his, of whom he speaks. There is nothing as essential in forming the standard of true faith, as this very point of the sinner’s justification before God. If we are confused in our apprehension of things here, that confusion will run, like the links in a chain, through every part in life and practice. Now the Apostle expressly saith, that Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone that believeth. Here then is the righteousness, the sole righteousness of his people. In this the soul of the true believer is justified before God. And, such is the infinite worth and perfection of it, that God beholds and accepts the persons of the redeemed in it, as fully and compleatly justified, as if they had wrought it out themselves. For Christ and his redeemed are one. The scripture blessedly saith concerning it, that it is unto all and upon all them that believe, Rom 3:22 . See the Commentary on this passage.

And I beg the Reader yet one moment longer to bear with me while I add, that beside the proper apprehension of the doctrine itself, in order to a real enjoyment of the soul, there must be an heart-felt acquaintance with it in the conscience. The Apostle James calls that word an engrafted word which is able to save the soul, Jas 1:21 . meaning, that it lives in the heart, and is always remaining there. Not floating in the understanding, but influencing the whole life. A child of God, when regenerated by the Holy Ghost, awakened to a sense of sin, and an apprehension of the Person, work, and glory of Christ; hath passed from death to life. He hath felt the sentence of God’s broken law in his conscience; and hath fled from it to Jesus, and his complete, all-justifying righteousness. And here he rests. In this he finds a perfect security. And his comfort in it is not made up in the correctness of his judgment, but in the lively actings of faith in his soul. Reader! are your apprehensions of Christ, as the end of the law for righteousness, living principles, inwrought by God the Spirit on this foundation?

Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

The Present Blessing

Rom 10:5-11

Whatever difficulty the commentator may find in this adoption by the Apostle of the words of the lawgiver, the evangelical import of the passage is both clear and rich. The redemption in Christ is set forth with marvellous plainness and power. Note the three leading characteristics of His great salvation.

I. It is marked by clearness. The ninth verse gives the true Apostles’ creed, ‘Because if thou shalt confess with thy mouth Jesus as Lord, and shalt believe in thy heart that God raised Him from the dead, thou shalt be saved’. It is a definite creed. All have heard of the lament of the dying German metaphysician: ‘Only one man in Germany understands my philosophy, and he does not understand it’. But the message of Christ does not call upon us to grasp abstruse and incomprehensible speculations; only to accept simple, definite, historical facts. It is a short creed. It is a simple creed. ‘With the heart man believeth unto righteousness.’ Here is the grand point too often overlooked. We approach religion as though it were a science to be dealt with intellectually, as other sciences are, whereas it is in a special sense the sphere of the heart. As we know God chiefly through our heart, so with the heart we must understand and appropriate the salvation which He has wrought out for us in Christ.

II. It is marked by nearness. ‘It is in thy mouth.’ All the great words summed up in the one word ‘salvation’ are in our mouth, and have been in our mouth since our earliest days. ‘And in thy heart’ We need not gaze into heaven or peer into the abyss; God is already within us, seeking to effect the purpose of His will. The energy necessary to save and perfect lies even now latent, dormant within. The difficulty is not to find Christ, it is to avoid Him; the difficulty is not to get Him into our life, but to keep Him out.

III. It is marked by freeness. Genius is for the few, whilst in the redemption of the soul the same Lord over all is rich unto all who call upon Him. In mythology we read of one of the gods fettering a terrible wolf with a thread of silk: with the softer, more ethereal thread of faith working by love Christ tames the wildness of our nature, and winsomely leads us along the lilied pathways of purity and peace.

We do not offer a salvation far off, but here. We do not offer a salvation far off, but now. The poet speaks of running back to fetch the age of gold, but we need not traverse nineteen centuries to find Christ; He has annihilated time, and stands at our side mighty to save.

W. L. Watkinson, The Bane and the Antidote, p. 187.

References. X. 6. J. S. Bartlett, Sermons, p. 108. X. 6-9. F. D. Maurice, Sermons, vol. vi. p. 63. X. 7. Expositor (4th Series), vol. iii. pp. 245, 369; ibid. (5th Series), vol. vii. p. 222.

Rom 10:9

See Augustine’s Confessions, book viii. ii., and Clough’s fine poem, A Protest.

Belief and Confession

Rom 10:9-10

With the mouth, Confession; with the heart, Belief. There are, says St. Paul, in the act of faith two moments, that of believing, that of confessing: they are two and not one.

There is centre and there is circumference, there is fact and the name which echoes the fact, thought and the action which it genders, vision and the art which externalises it, a Belief in the heart and Confession with the mouth, communion held with God and this communion made known to oneself and to the brethren; lastly, there is the life of the soul, which is our faith, and there is the language whereby we live it, which is our creed.

I. Creed enables the personal life, in religion but also in all else. The difficulties arise not over the private creed, but the public: it is here that a man’s faith is gauged by his fellows, and is approved or reprobated. So let us ask what is the Creed, when recited in public and in common. Is it then still a language, still an instrument enabling life, but the life of a community.

We will consider what it is that happens when the worshippers turn eastward and utter together, ‘I believe in God the Father’. What are they doing? Loading the air with vibrations of sound? Charging the minds of listeners with vibrations of thought? Much more than that We are doing an act of will, and an act not of the private will but the public, the will of the Church of Christ It is our Father Whom I in the midst of the congregation declare, not my Father, as in my chamber. The thing which I will is that my fellow-believers throughout the Church Universal, and I myself with them, should be one in common sonship to the Father of all.

‘I believe in Jesus Christ,’ Who redeemed us. Again I declare and I will and purpose the redemption of the world by Jesus Christ, the Son, Who for us men and for our salvation became man. The Redeemer, whose day I rejoice to see, is the Redeemer of all living, yea, of the groaning and travailing creation. The Passion, which by declaring my belief in Him I consent to share, is a Passion not only of Christ in me, but of Christ in the Church; a Passion which puts to the cross, and racks and breaks and buries into life the whole organism of the Body of Christ The thing I will is that my fellow-members of His body, and with them I, should be made conformable to the death of Jesus, which is a death unto life.

And when last I declare that ‘I believe in the Holy Ghost,’ Who sanctifies, I do not declare and purpose the enlightenment of my sole mind, as might some self-sent prophet, but of the collective mind of all who are in Christ; nor the kindling of my own heart’s fire, but of the fire on the deep and wide heart of humanity summed in Christ, with my own spark kindled from it; nor a nerving only of my single will, but a massed will of the holy commonwealth. The unction of the Spirit is an anointing not of a believer’s single head, but a dew that lights on all the breadth and length of the heavenly kingdom, like as the dew of Hermon which fell upon the hill of Zion.

II. There is no question of re-writing, of modernising the creeds, as some would propose, offering us samples of how to do it, which do not attract. This must not be done, unless the life of the symbolism were at stake. It must not be done, because the life of the Church must be continuous, and this continuity requires fixity in the formula of the life: a watchword or signal cannot be changed, only because a new one might be convenient for a modern and for the moment. And it must not be done because an ancient speech is also consecrate, and has power, has a pure and holy and wholesome magic on the will of the commonwealth, and to change it would be to unnerve the sanctions of the creed.

But, last, it does not need to be done, because there are some truths which can be told in words which do not need re-writing, which do not grow old, but have eternity, or what is, for any mortal man’s interest, eternal.

J. Huntley Skrine, Sermons to Pastors and Masters, p. 35.

References. X. 9. F. Pigon, Christian World Pulpit, vol. li. p. 356. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xxxii. No. 1898. Expositor (6th Series), vol. v. p. 45; ibid. vol. viii. p. 345. X. 9, 10. W. P. Du Bose, The Gospel According to St. Paul, p. 45. C. Perren, Revival Sermons in Outline, p. 264.

Rom 10:10

To a world distracted by hostile creeds and colliding philosophies, it [Christianity] taught its doctrines, not as a human speculation but as a Divine revelation, authenticated much less by reason than by faith. ‘With the heart man believeth unto righteousness;’ ‘He that doeth the will of My Father will know the doctrine, whether it be of God’; ‘Unless you believe you cannot understand’; ‘A heart naturally Christian’; ‘The heart makes the theologian,’ are the phrases which best express the first action of Christianity upon the world. Like all great religions, it was more concerned with modes of feeling than with modes of thought.

Lecky, History of European Morals, iii.

References. X. 10. S. A. Eliot, Christian World Pulpit, vol. lx. p. 23. H. Allen, Penny Pulpit, No. 1647, p. 217. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. ix. Nos. 519 and 520, and vol. lii. No. 3011. X. 11. Ibid. vol. xxxvi. No. 2145. X. 12. Lyman Abbott, Christian World Pulpit, vol. lviii. p. 123. X. 13. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. iii. No. 140. X. 14, 15. Ibid. vol. xxxix. No. 2327. X. 14-17. C. S. Home, Relationships of Life, p. 139.

Rom 10:15

The time had now arrived when it was necessary for Addison to choose a calling. Everything seemed to point his course towards the clerical profession. His habits were regular, his opinions orthodox. His college had large ecclesiastical preferment in its gift and boasts that it has given at least one bishop to almost every see in England. Dr. Lancelot Addison held an honourable position in the Church, and had set his heart on seeing his son a clergyman.

Macaulay.

Compare Earle’s description in his Microcosmography of the career of a younger brother. ‘If his annuity stretch so far, he is sent to the university, and with great heartburning takes upon him the ministry, as a profession he is condemned to by his ill fortune.’

References. X. 15. H. R. Heywood, Sermons and Addresses, p. 138. A. P. Stanley, Canterbury Sermons, p. 1. J. Baines, Sermons, p. 86.

Rom 10:16

The Roman senators conspired against Julius Csar, to kill him. That very next morning, Artemidorus, Caesar’s friend, delivered him a paper, desiring him to peruse it, wherein the whole plot was discovered; but Caesar complimented his life away, being so taken up to return the salutations of such people as met him in the way, that he pocketed the paper, among other petitions, as unconcerned therein; and so, going to the senate-house, was slain. The world, flesh, and devil have a design for the destruction of men; we ministers bring our people a letter, God’s Word, wherein all the conspiracy is revealed. ‘But who hath believed our report? ‘Most men are so busy about worldly delights, they are not at leisure to listen to us or read the letter; but there, alas I run headlong to their own ruin and destruction.

Fuller.

References. X. 16. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xlviii. No. 2804. X. 17. W. E. Barton, Christian World Pulpit, vol. li. p. 83. W. H. Hutchings, Sermon Sketches, p. 228. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xviii. No. 1031. Expositor (6th Series), vol. vi. p. 6. X. 20, 21. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. iv. No. 207. X. 21. J. Keble, Sermons for the Holy Week, p. 126. X. 25. Expositor (6th Series), vol. iv. p. 439. XI. 1. Ibid. vol. xi. p. 40. XI. 2. H. Jones, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xliv. p. 138. Expositor (4th Series), vol. ix. p. 422.

Fuente: Expositor’s Dictionary of Text by Robertson

Paul on the Heart

Rom 10

Paul could never get away from this word “saved.” How much meaning he put into it as he wrote it or uttered it, we can never know. It was a great word to Paul. There are those who tell us to-day that the Church must not regard itself as a great soul-saving organisation. The statement can only be excused on the ground of its unconscious folly; or it can only be defended by assigning to the term “soul-saving” a narrow, and therefore an unapostolic and unscriptural, sense. What is soul-saving? It is not some new feat in sentimentalism, some more or less successful trick in mental metamorphosis: soul-saving is soul-creating, man-creating, man-restoring, man re-qualified for all the responsibilities of duty, for all the enjoyments of service, and for all the solemnities of the unknown destiny of the race. If you understand anything less or else by soul-saving, you are at liberty to pour your contempt on the efforts of the Church to save souls. But no man’s soul can be saved without his eyes being opened and his ears, and all his faculties being quickened into new sensitiveness, into larger receptiveness, into keener association and profounder fellowship with God. When, therefore, you hear men who never knew the mystery of the soul’s salvation, condemning those who seek the salvation of the soul, excuse them, if you can, on the ground that they are unconsciously and unintentionally foolish and almost profane. Paul would have men saved. He could do nothing with them until they were saved; they were plunging about in the sea until he got them saved; all their minds were in confusion and cloud and pitiful distraction until their souls were saved. He never left them without giving instructions of a disciplinary, military, and beneficent kind; he did not allow a man to say his soul was saved, and then to retire into elegant leisure, that he might nurse the soul that he supposed to be saved: instantly Paul set him to work, consumed him with the fire of sacrifice, and made him live through many a death. There is a soul-saving that is not worth thinking about. That is not the soul-saving of Christ, of Paul, of the Cross, of eternity.

In the opening of this chapter see how often the Apostle uses the word “heart”: “Brethren, my heart’s desire…. Say not in thine heart…. The word is in thy heart…. shalt believe in thine heart…. For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness…..” When Paul gets hold of a word that has God’s wine in it, he holds the goblet up until he has run every drop of that blessed wine into the souls of men. It is not tautology in the case of Paul. He is guilty of tautology who has nothing to say. He who has much to say will often say it over and over again, and even the change of words will never impair the substance and identity of the thought. Paul is now engaged with the heart of man that is, with the heart in various aspects and uses, and it may be profitable to follow him in his sacred and animating thought.

“My heart’s desire is that Israel might be saved.” Is this an earnest heart? It is an earnest heart indisputably: but is there any other word that could be put here, that would express a further and a more delicate shade of meaning? What did the angels sing at the first Christmastide? “Good-will toward men.” Paul’s expression might be so rendered Brethren, the goodwill of my heart is that Israel might be saved. We must not obliterate this word “goodwill.” It is a domestic word, it is a sweet, simple, healthy word; we could say in strict conformity with the etymology of the text, “My longing is that Israel might be saved my wish above all other wishes is that Israel might be saved.” This might all be etymologically correct. Yet there is a sweetness about “the goodwill of my heart” there is a womanliness about that description that suits the strong man well. Sometimes we think Paul’s great strength will run away with him, and when he is in the very fury of his power some element of womanliness falls upon his passion and softens it into domestic music. Every Christian should be the trustee of goodwill for the whole world. If there is any Christian whose goodwill is limited to his own family, or to his own country, he is no Christian at all. Good-will is not a geographical term: it would be at home amid the throngs of the planets: wherever there is weakness or want, that word would take a supreme place in the language of desolation and necessity. Good-will is no stay-at-home; goodwill is not a local parishioner; goodwill is not a mere seatholder, regular in attendance and uncertain in payment; goodwill belongs to every wind, to every zone, to every sea; goodwill tarries all night that it may help some wayfarer who has lost his path; goodwill says to the blind man, Take hold of my hand, and I will guide you across this busy thoroughfare; goodwill stoops down to the little child and carries the kiss the child has not strength to raise itself and get. Good-will was part of the angels’ song when the radiant host came down from the land of the morning to tell the children of men that the day was breaking upon the horizon of time. Let the Church be a brotherhood founded upon goodwill, animated by goodwill, ignorant of malice, clamour, censoriousness, and all manner of bitterness, and the Church will make itself felt yet

Was Paul unjust to anybody? Impossible. Where there is goodwill there can be no injustice. What then does he say? “I bear them record that they have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge.” They are all missionaries. It is a mistake to suppose that missionaries are Christian instruments or agents only. The Jew was a missionary; he compassed sea and land that he might make the Gentiles proselytes. The Jew had something in him that he did not understand; something that had to be purified and ennobled, and bloom out into the beauty of Christian philanthropy. “They have a zeal of God”: they burn for God. They know the letter of the law. Josephus says the Jew knew the law better than he knew his own name. That is zeal. The Jew overflowed “Asia Minor and Syria, and, to the great disgust of Latin historians, forced his way into Italy, and would not keep out of Rome, that he might convert the Gentiles and proselyte the Pagans. That is a zeal of God. There is nothing in zeal itself, any more than there is anything in sincerity. We are told that if a man be sincere that is enough. We deny it. We inquire, What is the man sincere about? What is the object or the motive of his sincerity? Saul was sincere when he took letters with him to Damascus, but his sincerity went for nothing when he was scorched by the white flame, and led into the city like a wounded baby he, the murderer, led blindly into the city he meant to devastate. It is not enough for you to be zealots, to have your Bethels, and Salems, and conventicles, and cathedrals, and temples, and ministers; it is not enough for you to shut yourselves up within your own four walls, and say, The temple of the Lord, the temple of the Lord, the temple of the Lord are we! That is zeal; it is to be counted: but it is not “according to knowledge.” The Jews knew the law and yet knew nothing about it. You cannot know any law by simply knowing the word of the law; law, if real law, anywhere, in county courts, or House of Lords, is equity turned to practical uses. Equity is an abstract term, it is a metaphysical symbol. Equity may be codified into law, but itself stretches back to eternity, and covers the very being of God. So the Bible is not so much stationery “authorised to be read, in churches”; it is a word, a logos, a spirit, a genius, an impalpable flame, an eternity. The Jews knew the law, remembered the law, quoted the law, fought for the law, counted all things but loss that they might excel one another in the knowledge of the law; and yet they knew nothing about it. It is possible to read the Bible without reading it. The Bible is in the Bible. If we could make this truth, so succinctly stated, felt, we should have new heavens and a new earth in the Church; a great Church would be created by that very doctrine, and man would touch man with a brother’s sympathy, and not with a critic’s suspicion. What part of the law do you know? What part of revelation fascinates you most? Make it your own, and never consider that the part is equal to the whole; remember that no one man is all men, no one Church is all the Church: we are all required simplest, poorest blunderer in the A B C class, and the oldest angel that wrinkles the forehead of his wisdom whilst he bends over the ineffable mysteries to make up the household of love. Fewer zealots, more Christians, must be the motto of progress.

In the sixth verse Paul seems to turn away from the earnest longing and goodwill of his own heart to describe the possibility of a speculative heart. His words are:

“Say not in thine heart, Who shall ascend into heaven?… Or, Who shall descend into the deep?” ( Rom 10:6 )

The Apostle passes on, but still keeps his hold upon the same theme, to say “The word is in thine heart.” That is, a trusted heart, a heart that is made the depository of Divine revelation. How does the word get into the heart? Variously. Who has the key of the heart? God. There is a word of God in every heart; in some cases a long way down, and so blurred as hardly to have shape or accent. God hath not left himself without witness; everywhere there is some glint of conscience, some sting of self-reproach, or some wonder about the mystery of things, that may at any moment brighten into a realised revelation. A scribe was listening in the congregation and wondering at the fair beauteous young Man whose face was old with eternity, and yet whose voice was young with the morning’s music; and when he heard that he answered them wisely, he said, “Well, Master, thou hast said the truth.” That is the testimony that Christ elicits testimony from observers, listeners, careful judges of his teaching. They listen to him and say, Yes! A thousand questions may be in charge of the angel or genius Speculation, but all the questions that the heart needs now to have answered Christ has abundantly satisfied. Be just to your best heart. Measure yourself when you are at your best. You are twenty men, and you should fix upon the real man and say, That is myself. Sometimes, even in the most iron eyes, there are indications of tears: seize that moment of sensibility, and say to your soul, Then thou art not yet dead. Sometimes an old strain of religious music will bring back all your yesterdays, and remind you of the time when you were fellow-worshippers with your father and mother, and there will be just a twinge of the heart, a sudden electric thrill: seize yourself at that moment, and say, I may yet live. There are devils enough to tell you to take the worst view of yourselves; when you are down in despair and self-disgust, they say, “That is you: what is the good of your praying, or singing, or thinking, or church going? you are almost in hell, why not go in? “Resist the devil, and he will flee from you.” God is born in every heart. Then he sometimes goes from the outside so to say to the inside, from the written to the receiving man, and in this sense the word of God is in thine heart. The Apostle advances and charges us to believe in this word.

“For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness.” (Rom 10:10 .)

There is a great deal of confusion about the etymology of this word “heart.” There are those who mark us out into mind, body, soul, heart, spirit. That analysis has its uses. The word heart is often used in the Scripture as being significant of the whole soul. Sometimes the word heart means the understanding, the intellect, the entire man, and it may do so here. “For with the heart, with the whole soul, man believeth unto righteousness.” I have no objection to that construction of the grammar; at the same time there is a consciousness which precedes all grammar and will survive it. Sometimes we believe with our whole consent in a nem. con. sense; there is no hostile voting: the resolution is carried nemine contradicente . That is not enough, we want it cordially, heartily, rapturously, passionately carried; then it will not be a dead letter on the minute book of our recollection, it will be the genius, the motive, and the ardent, persistent policy of a consecrated life. In that sense, I, begging pardon of etymology, put in a word for heart, as signifying that fine accent which lights up with fire every word of reason, and solemn dictate of judgment. We are in reality what we are in our hearts.

“You may lay it down as an eternal truth,” Archdeacon Farrar recently said in a sermon in St. Margaret’s, “that what the Divine Majesty requires is innocence alone. You will be saved neither by opinions nor by observances, but solely by your character and life. A man is not holy merely because he observes the Rubric. He must do right.” The Lord bless preachers who speak this bold morality! To hear such a voice under such a roof is to hear music under most favourable circumstances. The criticism I shall pass upon this is a criticism which the Archdeacon himself would instantly accept. Instead of saying man must “do” right I should simply say man must “be” right. The two words ought to be interchangeable and synonymous, but they are not always so in practice. A man may do right by reading the law, and yet he may miss the Christ of the law; a man may do right in going to church, and yet he may not be in church at all in any sense that really implies spiritual fellowship; his mind may be away flying on the uncertain winds, and his imagination may be distracted by the clamour of a thousand mountebanks: but when a man is you cannot get away from that verb To Be; that is the great mother verb of all the tongues when a man is right, everything he does is right the motive is right, the nature is right; you have not only good work, but a good worker. “Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.” We cannot get the start of Christ, we cannot get to some deeper metaphysic; when we think we have discovered something original we find it marked by his blessed fingers; he has taken it up into his arms and blessed it, and only left it there to be discovered by us. He is from eternity. If we would be right, we must be in Christ; if we would be in Christ, we must go to him by way of the Cross. We cannot be left out of this. Sometimes riotous men, who have money in all their pockets, and who have only to touch the bell to call a roomful of servants, say, Ha, ha, we do not want this tragic Gospel. Nor do they; the ox in the field does not need it, the fatness of prosperity may exclude the Cross: but there comes a time when man can no longer enjoy his own luxuries, when appetite is sated by the fulness of its own delicacies, then the heart cries out, Am I an orphan? do I belong to any household? What am I? whither go I? Oh, this mystery of dying! “the world recedes, it disappears”: is there no one to touch my hand without hurting it? is there no one to touch my hand so that my hand shall touch his heart, and my heart again shall touch some kindred heart? Ah me! then ask the mockers who laughed at Christ what answer they have to the swellings of Jordan. The beauty, the blessedness, the grandeur of this Cross is, that it is most to us when we need it most.

Fuente: The People’s Bible by Joseph Parker

XVIII

THE HARMONY OF THE PROBLEM OF JEWISH UNBELIEF WITH THE PLAN OF SALVATION

Rom 9:1-10:21 .

Paul’s statement of the plan of salvation closes with Rom 8 , so we now take up the problem of Jewish unbelief, its effect on Paul, and the occasion and extent of his concern: So far as this letter goes we find the discussion in Rom 9:1-5 , and in Rom 10:1-2 , but this concern is equally evident in Luke’s history of his labors, addresses and sermons in Acts, and in several other letters written by Paul. One of the deepest passions of his soul was excited and stirred by this problem of Jewish unbelief. The grounds of his concern are the following:

1. These people were his kindred according to the flesh.

2. It was his nation and country, and he had an intense patriotism.

3. They were God’s adopted people.

4. They had all of the marvelous privileges of that adoption, and these privileges are thus enumerated by him in Rom 9 , first paragraph:

(1) “Whose is the adoption and the glory.” This glory was the cloud, symbolizing the Divine Presence.

(2) They had the covenants, the covenant of grace with Abraham in Gen 12 , and the covenant of circumcision as expressed in Gen 17 .

(3) Then they had the giving of the law on Mount Sinai such a law as cannot be paralleled in the later world. The circumstances under which it was given were more imposing and impressive than the giving of any other code in the annals of time. They had that.

(4) Then they had the promises the promise to Abraham, the promise to Isaac, the promise to Jacob, the promise to the nation, the promise to Moses, and so on. They had all the promises.

(5) Then they had the fathers, the patriarchs. It was an illustrious heritage. No other nation had such a list of fathers Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and the twelve patriarchs, the great leaders all through their history.

(6) Then they had the services, that is, the imposing ritual of worship set forth in the book of Exodus from Exo 38 to the end, and in all of the book of Leviticus, and a great part of the book of Numbers. That service showed the place to meet God, the time to meet God, the sacrificial means of hearings before God, the mediator through whom they could approach God. They had that service. No other nation has ever had anything like it. All the churches of the present time have not improved that ritual, including the Romans, the Greeks, the Catholics, the Epicureans, and some Baptists who wear robes in the pulpit and intone their services.

(7) The last and greatest of the privileges was, that of them came Christ according to the flesh, the line running through Seth, Heber, Peleg, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Judah, David, and on down until we come to Christ himself. They had Christ according to the flesh. That was the ground and the occasion of his interest. So the problem is, that Christ was rejected by his own people. More than once an infidel has said to me, “If the proof and the merits of Christ be so obvious, why is it that his own people did not take him?”

We now come to the extent of Paul’s concern for this rejection of Christ. (1) He says in Rom 10 , which is a part of this section, “I bear my people witness that they have a zeal toward God, but not according to knowledge. (2) I sincerely desire the salvation of my people. (3) Their rejection of Christ gives me continual sorrow and pain of heart. (4) Finally, I could wish myself accursed from Christ for my brethren’s sake.” There is only one similar expression in the history of men, and that is where Moses, when all Israel had sinned and God said, “I will blot them out,” stood in the breach and said, “If thou wilt not forgive these people, blot my name out of thy book.” That disposition on the part of Moses and Paul not merely to suffer temporal death but severance from Christ if it would save the nation, approaches the feeling that was in the heart of the redeemer when he came to die the spiritual death for the salvation of men. Two others had the experience that is here illustrated, for instance, when Abraham offered up his only begotten son, and passed through the anguish of a father’s heart in giving up his son. He is the only man in the world whose experience approximated the experience of God the Father, when he gave up his only begotten Son. And Isaac, in consenting to be so sacrificed, approximated the experience of the Son in voluntarily coming at the Father’s bidding to die for the world. Higher than all the mountain peaks of time, stands these four names: Abraham, representing the sacrifice of the Father; Isaac, representing the sacrifice of the Son; Moses and Paul, representing the Spirit that prompted Jesus to be forsaken of God in order to the salvation of men.

We come now to the key-sentence of these three chapters, in verse Rom 9:6 : “But it is not as though the word of God hath come to naught.” The object of the plan of salvation as presented in Rom 8 has this objection against it: Since the Jewish people did not believe it, how can we harmonize with that plan the problem of the unbelief of the Jews themselves? He starts off to argue that question by the affirmation that this Jewish rejection of Christ does not militate against the plan of salvation as set forth. That is his proposition, and the first argument that he makes is that all of Abraham’s children all of Abraham’s lineal descendants were never included in that national adoption. Abraham had two sons Isaac and Ishmael. Ishmael and his descendants, the Ishmaelites, are not included. Keturah, Abraham’s second wife, had a pretty large family, and these Midianites, descendants of Keturah, were not included. Then the next one after Abraham, Isaac, had two children, Jacob and Esau. Esau and the Edomites descended from him, though lineal descendants, were not included. He then presents a case of divine sovereignty concerning these two children of Isaac. He says that the selection of the one to be the people of God in the adopted sense and the rejection of the other, was not based upon any work, and good to be done by the one or evil to be done by the other. It was not according to the wish of the parents of those children. The selection was made before the children were born before either one of them knew good from evil. So that it was not of Isaac that willed Esau to be the heir, nor of Esau that ran to get the venison in order that he might obtain the blessing of the heir, nor of the plotting of Rebekah and Jacob. Their plotting did not have anything to do with it. It was not of him that runneth, nor him that plotteth; it was the act of divine sovereignty.

Whatever is meant by this adoption of a nation, it was not based upon any merit in that nation, or in the particular individuals through whom this adoption came. Jerusalem when it was first established was no better than any other city; it was of God’s sovereignty just as the raising up of Pharaoh. “For this purpose did I raise thee up, that I might show in thee my power.” Right on the reels of that comes the question from the objector, “Why doth he still find fault? For who withstandeth his will?” Paul is not disposed to answer that question in this connection. We will find the answer before we get through with these three chapters, but here he waives it aside with a counter question: “Hath not the potter power over his clay to take one part of the lump and make a beautiful vessel for the parlor, and to take another part and make a very inferior vessel for the kitchen? And shall either one of the vessels object to the potter?” He waives it for the time being by merely denying the power of the Christian to intrude into the power of the divine sovereignty. His purpose is to show that the word of God touching salvation has not come to be ineffectual because the Jews rejected it.

That is the argument he is on now, and he then advances in it, and says, “Not even all the lineal descendants of Abraham in the select line according to the plan of salvation were to be saved; not all of them could see these two covenants side by side; one was a national covenant, with its seal of circumcision, and promising the earthly Canaan, and the other was the grace covenant that looked to a spiritual seed.” Or, as he puts it in another place, “He is not a Jew (in the spiritual sense) who is just one outwardly, but he is a Jew who is one inwardly. The circumcision is not the circumcision of the flesh, but the circumcision of the heart regeneration.” In the exercise of the sovereign purpose of God, there is nothing that the finite man can do concerning him. It is an ocean too deep for our line to fathom. We would have to be infinite to understand it, but we do know that in all human history, without any explanation to us, God’s purpose is working. God bad a purpose in having this continent discovered just when it was. He had a purpose in the success of the American Revolution. He had a purpose in the redemption of Texas in the battle of San Jacinto.

High above human thought, beyond the scope of human sight, of the human mind, the Omnipotence and Omniscience is ruling, and his rule is supreme, and yet nobody is taken by the hair and dragged into hell, and nobody is taken by the hair and dragged into heaven, as he will show more particularly later.

Let us explain and give the application of the vessels of wrath and mercy. In Rom 9 is a passage, from Rom 9:22 to the end of the chapter, about the vessels of wrath and the vessels of mercy. Those that were vessels of wrath, those who voluntarily stand against God, God patiently endured a long time, and his forbearance signified that he was giving them opportunity for repentance. Those vessels of mercy, they also had opportunity for salvation, whether they were Jews or Greeks. He shows that God is no respecter of persona in selecting the Jewish nation. But why did he select that nation? If he had selected the Jewish nation, every one of them to be saved in heaven, and rejected every other nation, then the objection would have been sustained, but it had a different purpose. The election of the Jewish nation looked to the salvation of the Jews and Gentiles that received the message of God, also the covenants, and the coming of Christ from them according to the flesh. That election looked through them to others and, so far as salvation in heaven is concerned, the Jews that believed were saved, and so far as other nations were concerned he quotes certain parts in Hosea and the Old Testament, the paragraph referring to the ingathering of the Gentiles: “I will call them my people which were not my people.”

In objecting to God’s selecting one nation and calling that nation “my people” he says, “I will call them my people which were not my people,” and in a place where it is said, “They are not my people, there shall they be called sons of the living God,” if they believe on Jesus Christ. He then quotes from Isaiah who distinguishes between the holy stock of Israel and the natural stock of Israel as if he had said, “If the number of Israel had been as abundant as the sands of the sea, it is only the remnant that are saved” those that by faith accept Christ. We see he is laying the predicate for that olive tree illustration that he will introduce later in the discussion. Isaiah then goes on to say that if the grace of God had not been revealed, and the Lord God of hosts had not left a seed, the whole of them would have been as Sodom and Gomorrah. Nothing but divine grace saves those that were saved not their ritual, not their law. He then reaches this conclusion, “What shall we say then?” The Gentiles who followed not after righteousness, that is, the Jewish way, attained to righteousness because they sought it in a different way. The Jew following the law had not arrived at righteousness. Wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith, but by works; they stumbled at that stumbling stone.

Next he shows that the rejection of the Jews was not total, He commences Rom 10 by slating that as far as he is personally concerned his heart’s desire and prayer for Israel is that they would be saved, and he is willing to acknowledge that they had a zeal, but not the zeal of knowledge. They busied themselves to establish their own plan of righteousness, and he puts it in such a way that we can’t mistake the law righteousness and leave the faith righteousness as they did. We must not forget that the law says, “Do to live,” but faith says “Live to do.” In other words, doing the will of God comes out of having been made alive to God. Life must come first; make the tree good, and then the fruit will be good. One of them makes doing the means of life, and the other puts life as a means of doing. Then he shows that while Moses had handed down this law and set before them its requirements that if one would have kept its requirements in strict obedience he would have been saved, but the law required him to start right in his nature and then to continue to do everything that is contained in the law. He goes on to quote from Moses. Paul quotes from the Hebrew and not from the Septuagint which runs thus: “The righteousness which is of faith saith thus, Say not in thy heart, Who shall ascend unto heaven (that is, to bring the Saviour down, or to bring salvation down) or, Who shall descend from heaven (that is, to bring Christ up from the grave.)” This is the Septuagint idea. The Hebrew idea is not that a man tries to go to heaven as the ancient Titan tried to do by piling Pela on Ossa to make a stairway. Nor that he tries to go directly into the depths, down into the abyss, and wrench salvation from the depths. The Hebrew represents him, not as going down, but as going across, saying that man does not go to the other side of the sea to find salvation to bring it back. Paul changes this a little and makes it correspond better than does Moses. Instead of going across the sea, he has the man going down into the depths of the sea, and he goes on, still quoting Moses, that the real salvation does not come from afar. Paul puts this explanation on it, that it was the word that he preached: “It is the word of faith which we preach.”

The plan of salvation is not making tedious pilgrimages; it is not wearing a hairy undershirt to irritate; it is not wearing bracelets that have thorns on them, and to keep on doing penance; it is the word of faith.

Thus he says, “You may be sure that if from the heart you believe in Jesus Christ, and if with your lips you make confession of that faith, you shall be saved.” It is not an intellectual faith it is heart faith. But a good many people misunderstand the import of confession. It doesn’t mean to confess sins to your brother, nor to a priest, nor even to God that is not the confession he is talking about, but it is a public confession of Christ as Saviour. If we have not faith enough to confess the Christ that we say we believe in, we have not faith enough to be saved. Confession implies that whoever makes it must have a great deal of courage. In this time of peace it doesn’t cost much to confess Christ, and even now sometimes shame prevents confession by young people. The young lady going into a city is told not to join a church because that will deprive her of all social functions. “Whoever shall be ashamed of me before this generation, of him shall I be ashamed before my father and the holy angels. And whosoever shall deny me, him will I deny.” And if we are afraid or ashamed to come out in public, and say, “I take Christ as my Saviour,” then the Father will be ashamed of us.

This law has no distinction as to nationality; there was only one door to Noah’s ark. The elephant went in at the same door as the snail, and the eagle sweeped down through the same door that a little wren hopped in at. And there is not a side door for a woman to go in. We all go to Christ through the same door. While it is true that God called Israel out of Egypt, the same Bible says that he called the Philistines out of Caphtor, and he is the Lord of all nations, and the universality of the plan of salvation is expressed in “Whoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.” Then comes up the question, How can any one call on God who has not believed in God, and how can be believe in a God of whom he has never heard? How can he hear unless somebody tells him unless there be a preacher and how can there be a preacher except he be sent? The sending there means God sent. What a marvelous theme for a missionary sermon!

Having stated that, he raises another question, “Have they not heard? Didn’t they have preachers?” Has not the word gone to them? From Genesis we learn that the antediluvians had light enough to be saved, and Paul is here quoting a psalm: “Their sound went out through all the earth.” Jesus Christ is the true light that lights every man that comes into the world. There has been light enough if the people had been willing to walk in the light.

I once heard a Methodist preacher state to a congregation that the heathen that did the best they could would be saved.

But he didn’t produce any heathen who had done their best. And where is the man that has done his best?

The plan by which men are to be saved is the plan to make the promise sure to all. It is as quick as lightning in its application. It is a fine thing for a man to quit his meanness; it is a fine thing for a man to do the best he can, but certainly it is not the way of salvation; we don’t secure salvation by that. “With a nation void of understanding will I anger you.” In other words, “If you will have no God, you adopted people, I will provoke you to jealousy by them that are no people,” as Isaiah said, “I was found of them that sought me not; I was made manifest unto them. But to Israel he said, I have stretched out my hands unto this disobedient and gainsaying people.” Their whole record is no matter who called, who was sent, who preached, they rejected. Having shown them that God was not unjust in rejecting them, and that he did not violate the gospel plan of salvation, Paul says, “I am one of them; not all the Jews were lost; I am one of them.” Neither in its totality nor in its perpetuity were the Jews rejected. Elijah supposed once that he stood by himself, and that he was the only one left. God says, “I have preserved 7000 that have not bowed the knee to Baal.” Having shown from Romans 9-10 that the rejection of the Jews was not total, we will show from chapter II that it was not perpetual.

QUESTIONS

1. What the problem of Rom 9:1-11:36 ?

2. How did it affect Paul?

3. What is the grounds of his concern?

4. What is the marvelous privileges of the Jews’ adoption?

5. What is the infidel argument on this point?

6. What the items which indicate the extent of Paul’s concern for his people?

7. What is Paul’s meaning here, and what Old Testament examples of this experience and spirit?

8. What is the key sentence of Romans 9-11, and what its meaning?

9. What is Paul’s first argument on this point?

10. What is the case of divine sovereignty concerning Jacob and Esau?

11. How is this principle illustrated in the selection of Jerusalem?

12. What illustration of this point from the history of Pharaoh?

13. What question from the objector here introduced, and how does Paul dispose of it?

14. What is Paul’s purpose in thus disposing of this question?

15. What advance did he then make in his argument, and how does he illustrate it elsewhere?

16. What illustrations of the sovereign purpose of God cited by the author?

17. What is the explanation of the vessels of wrath and the vessels of mercy in Rom 9:22 ff?

18. How does Paul show that God was no respecter of persons in selecting the Jewish nation?

19. How does he prove this from the prophets?

20. What is the conclusion of all this, then, as stated in the closing part of Rom 9 ?

21. What is the argument of Rom 10 ?

22. What concession, does he make in favor of the Jews in the first part of Rom 10 , and what his objection raised?

23. What is the difference between the law righteousness and the faith righteousness?

24. Why could not any one be saved by the law righteousness?

25. What is the difference in the idea expressed in the Hebrew and that of the Septuagint?

26. What construction does Paul put on it, and what the application?

27. What is the meaning of the confession mentioned in this connection, and what its relation to salvation?

28. How does Paul show here that God makes no distinction between peoples of different nationalities, and what the author’s illustration?

29. What is the great missionary text in this connection?

30. What is Paul’s answer to the question, “Have they not heard?” and what the necessity of missionary operations?

31. With what reproof of the Jewish people does Paul close Rom 10 ?

XIX

THE LIMITATIONS AND MERCIFUL PURPOSE OF GOD’S REJECTION OF ISRAEL Rom 11:1-36 .

Israel’s rejection was neither total nor perpetual. The elect, or spiritual Israel, were never cast off. From Abraham to Paul every Israelite who looked through the types and by faith laid hold of the Antitype, was saved. In this sense there were no lost tribes, but out of every tribe the elect, manifested in the circumcision of the heart, not of the flesh, were saved. For example:

1. The apostle cites his own case. That he himself was an Israelite is abundantly shown here, and even more particularly elsewhere, (Phi 3:4-6 ; Act 22:3-15 ) and yet he was saved after Israel according to the flesh was cast off and the kingdom transferred to the Gentiles, as were all the Jews from Pentecost to Paul. The number of elect Jews thus saved was always greater than appeared to human sight, as evidenced in Elijah’s time.

2. Elijah in his panic supposed himself to be alone, but Jehovah showed him that through grace there were seven thousand who had not bowed the knee to Baal.

3. So it continued to be in Paul’s time; there was a remnant spared according to grace.

But the apostle is careful to show that this elect remnant, never cast off, every one of them, was saved by grace, and not one of them by the works of law. Then he explains this finding of salvation by the elect Jews, and the casting off of the non-elect Jews by the two essentially different methods of seeking salvation. The elect sought it by faith and obtained it; the rest because they persistently sought righteousness by works of the law, rejecting God’s righteousness, were judicially blinded as shown: (1) By the law itself (Deu 29:4 ); (2) by the prophets (Isa 29:10 ); (3) by the Psalms (Psa 69:22 ).

Having shown the casting off was never total, and why, he then shows that it was not intended to be perpetual by proving the ultimate restoration of all Israel as a nation, whenever it should turn to the grace method of salvation, -the scriptural proof of which is as follows:

1. In the law itself, which denounces their casting off, is the promise of an expiation through grace (Deu 32:43 ).

2. In the prayer of Solomon at the dedication of the temple it is suggested (1Ki 8:46-53 ).

3. In the prophets it is clearly foretold, and all the method of it (Isa 66:8 ; Eze 36:22-37:28 ; Zec 12:9-13:1 ). The element of mercy dominant in the election of Israel as a nation is that they were chosen that through them all the nations might be blessed. The element of mercy in their rejection is that through their downfall life might come to other nations. The element of mercy toward the Jews in the call of the Gentiles was that cast-off Israel might be provoked to return to God. In saving Gentiles there was an aim at the salvation of his cast-off people. This is proved in his argument thus: “By their fall salvation is come to the Gentiles to provoke them to jealousy,” and then he magnified his own office as an apostle to the Gentiles to provoke the jealousy of his own people in order that he might save some. He foresees a wonderful effect on the Gentiles in the restoration of the Jews. It will be even more beneficial than their downfall: “Now if their fall is the riches of the world, and their loss the riches of the Gentiles; how much more their fulness? . . . For if the casting away of them is the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the-dead?” (Rom 11:12 ; Rom 11:15 ). Then our concern, prayer, and labor for that great future event the restoration of God’s ancient people is a concern for other nations who never will be thoroughly aroused until moved by redeemed Israel.

A passage from Peter shows the relation of the conversion of the Jews to our Lord’s final advent, and a declaration of our Lord shows the time of this general salvation of the Jews. Peter says, “Repent ye therefore, and turn again, that your sins may be blotted out, that so there may come seasons of refreshing from the presence of the Lord; and that he may send the Christ who hath been appointed for you, even Jesus: whom the heavens must receive until the times of restoration of all things, whereof God spoke by the mouth of his holy prophets that have been from of old” (Act 3:19-21 ). Our Lord says, “And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led captive unto all the nations; and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled” (Luk 21:24 ). Then according to Isaiah, Ezekiel, and Zechariah, the means and methods of this great salvation of the Jews are as follows:

1. It will be preceded by a gathering together of Israel out of all nations.

2. Christ whom they pierced will be lifted up in Gentile preaching.

3. The Holy Spirit in convicting and converting power will be poured out on them, whereby they shall mourn and pray and see the Lord as their Saviour.

4. The nation shall be born of God in a day. The apostle bases this marvelous work of God upon the principle that “if the first fruit is holy, so is the lump: and if the root is holy, so are the branches. . . . And this is my covenant unto them, When I shall take away their sins . . . For the gifts and the calling of God are not repented of” (Rom 11:16 ; Rom 11:27 ; Rom 11:29 ). Then follows his illustration of the olive tree, the explanation of which is as follows:

1. Christ is the root.

2. The holy stock is the spiritual elect, Israel.

3. The branches broken off are the unbelieving Jews.

4. The branches grafted in are the believing Gentiles.

5. The principle is vital and spiritual connection with Christ, through faith, without respect to Jew or Gentile.

6. The unbelieving children of Abraham are like branches merely tied on the stock externally; there is no communication of the fatness of the sap into the veins of the branches tied on externally.

7. So a Gentile tied on externally, without this vital connection, will be broken off.

The divine purpose in shutting up both Gentile and Jew unto disobedience as shown in the argument (Rom 3:9-20 ) is expressed thus: “For God hath shut up all unto disobedience, that he might have mercy upon all” (Rom 11:32 ). We will conclude this discussion with an analysis of the doxology which is the climax of his argument:

1. An exclamation of the profundity of the riches of both God’s wisdom and knowledge.

2. The incomprehensibility to the finite mind of his judgments and ways.

3. No finite being knew his mind or advised his actions.

4. No beneficiary of his goodness ever first gave to God as a meritorious ground of the benefaction.

5. Because he is the source of all good, and the medium of salvation from its initiation to its consummation, all the glory belongs to God.

QUESTIONS

1. What the limits of Israel’s rejection?

2. Wherein was it not total? Illustrate.

3. What is the apostle careful to show about this elect remnant never cast off?

4 How does he explain this finding of salvation by the elect Jews, and the casting off of the non-elect Jews?

5. How is the judicial blindness of the non-elect Jews shown?

6. How does he next show that the casting off was not intended to be perpetual?

7. What the scriptural proof of this ultimate restoration of Israel?

8. What element of mercy was dominant in the election of Israel as a nation?

9. What element of mercy in their rejection?

10. What element of mercy toward Jews in the call of the Gentiles? 11. How is this proved in his argument?

12. What effect on the Gentiles does Paul foresee in the restoration of the Jews?

13. What then our concern, prayer, and labor for that great future event, the restoration of God’s ancient people?

14. Quote a passage from Peter showing the relation of the conversion of the Jews to our Lord’s final advent.

15. Quote a passage from our Lord showing the time of this general salvation of the Jews.

16. According to Isaiah, Ezekiel, and Zechariah, what the means and methods of this great salvation of the Jews?

17. Upon what principle does the apostle base this marvelous work of God?

18. In the olive tree illustration what the root, the holy stock, the branches broken off, the branches grafted in, the principle, the condition of the unbelieving children of Abraham, and what of the Gentile tied on externally?

19. What then the divine purpose in shutting up both Gentile and Jew unto disobedience?

20. Give an analysis of the doxology.

Fuente: B.H. Carroll’s An Interpretation of the English Bible